Proposal: Allow teams to trade at 50% off cap

Discussion in 'Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk' started by Kcoyote3, Feb 22, 2021.

  1. It's phishing season. Members should beware of an email informing them their password is about to expire. You should delete it. This is a scam to steal passwords.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. Kcoyote3 Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    8,942
    Likes Received:
    3,091
    Trophy Points:
    126
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Teams are stuck with bad contracts everywhere.

    What if the league allowed teams to trade players at 50% of their salary, and remove that from the cap? So basically, let's take Buffalo.

    They trade Skinner to a team for $4.5 million x 7 years (still overpaid, but for the sake of argument). That team agrees to pay Skinner half his contract and take on that cap hit, while Buffalo agrees to pay Skinner that remainder $4.5 million x 7 years but no longer take the cap hit.

    Couple of stipulations would have to be put into place.

    1. A player cannot be traded in this manner again from a team. So if the second team does trade him, they cannot retain salary
    2. A team cannot take back any assets for "dumping" said player, this is purely a for free situation. If it works out for the new team, fantastic, if not, well, they won't feel like they gave up anything but cap space.
    3. Can only be done for contracts longer than 3 years, or else teams should just use a buyout


    It's a win-win-win.

    -Players keep their contract, and the money they signed for, instead of being bought out
    -Teams free up space
    -Teams with space get cheaper players that might be able to turn things around
    -Less dead space on the cap in the form of buyouts, and more flexibility for teams that are avoiding buyouts

    Edit: Also I think this is a bad title, but too late to edit it now. Basically allow teams to trade contracts and remove 50% of the cap from that player's contract.
     
    libertarian likes this.
  2. LaVal Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2002
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    380
    Trophy Points:
    169
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Location:
    Kelowna
    You make your bed you lie in it.

    This is coming from a Canucks fan, who have a team loaded with bad contracts.
     
  3. themelkman Always Delivers

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,148
    Trophy Points:
    142
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta
    Agreed. Sharks have tons of awful contracts, but id rather teams like Toronto not be able to slither out of massive deals
     
  4. Boondock Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    Messages:
    4,306
    Likes Received:
    1,027
    Trophy Points:
    139
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    One of the major reason the league went to a cap system was to level the playing field. If every team knows there is a level of cost certainty they can better plan and each team essentially has similar amounts of money to construct their team. In your suggestion teams like the Leafs (or any other big money team) would benefit from having disposable cash. Sign big name free agent #1 to a $9million dollar deal. It doesn't work out, eat half in cash and sell the player at 50% with no cap implications. A team like Ottawa (or any other small market cash strapped team) wouldn't have the extra $4.5 in cash to make these types of deals.

    With this said, I like that you are thinking outside the box for ways to improve a fairly rigid cap structure. I had thought it would be a good idea if a teams own drafted players had a 15% reduction to their cap hit. This might force teams to invest in their scouting departments and reward teams that built through the draft. It will suck when the Avs have to let players walk because they drafted so well they can't fit them all under the cap.
     
    Altimus and Richard88 like this.
  5. Pierce Hawthorne Formerly Avsare1

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    28,594
    Likes Received:
    15,079
    Trophy Points:
    176
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Location:
    Caverns of Draconis
    Sounds like an awful idea.
     
    Guitpik, Cogburn and go4hockey like this.
  6. CatchyTune JOHN TAVARES IS A MAPLE LEAF

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2016
    Messages:
    3,502
    Likes Received:
    2,265
    Trophy Points:
    126
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ontario
    same. anxiously anticipating the Marner buyout.
     
    Smif, leafsfan5, EK392000 and 5 others like this.
  7. BStinson Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,974
    Likes Received:
    287
    Trophy Points:
    94
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Really throws a wrench in the revenue split and provides large market teams an advantage.
     
    voxel and themelkman like this.
  8. themelkman Always Delivers

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,148
    Trophy Points:
    142
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta
    Im not saying they have one right now, but give it two years they would love to do the proposal with Tavares
     
  9. WillyNy Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2019
    Messages:
    1,147
    Likes Received:
    892
    Trophy Points:
    100
    SB Cash:
    $ 169,511
    Gender:
    Male
    sucks that the leafs won't be able to trade matthews or marner
     
  10. WillyNy Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2019
    Messages:
    1,147
    Likes Received:
    892
    Trophy Points:
    100
    SB Cash:
    $ 169,511
    Gender:
    Male
    he has a full nmc. he will be he in TO till he's 33
     
  11. CatchyTune JOHN TAVARES IS A MAPLE LEAF

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2016
    Messages:
    3,502
    Likes Received:
    2,265
    Trophy Points:
    126
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ontario
    doubt it.

    i was joking, thought you meant Robidas or Clarkson type deals.
     
    Altimus likes this.
  12. Richard88 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2019
    Messages:
    9,400
    Likes Received:
    7,187
    Trophy Points:
    101
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    You addressed the problem well here. The big money teams like Leafs and Rangers would use this to their advantage in a big way for sure.

    Interesting idea with the 15% reduction on caphits for your own drafted players. That would create a whole new dynamic with young RFA's asking for higher salaries given that they're more valuable to their teams at a 15% discount for instance. This might also make it less enticing to trade struggling young prospects though, as teams will hold out in the hope that they'll turn things around in order to have that 15% discount if they do well. Maybe there would be salary or escrow considerations too. Interesting idea though on the whole.
     
    Morrison and voxel like this.
  13. BigDaddyLurch #ProtekDaTie

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2013
    Messages:
    11,572
    Likes Received:
    1,485
    Trophy Points:
    139
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Occupation:
    Goon
    Location:
    Back in da Foxhole
    Why have a cap, then??...
     
    ylekot, Morrison and voxel like this.
  14. Pinkfloyd Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Messages:
    61,715
    Likes Received:
    6,415
    Trophy Points:
    220
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Occupation:
    Government Employee
    Location:
    Roseville
    Players don't really have a reason to agree to something like this. The amount of guys at that level that would actually get bought out is not worth the tradeoff.
     
  15. voxel Go Condors!

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2007
    Messages:
    18,222
    Likes Received:
    2,528
    Trophy Points:
    186
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    I prefer a luxury tax... like a massive penalty. If a team wants to make a run one year and want to be $2M/yr over... then they pay the tax (say 100% or 150%) that is distributed to the bottom 10 revenue teams.
     
  16. Mrfenn92 Proud to be American

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2018
    Messages:
    11,006
    Likes Received:
    9,604
    Trophy Points:
    131
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    CME
    Location:
    Chicago,Illinois
    Bring back compliance buyouts
    They don’t count against the players share of revenues
     
    Morrison likes this.
  17. Puckclektr Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    4,606
    Likes Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    184
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Location:
    GTA
    How is this fair for the teams who don’t have salary issues? What do they get out of it?
     
    Pertti and Gabe MacAntanen like this.
  18. BigDaddyLurch #ProtekDaTie

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2013
    Messages:
    11,572
    Likes Received:
    1,485
    Trophy Points:
    139
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Occupation:
    Goon
    Location:
    Back in da Foxhole
    Screwed...that's it, just screwed...which is why it's a terrible idea...if you sign a massive deal and the player doesn't meet expectations, that's hockey...
     
    Guitpik and go4hockey like this.
  19. Mrfenn92 Proud to be American

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2018
    Messages:
    11,006
    Likes Received:
    9,604
    Trophy Points:
    131
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    CME
    Location:
    Chicago,Illinois
    High five. A crisp one.
     
  20. go4hockey Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    5,737
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    139
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Location:
    Alta Loma CA
    This is the dumbest idea I have seen on here in a while. Why even have a cap if you put in ways to cheat it.
     
    Guitpik likes this.
  21. Qwijibo Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2014
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    955
    Trophy Points:
    109
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Good luck convincing the owners to write more checks for players they aren’t paying AND open up more cap space for GM’s to blow. There’s an agreed to 50/50 split of revenue. The flat cap atm is a mechanism of that. The owners are losing money hand over fist this season and trying to find ways for them to lose even more is going to fall on deaf ears.

    This won’t happen for the same reason that compliance buyouts didn’t happen this past summer.
     
  22. _Del_ Stomp out racism against Cubanos

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Messages:
    15,426
    Likes Received:
    6,708
    Trophy Points:
    250
    SB Cash:
    $ 10,000
    Occupation:
    Renegotiating bad contracts
    Location:
    Cuba
    Home Page:
    I'd be fine with a 5% overage of a soft cap. i.e. -- Soft cap at 81M and hard cap at 85.05M as long as the luxury cap is 200% and goes straight to the bottom 10 teams. If a team spends the year at 85.05M, that $8.1M cash on top that goes to revenue sharing.
     
  23. WTFMAN99 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    27,076
    Likes Received:
    4,240
    Trophy Points:
    186
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    AC
    Every 5 years (so in 2025...2030...) or simply let a team have one every 5 years to use as they wish.
     
  24. seroes Registered User

    Joined:
    May 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,683
    Likes Received:
    713
    Trophy Points:
    95
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    California
    As much as i would love to get out of the Jones, Karlsson and Vlassic contracts, as others have said the big market teams will abuse this. The sharks made those contracts to win now and now have to pay the price.

    I dont like a pure luxury tax system for the same reason. Big market teams will use it to circumvent the cap and the smaller market owners increase their profits a little. They most likely won't use it to improve the roster.

    If the GMs really want to change this they need to stop giving out 7 and 8 year deals to older players.
     
    Guitpik likes this.
  25. BlueBaron Registered User

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    12,532
    Likes Received:
    4,114
    Trophy Points:
    190
    SB Cash:
    $ 50,000
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sarnia, On
    Well I think it's silly but there is a solid reason why it probably can't happen.

    Your deal causes inflation and increases overall spending on salaries and the amount is unpredictable.

    Top that off with a huge drop in revenue due to Covid.

    It also does not benefit everyone equally. Not every team has this problem.

    This is the opposite of how the NHL likes to work but is a great gift for the NHLPA who would probably love your idea.

    A better solution is to stop handing out bad contracts.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"