I started typing out a detailed explanation, and then realized I'm not sure how it works.

But it does work. We know that.

Horton contract was not stupid - when they acquired him, they knew he was never going to play another game. It was a conscious decision.
- Atomic Wedgie

Yes, but that was a contract that we all know is uninsured. I guess it is what others are saying, they must have to pay a portion of the players contract (like how most of us have to pay a portion of our medication). Maybe that portion (say 20%) is too much. 20% on a 7mil contract is 1.4 million the team is paying for a guy not to play, and they can't afford to spend extra money at the moment.

I think we needed to get to the cap max so we could go over it and sign Marner, something along those lines. I don’t think it usually helps teams other wise.

But I’m for sure not 100%
- Garnie

This is along the lines of what I have been saying for the past few weeks. I expect Dubas to put some deals together the takes advantage of the Leafs financial situation. Taking on a bad contract or 2 to get the players we require. If some got to Robidas Island, they go..

That's the part, I am not sure about.
- PatC80

I think there was a time limit on the signing and so they signed him and then did the testing after and he failed. Something like that....

This is along the lines of what I have been saying for the past few weeks. I expect Dubas to put some deals together the takes advantage of the Leafs financial situation. Taking on a bad contract or 2 to get the players we require. If some got to Robidas Island, they go..
- bixll

I don’t think it helps this year, we only needed it last year to sign Marner.

How was everyone's first night of fantasy football?

I don’t think it helps this year, we only needed it last year to sign Marner.
- Garnie

I think it can help any year, with the way the CBA is written.

Bruins owner said they might have to be a budget team....

Be happy you are a leaf fan right now with folks, could get ugly for some teams.
- Santo_44

Well its not as if the leafs have much cap room to spend.
We'll see how it goes.

I think it can help any year, with the way the CBA is written.
- bixll

Maybe, I think last year we had to get to max to help sign Marner. We’re already at max this year so I’m not so sure it helps.

Their scouting looks great and they have the best scouts money can buy.


Goaltending takes so long to develop. Woll or Scott could be very good. Impossible to say.
- RogerRoeper

Bahaha.
I so expected this response from you.
"Best money can buy?" How do you know they are the best?
Was there an article or something?

honestly NHL, now that the cap is capped for next year, mayyyyyybe two.
Just allow each team to have one contract that doesnt count against the cap.
Im sure the PA would be ok with this

Ill text them.

WE CHARITY

So, they don’t run this Student program and all of a sudden they are shutting down and selling their assets...hmmm, I have a sick feeling all these assets they have are all off the tax players dime. Something seems a bit fishy....

honestly NHL, now that the cap is capped for next year, mayyyyyybe two.
Just allow each team to have one contract that doesnt count against the cap.
Im sure the PA would be ok with this

Ill text them.
- Fakepartofme

I'm sure the PA would agree.

I don't see the owners opening the door to losing their franchise players to Toronto/New York/Montreal who decided to pay them 20M/ year.

I'm sure the PA would agree.

I don't see the owners opening the door to losing their franchise players to Toronto/New York/Montreal who decided to pay them 20M/ year.
- Scabeh

Put a cap on the contract you are allowed to "write off".
Say 11m lol
No really, make it a certain percentage of the cap.

Not a lot of guys in the same position as Andersen, unfortunately.

If you go through them on CapFriendly, nothing really sticks out.

Kerfoot was slightly front-loaded, but not really by that much. In terms of actual dollars, he's now a $3.5M cap hit, with about $2.7M per year in actual salary for the next three years. Are teams going to line up for that? Salary dump maybe, but you aren't going to get much back, if at all.

Johnsson is $3.4M cap hit, about $2.5M in actual salary for next three years. OK, maybe a team is interested, but that's less than a million a year in savings.

Justin Holl had a $1M singing bonus this year, but we aren't trading him.

That's about the extent of it.

So you can probably move Freddy, but you need to replace him.

And you can probably move Johnsson, but the return won't amount to much.

Sorry, I just don't see the huge advantage to the Leafs here.
- Atomic Wedgie

So what’s wrong with an advantage even if it’s not a huge advantage? They got more than they might have for Kapanen - cool. If they get some more from these others, that’s cool too. Maybe more importantly it dispels any idea of unmovable players and ensures that Dubas can move out the Cap space he needs to. Without getting hosed.

World shaking? Not as much as it’s being made out to be but still a nice little advantage.

I don’t see how it helps except during the off-season maybe?

Serious question.

You can still only spend 81 on players that can play
- Garnie

LTIR loophole allow teams over spent if they are near the cap ceiling on replacing injured players. cap hit must be equal or close to the injured player cap hit.

Well its not as if the leafs have much cap room to spend.
We'll see how it goes.
- Fakepartofme

They have contracts that are all less than their cap hits.

What the (frank) were they watching when they scouted Barrie.
- Garnie

his highlight real .....

LTIR loophole allow teams over spent if they are near the cap ceiling on replacing injured players.
- dmnted

so if they aren't near the cap ceiling, the team can't use ltir? does that mean that team would have to pay the contract?

LTIR loophole allow teams over spent if they are near the cap ceiling on replacing injured players.
- dmnted

If you have 81m in healthy players or 100m with 81 healthy and 19 injured...I don’t see the help to be honest.

so if they aren't near the cap ceiling, the team can't use ltir? does that mean that team would have to pay the contract?
- matt1337

No, just means you don’t need it for cap relief. Insurance pays regardless.

TRade Andersen for a 2nd rounder, trade for Kuemper. *if* Pietrangelo signs in St.Louis, trade for Colton Paryko. As a backup, make a pitch to Florida to get Ekblad. Offer the 1st rounder, Lilljegren or even Sandin if you have to. Sign Spezza and Simmons. Trade jonsson. Trade for Hossa and Kesler for LTIR
- RogerRoeper

Thats awful value for Andersen and his contract. Ekblad really isnt that good, and not worth this contract and you want to offer a first and Sandin?

Id trade for him, but im not including Sandin and a first.

so if they aren't near the cap ceiling, the team can't use ltir? does that mean that team would have to pay the contract?
- matt1337

exactly how I understand it to work. no point in using LTIR if you are not near the cap ceiling. it doesn't help the team out
if the contract is insured, it mostly 80/20 split between the insurance company and the team.

honestly NHL, now that the cap is capped for next year, mayyyyyybe two.
Just allow each team to have one contract that doesnt count against the cap.
Im sure the PA would be ok with this

Ill text them.
- Fakepartofme

That would be pretty awesome for the Leafs, never gonna happen. They only cater to poor teams and teams with low state tax.

If you have 81m in healthy players or 100m with 81 healthy and 19 injured...I don’t see the help to be honest.
- Garnie

then you run a very short bench
it allows a team to replace a LTIR player without being penalized

then you run a very short bench
it allows a team to replace a LTIR player without being penalized
- dmnted

Yes, but having a guy like Hossa or Horton doesn’t help regardless. There’s no loophole that I see.

I understood we traded for those guys last year ( their caps count during the off-season ) so we were at max cap and THEN we could go over by 10% allowing us to sign Marner.