With respect to RJ Umberger, is mutual termination an option?
If the Flyers buy him out this summer, Umberger gets $1.5M for the next 2 years for a total of $3M. However, what if the Flyers offerred him $3.25M for a mutual termination this year? He'd make an extra $250K, he'd get it in a lump sum (you could tweak the number when taxes are factored in), and the Flyers don't have to carry the extra $1.5M cap hit for next year.
Whadda ya think?
Edit: Mike Richards will be getting paid by the LA Kings until 2032. Yes, 2032. - jmatchett383
It has been kind of unclear for a while, but I believe there is nothing stopping the Flyers from doing that other than the NHL and NHLPA fighting a mutual termination (it opens a can of worms). However, I do not think you can actually pay a guy to terminate a contract. It would basically end up being the Richards situation with a much smaller amount and length
Just wait, one day he'll be mentioned along with promising young defensemen like Tim Erixon, Tim Ramholt, and Kevin Marshall...you know, guys who weren't quite on the level of Luca Sbisa, Ryan Parent, and Oskars Bartulis. - jmatchett383
I wouldnt do the deal without TJ Brennan coming this way
It has been kind of unclear for a while, but I believe there is nothing stopping the Flyers from doing that other than the NHL and NHLPA fighting a mutual termination (it opens a can of worms). However, I do not think you can actually pay a guy to terminate a contract. It would basically end up being the Richards situation with a much smaller amount and length - YuenglingJagr
Yes, but the Richards money is on the cap, so it has to be an amount that the players agrees to but that the team can absorb. If they agree to it, the NHL/NHLPA can't really fight it. However, if they try an off-the-books deal, THAT is where the PA would have an issue.
Yes, but the Richards money is on the cap, so it has to be an amount that the players agrees to but that the team can absorb. If they agree to it, the NHL/NHLPA can't really fight it. However, if they try an off-the-books deal, THAT is where the PA would have an issue. - jmatchett383
I am not sure I follow completely. The Richards money is on the cap because the NHLPA fought the termination and they settled on a deal that was less than a buyout but more than termination (along with cap recapture penalties).
The way I am understanding...what you are saying is the Flyers basically saying you cant play anymore and terminate his contract. It is basically creating a new contract that replaces the old one ( a 0 year contract worth 3.25million). I think the NHL would have an issue with it since it is pretty clear cap circumvention.
I think a more likely scenario is jsut a regular buyout. 1.5 million isnt that much to absorb for a year. They could even do an LTIR situation, but if they need to keep someone with a NMC...he has to be boughtout
Location: Driver's Seat: Mitch Marner bandwagon. Grab 'em by the Corsi. Joined: 02.04.2009
Jun 1 @ 2:57 PM ET
I am not sure I follow completely. The Richards money is on the cap because the NHLPA fought the termination and they settled on a deal that was less than a buyout but more than termination (along with cap recapture penalties).
The way I am understanding...what you are saying is the Flyers basically saying you cant play anymore and terminate his contract. It is basically creating a new contract that replaces the old one ( a 0 year contract worth 3.25million). I think the NHL would have an issue with it since it is pretty clear cap circumvention.
I think a more likely scenario is jsut a regular buyout. 1.5 million isnt that much to absorb for a year. They could even do an LTIR situation, but if they need to keep someone with a NMC...he has to be boughtout - YuenglingJagr
What if... the Flyers just ignored the CBA and just made up their own rules and paid RJ all his money to go away but they like squeezed it into the cap calculations so maybe Bettman wouldn't mind... like omg, I can't believe I was the first person to think that up... genius!!
What if... the Flyers just ignored the CBA and just made up their own rules and paid RJ all his money to go away but they like squeezed it into the cap calculations so maybe Bettman wouldn't mind... like omg, I can't believe I was the first person to think that up... genius!!
I am not sure I follow completely. The Richards money is on the cap because the NHLPA fought the termination and they settled on a deal that was less than a buyout but more than termination (along with cap recapture penalties).
The way I am understanding...what you are saying is the Flyers basically saying you cant play anymore and terminate his contract. It is basically creating a new contract that replaces the old one ( a 0 year contract worth 3.25million). I think the NHL would have an issue with it since it is pretty clear cap circumvention.
I think a more likely scenario is jsut a regular buyout. 1.5 million isnt that much to absorb for a year. They could even do an LTIR situation, but if they need to keep someone with a NMC...he has to be boughtout - YuenglingJagr
Hmmm, I don't know now that I think about it. I was trying to think of a way where they don't have to protect him in the expansion draft but don't have to pay him next year either. I guess a mutual termiantion would just be zero money.
Could a they gree to mutually terminate and then sign him on a one-year, one-way deal for $3.5M and then bury him in the minors? I know you can't sign a player for one year after a buy-out, but not sure about a mutual termination.
Or can they make him the recipient of the first annual RJ Umberger Award, which comes with a cash prize of $4M?
