Steve Stamkos?

[sneakyray]

#3  When you mentioned the risk for stamkos you specifically said  risk of injury so thats what I was responding to.

Right, and what I'm saying is that taking a shorter term deal is risky for all players, to say nothing of someone with an injury history. It's a factor in why signing a long term deal(which, again, can be structured however) would be more attractive, it wasn't meant to be the be all and end all in my point.

Term limits being the way they are though might change someones mind because a short deal opens up the possibility of signing for the extra year on the next deal.

so if stamkos signed a 1 year deal on july 1st when could he sign an 8 year extension with that team.  The new year?  thats the only issue I think could possibly keep anyone from signing the longest deal possible on their first ufa deal.

 

[Kin]

In the offseason, Horton counts against the cap.  We are in the offseason.

But Clarkson would be on the cap anyway so they're not eating anything. Their cap situation is fundamentally the same except for when games are actually being played when it's better.

 

[rdowdall]

Oh, I think I do.  Stop pretending your word is God.  It is an opinion like any other.

CBJ initiated the Clarkson trade, because they are too much of a budget team to eat that salary on a player not playing.

You said:

We basically had to eat all of Clarkson's AAV cap hit to trade him.  Fortunately the term is shorter with Horton.

But the Leafs don't have to eat any cap hit. The whole point of the deal was that with Horton on LTIR they can still spend to the cap on actual players and just absorb Horton's salary.

Also, the terms on their deals are identical. I don't speak for god, my bible is NHLnumbers.

In the offseason, Horton counts against the cap.  We are in the offseason.

I'm not sure that what you are saying really applies to the argument being made, but if it did, there is the case that in the offseason you are also allowed to spend over the cap by 10%.

 

[TBLeafer]

In the offseason, Horton counts against the cap.  We are in the offseason.

But Clarkson would be on the cap anyway so they're not eating anything. Their cap situation is fundamentally the same except for when games are actually being played when it's better.

You're missing the point.

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

 

[bustaheims]

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

Nik's point still stands. The only reason the Leafs made the deal was because it made their in-season cap position more favourable, with no real impact on their off-season cap position.

 

[Kin]

You're missing the point.

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

How does that translate to eating a cap hit? You said the Leafs ate money with Kessel and they did, the 1.2 million per year they ate will be on the books and prevent the Leafs from spending to the cap on their own players. Then you said they ate Clarkson's entire AAV. But they didn't. The Clarkson trade effectively took his cap hit off the books in every meaningful way.

 

[rdowdall]

In the offseason, Horton counts against the cap.  We are in the offseason.

But Clarkson would be on the cap anyway so they're not eating anything. Their cap situation is fundamentally the same except for when games are actually being played when it's better.

You're missing the point.

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

Right, but the deal wouldn't have happened if Hortons contract was insured, because Horton's situation comes with the ability of using his LTI as a way of gaining cap space.  The real problem was that Columbus couldn't afford to pay a player not to play, where as the Leafs can.  But they get the cap space because of the LTIR clause in the CBA.  Also they can spend up to his amount because they are allowed the overage in the offseason. 

 

[L K]

You're missing the point.

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

How does that translate to eating a cap hit? You said the Leafs ate money with Kessel and they did, the 1.2 million per year they ate will be on the books and prevent the Leafs from spending to the cap on their own players. Then you said they ate Clarkson's entire AAV. But they didn't. The Clarkson trade effectively took his cap hit off the books in every meaningful way.

The only thing the Leafs ate in the Clarkson trade was the salary that they have to pay out of their own pockets instead of the the insurance for Horton while insurance pays for Clarkson when he goes on the IR.

 

[TBLeafer]

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

Nik's point still stands. The only reason the Leafs made the deal was because it made their in-season cap position more favourable, with no real impact on their off-season cap position.

That was kinda my point as well actually, but you guys are just so used to disagreeing with me since I've joined.

Moving Clarkson, Kessel and Phaneuf is what put them in a position to potentially sign Stamkos in the first place.

Sometimes you guys can stop arguing with me for the sake of arguing.  Its okay.

 

[bustaheims]

That was kinda my point as well actually, but you guys are just so used to disagreeing with me since I've joined.

Well, then you stated it pretty poorly. You said the Leafs ate Clarkson's AAV. That's not true. They ate the real dollar value of Horton's contract, while putting themselves in a more favourable cap position.

 

[Redleaf]

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

Nik's point still stands. The only reason the Leafs made the deal was because it made their in-season cap position more favourable, with no real impact on their off-season cap position.

That was kinda my point as well actually, but you guys are just so used to disagreeing with me since I've joined.

Moving Clarkson, Kessel and Phaneuf is what put them in a position to potentially sign Stamkos in the first place.

Sometimes you guys can stop arguing with me for the sake of arguing.  Its okay.

Give it time. It will get ...

It doesn't get better. Lol

I think the signs are pointing to Stammer coming to Toronto. I mean you either believe he's just out for a huge cash grab no matter who the team is that pays him, or he, just maybe, wants to play in his home town. It isn't unheard of players wanting to play for the team they grew up cheering for. And, he still walks away with a boatload of cash and endorsements on top.

Anyways, My vote is for him joining the Leafs in a few weeks time!

 

[TBLeafer]

That was kinda my point as well actually, but you guys are just so used to disagreeing with me since I've joined.

Well, then you stated it pretty poorly. You said the Leafs ate Clarkson's AAV. That's not true. They ate the real dollar value of Horton's contract, while putting themselves in a more favourable cap position.

I only said AAV because I didn't look up his actual salary over the remainder of his term.  I didn't think it was important enough of a discussion to do so.

 

[Kin]

That was kinda my point as well actually, but you guys are just so used to disagreeing with me since I've joined.

Moving Clarkson, Kessel and Phaneuf is what put them in a position to potentially sign Stamkos in the first place.

Sometimes you guys can stop arguing with me for the sake of arguing.  Its okay

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEZm5tosOo0[/youtube]

 

[TBLeafer]

CBJ wanted to remove an inactive player from the books.  The Leafs could comfortably absorb that inactive player without batting an eye.

Nik's point still stands. The only reason the Leafs made the deal was because it made their in-season cap position more favourable, with no real impact on their off-season cap position.

That was kinda my point as well actually, but you guys are just so used to disagreeing with me since I've joined.

Moving Clarkson, Kessel and Phaneuf is what put them in a position to potentially sign Stamkos in the first place.

Sometimes you guys can stop arguing with me for the sake of arguing.  Its okay.

Give it time. It will get ...

It doesn't get better. Lol

I think the signs are pointing to Stammer coming to Toronto. I mean you either believe he's just out for a huge cash grab no matter who the team is that pays him, or he, just maybe, wants to play in his home town. It isn't unheard of players wanting to play for the team they grew up cheering for. And, he still walks away with a boatload of cash and endorsements on top.

Anyways, My vote is for him joining the Leafs in a few weeks time!

This time wearing the right uniform!

 

[herman]

you guys are just so used to disagreeing with me since I've joined.

It's not personal. You just happen to espouse opinions that seem contrary to the facts on hand, or are phrased unclearly, and we all enjoy talking about the team. The people that agree with your opinions also get the same deal. A forum is not an echo chamber.

If you were being treated roughly (the way some treated you on your previous forum), we'd all call them out on it. If you don't like the arguments in return, work harder to post more robust arguments.

Opinions + Facts = Arguments

 

[bustaheims]

I only said AAV because I didn't look up his actual salary over the remainder of his term.  I didn't think it was important enough of a discussion to do so.

It's a pretty significant distinction.

 

[Kin]

I only said AAV because I didn't look up his actual salary over the remainder of his term.  I didn't think it was important enough of a discussion to do so.

You said cap hit. Eating cap hit and eating salary are two entirely different things. I disagreed with you because what you said was untrue.

 

[sneakyray]

I think he's coming to toronto.  I think this whole situation reminds me of babcock last summer.  He said all the right things but the longer it went on it just looked more and more like it was going to happen.  Even though people were saying why would babcock ever go to toronto?  It feels like that all over again.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

The draft really can't get here soon enough...

 

[Redleaf]

I think he's coming to toronto.  I think this whole situation reminds me of babcock last summer.  He said all the right things but the longer it went on it just looked more and more like it was going to happen.  Even though people were saying why would babcock ever go to toronto?  It feels like that all over again.

Agreed.