With very little chance of an AHL season, Loui has zero reason not to report, as he will get paid for staying home.
- Reubenkincade

Depending on how it plays out, they can require him to live in Canada and be available for call up at a moments notice. With his family in Dallas he may not be able to see them as much as one would think.

With very little chance of an AHL season, Loui has zero reason not to report, as he will get paid for staying home.
- Reubenkincade

Yeah...I wondered if they could push him all the way to the ECHL, but it turns out the CBA only allows for waivers to the AHL affiliates.

They could still waive him, but if there is no claims from other teams (LOL!) and no AHL team, he would end up staying with the team, with no reduction in cap hit.

Depending on how it plays out, they can require him to live in Canada and be available for call up at a moments notice. With his family in Dallas he may not be able to see them as much as one would think.
- Retinalz

Isn’t that just like a normal NHL season?

Jesus are the Canucks in on every deal this off season? Lol e20

You moved one concept in former paragraph of inactivity until arb period is over into a second concept. This one being the plan B which was introduced by the word "though" that is not a connecting word. In that switch to using Tryamkin coming over, where common knowledge is not until well into next season, at earliest. This connects to the "by then introduction" of 2 player resolves. Though any post can be reworded to read better it wasn't a leap to accept my timing was not as next month. Thank you and good day to you too.
- NuckUp

That is incomprehensible.... moving on.

Wow.
- Marwood

Yeah...I wondered if they could push him all the way to the ECHL, but it turns out the CBA only allows for waivers to the AHL affiliates.

They could still waive him, but if there is no claims from other teams (LOL!) and no AHL team, he would end up staying with the team, with no reduction in cap hit.
- SlightlyOffside

I doubt the NHL will force teams to keep full cap hits for players if there's no AHL. Way too many logistical nightmares.

- NewYorkNuck

I looked for this gif

Pretty good ball game

I doubt the NHL will force teams to keep full cap hits for players if there's no AHL. Way too many logistical nightmares.
- NewYorkNuck

Yes, I would imagine there'd be a practice squad with the same cap repercussions as sending them to the A.

Yeah...I wondered if they could push him all the way to the ECHL, but it turns out the CBA only allows for waivers to the AHL affiliates.

They could still waive him, but if there is no claims from other teams (LOL!) and no AHL team, he would end up staying with the team, with no reduction in cap hit.
- SlightlyOffside

I don't think that it would work that way.
Every player that has signed an NHL contract would then have to be a part of the team, including Lind, Gadjovich, Brisebois, Sautner, Jasek, Juolevi, Chatfield etc.

You moved one concept in former paragraph of inactivity until arb period is over into a second concept. This one being the plan B which was introduced by the word "though" that is not a connecting word. In that switch to using Tryamkin coming over, where common knowledge is not until well into next season, at earliest. This connects to the "by then introduction" of 2 player resolves. Though any post can be reworded to read better it wasn't a leap to accept my timing was not as next month. Thank you and good day to you too.
- NuckUp

- bloatedhefty

I think he's broken

https://youtu.be/Qe500eIK1oA

I don't think that it would work that way.
Every player that has signed an NHL contract would then have to be a part of the team, including Lind, Gadjovich, Brisebois, Sautner, Jasek, Juolevi, Chatfield etc.
- Reubenkincade

This is the way the CBA reads. of course, NHL & PA are adapting to pandemic reality and have already made a bunch of adjustments, so I agree they are likely to work around potentially having no AHL affiliates as well. Non-playing roster, perhaps.

I was over on TSN and (frank) is what is Toronto doing? They signed Thornton and Bogosian while they still have Spezza on the roster. That is some slow dudes with their best before date well past.
- micah555

Sharks not letting Marleau just retire already is also weird but I guess they want a mentor during a tank year

With very little chance of an AHL season, Loui has zero reason not to report, as he will get paid for staying home.
- Reubenkincade

He would actually earn more money being assigned to Utica as the escrow does not apply to salary other than in the NHL.

This started with the point that the Canucks have more control in dealing with these 2 players then getting cap relief trades done. It was pointed at a couple more times when the assumption ended in but what if the players challenge.

Facts you are leaving out. 1) Ferland could not be bought out because he was an injured player. 2) the extent of the injury is not known but he has not played more then a couple games in a row retreating 3 times within 1 year.

Now for the speculation. Ferland's not on LTIR now maybe because of insurance issues. Ferland can say he's healthy just like Malhotra did but the team can deem him not fit to play. His injury is a grey matter, pun intended again, that medical prognosis can back the team position up. Its an impairment like impaired vision (you know other players have played with one eye or impaired visually because the teams wanted them to play). Its an excuse that had the Canucks keep Malhotra from playing. They did this before the new season to save cap. This was after Manny had come back to play in the preceding playoffs. This option actually is more in JB's control with past precedent.

Now for LE. There needs to be an AHL season. Then the Canucks have leverage. What is under control is they can have a discussion like with Bagosian and he agrees to leaving. LE might think hey the Stars were close and I can play at home on a show me. Who knows its just more preferable to being somewhere you are not wanted. There is also the Luongo treatment to get $$/role for retiring.

None of these outcomes are guaranteed. Just more controllable then trying to make cap dump trades, with all the variables involved there, in the new flat cap NHL.
- NuckUp

I’m not entirely sure what you are saying in the bolded, I have read it several times, but just not getting the meaning but that is probably on me, I’ve had a few drinks.

I didn’t leave out the fact Ferland couldn’t be bought out, because that wasn’t a consideration. What are the cap savings on a buyout, just over a million?

There certainly could be a possibility that Ferland does return to training camp and either makes it through or cannot continue. Benning has absolutely no control over these actions.

Eriksson may or may not wish to report to an AHL assignment, if he doesn’t then Benning has some form of control, if he does report, there is not a bloody thing Benning has control over.

So to summarize, Benning has no control going forward other than to waive or trade either player, a buy out is not plausible.

https://youtu.be/Qe500eIK1oA
- Reubenkincade

Great song!

I just want to know if someone is getting whacked.
- Marwood

They’re getting whacquillinied!
Don’t mess with the family men😎

I’m not entirely sure what you are saying in the bolded, I have read it several times, but just not getting the meaning but that is probably on me, I’ve had a few drinks.

I didn’t leave out the fact Ferland couldn’t be bought out, because that wasn’t a consideration. What are the cap savings on a buyout, just over a million?

There certainly could be a possibility that Ferland does return to training camp and either makes it through or cannot continue. Benning has absolutely no control over these actions.

Eriksson may or may not wish to report to an AHL assignment, if he doesn’t then Benning has some form of control, if he does report, there is not a bloody thing Benning has control over.

So to summarize, Benning has no control going forward other than to waive or trade either player, a buy out is not plausible.
- Makita

Buying out Loui saves 333,333.00 dollars on the cap, where waiving/demoting him frees up over 1 million, I don't get how people think they can just off-load him.
I think people think other teams like Ottawa, Devils etc will b happy to take on a player as bad as Loui, just to get the cap floor, not in these uncertain times. IMO

Buying out Loui saves 333,333.00 dollars on the cap, where waiving/demoting him frees up over 1 million, I don't get how people think they can just off-load him.
I think people think other teams like Ottawa, Devils etc will b happy to take on a player as bad as Loui, just to get the cap floor, not in these uncertain times. IMO
- Reubenkincade

Last year the salary cap was $81.5M and the salary floor $60.2M. I guess it's the same this year for both.

Currently, the lowest cap team is Ottawa at 60.8 million, with 4 players spots left on their roster. No one is in danger of not meeting the floor.

Buying out Loui saves 333,333.00 dollars on the cap, where waiving/demoting him frees up over 1 million, I don't get how people think they can just off-load him.
I think people think other teams like Ottawa, Devils etc will b happy to take on a player as bad as Loui, just to get the cap floor, not in these uncertain times. IMO
- Reubenkincade

Yes I agree, I really tried to understand the logic behind the claims Benning has control going forward, but no matter how you work it out, it’s these 2 players that have control over their status not Benning.

Buying out Loui saves 333,333.00 dollars on the cap, where waiving/demoting him frees up over 1 million, I don't get how people think they can just off-load him.
I think people think other teams like Ottawa, Devils etc will b happy to take on a player as bad as Loui, just to get the cap floor, not in these uncertain times. IMO
- Reubenkincade

This what I find so amusing.