Speculation: Trade & Free Agency Talk XXXIV

[Wabit]

Does anybody know and/or can somebody post what the recapture penalties would be if retired here or retired after he was traded? Maybe even for each year remaining? It would be nice to have some sort of number to wrap my head around.

Here's an old Weber article from when the Weber/PK trade happened. It's in the ballpark of what a Parise or Suter recapture would be if they were traded this summer.

Weber for Subban could hurt Preds in long run

Click to read more...

 

[Bazeek]

Here's an old Weber article from when the Weber/PK trade happened. It's in the ballpark of what a Parise or Suter recapture would be if they were traded this summer.

Weber for Subban could hurt Preds in long run

Ah... so if Parise's traded before we hit those years where Cap Hit > Salary, the net cap benefit never has a chance to go down and we're saddled with the whole $18m-$20m (or whatever it happens to be at the time of the trade).

 

[AKL]

Ah... so if Parise's traded before we hit those years where Cap Hit > Salary, the net cap benefit never has a chance to go down and we're saddled with the whole $18m-$20m (or whatever it happens to be at the time of the trade).

Precisely. So the sooner we trade him the more potential for a horrible recap penalty. If we trade him and he retires a year later it’s not as bad, but if we trade him and he plays through 2023-24, we’re going to have a 19M cap penalty that next year.

 

[Bazeek]

It's tempting to trade Suter and Parise in 2021 just for the opportunity to see what a team with $40m in dead cap space looks like.

 

[Wabit]

Ah... so if Parise's traded before we hit those years where Cap Hit > Salary, the net cap benefit never has a chance to go down and we're saddled with the whole $18m-$20m (or whatever it happens to be at the time of the trade).

Correct.

 

[AKL]

We could always hope that if we somehow do trade him, that team ends up LTIRetiring him, but that carries all the risks that that doesn’t happen.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

So if we keep him and he retires because he's grumpy or something, no matter when, it really doesn't mean much because he'd be replaced by a 4th liner or and ELC and either of them plus his recapture, at worst, is about equal to what his current cap hit is right now anyway?

 

[AKL]

So if we keep him and he retires because he's grumpy or something, no matter when, it really doesn't mean much because he'd be replaced by a 4th liner or and ELC and either of them plus his recapture, at worst, is about equal to what his current cap hit is right now anyway?

Actually if he retires now, a 4th liner and his penalty would probably be about 2.5M cheaper than he is now. But ultimately yes, no matter when he retires, if he does it with us, a 4th liner and his penalty would never be more than his current hit.

 

[2Pair]

To answer the question that Dr. Jan asked in the old thread. Yes the player and team can mutually agree to terminate a contract. Patrik Berglund did it last season. Would be interesting to see if the league would/could step in if it happened.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

Operation 'Piss Off Parise' in full effect then I guess. Maybe this was Fenton's plan all along? Make him want to retire.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

To answer the question that Dr. Jan asked in the old thread. Yes the player and team can mutually agree to terminate a contract. Patrik Berglund did it last season. Would be interesting to see if the league would/could step in if it happened.

Interesting... There'd definitely be an upshot for both parties.

 

[AKL]

Interesting... There'd definitely be an upshot for both parties.

They can only mutually terminate it if the player clears unconditional waivers, which I’m going to guess a NMC prohibits.

Would be an interesting process for Guerin and Parise to go through. Parise has to agree to waive his NMC and be waived. Then he has to clear. Then they can terminate it.

 

[57special]

Can you be LTIR'ed due to Grumpiness?

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

They can only mutually terminate it if the player clears unconditional waivers, which I’m going to guess a NMC prohibits.

Would be an interesting process for Guerin and Parise to go through. Parise has to agree to waive his NMC and be waived. Then he has to clear. Then they can terminate it.

And if he doesn't clear, then the recapture penalties would reappear? Though, I have no idea why any team would want to claim him and take on the $7.5M when they could wait until he's UFA and pay him half that for half the term. It would be interesting though.

 

[Bazeek]

Can you be LTIR'ed due to Grumpiness?

Is a fractured ego an LBI or UBI?

 

[AKL]

And if he doesn't clear, then the recapture penalties would reappear? Though, I have no idea why any team would want to claim him and take on the $7.5M when they could wait until he's UFA and pay him half that for half the term. It would be interesting though.

I would assume the recap penalties would reappear though I can’t say with 100% certainty. But yeah, I don’t see why any team would claim him with that contract.

 

[2Pair]

And if he doesn't clear, then the recapture penalties would reappear? Though, I have no idea why any team would want to claim him and take on the $7.5M when they could wait until he's UFA and pay him half that for half the term. It would be interesting though.

1. Nobody would claim that contract
2. A NMC means Parise could forgo waivers

 

[AKL]

1. Nobody would claim that contract
2. A NMC means Parise could forgo waivers

Link to where it says he can terminate his contract without going through waivers because of the NMC?

 

[Wild11MN]

Link to where it says he can terminate his contract without going through waivers because of the NMC?

Cap friendly says this:
"If a player has a no-movement clause, the player can reject the option of waivers and proceed to the buyout process."

In accordance with the source of all truth on the internet, Wikipedia, which says this:
"Additionally, a player and team may mutually agree to terminate a contract at any time. This process can only be completed if the player clears unconditional waivers."

... which would indicate he could skip waivers and immediately proceed to terminating, but I can't say that with 100% certainty.

 

[AKL]

Cap friendly says this:
"If a player has a no-movement clause, the player can reject the option of waivers and proceed to the buyout process."

In accordance with the source of all truth on the internet, Wikipedia, which says this:
"Additionally, a player and team may mutually agree to terminate a contract at any time. This process can only be completed if the player clears unconditional waivers."

... which would indicate he could skip waivers and immediately proceed to terminating, but I can't say that with 100% certainty.

The buyout process isn’t the same as the team and player mutually terminating the contract.

Maybe that’s the case, who knows.
Frankly would also make it a lot easier to terminate Suter’s contract too. Just get them to agree to terminate next summer.

 

[Wild11MN]

The buyout process isn’t the same as the team and player mutually terminating the contract.

Maybe that’s the case, who knows.
Frankly would also make it a lot easier to terminate Suter’s contract too. Just get them to agree to terminate next summer.

I would assume the part that said "the player can reject the option of waivers" means that it would apply to any scenario, but you're right, who knows?

 

[2Pair]

The buyout process isn’t the same as the team and player mutually terminating the contract.

Maybe that’s the case, who knows.
Frankly would also make it a lot easier to terminate Suter’s contract too. Just get them to agree to terminate next summer.

The CBA doesn't distinctly cover a mutual termination, But a NMC means that a player doesn't have to go on waivers if he decides not to.

 

[Wild11MN]

Okay, I'm bored, so I found this in the CBA:

13.21 (a) When a Club desires to terminate a Player's SPC for any reason, such action may
not be taken until Unconditional Waivers have been requested and cleared in conformity with
this Article. Notwithstanding this provision, a Player with a no-move clause shall have the rights
set forth in Section 11.8.

11.8 Individually Negotiated Limitations on Player Movement.
(c) A no-move clause may prevent the involuntary relocation of a Player, whether by
Trade, Loan or Waiver claim. A no-move clause, however, may not restrict the Club's Buy-Out
and termination rights as set forth in this Agreement. Prior to exercising its Ordinary Course
Buy-Out rights pursuant to Paragraph 13 of the SPC hereof, the Club shall, in writing in
accordance with the notice provisions in Exhibit 3 hereof, provide the Player with the option of
electing to be placed on Waivers. The Player will have twenty-four (24) hours from the time he
receives such notice to accept or reject that option at his sole discretion, and shall so inform the
Club in writing, in accordance with the notice provisions in Exhibit 3 hereof, within such twentyfour
(24) hour period. If the Player does not timely accept or reject that option, it will be deemed
rejected.

 

[AKL]

Okay, I'm bored, so I found this in the CBA:

So essentially, using Suter as an example.

If the Wild want to buy Suter out, they have to ask him if he wants to go through waivers, which would allow him to keep his contract. Since it’s a buy out, he’s going to say no because he’ll get the correct money, and he’ll get to sign a new contract getting more money.

In the case of a mutual termination, he must be given the option to go through waivers to keep his current contract. He’ll say yes, because assuming he’s taken, he’ll get to keep his current contract and stands to make his money. If he doesn’t go through waivers, or does clear, he won’t have a chance to make the rest of his contract.

He’s still due 9M this year, 8M next year, and 6M the year after, so the soonest he’d likely agree to NOT go through waivers would be the summer of 2023.

Parise is different because he would undoubtedly clear, so it would be in his best interest to terminate as soon as possible to hopefully get some money while he still can. Assuming he agrees to terminate in the first place.

 

[Wild11MN]

So essentially, using Suter as an example.

If the Wild want to buy Suter out, they have to ask him if he wants to go through waivers, which would allow him to keep his contract. Since it’s a buy out, he’s going to say no because he’ll get the correct money, and he’ll get to sign a new contract getting more money.

In the case of a mutual termination, he must be given the option to go through waivers to keep his current contract. He’ll say yes, because assuming he’s taken, he’ll get to keep his current contract and stands to make his money. If he doesn’t go through waivers, or does clear, he won’t have a chance to make the rest of his contract.

He’s still due 9M this year, 8M next year, and 6M the year after, so the soonest he’d likely agree to NOT go through waivers would be the summer of 2023.

Parise is different because he would undoubtedly clear, so it would be in his best interest to terminate as soon as possible to hopefully get some money while he still can. Assuming he agrees to terminate in the first place.

I think you've got it, but I think Suter would have to be 100% sure he would get claimed to make that decision if he doesn't want to risk millions.