Trading Salary Cap Space
View Single Post
01-09-2013, 07:52 AM
Join Date: Aug 2005
Originally Posted by
Yeah, that's going to be insane
One little wrinkle here, but as I read the rules, it could also some times play in the opposite direction.
Take Redden as an example. Rangers just sent him down and kept that mistake off the NHL roster, thus suffering no cap consequences.
With this rule, say they had found someone to take him while paying some of the salary. That cap-hit they would have to take and the impact would be like buying him out, just cheaper. As the economic benefit of trading the player is so significant compared to retaining all the costs, even the most deep pocketed teams will likely do this.
Also, if Vancouver wants to get out from under Luongo for instance, and take on some salary/caphit, that will improve the return they get on Luongo, but it also takes away some of their cap-room.
In KIRK's Calgary example, that's not an issue for Calgary as they would be going nowhere in the short term anyway, but for Vancouver having (say) two million less in cap-space next season (and a long time into the future), that would be an issue for a contender.
But it surely will open some very interesting scenarios.
I really do see Calgary as the fascinating example. Say they're completely out. Iginla says o'k to a trade. Clearly, it's rebuild time, and they'll get a nice package for Iggy.
Now, they're going to be out of it for a couple of year. Why not get something for guys who will be UFA's after the 2013-2014 season?
Cammallerri . . . not much trade value at 6M per, but at 3M, he's worth a lot.
J-Bo . . . 6.6M, no thanks; 3.3M, you get a top defensive prospect from someone.
Kiprusoff . . . 5.8M, can't afford the hit; 2.9M, if I've got questions in goal and I'm a contender . . .
Add up the return from Iggy and the returns from Cammy, J-Bo, and Kipper at half cap hits, and IMO Calgary would be stocked.
There are other examples. Not a lot, but others.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by KIRK