I don't know if I'm interpreting this properly or not, :

"When a team trades a player, they have the option to retain a part of their salary (and cap hit). The team who retains the salary then pays the retained percentage of the salary, and also retains the percentage of the cap hit until the contract expires. The following requirements must be met to retain salary:"

The percentage of salary that you retain would equate the percentage of cap-hit, I would imagine. So you can retain 50% of his salary and that would equate to 50% of his cap-hit. From an actual dollars perspective, though, using that wording, the SALARY is $1.25m, so they could only eat about $660k, leaving the receiving team to pay him $660k and his $1.5m bonus.

His cap hit, though, would be $3.125 million.
- Monkeypunk

Ya, this has always been my understanding. When the trade is approved you take the percentage agreed upon and apply it to both salary and cap (which are almost always different).

Nylander for Patrick

Who says no?
- Arctic_AARDVARK

Sadly, the Flyers have already spent their cap space on the great Kevin Hayes and by trading for Matt Niskanen.

Patrick Kane?
Patrick Maroon?
Patrick Eaves?
- PatC80

Nolan Patrick

Just Patrick.
- Arctic_AARDVARK

Sadly, the Flyers have already spent their cap space on the great Kevin Hayes and by trading for Matt Niskanen.
- Scabeh

We should definitely trade for Provorov,, Philly has about 15 NHL defensemen now

If the leafs trade him on July 2 and take half his cap/salary then yes it's 1.375 in real dollars but it's 3.125 in salary cap.
- The Law

I'm just going to throw this out here again:

July 2nd: mutual agreement to terminate contract.

Marleau walks away with $1.5 million, leaving $2.75 million on the table.

He becomes a UFA, signs with San Jose for $1 million.

Leafs get cap relief.

Marleau gets to move to San Jose (losing only $1.75 million).

San Jose gets Marleau for cheap.

Vancouver Canucks fans lose their poop.

It's a win-win-win-win.

As far as I know, the CBA requires the cap hit to stay if the player retires.

I do not believe that they included anything about mutual agreement to terminate (remember - this was inserted in the CBA in 2005, when they wrote up the thing in 20 minutes, and GMs found loophole after loophole after loophole).

No
- bixll

Mould him into a gritty 3C and PK’er.

Let Kadri ride with Matthews or Tavares.

Nolan Patrick
- GreatGigInTheSky

Nah, I'd rather keep Will.I.Am Nylander

Stone over marner?

Jesus. What have we come to?

A 62pt player with a 9.5 cap who's 27 over a 22 year old 94 pt player.

Hilarious.
- Fakepartofme

Easy Mr. Ferris ....

Nah, I'd rather keep Will.I.Am Nylander
- PatC80

- AdamFrench

- AdamFrench

Yes please..

Perry for $1 million.

Let's get this done.

Sadly, the Flyers have already spent their cap space on the great Kevin Hayes and by trading for Matt Niskanen.
- Scabeh

Yeah, that Hayes signing is terrible, lol..

I'm just going to throw this out here again:

July 2nd: mutual agreement to terminate contract.

Marleau walks away with $1.5 million, leaving $2.75 million on the table.

He becomes a UFA, signs with San Jose for $1 million.

Leafs get cap relief.

Marleau gets to move to San Jose (losing only $1.75 million).

San Jose gets Marleau for cheap.

Vancouver Canucks fans lose their poop.

It's a win-win-win-win.

As far as I know, the CBA requires the cap hit to stay if the player retires.

I do not believe that they included anything about mutual agreement to terminate (remember - this was inserted in the CBA in 2005, when they wrote up the thing in 20 minutes, and GMs found loophole after loophole after loophole).
- Atomic Wedgie

Absolutely makes the most sense.

Perry for $1 million.

Let's get this done.
- Atomic Wedgie

He’d me more useful than Marleau.

Stone over marner?

Jesus. What have we come to?

A 62pt player with a 9.5 cap who's 27 over a 22 year old 94 pt player.

Hilarious.
- Fakepartofme

well 62 points in 59 games.
If you factor in his 12 points in 7 playoff games ..

he has produced at over a point a game the last 2+ seasons and is far superior defensivley to Marner.

Stone is probably top 5 in the league in overall impact/Wins/GAR etc.

so if I wanted to win now, id take him

Easy Mr. Ferris ....
- The Law

I just paid dreger to report this nonsense

I'm just going to throw this out here again:

July 2nd: mutual agreement to terminate contract.

Marleau walks away with $1.5 million, leaving $2.75 million on the table.

He becomes a UFA, signs with San Jose for $1 million.

Leafs get cap relief.

Marleau gets to move to San Jose (losing only $1.75 million).

San Jose gets Marleau for cheap.

Vancouver Canucks fans lose their poop.

It's a win-win-win-win.

As far as I know, the CBA requires the cap hit to stay if the player retires.

I do not believe that they included anything about mutual agreement to terminate (remember - this was inserted in the CBA in 2005, when they wrote up the thing in 20 minutes, and GMs found loophole after loophole after loophole).
- Atomic Wedgie

Love it ...simple. And Marleau already getting 16 in the first two years leads me to consider that maybe this was the plan/loophole all along.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/sharks/nhl-rumors-patrick-marleau-only-wants-trade-sharks-maple-leafs
- PatC80

NBC has no clue, his salary this year is 4.25.

The Habs will respond to this by offer sheeting McAvoy.
- Scabeh

The League will respond to this by suspending Kadri.

Yeah, that Hayes signing is terrible, lol..
- Arctic_AARDVARK

An interesting thing about those signings . . . EvolvingWild's contract projection model had Hayes at $6.7m on a 7 year term.

It had Karlsson at $9.9mx8.

It had Skinner at $8.5mx8.

For Skinner and Hayes, that's a 5% projected variance, and for Karlsson, that's an 11% projected variance.

It's not off by much.

They have Marner @ 9.8m. If there's a 5% variance, it puts him around $10.4m.

BTW, we collectively had projected Marner at $10.1m over 6 years from your exercise.

I'm just going to throw this out here again:

July 2nd: mutual agreement to terminate contract.

Marleau walks away with $1.5 million, leaving $2.75 million on the table.

He becomes a UFA, signs with San Jose for $1 million.

Leafs get cap relief.

Marleau gets to move to San Jose (losing only $1.75 million).

San Jose gets Marleau for cheap.

Vancouver Canucks fans lose their poop.

It's a win-win-win-win.

As far as I know, the CBA requires the cap hit to stay if the player retires.

I do not believe that they included anything about mutual agreement to terminate (remember - this was inserted in the CBA in 2005, when they wrote up the thing in 20 minutes, and GMs found loophole after loophole after loophole).
- Atomic Wedgie

If he retires cap hit stays, cause it's an over 35 contract, but they could trade the contract to team that needs to get to the cap floor

Absolutely makes the most sense.
- GreatGigInTheSky

so much sense ....he takes his 1.5 taking his 2 yr tally from the Leafs to 17.5 milly ..not bad.

And he gets to head home and hand out resumes along the west coast. He'll get a couple milly if he wants meaning he's lost almost nothing.

He gets exactly what he wants and the Leafs get to piss off the Canuck fans again.

Why isn't this done more often?

An interesting thing about those signings . . . EvolvingWild's contract projection model had Hayes at $6.7m on a 7 year term.

It had Karlsson at $9.9mx8.

It had Skinner at $8.5mx8.

For Skinner and Hayes, that's a 5% projected variance, and for Karlsson, that's an 11% projected variance.

It's not off by much.

They have Marner @ 9.8m. If there's a 5% variance, it puts him around $10.4m.

BTW, we collectively had projected Marner at $10.1m over 6 years from your exercise.
- Monkeypunk

Darren Dreger laughs at this