Salary Cap: Salary Cap and Roster Building... just start the draft dammit

Status
Not open for further replies.

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
I just don’t think NHL teams should be able to claim LTIR relief for a wear and tear injuries from playing the sport...it’s part of the hazard of owning a team...that’s my main problem with accepting cap relief for something like this

No part of the hazard for owning the team is paying the players even after they get hurt. Ideally insurance covers it... but given that a huge percentage of players are not insured (only 6/8 players per team is mandatory), there's a very real risk that TB is on the hook for him regardless of his injury status. That's part of owning an NHL team.

I mean concussions are part of the "wear and tear" of the NHL, whether we like it or not... if Crosby and Hornqvist both come down with concussions and need to retire... do you not think we should get relief for them (not that it would really matter, but that's a different matter)? Really the only fair way to have this system is for everything "long term" to be covered, with the NHL verifying (whether that's just checking up on paperwork or by using an independent doctor) the issues as they come up. Because, once again, no player is going to voluntarily "retire" just to do their team a solid if they can still play. You're talking about a loss of future earnings, respect, a hit to their ego, potentially missing out on winning a Stanley cup... lots of things... with next to no benefit to the player.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Peat

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
This was discussed just at insane lengths for years and years. I've always said the same thing and @Empoleon8771 put it well a couple threads ago. There are pros/cons to discuss Letang's game. Those are fair. His bad games are bad. But they aren't every night. His good games are good. And he's great/top 5 on a lot of occasions. His pros/cons spark amazing debate.

But the line is trading him. That is stepping over the art of discussion regarding his game. And I think 80%, if not more, of us have always agreed it wouldn't be worth the risk.
The risk is fun to assess and analyze at times, but at the end of the day - it just makes perfect sense to keep 58 through his contract.

I think that was true several years ago. However I think that the risk/reward is a lot narrower now then it was 3-4 years ago. That doesn't mean dump him or accept any old return... but I think we should be a lot more open to the idea now then we should have been back then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHOOTANDSCORE

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
Because that requires everybody to be defensively sound. Letang has proven time and time again he can't do it.

And yet 2016 proved that that isn't true. We had Letang (28:53/23:37EV), Dumoulin (21:31/19:42), Daley (22:08/18:10), Maatta (17:44/16:50), Lovejoy (17:46/15:44), Cole (16:13/13:25) and Schultz (13:01/11:18).

Out of those 7 blueliners who all played at least 15 games... you have at best 3 maybe 4 who are "defensilvely sound" if you're not counting Letang. And you have 2 who are/were significantly worse then what Letang is on average...

I'm sorry you have such an agenda against Letang... it's just too bad that you're so bias against him that you can't even debate things from a factual point of view.
 

Dipsy Doodle

Rent A Barn
May 28, 2006
76,554
21,097
This was discussed just at insane lengths for years and years. I've always said the same thing and @Empoleon8771 put it well a couple threads ago. There are pros/cons to discuss Letang's game. Those are fair. His bad games are bad. But they aren't every night. His good games are good. And he's great/top 5 on a lot of occasions. His pros/cons spark amazing debate.

But the line is trading him. That is stepping over the art of discussion regarding his game. And I think 80%, if not more, of us have always agreed it wouldn't be worth the risk. The risk is fun to assess and analyze at times, but at the end of the day - it just makes perfect sense to keep 58 through his contract.

Letang's an elite defenseman, but he's either been injured or a liability during critical moments in 4 of the Pens' last 5 playoffs. Lately, when he's healthy, he has a tendency of losing his head when the pressure mounts. A team whose success is measured by playoff success has to consider that IMO.

You don't give him up unless you're getting at least a more reliable top pairing RH PMD through that trade or some other means, but in the right scenario I think you have to consider moving him.
 

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
Quick cliffs notes version. If marner gets offer sheet and leafs don't match. What all happens

Marner becomes property of the new team, and the new team would have to pay Toronto 4 first round picks as compensation (compensation is based on the AAV, but there's no way that they wouldn't match something that gave them less).
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrookswasHere44

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
If Toronto actually has to keep Marleau, theyre ****ed. They have 7.8m in cap space to sign Marner, Kapanen and Johnsson. Thats over 16/17m they need to sign.

Yep. Honestly, the thought makes me giddy - even though we will almost certainly get zero benefit from it.

That said, Horton would go onto LTIR, so they'd have more like 12/13m... but the point still stands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Malkinstheman

Turin

Registered User
Feb 27, 2018
22,075
25,493
Kris Letang’s insta story has him with Val-D’or and Pittsburgh and it says “always been in black and gold”. Don’t change that JR you madman
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad