HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

09-10 Canucks Injury Status

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-09-2009, 06:22 PM
  #26
Tripwyre
Registered User
 
Tripwyre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Calm down. Why can't you just talk to the point without getting so personal.
This isn't a Patrick White thread, I'm quite calm right now. You don't see how making an argument out of "No we are not under the cap, we are simply under the cap " is just a wee bit annoying?

Tripwyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 06:31 PM
  #27
StrictlyCommercial
Registered User
 
StrictlyCommercial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
That is not correct. There is an exception but that only comes into effect once the team is up against the Upper Limit.


http://www.nhlscap.com/cap_faq.htm#article_50.10
Seriously? You're backing up what I said... The team's current composition guarantees we will be over the cap on day 1 if we carry a 23 man roster with 8 defensemen as Gillis as stated. That according to capgeek places our salary situation at just under $2M over the cap. Thus with Demitra on the LTIR the Canucks would be over the Upper Limit, thus qualifying for the exception.

You can argue that this is not necessarily going to be our team's composition, but it doesn't refute the scenario in which that is the team's composition.

StrictlyCommercial is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 06:45 PM
  #28
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripwyre View Post
Why do you have to be so smug about everything? It might not be "cap savings" but seeing as we're over the cap, it will get us under. That's what matters. Stop arguing semantics.
You appear to mistake smugness for accuracy and precision in language.

It is most definitely not "cap savings" so it most definitely is not semantics.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 06:49 PM
  #29
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrictlyCommercial View Post
Seriously? You're backing up what I said... The team's current composition guarantees we will be over the cap on day 1 if we carry a 23 man roster with 8 defensemen as Gillis as stated. That according to capgeek places our salary situation at just under $2M over the cap. Thus with Demitra on the LTIR the Canucks would be over the Upper Limit, thus qualifying for the exception.

You can argue that this is not necessarily going to be our team's composition, but it doesn't refute the scenario in which that is the team's composition.
The roster composition on opening day has yet to be seen. Currently the Canucks are cap compliant.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 06:53 PM
  #30
StrictlyCommercial
Registered User
 
StrictlyCommercial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
The roster composition on opening day has yet to be seen. Currently the Canucks are cap compliant.
You just hate speculation don't you.

StrictlyCommercial is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 06:53 PM
  #31
Libor Polasek
Registered User
 
Libor Polasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
You appear to mistake smugness for accuracy and precision in language.

It is most definitely not "cap savings" so it most definitely is not semantics.
What Tripwyre fails to realize, is that Wetcoaster is a lawyer. "Smug" and the "arguing of semantics" is part of the whole package, baby.

One of my favorite quotes is from a buddy of mine, Owen (who happens to be a lawyer). A mutual friend of ours learns that Owen practices family law and says, "Oh, a lawyer, eh? I guess that makes you some kind of jerk."

Owen's response: "Well, yeah. But for the record, I was a jerk before I became a lawyer".

Libor Polasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 06:58 PM
  #32
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrictlyCommercial View Post
You just hate speculation don't you.
I have enough dealing with reality - speculation and hypotheticals are just too much to handle.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 08:16 PM
  #33
GreenPenInk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
So - just because a player has a long-term injury does not automatically grant the team extra cap space. A team with a payroll of $44 million that has a player making $4 million get injured doesn't gain any extra cap space as a result; a team at $54 million and a player at $4 million only gains $1,300,000 (all pro-rated, of course). Relief toward the salary cap only comes if replacing an injured player's salary would push the team over the cap, and the amount of relief is limited to the amount the team would go over the cap - not the entire amount of the injured player's salary.
I don't understand how this is any different than just saying your cap is now 56.8m + (injured player's cap hit) for the duration of the injury also note that the injured player's cap hit does not come off the books while he is injured. I am sure that statement may be able to be ripped a new one by a loopholologist but I don't get how or to what benefit. At first I thought it may have meant you already had to have been over the cap by a certain amount but it mentioned replacing an injured player's salary pushing you over so that doesn't fly.

Also why does it include the word pro-rated at all? I am guessing that's where all the weird calculations people do (which are never the same between two people hah!) come from. Maybe assuming they read parts of the CBA at all is giving them too much credit though.

I just don't get what the point of making a fuss over the fact that your salary cap doesn't automatically go to 60.8 million in this instance with Demitra is. I could see if they meant something along the lines of only being able to replace an injured player with one other player to push you past the cap, but that statement doesn't seem to limit you from rearranging your roster to fully 'exploit' your potential cap savings. Something that is definitely harder to do mid-season than pre-season.

And the more I read it the more it seems like it *is* saying you get real, for lack of a better word, cap space tacked on to your normal cap space with words like extra cap space and pro-rated being used. But that is disputed by wetcoaster and others. What are my layman's eyes missing?


Last edited by GreenPenInk: 09-09-2009 at 08:32 PM.
GreenPenInk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 08:43 PM
  #34
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenPenInk View Post
I don't understand how this is any different than just saying your cap is now 56.8m + (injured player's cap hit) for the duration of the injury also note that the injured player's cap hit does not come off the books while he is injured. I am sure that statement may be able to be ripped a new one by a loopholologist but I don't get how or to what benefit. At first I thought it may have meant you already had to have been over the cap by a certain amount but it mentioned replacing an injured player's salary pushing you over so that doesn't fly.

Also why does it include the word pro-rated at all? I am guessing that's where all the weird calculations people do (which are never the same between two people hah!) come from. Maybe assuming they read parts of the CBA at all is giving them too much credit though.

I just don't get what the point of making a fuss over the fact that your salary cap doesn't automatically go to 60.8 million in this instance with Demitra is. I could see if they meant something along the lines of only being able to replace an injured player with one other player to push you past the cap, but that statement doesn't seem to limit you from rearranging your roster to fully 'exploit' your potential cap savings. Something that is definitely harder to do mid-season than pre-season.

And the more I read it the more it seems like it *is* saying you get real, for lack of a better word, cap space tacked on to your normal cap space with words like extra cap space and pro-rated being used. But that is disputed by wetcoaster and others. What are my layman's eyes missing?
The first line in the quote makes it clear.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 08:47 PM
  #35
GreenPenInk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 513
vCash: 500
So basically you don't have extra cap space unless you choose to use it. No wonder people hate lawyers.

Also, it doesn't clear up the use of pro-rated and extra cap space at all.

GreenPenInk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 09:18 PM
  #36
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenPenInk View Post
So basically you don't have extra cap space unless you choose to use it. No wonder people hate lawyers.

Also, it doesn't clear up the use of pro-rated and extra cap space at all.
This is more of an accounting matter than a legal matter.

Pro-rated refers to the amount of money remaining on a contract at any point in time.

The illustration example in post #16 seems quite clear on these points.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2009, 11:01 PM
  #37
timorousme
luongod
 
timorousme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,523
vCash: 500
I don't know why people always argue with Wetcoaster when he's probably the only one who's actually read and can understand the CBA

timorousme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 12:33 AM
  #38
Tripwyre
Registered User
 
Tripwyre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by timorousme View Post
I don't know why people always argue with Wetcoaster when he's probably the only one who's actually read and can understand the CBA
That's just it though, no one here is arguing anything. We're all saying the exact same thing. But you'd never know it by the nature of the replies.

Tripwyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 04:58 AM
  #39
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,634
vCash: 500
Demitra is talking about 6 to 8 weeks... so make that 8 weeks. Then there will a conditioning period... probably at least a few weeks. That will probably take us into December.

However lots of obvious up-side here:

1. Gives a chance for a player like Grabner (who might be as effective as Demitra) a chance to break into the league. In the case of Grabner his time has be soon. If he doesn't break thru this season the window is going to start closing quickly on him. Shirokov or Hansen might also factor in here. (assuming Kesler or, maybe, Hodgson will be center here)

2. Provides time for a defenseman on another team to go down and thus makes a trade of surplus defenseman like Lukowich more likely.

3. Puts Demitra in a position where he can be fresher during crucial stages of the season (like the monstrous road trip)

4. Obviously puts the Canucks (at least in the near term) in a much better cap position. Creates the breathing room to juggle the roster.

5. Allows the Canucks some room to keep Schneider around. Hopefully ups his trade value.

I think it was clear months ago that this was the way things were going to come down and was probably a factor in Gillis's maneuvers during the off -season.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 10:43 AM
  #40
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,084
vCash: 500
How does it work with bonuses?

Work with me here...

Say Demitra goes on LTIR. The most logical "replacement player" would be Bieksa. The Canucks could spend to the cap and then tack Bieksa's salary on top.

But the team's salaries, minus Bieksa, only add up to about $55.6m. Could the Canucks then include Schneider's $1.2m bonus in their cap figure, taking them to the full $56.8m, and then tack Bieksa's salary on top, making the total cap $60.6m?

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 11:29 AM
  #41
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
How does it work with bonuses?

Work with me here...

Say Demitra goes on LTIR. The most logical "replacement player" would be Bieksa. The Canucks could spend to the cap and then tack Bieksa's salary on top.

But the team's salaries, minus Bieksa, only add up to about $55.6m. Could the Canucks then include Schneider's $1.2m bonus in their cap figure, taking them to the full $56.8m, and then tack Bieksa's salary on top, making the total cap $60.6m?
Basically Gillis sets his 23 player roster with all bonuses factored in.

Assuming Demitra is part of that roster, and goes on LTIR to start the season, the Canucks can then replace the amount of overage from Demitra's cap hit by a player or players who have a total cap hit equal to that and be over the cap as an exception.

That is what the Flyers did with Rathje who went on LTIR for the start of the season and remained there - he is still there for this season. Last season the Flyers put Derian Hatcher on LTIR to begin the season and he missed the whole season. In both cases as they were tight to the cap they could use the exemption since replacement put them over the Upper Limit.

It can get complex. If you recall the Canucks avoided putting Kesler on LTIR in 2007 as they wanted to push as close as they could to the cap before assigning him to LTIR to get the maximum value. He was placed on LTIR and the Canucks added players to take up the room. Kesler was brought back for the post-season when the cap did not apply - and promptly broke his finger.

The problem will be once Demitra is healthy space would have to be made on the roster (as the exemption disappears) to bring him back or he would have to be waived or traded.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 01:17 PM
  #42
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
Basically Gillis sets his 23 player roster with all bonuses factored in.

The problem will be once Demitra is healthy space would have to be made on the roster (as the exemption disappears) to bring him back or he would have to be waived or traded.
But he can take those bonuses off once Demitra comes back, right?

With a full roster not including "replacement player" Bieksa, and including $2.2m in bonuses with Rome as the 8th d-man, not Lukowich, the Canucks stand at $56.7m.

When Demitra comes back, can the Canucks then defer those bonuses and use the pro-rated part of the $2.2m that accumulated during the injury for a future date?

They would still have to clear about $1.5m, of course, but it's very possible that one of the 13 other players on the roster that make in excess of $1.5m could be injured and could be shifted into LTIR at that point.

You can really see why teams have full time capologists. I wonder how they keep track of everything at the NHL headquarters to make sure nobody is breaking the rules.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 02:05 PM
  #43
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
But he can take those bonuses off once Demitra comes back, right?

With a full roster not including "replacement player" Bieksa, and including $2.2m in bonuses with Rome as the 8th d-man, not Lukowich, the Canucks stand at $56.7m.

When Demitra comes back, can the Canucks then defer those bonuses and use the pro-rated part of the $2.2m that accumulated during the injury for a future date?

They would still have to clear about $1.5m, of course, but it's very possible that one of the 13 other players on the roster that make in excess of $1.5m could be injured and could be shifted into LTIR at that point.

You can really see why teams have full time capologists. I wonder how they keep track of everything at the NHL headquarters to make sure nobody is breaking the rules.
Come on it is not that difficult it is just Grade 10 math according to Darryl Sutter.

As long as the bonus cushion is available there is some slippage available.

There are so many permutations it is almost impossible to cover them all off - and then everything can change in an instant if another high salary player goes down with a serious injury prior to the regular season.

It is one of the reasons that the increased cap is available in the off-season.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 02:41 PM
  #44
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
Come on it is not that difficult it is just Grade 10 math according to Darryl Sutter.

As long as the bonus cushion is available there is some slippage available.

There are so many permutations it is almost impossible to cover them all off - and then everything can change in an instant if another high salary player goes down with a serious injury prior to the regular season.

It is one of the reasons that the increased cap is available in the off-season.
And that seems to be why Gillis isn't worried. Being forced to waive a player / make a trade with less than optimal return is only one of the results of those permutations. With Demitra likely on LTIR he's covered for the start of the season, and they can deal with whatever arises later.

It's going to be "fun" to see the local journalists hyperventilate as the season gets closer though.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 03:36 PM
  #45
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
And that seems to be why Gillis isn't worried. Being forced to waive a player / make a trade with less than optimal return is only one of the results of those permutations. With Demitra likely on LTIR he's covered for the start of the season, and they can deal with whatever arises later.

It's going to be "fun" to see the local journalists hyperventilate as the season gets closer though.
And which is why I have pointed out it is a mug's game to try to figure the cap until closer to the regular season.

Since the cap is currently at $62.48 million and there are about three weeks to go with Gilman and Gillis both being capable capologists (unlike Darryl Sutter) there is nothing to worry about at this point.

If Sundin comes back expect Demitra gone and likely Wellwood (if Hodgson makes the team). That is about the extent of what I can see happening at this time.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 11:47 PM
  #46
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Also, you could almost list Hodgson as day to day at this point (since he skipped the rookie games).

I've thought this over and it would be a huge mistake to keep Hodgson over Wellwood at this stage.

Wellwood had a decent year and good playoff considering he was injured during the summer, was out of shape and really had a lot of uncertainty surrounding his role last year. Now he's in better shape, is more secure (guaranteed 1.2) and knows his environment and his role (3rd line center). The guy is not necessarily going to explode but he is going to be a solid 3rd line center for us.

Why would you put Hodgson in lieu given a) coming off a medium rare injury b) burns a year off his ELC c) probably not strong enough for the NHL now anyways d) probably not suitable for the role of a 3rd line center with big defensive responsibilities. Very risky decision-making, IMO.

Demitra will be on LTIR and then traded for a 2nd rounder to NYR (speculation), and Sundin will start with the team early November - if he doesn't Kesler will be 2nd line center with a playmaker on the wing, Shirikov.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2009, 12:27 PM
  #47
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,084
vCash: 500
Wow, that's a lot of speculation right there.

If Demitra is to start the season on LTIR, there's no harm in keeping Hodgson for the 9 game tryout. After that, decisions can be made.

It's unlikely that Demitra would fetch a pick at this point though, not when Tanguay is playing for $2.5m. I'd say they are comparable players.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2009, 03:21 PM
  #48
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Wow, that's a lot of speculation right there.

If Demitra is to start the season on LTIR, there's no harm in keeping Hodgson for the 9 game tryout. After that, decisions can be made.

It's unlikely that Demitra would fetch a pick at this point though, not when Tanguay is playing for $2.5m. I'd say they are comparable players.
NYR could use Demitra to play with Gaborik. I think they'll be REALLY solid together in the one game they would both be healthy.

YogiCanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-15-2009, 02:39 PM
  #49
Xavier
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 96
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
Also, you could almost list Hodgson as day to day at this point (since he skipped the rookie games).

I've thought this over and it would be a huge mistake to keep Hodgson over Wellwood at this stage.

Wellwood had a decent year and good playoff considering he was injured during the summer, was out of shape and really had a lot of uncertainty surrounding his role last year. Now he's in better shape, is more secure (guaranteed 1.2) and knows his environment and his role (3rd line center). The guy is not necessarily going to explode but he is going to be a solid 3rd line center for us.

Why would you put Hodgson in lieu given a) coming off a medium rare injury b) burns a year off his ELC c) probably not strong enough for the NHL now anyways d) probably not suitable for the role of a 3rd line center with big defensive responsibilities. Very risky decision-making, IMO.

Demitra will be on LTIR and then traded for a 2nd rounder to NYR (speculation), and Sundin will start with the team early November - if he doesn't Kesler will be 2nd line center with a playmaker on the wing, Shirikov.
I agree on all points. Hodgson has a pretty serious injury IMO, a bulging disk is going to eventually require surgery as Wetcoaster pointed out. He is small as it is, and opposing goons are gonna be taking runs at him knowing his fragile back. I'd say that Gillis will not risk it, and we should probably forget an R.O.Y. dreams. So dissapointing, was really looking to see him in the NHL this year, but the risk is too great going forward.

On the flip-side, Wellwood looking fit, Shiro gets a better chance now, so Canucks will manage just fine. Hopefully Grabs picks it up a little, but only one game so hard to judge.

Xavier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-15-2009, 02:47 PM
  #50
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier View Post
I agree on all points. Hodgson has a pretty serious injury IMO, a bulging disk is going to eventually require surgery as Wetcoaster pointed out. He is small as it is, and opposing goons are gonna be taking runs at him knowing his fragile back. I'd say that Gillis will not risk it, and we should probably forget an R.O.Y. dreams. So dissapointing, was really looking to see him in the NHL this year, but the risk is too great going forward.

On the flip-side, Wellwood looking fit, Shiro gets a better chance now, so Canucks will manage just fine. Hopefully Grabs picks it up a little, but only one game so hard to judge.
That is the report on Hodgson.

According to a report yesterday Hodgson is suffering from a bulging disc in his back that they are treating with physiotherapy.

The good news? The agonizing shooting pains are subsiding.

The bad news? It looks like he is at least one week away from full contact and who knows what his conditioning will be like.

These are the sort of injuries that will often require surgery at some point.
http://www.faceoff.com/hockey/teams/...%3Fid%3D894638

I agree with your assessment. This could well mean Hodgson is going to be too far behind to catch up and do you want to take a chance of him being hit by bigger, faster and stronger NHL players?

Wetcoaster 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 10:51 AM.

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.