Any official word on contract restructuring?

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by NomadManderson, Jul 13, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. NomadManderson

    NomadManderson Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    5,041
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I previously read a brief report of undetermined credibility that it would not be allowed, but I haven't seen it mentioned one way or the other the various writeups about the agreement.
     
  2. kdb209

    kdb209 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    16,271
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    126
    http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2005/07/13/1130172-cp.html

     
  3. FlyerFan

    FlyerFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  4. kdb209

    kdb209 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    16,271
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Nope. That would defeat the whole intent. Before re-signing RFAs, no team (except possibly Detroit - $38M for 18 players signed for 2005-06 according to the NHLPA Dec 9 offer, Exhibit 9) would be over the cap. If teams could restructure then, and then sign their RFAs & UFAs, the no restructure limitation would be meaningless.
     
  5. Winger98

    Winger98 powers combined

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    18,357
    Likes Received:
    450
    Trophy Points:
    199
    Location:
    Cleveland
    Home Page:
    Detroit might not even fit under that description as I think that $38m includes an $8 million option year for Cujo that was triggered by performance goals that weren't met.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"