HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

$5,000,000 cap space

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-26-2012, 11:46 AM
  #51
Blank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 331
vCash: 500
I'd guess that the cap space would be more a throw-in with a player. I.E Columbus trades Doan+2-5 mil cap for xxx.

Blank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 12:05 PM
  #52
Rydgar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Fiji
Posts: 452
vCash: 500
I think the idea is great if it also means ELCs are extended. Losing parity to some degree is fine if it also means crappy teams can rebuild faster. I don't think parity really matters when it comes to bottom feeder teams. Also, it means that there is going to be an increase in the amount of trading of players between teams.

Rydgar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 12:41 PM
  #53
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Woodballs View Post
So when the prospects are ready the teams with extra cap space can essentially poach them?

Just like what Philly tried to do to Nashville.
That or the team that has the players coming into their own can finally spend to the cap, just like Philly does. Look, at some point the reality of the situation is that you're going to have to pay to be a contender. It is not the job of anyone to find a way for small market teams to compete with out having to spend to the cap, other than the small market teams. The ability to trade cap space actually gives the poor teams or rebuilding teams the ability to leverage their suckage into greater means to rebuild and get back to being competitive faster.

And yes, it allows big market teams to mortgage their future for a one year fix. If a team plans to continually make use of trading for cap space then they're screwed. It will not be a sustainable long term approach to trade away your picks for space to sign name players. All that it would effectively be is one more way for big market GM's to hang themselves as a group/market because of individuals competing for talent within the said market, and small market teams get something for nothing because they weren't gonna use the cap space anyway.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 12:59 PM
  #54
Alazais
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 388
vCash: 500
I think the most reasonable idea here would be to keep some of the players contract on your cap hit. You trade Komisarek and agree to pay 2 million of his cap hit for the remainder of his contract. That would be the best possible way to go about it.

Alazais is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 01:14 PM
  #55
Leafs For Life*
Nothing
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,636
vCash: 500
I feel that it would be used to offset the cap going to one team in a trade ex Gaborik+5M for Couturier NOT SAYING VALUE, JUST THAT TYPE OF DEAL.

Leafs For Life* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 02:18 PM
  #56
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
Id give like a 4th from buffalo

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 02:21 PM
  #57
danyhabsfan
Registered User
 
danyhabsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,562
vCash: 500
I dont think the Burke idea was to trade cap space alone.

more like

Gomez + 3M for xxxxxx

the team receives Gomes with a 4.35M/year cap hit and Montreal has 3M on his salary cap.

danyhabsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 02:59 PM
  #58
CanadienKid25
Registered User
 
CanadienKid25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 360
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
NYI and EDM have strong prospect pools. I can't speak for Oiler fans, but I have ZERO interest seeing Wang with his cap floor tricks, picking up an extra pick/prospect while pocketing $5m.

Woohoo

There's a cap in place. Let deep pocketed teams spend wisely. Then they won't need to buy cap space.
Sorry, you misunderstood my post. Giving up cap space does not mean you are receiving $$ towards the floor. I also thought of an amendment to my rules...this provision addresses Team X from overspending during the summer.


1. Trading cap space is a one time offer to teams over the life of the new CBA
2. You can only trade cap space in the current year, after the season has started
3. It can be a maximum of $5,000,000

CanadienKid25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 03:00 PM
  #59
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaffan16 View Post
I feel that it would be used to offset the cap going to one team in a trade ex Gaborik+5M for Couturier NOT SAYING VALUE, JUST THAT TYPE OF DEAL.
The last cba eliminated cash in trades.You basically want to undue that rule change.

What's the limit? $5m per deal, $10m?

Stamkos to the Red Wings for $10M+ a late 1st?

Tavares to the Leafs for $10m+ Franson?

Duchene to Vancouver for Ballard+ $10m?

Those remind me of Larry Brooks shilling for the NYR, in the NY press:
Jagr to the NYR in his prime, for millions. Palffy in his prime to the NYR for millions.

No thanks.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 03:04 PM
  #60
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadienKid25 View Post
Sorry, you misunderstood my post. Giving up cap space does not mean you are receiving $$ towards the floor. I also thought of an amendment to my rules...this provision addresses Team X from overspending during the summer.


1. Trading cap space is a one time offer to teams over the life of the new CBA
2. You can only trade cap space in the current year, after the season has started
3. It can be a maximum of $5,000,000
I'm against selling cap space or draft picks/prospects. I don't think it matters whether the sales take place before the season or during the season.

GMs want to make trades, but don't have cap room? Then salary dump another player to make room. Spend wiser in the future.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 03:09 PM
  #61
The Messenger
Registered User
 
The Messenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTricK09 View Post
I dont like this idea.
Cap space is supposed to stop richer teams from getting stacked too much, with this, poorer teams would be trading cap space every year and this will be abused.
The NHL is doomed for failure if 30 team absolute parity is the goal. The NHL needs the big markets to be successful. The current revenue sharing is very unfair as big markets are forced to share revenue but get nothing in return. Surely the trading of cap space is beneficial to both the buyer and seller.

PS: I would even allow teams to sell for cash players or picks with a caveat of perhaps only one of these trades every 5 years. Isn't that the best form of revenue sharing?

The Messenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 03:17 PM
  #62
CanadienKid25
Registered User
 
CanadienKid25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 360
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I'm against selling cap space or draft picks/prospects. I don't think it matters whether the sales take place before the season or during the season.

GMs want to make trades, but don't have cap room? Then salary dump another player to make room. Spend wiser in the future.
Understandable. I was just clarify the idea in the post to clear up any confusion

CanadienKid25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 03:21 PM
  #63
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,498
vCash: 500
Perhaps a third-rounder...

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 03:24 PM
  #64
Guest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 500
I cannot help but feel this will be a similar thing to RFA Offer Sheets where people think it'll be used more often than it really is but it'll really just be the richer teams taking advantage of the rule.

I am not a big fan of the idea of outright trading cap space for other assets. I think if you do this you have to put some regulations in place to support it.

I do think it would be reasonable to provide cap relief in trades regarding the players being traded. For example if a team wants to trade a guy and pickup $2M of his salary/cap to get the deal done they could make it as part of the package. It would give GM's more flexibility in moving guys and keep the cap economy equal.

Back to the idea of trading cap space alone, the idea came to me that maybe you require the team trading the cap space to be that much over the cap floor. For example, if the Coyotes traded $5M in cap space they would have to be $5M over the cap floor to do so. I think many people would be afraid of the cap floor teams dealing all of their extra cap space away to the highest bidder. This would be a good way to ensure that doesn't happen while keeping the cap economy equal.

If you had teams outright buy cap space with money that could be a modified form of revenue sharing to help equalize the finances across the league. The rich teams could be buying up all of the cap space but it would give the poorer teams more of a chance to break even financially. Even better, create a luxury-tax like system where the value of the cap space purchased has a premium. I.E. it's not dollar for dollar but maybe a 10-25% markup. I'm not sure I support this idea, but it's good to throw all possible solutions out for vetting.

If you start trading cap space then I think you need to shrink the difference between the cap max and the floor. You don't want to increase the disparity between these areas more than they are already so that needs to be properly adjusted if this is allowed.

Guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 04:06 PM
  #65
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,425
vCash: 500
Nothing, I wouldnt trade anything for 5mil in space.

I would use whatever other teams are trading (ie/2nd rounder), + whatever it takes to get the 5mil player and then just dump a couple contracts in the minors if needed.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 04:39 PM
  #66
supert
Registered User
 
supert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by medhatcanuck View Post
It counter acts parity in the short run. But once the New York Islanders sell of their 5 mil for 5 years, they'll be the ones laughing with an extra 5 1st round draft picks, which would be significant for any organization.

I support the motion because, let's face it, the teams willing to trade off their 5 million aren't going to be a championship team anyways. Why not make a profit on the cap you don't use and will just sit there. This puts more money in the players pocket and allows for teams in their performance window, to be even more competitive.

Since these teams that r selling off 5 million are rebuilding and need revenues. Why not get 1st round draft picks???

The only downside I see is short term parity, but we know one extra player doesn't put an entire team to a Stanley cup.
I think it should be draft picks and dollar for dollar paid to buy it . This CBA is about teams losing money and the players wanting a fair share . if a team can sell enough cap space and make a profit doing so and the big teams buy it and pay the players everyone should be happy .

Hell does Wang really care if he sell 20,000,000 in cap space and makes a profit while piling up assets to make a run at the cup when he has his new arena . Does the reg. 3000 loyal fans in Phoenix care . The team turns a profit and are very well coached and well always be close to making the playoffs or in them . Plus they pile up some assets . Once they asset are enough for them to have a chance at the cup they can keep their cap and pay and hope a few years of being a competitor for the cup grows their fan base with loyal fans that will stay during the tough times ,plus extra sales of merchandise will also increase their revenue . I really think if it was done right everyone could be happy . I am sure there would have to be rules so some owners never put an AHL team on the ice and profit from the sale of Cap space .

Sorry Phoenix , the 3000 fan comment was just a number i picked and not meant in any way shape or form to put you guys down . I think there are more loyal fans then go to the game , but your arena is a long drive for most working people . I am sure if it was built closer or in your down town core it would have more people there .

The Wang comments was directed at him being cheap . The islanders fan has suffer long enough with bad GM,S and a bad owner . I loved when my Oilers were battling you guys for their first cup , well the second time more as i hated the sweep the first time

Here hoping the Oilers and Islanders get to battle for a cup soon


Last edited by supert: 08-26-2012 at 04:57 PM.
supert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 05:15 PM
  #67
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Do you think NHL should try to maintain parity, or Teams with the greatest fans who pay more $ and contribute to make their team richer, deserve a better team?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 09:41 PM
  #68
mytor4*
 
mytor4*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by senorchang View Post
Trading cap space? Not sure how I feel about this. The purpose of a cap is to equal the playing field so trading cap seems wrong.
Totally agree.Seems like a way to try to by the cup come trade dealline time.
A top contender trades their 1st rd pick for mil mil cap space and then goes and trades for a 5 - 7 mil player depending on how much they already have in cap space.
Also how long does that cap space last? till the remainder of that season?longer?

mytor4* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 11:27 PM
  #69
Leafs For Life*
Nothing
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
The last cba eliminated cash in trades.You basically want to undue that rule change.

What's the limit? $5m per deal, $10m?

Stamkos to the Red Wings for $10M+ a late 1st?

Tavares to the Leafs for $10m+ Franson?

Duchene to Vancouver for Ballard+ $10m?

Those remind me of Larry Brooks shilling for the NYR, in the NY press:
Jagr to the NYR in his prime, for millions. Palffy in his prime to the NYR for millions.

No thanks.
ITS CAP SPACE. Not cash. So then Gaborik's cap hit in my deal I said would be 2M to Philly, and NYR get's it back when Gabby's deal ends.

Leafs For Life* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2012, 06:58 AM
  #70
luki here
Registered User
 
luki here's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vienna
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Players and their leaders care less about a level playing field, then they do with the owners being able to spend to the absolute maximum.

Wang had an actual payroll of just above $36m this season.

Watching him sell $16m-$20m in cap space, while icing a barely cap floor team would be a real kick in the teeth.
Wang would love any way of selling picks, cap space or prospects for hard cash. Nyi spending is revealed as the joke it is if you consider to whom the majority of those 36 million was paid to. Di pietro, rolston, nino, yashin?

The most important change to the cba is lowering the cap floor from wangs perspective. Nough said.

However i agree that being abke to trade cap space to loaded teams could help the poorer teams remain competitive. I guess the central question is: can the north american market sustain 30 (perhaps 32 wih the new conferences) competitively spending teams? If not, allow the poor teams to trade away cap space. Otherwise force them to relocate by raising the cap floor.


Last edited by luki here: 08-27-2012 at 07:06 AM.
luki here is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2012, 07:37 AM
  #71
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukasfindl View Post
Wang would love any way of selling picks, cap space or prospects for hard cash. Nyi spending is revealed as the joke it is if you consider to whom the majority of those 36 million was paid to. Di pietro, rolston, nino, yashin?

The most important change to the cba is lowering the cap floor from wangs perspective. Nough said.

However i agree that being abke to trade cap space to loaded teams could help the poorer teams remain competitive. I guess the central question is: can the north american market sustain 30 (perhaps 32 wih the new conferences) competitively spending teams? If not, allow the poor teams to trade away cap space. Otherwise force them to relocate by raising the cap floor.
Is he currently trying to sell the team? If not one would have to wonder why not.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2012, 07:40 AM
  #72
thadd
Oil4Life
 
thadd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: China
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,057
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to thadd
At the trade deadline I could see 5M in cap space going for a 2nd rounder from a playoff bubble team or a 1st rounder from one of the top 4-6 teams.

thadd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2012, 08:13 AM
  #73
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 10,955
vCash: 500
I would think it could go along the lines of this.

Team A buys 5m worth of cap space from team B for 5m cash per season on a binding contract length of x.

Let teams sell off between 5/10m worth of cap space,per year.

League sets terms on min compensation and term length. Like no less then 1 for 1. 1m cash for 1m cap space per year, contract max set at 5 years.

Put cash directly into the pockets of teams that need the $ and lowering their cap floor at the same time.

If a owner choses to risk their teams parity to add/save 10/20m $ per season, thats their rite and business.

No one team can purchase or sell or have more then 5/10 m worth in any given season.

Say NYI sells a 10m per year on a 5 year term , thats 50m cash AND 50m in floor they could put on the books over 5 years. Who knows maybe a bidding war is started and they get more then 1m cash per for 1m worth of cap space.

Putting/saving a combined 100m or more in the pocket of the islanders over 5 years.

Some one tell me how that is not good for them?

Parity issues? Well it does not have to be so if the ownership so choses, the islanders could till spend up to 60m in cap vs say the purchaser at 80m.


Last edited by Faltorvo: 08-27-2012 at 08:40 AM.
Faltorvo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2012, 08:25 AM
  #74
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,650
vCash: 10592
To me it's a just a throw in to open up the trade market to all teams instead of just the ones that can fit said player(s) without it.

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2012, 08:49 AM
  #75
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaffan16 View Post
ITS CAP SPACE. Not cash. So then Gaborik's cap hit in my deal I said would be 2M to Philly, and NYR get's it back when Gabby's deal ends.
I'm against cap space being sold for cash, prospects or picks. Gm's who want to acquire a player but lack cap space, have the option of salary dumping another player to make room.

I think buying cap space gives deep pocketed teams a huge advantage, in a push for a playoff spot.

CREW99AW 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 09:20 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.