HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Marleau's recapture penalty? (mod: Toronto's cap situation)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-07-2017, 05:21 PM
  #26
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
There isn't... but if he gets traded on July 2nd after the bonus is paid in that 3rd year, and then when he's due to earn 1.25m, he retires from his new team (FLA, ARI, etc), they absolutely should implement some sort of recapture.

GMs need to be held accountable to ensure that they're only signing contracts that both sides plan on fulfilling to its' entirety. And this contract (much like some of the absurdly long ones from the old CBA) just screams of one that won't be played out for all 3 seasons.
I think it would be more entertaining if Marleau got his 3rd year bonus, was then traded to another team, and retires.

Then that new team files a grievance to claw back 1/3rd of Marleau's contract signing bonuses. $14.5m in bonuses / 3 = $4.83m.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2017, 08:23 PM
  #27
BaccusDrunk
Registered User
 
BaccusDrunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Yes, I'm sure team doctors are lining up to commit possible insurance fraud so conspiracy nitwits can continue on with their made up escape mechanisms.

You don't think Pronger would be playing if he still could? One year he's dragging his team through to the finals, and a couple later he's looking to collect while sitting on his ass? I mean really, the same players you put up on pedestals you are awfully quick to tear down on some half-assed *********.

All 30 other teams in the league are letting the Blackhawks, Leafs, whomever get away with this fraud for what reason?

BaccusDrunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2017, 10:11 PM
  #28
Riptide
Registered User
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaccusDrunk View Post
Yes, I'm sure team doctors are lining up to commit possible insurance fraud so conspiracy nitwits can continue on with their made up escape mechanisms.

All 30 other teams in the league are letting the Blackhawks, Leafs, whomever get away with this fraud for what reason?
It's only insurance fraud if the team tries to get the insurance company to pay for the players salary. If the team puts them on LTIR and doesn't file an insurance claim... where's the fault (legality) wise with any insurance company?

__________________
I've been looking for trouble... but trouble hasn't been cooperating!
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2017, 01:37 PM
  #29
BaccusDrunk
Registered User
 
BaccusDrunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
It's only insurance fraud if the team tries to get the insurance company to pay for the players salary. If the team puts them on LTIR and doesn't file an insurance claim... where's the fault (legality) wise with any insurance company?
Obviously.

It would still constitute some level of cap circumvention that the other 30 teams would want stopped. I would assume doctors giving false medical reports is a level of 'fraud' at least in the moral/argumentative sense if not something their state medical boards would be interested in.

Again, my point is more, why would doctors risk this, why would the other 30 teams ignore it and why would the Blackhawks have been forced to sell off talent to remain cap compliant, but suddenly figure out they can randomly get Hossa to sit on his ass with some "made up" issue?

BaccusDrunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2017, 02:27 PM
  #30
Iceman
Registered User
 
Iceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Country: Sweden
Posts: 7,593
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madhi19 View Post
Nobody retire anymore they get "skin rash".
Indeed.

Iceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2017, 02:32 PM
  #31
Lempo
I heart Toby Enström
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Country: Finland
Posts: 4,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaccusDrunk View Post
Obviously.

It would still constitute some level of cap circumvention that the other 30 teams would want stopped. I would assume doctors giving false medical reports is a level of 'fraud' at least in the moral/argumentative sense if not something their state medical boards would be interested in.

Again, my point is more, why would doctors risk this, why would the other 30 teams ignore it and why would the Blackhawks have been forced to sell off talent to remain cap compliant, but suddenly figure out they can randomly get Hossa to sit on his ass with some "made up" issue?
The other teams may at some point find themselves with a silly crippling contract they want to send to Robidas Island themselves, plus it's a problem that's phasing out because quite so egregiously front-loaded contracts as Hossa's aren't allowed any more.

Lempo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2017, 05:44 PM
  #32
madhi19
Just the tip!
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaccusDrunk View Post
Obviously.

It would still constitute some level of cap circumvention that the other 30 teams would want stopped. I would assume doctors giving false medical reports is a level of 'fraud' at least in the moral/argumentative sense if not something their state medical boards would be interested in.

Again, my point is more, why would doctors risk this, why would the other 30 teams ignore it and why would the Blackhawks have been forced to sell off talent to remain cap compliant, but suddenly figure out they can randomly get Hossa to sit on his ass with some "made up" issue?
These guys have enough mileage on their body that you don't need to commit fraud to find some debilitating problem if you dig hard enough.

madhi19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2017, 10:36 PM
  #33
BaccusDrunk
Registered User
 
BaccusDrunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madhi19 View Post
These guys have enough mileage on their body that you don't need to commit fraud to find some debilitating problem if you dig hard enough.
Of course, but that's nothing like your offhand skin rash comment. And if a problem is debilitating, nobody's going to have to dig for it.

BaccusDrunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2017, 02:18 PM
  #34
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,191
vCash: 500
I wouldn't look for Marleau to develop anything. He's going to play out his contract. The Leafs and him may agree to trade him for that 3rd year, maybe back to San Jose, but I'm certain he'll play out that contract.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2017, 02:21 PM
  #35
SenzZen
I Ain't Even Mad
 
SenzZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,522
vCash: 500
They would probably just "trade" him to Vegas or Arizona.

SenzZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2017, 04:20 PM
  #36
Riptide
Registered User
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenzZen View Post
They would probably just "trade" him to Vegas or Arizona.
He would have to waive his NMC for that.

Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2017, 04:27 PM
  #37
lifelonghockeyfan
Registered User
 
lifelonghockeyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Lake Huron
Posts: 1,872
vCash: 500
Since Marleau is plus 35+ contract, the Leafs get NO cap benefit if he goes on LTIR (just 925,000).
Much like the Robidas contract. Yes most of Robidas's contract was a cap hit. I know there is thought that Leafs are somehow will circumvent the cap or CA, but c'mon folks,
Yes, Marleau might be traded to Phoenix if the Marleau wants to retire so the Leafs could avoid a cap hit but that is different than LTIR.

lifelonghockeyfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2017, 04:29 PM
  #38
Classic Devil
Spirit of 1988
 
Classic Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 39,447
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelonghockeyfan View Post
Since Marleau is plus 35+ contract, the Leafs get NO cap benefit if he goes on LTIR (just 925,000).
Much like the Robidas contract. Yes most of Robidas's contract was a cap hit. I know there is thought that Leafs are somehow will circumvent the cap or CA, but c'mon folks,
Yes, Marleau might be traded to Phoenix if the Marleau wants to retire so the Leafs could avoid a cap hit but that is different than LTIR.
This isn't right. He could go on LTIR and Toronto would receive cap relief - see Pronger, Savard, etc. But if he retires, the Leafs receive no cap relief, they have to eat the cap hit as if he were still under contract.

Classic Devil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 01:11 AM
  #39
oooooooooohCanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Btw for those of you that were discussing the Leafs not being able to resign Brown.. some interesting news came out today that was previously unknown. From an article by Mirtle of The Athletic. Here are some relevant quotes:

Quote:
Privately, I was hearing from other teams right after the Leafs signed Patrick Marleau on July 2. “What the heck are they going to do?” was the typical response, as several executives claimed they had never seen an NHL team get that close to the off-season cap while still needing to sign a key restricted free agent.

The concern was that if another team offer sheeted Brown, the Leafs might not have the cap space to match.

“They have something like $3-million left to spend before they hit the limit, with [Zach] Hyman and Brown still needing contracts,” one team said last week, before Hyman signed his four-year, $9-million deal.

“I think they're in a tough spot,” said another team executive.

The reason I didn't write on this last week was I kept getting different answers as to whether the Leafs were in trouble or not. The team itself, according to multiple sources, was not concerned, which was a huge red flag that we were missing something.

That something is apparently that the Leafs can — and likely already have — use long-term injured reserve space in the summer.

That goes against what we've believed possible previously, but NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly confirmed to The Athletic on Tuesday afternoon that it was allowed.

“Yes, they can,” Daly said when asked if teams were permitted to access additional cap room in this fashion long before the season started. “Same as in-season.”
The understanding, as of now, is that one of Lupul/Horton is on LTIR, and the one that wasn't will be once Brown is signed/the team gets as close to the cap as they want to maximize the cap space.

oooooooooohCanada is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 01:42 AM
  #40
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oooooooooohCanada View Post
Btw for those of you that were discussing the Leafs not being able to resign Brown.. some interesting news came out today that was previously unknown. From an article by Mirtle of The Athletic. Here are some relevant quotes:



The understanding, as of now, is that one of Lupul/Horton is on LTIR, and the one that wasn't will be once Brown is signed/the team gets as close to the cap as they want to maximize the cap space.
Been following the situation. Assuming Mirtle has the info correct that off-season LTIR works the same as regular season LTIR there is no need to have Lupul or Horton on the LTIR Exception at this time. The off-season 110% cap has enough room for the current Leaf cap hits.

If no other roster changes are made beforehand then signing Brown would require one of Horton or Lupul to go on the LTIR Exception first. And if no other changes were made before the start of the season--based on CF's projections--then the other player would have to go on the LTIR Exception before the regular season starts.

Having both Lupul and Horton on LTIR Exception before the season starts could be less optimal for the Leafs' cap then having one on LTIR-E before the regular season and placing the other on LTIR-E after the regular season starts.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 03:03 AM
  #41
BillDerlago
They did it Naylor
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 905
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,471
vCash: 500
It's pretty funny to me that Stephane Robidas' legacy will be a fictional island in his name that old unwanted hockey players get "sent" to.

BillDerlago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 02:32 PM
  #42
danielpalfredsson
dorion is an ok gm
 
danielpalfredsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,253
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dustin View Post
Thank you very much. So wouldn't this mean that in his final year the Leafs would be held accountable for the full cap hit for that one year only? So the Leafs would be on the line for $6.5 on his last year. And that would only be if he decided to retire.
His cap hit would remain on the books. Theoretically, if he wanted to retire the Leafs could package him with an asset and trade him to another team where he could retire after the trade and his cap hit would remain on his new team rather than the Leafs.

A curious factor of Marleau's contract is that in year three he makes roughly 4 million dollars, but 3 million of that 4 million is in the form of a signing bonus the Leafs would pay (most likely) early in July of that year. For whatever reason, the NHL doesn't count previously paid signing bonuses towards a team's cap when they later trade a player (Bernier from TOR to ANA as an example or Brassard from NYR to OTT) so there is a plausible scenario where the Leafs and Marleau may have some sort of agreement where in year 3 the Leafs pay the signing bonus, ship Marleau to an Arizona type team, and then he can retire having been paid all but roughly 1M of his contract by the Leafs, yet the Leafs would have nothing on the books in year 3.

danielpalfredsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 04:49 PM
  #43
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalfredsson View Post
His cap hit would remain on the books. Theoretically, if he wanted to retire the Leafs could package him with an asset and trade him to another team where he could retire after the trade and his cap hit would remain on his new team rather than the Leafs.

A curious factor of Marleau's contract is that in year three he makes roughly 4 million dollars, but 3 million of that 4 million is in the form of a signing bonus the Leafs would pay (most likely) early in July of that year. For whatever reason, the NHL doesn't count previously paid signing bonuses towards a team's cap when they later trade a player (Bernier from TOR to ANA as an example or Brassard from NYR to OTT) so there is a plausible scenario where the Leafs and Marleau may have some sort of agreement where in year 3 the Leafs pay the signing bonus, ship Marleau to an Arizona type team, and then he can retire having been paid all but roughly 1M of his contract by the Leafs, yet the Leafs would have nothing on the books in year 3.
The chances of that scenario playing out is as close to zero as it's ever going to get without being zero. Marleau wants to play another five years. I can see him agreeing to a trade to help the Leafs but it's not going to be to retire.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 08:43 PM
  #44
leaffaninvancouver
formerly in Victoria
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillDerlago View Post
It's pretty funny to me that Stephane Robidas' legacy will be a fictional island in his name that old unwanted hockey players get "sent" to.
I know Leaf fans use it a fair bit here but does anyone else?

leaffaninvancouver is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 11:47 PM
  #45
jumptheshark
McDavid Headquarters
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lord of HFBOARDS
Country: United Nations
Posts: 74,925
vCash: 9240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dustin View Post
Thanks. Can you point to a site where I can read that from the CBA?
Chris Pronger's ending is an example. There was nothing Philly could do.

__________________
**Avatar approved by the powers that be***

I am the KING of Alternative Facts as any hockey fan is
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2017, 07:30 AM
  #46
Curufinwe
Registered User
 
Curufinwe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 30,131
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Something else that should probably be looked at - although we all know it never will be. I had no issues with Pronger or Dupuis or Savard spending years on LTIR. We all knew they were injured to the point where they could not play professionally again. That's fine, that's what it's there for. And I haven't looked at Robidas's case enough to comment on it, so I'll leave it. But Hossa "developing an allergy" to his equipment? Common. And I'm sure we'll see more examples of "allergies" in the coming years to handle getting around stupid contracts.
He's not the first guy to be forced out of the sport due to what you mockingly quote as allergies.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/s...id-out-of-nhl/

http://www.lockerroomdoctor.com/the-...t-oozing-rash/

Curufinwe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2017, 11:11 PM
  #47
oooooooooohCanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
The chances of that scenario playing out is as close to zero as it's ever going to get without being zero. Marleau wants to play another five years. I can see him agreeing to a trade to help the Leafs but it's not going to be to retire.
Obviously this is nill if Marleau is still a good player. But it gives them the ability to ship his contract off the books should he want to retire. If the Leafs went and won a cup in year 2 of the deal, he 100% retires I'd think.

Also there's going to be a lockout for that third year, we all know this, so its a moot point .

oooooooooohCanada is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2017, 11:18 PM
  #48
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 18,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oooooooooohCanada View Post
Obviously this is nill if Marleau is still a good player. But it gives them the ability to ship his contract off the books should he want to retire. If the Leafs went and won a cup in year 2 of the deal, he 100% retires I'd think.

Also there's going to be a lockout for that third year, we all know this, so its a moot point .
You might want to check your math.

mouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 01:34 PM
  #49
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oooooooooohCanada View Post
Obviously this is nill if Marleau is still a good player. But it gives them the ability to ship his contract off the books should he want to retire. If the Leafs went and won a cup in year 2 of the deal, he 100% retires I'd think.

Also there's going to be a lockout for that third year, we all know this, so its a moot point .
He's very likely not going to want to retire. I think the guy is going to chase down the games played record regardless.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2017, 09:53 AM
  #50
klamla
Registered User
 
klamla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillDerlago View Post
It's pretty funny to me that Stephane Robidas' legacy will be a fictional island in his name that old unwanted hockey players get "sent" to.

klamla is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:34 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.