Friedman: Belief that trade agreed on Clarkson and a first to Vegas

[Nanabijou]

It's unclear as to whether or not "salary" in the context of "80% of Clarkson's salary" means salary as in the actual paid salary as defined by the CBA (not including signing bonuses), or "salary" as in the cash he receives that year independent of cap hit (including signing bonuses). It's been used interchangeably and confusingly for both and so we don't know for sure.

Yes, this is a big issue and Portzline (CBJ beat writer) really should have gotten Jarmo on record about what is covered. Because if his signing bonus isn't covered, which is the bulk of what he is owed, then I see the CBJ getting raked pretty hard over the coals in moving Clarkson.

 

[mouser]

That's the thing. If the bolded is actually there as described, then that would actually make for something like a reasonable deal - depends on the prospect, obviously. The concern is that the only thing being mentioned is "prospect+1st+Clarkson", and it's a little too easy to see that as "all that just to dump the contract".

Honestly that strikes me as a fair price just to dump the contract. In a similar situation last year Florida had to send Lawson Crouse (1 year removed from being a #11 pick) to dump a similar contract in Bolland with $3.3m in real dollars remaining.

Assuming reports are accurate that Clarkson has $3m in real dollars remaining, the #24 pick in 2017 would be lesser value then Crouse imo. Adding on an prospect or additional pick from Columbus seems appropriate.

 

[mouser]

Insurance covers 80% of the salary.

It is also likely that insurance doesn't cover Clarkson's signing bonuses which is the bulk of his deal. It's very likely that Columbus has to pay those out of pocket which would be the real incentive to do this deal for them.

There's no fundamental reason why insurance should or shouldn't cover the signing bonus. It's all a matter of what the NHL contracted for in their group contract insurance policy. I'm confident an insurer would provide a policy for either option given the appropriate premiums.

Of course it would dramatically change Clarkson's situation if signing bonuses aren't covered.

 

[mouser]

Unless I am mistaken, insurance doesn't cover 100% of the contract value for injured players. It's closer to 80%, and 80% of what Clarkson is due for the rest of his contract works out to around $3M.

So CLB is saving that $3M at the cost of a 1st round pick.


Last summer Ottawa gave NYR a 2nd round pick to delay the agreement on the Brass-Zib trade and save the $2M signing bonus that Brassard was scheduled to get. **This wasn't reported as such but was widely speculated and generally agreed upon by just about everyone**

In past versions of the NHL contract insurance policy teams received a pool of insurance dollars they could spread across 5-7 contracts. Insuring 5 contracts at 100%, or up to 7 at less then 100%.

It's possible that system is still in place, or it's possible a newer version of the insurance policy only insures every contract at 80%. In summary, we know a couple recent insurance coverages have been publicized as being 80%, but I don't think we know that every insured contract must be 80%.

 

[CBJx614]

Honestly that strikes me as a fair price just to dump the contract. In a similar situation last year Florida had to send Lawson Crouse (1 year removed from being a #11 pick) to dump a similar contract in Bolland with $3.3m in real dollars remaining.

Assuming reports are accurate that Clarkson has $3m in real dollars remaining, the #24 pick in 2017 would be lesser value then Crouse imo. Adding on an prospect or additional pick from Columbus seems appropriate.

And adding both Milano(2014 1st) and a 2017 1st should be enough to take Clarkson and chose who gets taken in the draft.

 

[Blue Goose]

There's no fundamental reason why insurance should or shouldn't cover the signing bonus. It's all a matter of what the NHL contracted for in their group contract insurance policy. I'm confident an insurer would provide a policy for either option given the appropriate premiums.

Of course it would dramatically change Clarkson's situation if signing bonuses aren't covered.

If the signing bonuses aren't covered by insurance, and CBJ trades him after July 1 of this year, here's the breakdown that the new team would be looking at:

2017-18 – Insurance: $1.6M; Salary: $400K
2018-19 – Insurance: $800K; Salary: $200K; Signing bonus: $3.75M
2019-20 – Insurance: $800K; Salary: $200K; Signing bonus: $2.25M

So the new team would be on the hook for $6.8M over three years.

 

[Sstroh84]

And adding both Milano(2014 1st) and a 2017 1st should be enough to take Clarkson and chose who gets taken in the draft.

If I were Jarmo I would choose for them to sign Sam Gagner. Then we don't lose anyone and he would count as their expansion selection from CBJ.

 

[RandallRitchey]

If I were Jarmo I would choose for them to sign Sam Gagner. Then we don't lose anyone and he would count as their expansion selection from CBJ.

Gagner would have to agree to sign there. Not that simple.

 

[Viqsi]

Honestly that strikes me as a fair price just to dump the contract. In a similar situation last year Florida had to send Lawson Crouse (1 year removed from being a #11 pick) to dump a similar contract in Bolland with $3.3m in real dollars remaining.

Florida also got two picks back in that deal. There are no such rumors of a return in our case at this point. That's a pretty significant part of the problem. Clarkson + 1st + prospect for free is not going to be a fair deal no matter how it's spun.

That, and IIRC Crouse was considered a bit of a reach to begin with, so I don't really care about his draft position.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Aaron Portzline‏ @Aportzline 18m18 minutes ago

#CBJ did not ask veteran forward Scott Hartnell to waive his no-move clause by today's 5 p.m. deadline.

 

[Riptide]

He will only be on LTIR if his cap hit puts Vegas over the cap ceiling, which is very unlikely in their first year.

How much they have to pay him of the $15m he is still owed on his contract is a separate insurance question.

However his contract is insured, which is the important thing.

 

[Mayor Bee]

[deleted]

 

[WTFMAN99]

Calling my shot, if the deal goes through, the prospect is Milano.

 

[Mayor Bee]

[deleted]

 

[Blue Goose]

Aaron Portzline‏ @Aportzline 18m18 minutes ago

#CBJ did not ask veteran forward Scott Hartnell to waive his no-move clause by today's 5 p.m. deadline.

Can I throw out a theory?

With Hartnell not waiving, this means that Anderson would likely not have been protected. Essentially, McPhee gets to choose between Korpisalo and Anderson, knowing he'd be happy with either one. CBJ would rather have Vegas take Korpisalo, knowing they still have Forsberg to backup Bob. So CBJ negotiates the 2-year deal for Korpisalo, thus allowing Vegas to take him without using one of the 10 slots reserved for RFA/UFA players, and they get to refrain from asking Hartnell to waive his NMC.

Does that make sense to anyone?

 

[Riptide]

So CBJ would give up a 1st + prospect + whoever Vegas takes just to drop Clarkson who is on LTIR (doesn't hinder our capspace during the season) and is largely being paid by insurance. Plus they would give up a pick/prospect to NJ. Just to get a 34 year old Kovalchuk?

What am I missing?

CBJ ownership should just pay Clarkson themselves and keep the prospects and picks.

Yes teams get relief for players on LTIR, but it's false to say that having a player on LTIR doesn't "hinder a teams capspace" - because it does.

For example (and the numbers won't be exact, but they'll be close enough to get the point across):

Team A has 1m in cap space that they've carried all year. Which means come the trade deadline, they can effectively acquire a player with a 4m cap hit with zero moves or roster adjustments. Basically because the new player's original team paid for 3/4 of their salary all year, team A can fit the player into their cap structure for 1/4 of his cap hit.

Team B has 2m in cap space, however they gained that by placing a player with a 3m cap hit on LTIR and calling up a replacement with a 1m cap hit. At the trade deadline (that 3m player is still on LTIR and will be done for the season), they can only fit in a player with a true 2m cap hit as they have to count the entire cap hit. This is where LTIR sucks and why we've seen teams pay another team to take a LTIRetire contract off their books (Pronger, Savard). When you're in LTIR space, you do not get the advantage of another team paying a players salary for part/most of the year like you do when you're not using LTIR space.

It's not a huge issue... but if you're a cap team looking for every edge possible, not being able to use any free cap space to your best advantage is a hindrance, and one that can affect the quality of the team you can ice for the playoffs.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

Can I throw out a theory?

With Hartnell not waiving, this means that Anderson would likely not have been protected. Essentially, McPhee gets to choose between Korpisalo and Anderson, knowing he'd be happy with either one. CBJ would rather have Vegas take Korpisalo, knowing they still have Forsberg to backup Bob. So CBJ negotiates the 2-year deal for Korpisalo, thus allowing Vegas to take him without using one of the 10 slots reserved for RFA/UFA players, and they get to refrain from asking Hartnell to waive his NMC.

Does that make sense to anyone?

Pure balderdash! And here's why

 

[Viqsi]

Can I throw out a theory?

With Hartnell not waiving, this means that Anderson would likely not have been protected. Essentially, McPhee gets to choose between Korpisalo and Anderson, knowing he'd be happy with either one. CBJ would rather have Vegas take Korpisalo, knowing they still have Forsberg to backup Bob. So CBJ negotiates the 2-year deal for Korpisalo, thus allowing Vegas to take him without using one of the 10 slots reserved for RFA/UFA players, and they get to refrain from asking Hartnell to waive his NMC.

Does that make sense to anyone?

It sounds like a lovely dream for y'all. It is good to have dreams.

I think the Korpi contract was more about locking down the backup position, myself, but we'll see. Especially considering that if we're spending that much on the Clarkson situation, we ought to be able to do better than "of the two guys we'd really really hate to lose, we might hate losing this guy just a teensy tiny bit less maybe sorta" - particularly if we're going to the trouble of signing him for you guys in advance. I don't think Kekalainen is quite that friendly.

 

[Blue Goose]

It sounds like a lovely dream for y'all. It is good to have dreams.

I think the Korpi contract was more about locking down the backup position, myself, but we'll see. Especially considering that if we're spending that much on the Clarkson situation, we ought to be able to do better than "of the two guys we'd really really hate to lose, we might hate losing this guy just a teensy tiny bit less maybe sorta" - particularly if we're going to the trouble of signing him for you guys in advance. I don't think Kekalainen is quite that friendly.

It just seems odd to me, that's all. My hope was always to land Korpisalo, since I assumed Hartnell would waive and Anderson would be protected. If Hartnell is taking up a protection slot, that tells me that either Jarmo is going to trade one of Jenner/Anderson, or he's got something else in place to prevent McPhee from taking one of those forwards - hence, this Clarkson situation. So now we're supposedly missing out on Anderson AND Korpisalo? Now I see why a 1st rounder has to be involved.

PS. I met Jarmo at the 2010 draft when he was still working for the Blues. I shook his hand and he stared daggers right through me...

 

[Viqsi]

It just seems odd to me, that's all. My hope was always to land Korpisalo, since I assumed Hartnell would waive and Anderson would be protected. If Hartnell is taking up a protection slot, that tells me that either Jarmo is going to trade one of Jenner/Anderson, or he's got something else in place to prevent McPhee from taking one of those forwards - hence, this Clarkson situation. So now we're supposedly missing out on Anderson AND Korpisalo? Now I see why a 1st rounder has to be involved.

That's at least the emerging theory as to why there'd be a prospect and a 1st, yep.

PS. I met Jarmo at the 2010 draft when he was still working for the Blues. I shook his hand and he stared daggers right through me...

Oy.

 

[Nanabijou]

Yes teams get relief for players on LTIR, but it's false to say that having a player on LTIR doesn't "hinder a teams capspace" - because it does.

For example (and the numbers won't be exact, but they'll be close enough to get the point across):

Team A has 1m in cap space that they've carried all year. Which means come the trade deadline, they can effectively acquire a player with a 4m cap hit with zero moves or roster adjustments. Basically because the new player's original team paid for 3/4 of their salary all year, team A can fit the player into their cap structure for 1/4 of his cap hit.

Team B has 2m in cap space, however they gained that by placing a player with a 3m cap hit on LTIR and calling up a replacement with a 1m cap hit. At the trade deadline (that 3m player is still on LTIR and will be done for the season), they can only fit in a player with a true 2m cap hit as they have to count the entire cap hit. This is where LTIR sucks and why we've seen teams pay another team to take a LTIRetire contract off their books (Pronger, Savard). When you're in LTIR space, you do not get the advantage of another team paying a players salary for part/most of the year like you do when you're not using LTIR space.

It's not a huge issue... but if you're a cap team looking for every edge possible, not being able to use any free cap space to your best advantage is a hindrance, and one that can affect the quality of the team you can ice for the playoffs.

Thanks for posting this. I had the opening day implications down, but didn't understand how LTIR potentially affected deadline acquisitions.

 

[deckercky]

You're right i forgot that's there's probably an agreed upon player heading from Columbus to Vegas as well so that would make a little more sense then.

Yeah the LTIR is a big headache for Detroit as well with Franzen on LTIR and then Kronwall was on LTIR as well, So that really messed up Detroit as well and Ken Holland has us tight up against the salary cap. So we wind up in a bad situation as well when it comes to making trade deadline deals. Because it affects our salary cap big time. So i can kind of get the picture at what Columbus is trying to do here. Columbus like Detroit needs to shed salary both teams are tight up against the cap here. And if the salary cap stays stagnant here for awhile. Both teams could be in big trouble.

Yeah don't know much about the Clarkson contract if insurance covers 100% of it or only a portion, That could have a lot to do with it as well.

Yes teams get relief for players on LTIR, but it's false to say that having a player on LTIR doesn't "hinder a teams capspace" - because it does.

For example (and the numbers won't be exact, but they'll be close enough to get the point across):

Team A has 1m in cap space that they've carried all year. Which means come the trade deadline, they can effectively acquire a player with a 4m cap hit with zero moves or roster adjustments. Basically because the new player's original team paid for 3/4 of their salary all year, team A can fit the player into their cap structure for 1/4 of his cap hit.

Team B has 2m in cap space, however they gained that by placing a player with a 3m cap hit on LTIR and calling up a replacement with a 1m cap hit. At the trade deadline (that 3m player is still on LTIR and will be done for the season), they can only fit in a player with a true 2m cap hit as they have to count the entire cap hit. This is where LTIR sucks and why we've seen teams pay another team to take a LTIRetire contract off their books (Pronger, Savard). When you're in LTIR space, you do not get the advantage of another team paying a players salary for part/most of the year like you do when you're not using LTIR space.

It's not a huge issue... but if you're a cap team looking for every edge possible, not being able to use any free cap space to your best advantage is a hindrance, and one that can affect the quality of the team you can ice for the playoffs.

^ These posts get it.

If Columbus wants to compete for the Cup over the next three seasons, including bringing in players at the trade deadline, then Clarkson being on LTIR is a significant issue. Considering how they played last season, I imagine ownership and management are on the same page about icing the most competitive team possible. Paying to move Clarkson's contract makes sense in that context.

 

[GoJackets1]

If you ask me, not asking Hartnell to waive means that Jarmo isn't concerned about needing to protect players- which means that part of this Clarkson deal is probably Vegas agreeing to take some AHL level player.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

he said "nobody in vegas or columbus are talking."

then how does he know other than just speculating?

 

[Crede777]

Only reason why expansion list isn't a concern would be if there's a deal already in place.