Clarkson for horton

[rdowdall]

They would get 5 million in LTIR cap relief.

Only if they sent 5 million worth of contracts back in the trade.

Not necessarily.  They could do this deal in the offseason, when they are aloud to go over, then place Horton on LTIR before the season starts.  You have to spend to the cap in order to take advantage of the LTIR.

Then how is Philadelphia allow to sign over the cap based on the LTIR of Pronger?

From NHL numbers, Philly's total cap hit is  76.210 based on the LTIR of Pronger.  They are allow to go over the cap the amount of Prongers contract.  Why wouldn't Chicago?  Why are the Leafs saying that they are allowed to now go over the cap by 5.3 million if the need should arise?  Why wouldn't Chicago?

If they are at $65 million dollars, and the cap is  $70 million dollars, and one of their contracts is the Horton contract, they can now go to $75 million dollars, can they not? If they can't, why can Philly?

 

[TML fan]

Just pretend Pronger's and Savard's and Horton's contracts don't exist.

 

[Kin]

Then how is Philadelphia allow to sign over the cap based on the LTIR of Pronger?

From NHL numbers, Philly's total cap hit is  76.210 based on the LTIR of Pronger.  They are allow to go over the cap the amount of Prongers contract.  Why wouldn't Chicago?  Why are the Leafs saying that they are allowed to now go over the cap by 5.3 million if the need should arise?  Why wouldn't Chicago?

If they are at $65 million dollars, and the cap is  $70 million dollars, and one of their contracts is the Horton contract, they can now go to $75 million dollars, can they not? If they can't, why can Philly?

You're sort of missing the central issue here. Chicago could go to 75 million including Horton's deal. So a team like Chicago who's in a cap crunch would still need to offload a bad contract for it to be of any benefit to them. So if Chicago is already at 65 and they trade just picks for Horton's deal...they're still at 65. They'd still only have 5 million of cap space. It's not like Horton's deal would mean they have 10 million in cap space unless they unloaded a bad contract in return.

Right? The Horton deal just doesn't count against the cap but it doesn't in and of itself free up space.

 

[Bullfrog]

That part's clear.

You're suggesting it's a good deal for Chicago because they'd get $5M in cap relief. But they don't really. That $5M or so is specifically for Horton who is on LTIR. There is no advantage to the team for that. And you're suggesting they trade prospects for this?

The only reason this works in the Columbus/Leafs situation is the real dollars side of thing. Columbus benefits by having an actual NHL player on their roster for the $5M they're spending -- even if he's only a 3rd/4th liner -- and the Leafs benefit by shipping out Clarkson. They get cap relief by getting him off their books, not by adding Horton.

 

[rdowdall]

Just pretend Pronger's and Savard's and Horton's contracts don't exist.

No, that's not it either.  But there is an advantage to having a contract on your roster that belongs to a player on LTIR, because you are allowed to reallocate that money.  And because you can trade that contract, then in theory you can trade that advantage.

 

[Joe S.]

If the Hawks have 70mil in Salary and trade picks or prospects (players that don't count against te cap) for Horton and his 5 mil the Hawks are still at 70 mil in salary.

It's that simple. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

If they trade 5 mil is Salary to the leafs for Horton their salaries would be at 65 mil now because Horton doesn't count against the cap.

The end.

 

[rdowdall]

Then how is Philadelphia allow to sign over the cap based on the LTIR of Pronger?

From NHL numbers, Philly's total cap hit is  76.210 based on the LTIR of Pronger.  They are allow to go over the cap the amount of Prongers contract.  Why wouldn't Chicago?  Why are the Leafs saying that they are allowed to now go over the cap by 5.3 million if the need should arise?  Why wouldn't Chicago?

If they are at $65 million dollars, and the cap is  $70 million dollars, and one of their contracts is the Horton contract, they can now go to $75 million dollars, can they not? If they can't, why can Philly?

You're sort of missing the central issue here. Chicago could go to 75 million including Horton's deal. So a team like Chicago who's in a cap crunch would still need to offload a bad contract for it to be of any benefit to them. So if Chicago is already at 65 and they trade just picks for Horton's deal...they're still at 65. They'd still only have 5 million of cap space. It's not like Horton's deal would mean they have 10 million in cap space unless they unloaded a bad contract in return.

Right? The Horton deal just doesn't count against the cap but it doesn't in and of itself free up space.

Okay, I understand now.  I still fell like this is cap circumventing on the part of the Leafs, but one that is allowed by the CBA.

 

[rdowdall]

It's that simple. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

Because it was.  Thanks for understanding. 

 

[Bullfrog]

You're actually talking cap hit, Joe, not salary.

If they're at 70M in salary and take on Horton's $5M salary, then they're at $75M in salary. As in, they're paying that out in real dollars.

The cap hit, or rather, the AVAILABLE cap dollars stays the same. The cap hit actually does go up, but the LTIR allows an exception for the amount it goes over (subject to certain rules.)

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Then how is Philadelphia allow to sign over the cap based on the LTIR of Pronger?

From NHL numbers, Philly's total cap hit is  76.210 based on the LTIR of Pronger.  They are allow to go over the cap the amount of Prongers contract.  Why wouldn't Chicago?  Why are the Leafs saying that they are allowed to now go over the cap by 5.3 million if the need should arise?  Why wouldn't Chicago?

If they are at $65 million dollars, and the cap is  $70 million dollars, and one of their contracts is the Horton contract, they can now go to $75 million dollars, can they not? If they can't, why can Philly?

You're sort of missing the central issue here. Chicago could go to 75 million including Horton's deal. So a team like Chicago who's in a cap crunch would still need to offload a bad contract for it to be of any benefit to them. So if Chicago is already at 65 and they trade just picks for Horton's deal...they're still at 65. They'd still only have 5 million of cap space. It's not like Horton's deal would mean they have 10 million in cap space unless they unloaded a bad contract in return.

Right? The Horton deal just doesn't count against the cap but it doesn't in and of itself free up space.

Okay, I understand now.  I still fell like this is cap circumventing on the part of the Leafs, but one that is allowed by the CBA.

Certainly it has the potential to be cap circumventing, but I don't think that's really suitable terminology at the moment, when the Leafs aren't presently exceeding the cap, either with or without Horton's salary.  It may or may not be a violation of the spirit of the CBA, but two teams and one player are happy.

 

[Kin]

I actually think I might be the person to blame for all of the confusion. In my original post about the Leafs potentially flipping the Horton deal I described it as a valuable asset and I think I'm realizing that it wouldn't be. If the Leafs could absorb a bad contract without trading away the Horton deal, as they could right now, then they can regardless of whether or not the Horton deal is involved. Including the Horton deal would really only be detrimental to the team taking it on and, as a result, would probably decrease what they might offer the Leafs for absorbing a bad contract. I think I may have confused things a bit with the NBA where the dollar amounts involved in trades need to even out.

 

[Joe S.]

You're actually talking cap hit, Joe, not salary.

If they're at 70M in salary and take on Horton's $5M salary, then they're at $75M in salary. As in, they're paying that out in real dollars.

The cap hit, or rather, the AVAILABLE cap dollars stays the same. The cap hit actually does go up, but the LTIR allows an exception for the amount it goes over (subject to certain rules.)

Yes you're right. That's what I meant, I should have said cap hit. Actually money paid vs cap hit.

 

[Joe S.]

It's that simple. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

Because it was.  Thanks for understanding.

Well as long as we helped.

 

[rdowdall]

It's that simple. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

Because it was.  Thanks for understanding.

Well as long as we helped.

When I am asked to cast a ballot for most helpful site on the internet, I will be sure to put down TMLFans.ca

 

[Joe S.]

It's that simple. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

Because it was.  Thanks for understanding.

Well as long as we helped.

When I am asked to cast a ballot for most helpful site on the internet, I will be sure to put down TMLFans.ca

Don't forget to mention your server.

 

[rdowdall]

It's that simple. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

Because it was.  Thanks for understanding.

Well as long as we helped.

When I am asked to cast a ballot for most helpful site on the internet, I will be sure to put down TMLFans.ca

Don't forget to mention your server.

But of course.  I would want them to get recognized for their net work.

 

[L K]

Clarkson gets 13 minutes and 8th most PP-TOI in game #2.  It's really unfair of Columbus to not give him a fair opportunity.

 

[Derk]

What, we aren't at 71 pages yet?

Columbus 0-2 with Clarkson in the lineup.

 

[freer]

What, we aren't at 71 pages yet?

Columbus 0-2 with Clarkson in the lineup.

they had lose 5 prior to the trade. So that is nothing different to them.

 

[Derk]

What, we aren't at 71 pages yet?

Columbus 0-2 with Clarkson in the lineup.

they had lose 5 prior to the trade. So that is nothing different to them.

Just wait until the Leafs pass them in the standings.

Of course, you have to score goals to win, usually.