Proposal: Phil Kessel to team with cap room through Toronto

[Americanadian]

Kyle Dubas has made 1 trade as a GM, trading Kessel to PIT. Lou came in and cleaned it up and turned the return into Andersen but the worst part of the deal remains: 1.2M retained for 4 more years. Could PIT trade Kessel through Toronto to a team that would take him at 8M? At the deadline was saw Brassard go through Vegas and they retained 2Mx2yrs for Ryan Reaves and a 4th. The leafs could possibly be in a cap crunch and I believe that cap space would be well worth a 2nd or a Bracco to them. The other scenario is Kessel to Toronto to Vegas/Arizona at 8M to team X at 6m where Vegas/ARI receives an asset for retaining 2M for 4 years.

Click to read more...

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

I have trouble understanding this proposal.

 

[hockeykicker]

I have trouble understanding this proposal.

I think he means trade kessel back to toronto and then toronto trades him again but this time not retaining

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

I think he means trade kessel back to toronto and then toronto trades him again but this time not retaining

It's going to be hard, though.

 

[Americanadian]

I think he means trade kessel back to toronto and then toronto trades him again but this time not retaining

Yes, a 3-way trade.

 

[SML2]

If the league is going to allow this type of salary cap flim-flammery, they may as well just do away with it. Keep a floor and do a luxury tax if you go over a certain amount. Proceeds go to the teams on the soup line. If a team wants to make it rain, make it rain. I think that's a lesser evil than allowing guys who haven't played in multiple seasons to be traded for accounting purposes and getting lower cap teams to take on bad players for no other reason than to warehouse their contracts.

 

[Brock Radunske]

Yes, a 3-way trade.

In theory it could work but I doubt it's worth the effort considering the retention on Toronto is not very much

 

[Spirit of 67]

There is no cap crunch coming if the Leafs don't get stupid and their system produces talent that can play on ELC's or smaller deals after that. But every team with top end talent needs the latter.

The $1.2M is just that. When I see people fret about that I feel like they're missing the "point."

 

[Flukeshot]

It's an interesting question. Does the Leafs retained portion "merge back" if the Leafs reacquire him? Then can he be traded again at a future date at full value or even a different retention amount.

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

There is no cap crunch coming if the Leafs don't get stupid and their system produces talent that can play on ELC's or smaller deals after that. But every team with top end talent needs the latter.

The $1.2M is just that. When I see people fret about that I feel like they're missing the "point."

Yea, I don't understand why some folks can't see their young stars when all other teams can. As of result of this ill foundered logic, some people still think the Leafs are in "win mode" now. Hardly true at all.

Of course I disagree with some Leaf fans that think they can wish away Marleau's NMC, 6.25 cap hit in 2019/20.

 

[Americanadian]

There is no cap crunch coming if the Leafs don't get stupid and their system produces talent that can play on ELC's or smaller deals after that. But every team with top end talent needs the latter.

The $1.2M is just that. When I see people fret about that I feel like they're missing the "point."

There’s not going to be a cap crunch if they don’t want one but if the right free agents want to sign here then they will have an issue in 19/20.

 

[tmg]

I can’t imagine a 1.2m annual cap hit being relevant enough to engineer a three team trade, involving a player that would be a tough enough move (as most prominent-player trades are) in a two team trade. The Brassard deal was an oddball in itself but at least that had the flexibility of being able to involve any willling party as the cap intermediary, with the ideal of the final destination getting a discount. Necessitating that the Leafs be an intermediary - in an intent to make him more expensive to his recipient rather than less as Brassard was - is adding a backbreaking constraint to an already constrained trade concept.

Suck up the 1.2 mil per year for term and move on, or find some other way to recoup that level of salary relief elsewhere. This toothpaste doesn’t go back into this particular tube anymore.

 

[Americanadian]

I can’t imagine a 1.2m cap hit being relevant enough to engineer a three team trade, involving a player that would be a tough enough move (as most prominent-player trades are) in a two team trade. The Brassard deal was an oddball in itself but at least that had the flexibility of being able to involve any willling party as the cap intermediary, with the ideal of the final destination getting a discount. Necessitating that the Leafs be an intermediary - in an intent to make him more expensive to his recipient rather than less as Brassard was - is adding a backbreaking constraint to an already constrained trade concept.

Suck up the 1.2 mil and move on, or find some other way to recoup that level of salary relief elsewhere. This toothpaste doesn’t go back into this particular tube anymore.

1.2M is not much but depending on what the leafs do I’m free agency or what kind of overhaul they do on their back end it could help in 19/20.

 

[Spirit of 67]

I can’t imagine a 1.2m annual cap hit being relevant enough to engineer a three team trade, involving a player that would be a tough enough move (as most prominent-player trades are) in a two team trade. The Brassard deal was an oddball in itself but at least that had the flexibility of being able to involve any willling party as the cap intermediary, with the ideal of the final destination getting a discount. Necessitating that the Leafs be an intermediary - in an intent to make him more expensive to his recipient rather than less as Brassard was - is adding a backbreaking constraint to an already constrained trade concept.

Suck up the 1.2 mil per year for term and move on, or find some other way to recoup that level of salary relief elsewhere. This toothpaste doesn’t go back into this particular tube anymore.

That $1.2M is basically the difference between a player on an ELC and a vet making $2M.

 

[rent free]

What would the net result be for Toronto in order to get rid if 1.2 million? They might throw Martin in as well if they were to pull this off.

 

[Djp]

If the league is going to allow this type of salary cap flim-flammery, they may as well just do away with it. Keep a floor and do a luxury tax if you go over a certain amount. Proceeds go to the teams on the soup line. If a team wants to make it rain, make it rain. I think that's a lesser evil than allowing guys who haven't played in multiple seasons to be traded for accounting purposes and getting lower cap teams to take on bad players for no other reason than to warehouse their contracts.

If the league allows it it would count as 2 separate salary retention’s out if the 3 allowed.