• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

2012 CBA Negotiations Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie
Sorry I lied. Important note on back-diving contracts (BDC). If player traded, then later in deal retires, original club on hook for cap hit

So, say Luongo gets traded here, plays for a few years and the retires... Vancouver gets pooched? Wow, if this happens (this rule not the Luongo trade) Burke is going to come out of this all roses.
 
At the same time, what would be the incentive for now for Vancouver to trade Luongo? Would it not be like selling your car and still having to insure, repair, and put gas in it? Does Luongo now become the 'old beater' that you just may as well keep and drive into the ground?
 
The Sarge said:
How's those Weber, Parise, Kovalchuk, Richards type deals looking now?  :o
Click to expand...

Largely similar. The teams will still be getting many, many years of service from those guys at reduced cap hits. This would only bite anyone if and when players retired with a bunch of years left, something that A) is still largely speculative and B) is far enough in the future that there will be at least one more round of CBA negotiations beforehand so it's still subject to change.

But beyond that? I don't think the Leafs want a situation where they can't exercise their financial clout to attract players. I know that's Burke's policy but there's no indication that, dollars and term being equal, Toronto is going to be able to attract free agents with any real success.
 
The Sarge said:
But to the point where they still would have got those exact same deals?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think so. Or thereabouts. I'm not as convinced as some that all of these guys are going to retire at 37 the way some assume. If I'm a team that can afford to front load a deal I still like the idea of spreading out the guaranteed money over a long stretch so as to reduce the cap hit in each year.

Either way, doing away with these deals is taking an option from wealthier teams off of the table to use their financial clout to attract talent which A) I'm not in favour of as a Leafs fan and B) You were so keen on demanding that big clubs should demand more of in return for the increased revenue sharing. Ask any Yankee fan if they'd like to trade their payroll advantage for relying on the prestige of the pinstripes.
 
Nik V. Debs said:
Ask any Yankee fan if they'd like to trade their payroll advantage for relying on the prestige of the pinstripes.
Click to expand...

Sure, but their payroll advantage has nothing to do at all with signing players to artificial contract years. It's entirely about being able to afford the luxury tax which as a Leafs fan, I'd be all for. I don't know, I'd rather build my team that way (if I could)  than through some crazy loophole that is already beginning to close... To your point about what the future may hold beyond this upcoming CBA, maybe they'll shut it for good and really put the teams holding these contracts over a barrel.

Edit: Also, it still doesn't change the fact that if they retire after 5 years, the original team would still be left with the cap hit... That's a big pill to swallow. Big enough that I can say with some confidence that these players might not have gotten so much term.
 
bustaheims said:
TSNBobMcKenzie: One of most interesting aspects of NHL proposal is aimed at punishing clubs more than players, with regard to existing back-diving deals.

TSNBobMcKenzie: Any existing deal in excess of 5 yrs would carry cap hit in every year of contract, even if player were to retire with year(s) left.

TSNBobMcKenzie: In other words, the benefit clubs thought they were getting by reducing AAV with back-diving deals/bogus end yrs would be reduced/negated.

The sound you're hearing . . . that's the fuse on the explosives attached to Luongo's trade value being lit.
Click to expand...

Seriously.
 
The Sarge said:
Sure, but their payroll advantage has nothing to do at all with signing players to artificial contract years.
Click to expand...

No, it's about using their revenues to be able to afford things other teams can't. Much like the Leafs could have signed these big front loaded deals and then buried them in the later years and used their financial clout to do things other teams couldn't.

The Sarge said:
It's entirely about being able to afford the luxury tax which as a Leafs fan, I'd be all for. I don't know, I'd rather build my team that way (if I could)  than through some crazy loophole that is already beginning to close...
Click to expand...

But, of course, you can't so it's moot. The point of the comparison is there's not much good from a Leafs fans perspective about the league closing off the very few and narrow opportunities the team has to exploit their financial advantage.

The Sarge said:
Also, it still doesn't change the fact that if they retire after 5 years, the original team would still be left with the cap hit... That's a big pill to swallow.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. If a team signed these contracts thinking either that  the players would play the length of the deals or that the advantages gained in the first 7-9 years of the deals where they're almost certain to play outweighed the downsides to such an extent that they were resigned to having those deals on their books regardless then there's virtually no change here. This only hurts if those deals are dishonest or a team planned on burying the guys in the minors/trading them and even then a bunch of the contracts you mention have NMC's or NTC's which made that a gamble either way.
 
Nik V. Debs said:
The point of the comparison is there's not much good from a Leafs fans perspective about the league closing off the very few and narrow opportunities the team has to exploit their financial advantage.
Click to expand...

We agree there. Where we disagree is how good it would have been for the Leafs now (assuming this rule kicks in) had the Leafs gone out and signed a player to a similar deal.
 
LeBrun with a little summary just now on twitter;

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Means those deals would continue to count vs team cap even if said player is no longer playing.

3m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
`` ... the Player is playing. '' Translation: hammer time on back-diving deals (Hossa/Luongo). .... cont

5m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
``... of five (5) years will be accounted for and charged against a team?s Cap (at full AAV) regardless of whether or where the ...'' cont

6m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Mentioned this last night in my blog but worth repeating. Within new NHL offer: `` All years of existing SPCs with terms in excess...'' cont
 
The Sarge said:
Where we disagree is how good it would have been for the Leafs now (assuming this rule kicks in) had the Leafs gone out and signed a player to a similar deal.
Click to expand...

Ok so, flat out, yes or no; you're GM of the Leafs and this deal gets done as reported. Nashville calls you tomorrow and offers you Shea Weber and his 14 year/110 million deal for nothing. Are you turning that down because of the added risk?
 
The Sarge said:
LeBrun with a little summary just now on twitter;

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Means those deals would continue to count vs team cap even if said player is no longer playing.

3m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
`` ... the Player is playing. '' Translation: hammer time on back-diving deals (Hossa/Luongo). .... cont

5m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
``... of five (5) years will be accounted for and charged against a team?s Cap (at full AAV) regardless of whether or where the ...'' cont

6m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Mentioned this last night in my blog but worth repeating. Within new NHL offer: `` All years of existing SPCs with terms in excess...'' cont
Click to expand...

I actually don't think the NHL's offer is so bad.  With a little tinkering (a.k.a counter proposals) by the PA might just bring all interested parties on the same page.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed.  :)
 
Nik V. Debs said:
The Sarge said:
Where we disagree is how good it would have been for the Leafs now (assuming this rule kicks in) had the Leafs gone out and signed a player to a similar deal.
Click to expand...

Ok so, flat out, yes or no; you're GM of the Leafs and this deal gets done as reported. Nashville calls you tomorrow and offers you Shea Weber and his 14 year/110 million deal for nothing. Are you turning that down because of the added risk?
Click to expand...

I say a flat-out no.  Unless a team is in such desperate need of such a player that their desperation would outweigh the added risk.

Otherwise, I'd say no.  As it stands, too risky.  Something here needs to be changed.
 
Nik V. Debs said:
The Sarge said:
Where we disagree is how good it would have been for the Leafs now (assuming this rule kicks in) had the Leafs gone out and signed a player to a similar deal.
Click to expand...

Ok so, flat out, yes or no; you're GM of the Leafs and this deal gets done as reported. Nashville calls you tomorrow and offers you Shea Weber and his 14 year/110 million deal for nothing. Are you turning that down because of the added risk?
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
Also, on a related note (regardless of term) I'm not sure how I feel about these 8 mil. deals now with a cap under 60 mil now. 
 
The Sarge said:
LeBrun with a little summary just now on twitter;

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Means those deals would continue to count vs team cap even if said player is no longer playing.

3m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
`` ... the Player is playing. '' Translation: hammer time on back-diving deals (Hossa/Luongo). .... cont

5m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
``... of five (5) years will be accounted for and charged against a team?s Cap (at full AAV) regardless of whether or where the ...'' cont

6m Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Mentioned this last night in my blog but worth repeating. Within new NHL offer: `` All years of existing SPCs with terms in excess...'' cont
Click to expand...

This reads like a telegraph from the turn of the last century...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top