whats to stop teams from.....

[boredmale]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal? (all under the table of coarse)

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

Click to read more...

 

[kingsfan]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal?

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

And what's to stop the player from shopping their services? I guess this could happen but, unless the team is offering much more than they could get on the open market or that player is VERY eager to stay with that team, why would they agree to return without at least shopping around?

 

[boredmale]

And what's to stop the player from shopping their services? I guess this could happen but, unless the team is offering much more than they could get on the open market or that player is VERY eager to stay with that team, why would they agree to return without at least shopping around?

well the player could make a deal under the table that if this happens he will resign(for a set price). Of coarse the player could screw the team over.

 

[Gags1288]

I proposed the same question a few days ago and I think the thing that will stop teams from doing this is the time line. Teams will be given a few days to get everything in order as far as signing RFA's, buying players out, etc... During this period, I don't believe that teams will be permitted to trade. Therefore, teams will be unable to trade these players and then buy them out without it counting against the cap.

 

[Benji Frank]

the teams ave till around August 1st as a grace period to buy players out without it counting towards thier cap & sign/make Qualifying offers to their own RFA's ... After this grace period, trading begins and all funds paid out go against the cap, so if I understand correctly, Philly couldn't trade Amonte until after August 1st & whoever picks him up at that point will have to count all funds paid to him against their cap.....

 

[Sens4Cup]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal? (all under the table of coarse)

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

Every trade and signing goes through the league office, there's no way they'll let this kind of stuff happen. Nuff said.

 

[Mess]

What happens if the bought out player can not find work with another team yet his former team would gladly take him back at a reduced rate ..

Does the player have a court challenge for loss of wages and damages as a result of the new CBA in regards to labour laws ..

 

[DaveMatthew]

Isn't there a rule that states that if you are traded from a team, you cannot play for that same team for a calendar year. There was a situation like this invloving Dean McAmmond a few years a go. He was traded from Calgary at the beginning of the year, and then traded back at the deadline. But he could not finish the season with Calgary, he had to sit out.

This prevents teams from "loaning" players.

Whether this rule also prevents players from signing with their former team, I don;t know.

 

[CarlRacki]

As has been said to each one of these fine ideas for how to circumvent the cap, the CBA is almost certain to have catch-all language that prohibits teams from engaging in behavior designed to circumvent the spirit of the cap or making arranmgements with undisclosed terms. I think it's fair to say the scenario outlined here would violate both provisions.

 

[kingsfan]

What happens if the bought out player can not find work with another team yet his former team would gladly take him back at a reduced rate ..

Does the player have a court challenge for loss of wages and damages as a result of the new CBA in regards to labour laws ..

For the most part, the only players that are going to have trouble finding work are borderline guys. the 3rd/4th liners and number 6 d-men. Guys like Hatcher and Amonte will have little trouble finding work. no team is going to try and pull off some trade and by-out flip like this for a depth D-man or checking forward. Why would they?

 

[Phanuthier*]

Massive fines (ie. five 1st round draft picks and $10 million)

Next?

 

[boredmale]

Whether this rule also prevents players from signing with their former team, I don;t know.

i am pretty sure wesley resigned with Carolina after the leafs traded for him at the trade deadline as a playoff rental.

Were there is a loophole i am sure somebody will find it(like when players who will become free agents get traded to teams with lower salaries close to the july 1st free agency period because if a team is over a certain budget, they don't get compensated(see rangers duming off players to edmonton)

 

[rwilson99]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal? (all under the table of coarse)

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

Believe it or not, I'd say the union. If high level players engage in this type of behavior it could screw up comps for arbitration for a number of years.

 

[Mess]

For the most part, the only players that are going to have trouble finding work are borderline guys. the 3rd/4th liners and number 6 d-men. Guys like Hatcher and Amonte will have little trouble finding work. no team is going to try and pull off some trade and by-out flip like this for a depth D-man or checking forward. Why would they?

I wasn't even referring to the trade and buyout situation .. That was already handled in part under the old CBA preventing this .. It used to be a waiver wire loophole and was prevented by prohibiting a player returning to his former team for a year .. I'm sure this will be handled similarly ..

The Phantom Trade:

Pete Peeters was traded by Philadelphia with Keith Acton to Winnipeg in exchange for future considerations on Sept. 28, 1989. Five days later, on Oct. 3, 1989, Winnipeg returned Peeters and Acton to Philadelphia in exchange for Toronto's 1991 fifth-round pick (Juha Ylonen) and an agreement to cancel the future considerations owed from a July 21, 1989, trade in which Winnipeg sent Shawn Cronin to Philadelphia. The Acton-Peeters deal was made to protect Philadelphia from losing either player in the 1989 NHL Waiver Draft. Neither Peeters nor Acton ever reported to Winnipeg during the five days between the two trades because Winnipeg general manager Mike Smith told them it wasn't necessary. At the time of the second trade, Winnipeg was given the option to take a 1990 sixth-round pick or 1991 fifth-round pick. The controversial trade prompted an investigation by the NHL, but Flyers general manager Bob Clarke argued that there was no prearranged deal in place. The trade was allowed to stand because the NHL was unable to prove that the first trade had included any plans for the second trade. However, both Philadelphia and Winnipeg were fined $10,000 for breaking a league rule that prevents teams from loaning players.

I was only referring to say John Leclair .. He gets bought out by Philly as a result of the new CBA ..

After shopping his services to the other teams there are no takers .. Yet LecLair is on record as saying he would have preferred to remain a Flyer and renegotiate his old contract ..

I wonder if there will be a clause in the new CBA that does allow the Flyers to resign him, with the condition that he needs to pass through waivers first, allowing all other teams to pick him up at the new offer sheet amount he has agreed to again with Philly ..

If he can't find work and the CBA prevents him from working in the NHL for any team, does John have a labour issue here ..

If he clears the waivers then he is allowed to return to his former team perhaps ..

 

[kingsfan]

Good question. I'd assume that if the players vote in the CBA, and the CBA states that owners can buy out players when ever they want, that the players approval of the CBA is also their waiving any rights to oppose a buyout. Thus, in effect, via the NHLPA, Leclair agrees to the buy out. That would make it hard to argue. I don;t really know though, I'd say ask one of the legal beagles around, but they don;t seem to get along with you as much

 

[Sens4Cup]

Isn't there a rule that states that if you are traded from a team, you cannot play for that same team for a calendar year. There was a situation like this invloving Dean McAmmond a few years a go. He was traded from Calgary at the beginning of the year, and then traded back at the deadline. But he could not finish the season with Calgary, he had to sit out.

This prevents teams from "loaning" players.

Whether this rule also prevents players from signing with their former team, I don;t know.

In McAmmond's case I think the issue was that he was traded a few days before the waiver draft and so he couldn't return to the Flames, I believe that otherwise the trade would have been fine, and he was able to play for them the next season.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal? (all under the table of coarse)

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

Why don't under the table salaries get paid in other capped leagues too?

 

[MiamiScreamingEagles]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal? (all under the table of coarse)

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

Reminds me of when the Reds traded a minor leaguer named Dave Revering and a boatload of cash to Oakland for the established Vide Blue. Baseball Commissioner Kuhn got involved and rejected the trade because "it wasn't in the best interest of baseball" (there were others along the line involving the A's)." I am sure there are bylaws that allow Bettman to make such a maneuver in the NHL, too.

 

[kdb209]

Good question. I'd assume that if the players vote in the CBA, and the CBA states that owners can buy out players when ever they want, that the players approval of the CBA is also their waiving any rights to oppose a buyout. Thus, in effect, via the NHLPA, Leclair agrees to the buy out. That would make it hard to argue. I don;t really know though, I'd say ask one of the legal beagles around, but they don;t seem to get along with you as much

The Buyout clauses already exist in every player's contract - they were part of the Standard Player's Contract under the old CBA. There is no doubt about the ability of a team to buyout a player. The only question is how the buyouts will be counted against the cap - that will be defined in the CBA. The speculated leaks say that there will be a short window where buyouts will not count against the cap - after that window closes they do. Also, as has been stated here before, there will be no trades allowed until after the buyout window ends, so there is no trade/buyout/resign loophole to worry about.

 

[Montrealer]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal? (all under the table of coarse)

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

You broke the system. Now Gary Bettman is going to have to kill you.

 

[Captain Ron]

What happens if the bought out player can not find work with another team yet his former team would gladly take him back at a reduced rate ..

Does the player have a court challenge for loss of wages and damages as a result of the new CBA in regards to labour laws ..

If you get a payout of 2/3rds of your original contract how can you claim lost wages? Getting paid 3 or 4 million dollars to do nothing does not sound like a problem the labor board would involve itself with.

 

[me2]

Trading a player they would buy out to another team, having them buy the player out(assuming they give them the finances), then resigning them to a lesser deal? (all under the table of coarse)

You might see a deal go down like this.

Philly trades Amonte to Detroit for Hatcher(both make roughly the same cash). Both teams buy the other guy out. Philly has an under the table deal for amonte to sign there for like a million bukcs and same with hatcher in detroit.

Can trading even take place before the buyout period is finished? If not its moot this off season.

Maybe in future years, something like this might happen, but probably won't be allowed. It seems kind of pointless trying to pick holes in a 600 page CBA when we don't even know what the 1st sentence looks like.

 

[Captain Ron]

Can trading even take place before the buyout period is finished? If not its moot this off season.

Maybe in future years, something like this might happen, but probably won't be allowed. It seems kind of pointless trying to pick holes in a 600 page CBA when we don't even know what the 1st sentence looks like.

Buy-outs in future seasons will still count towards your cap. This is the one and only time teams will have the opportunity to buyout players without it affecting their cap.

 

[LadyStanley]

When Alexander Korolyuk sat out (in part because he was Darryl Sutter's non-favorite) as an RFA, once Sutter was fired and Ron Wilson took the reins of the Sharks, on one forum someone asked about the possibility of Korolyuk signing and returning to the Sharks (say in January).

AIUI, under the old CBA, a team could bring in a player from Europe (or back from retirement) who didn't go through waivers, if and only if the other twenty nine teams agreed. (Might have happened with Vanbiesbrouck when he was brought back from "retirement".)

Now, if Player A gets bought out by Team B and gets signed by no other team, perhaps if the other twenty nine teams agree, Team B can re-sign him. Hard to believe after having all those $$s in the bank he can't be signed (if he wants to work).

But that is such a "irregular and unusual" occurence, that until someone specifically can see the appropriate section of the CBA, we may not know.

 

[me2]

Buy-outs in future seasons will still count towards your cap. This is the one and only time teams will have the opportunity to buyout players without it affecting their cap.

But a possible loophole is that in the future Team X trades a player to Y who buys him out. X sends a pick or something else. Y gets the pick as payment for using up its cap to help out X.

It's all up in the air until the CBA is seen.