Trades and Potential Trades

Burke is trying to get rid of something else or get something with him, otherwise he wouldn't have cleared waivers. Even the truculent one knows that contract is toxic.

 

who wouldn't want a grossly overpaid player with a head that big?

 

Jackman has a no trade clause, believe it or not that old man is the longest tenured athlete in St Louis. I would assume they'd like to have him back if the money fits but keeping Tarasenko and locking up Schwartz/Allen long term have to be higher priorities.

Also, back to Goc, it'll be interesting to see if Goc gets time on the PK, the Blues have struggled on the PK (17th) compared to PP (1st) and 5-on-5 Goals/Against (2nd).

 

I'm responding to this post on the Blues thread.

 

The Pens are liking Perron a bunch Skinny. Sorry to get back so late. Been on tons of other threads. Yes, he's got like 5 or 6 goals not counting assists in the 9 games he's been on the team so far. It just goes to show what some players can do when they are on a better team compared to the Oilers, haha.........I think he had another goal last night? I know he had an assist. Just think of what Eberle, Hall, Nugent-Hopkins and Yakupov could do on a good team. Good players need decent players around them. Perron is a prime example......Yes, Pens are happy with that trade.....The Pens just need to get all their players of IR and it will be 2nd place Islanders.....

 

richards has tons of money, some youth left and 2 cup rings and no job...

what a sport!

 

Luongo talked about it before when he was trying to get traded for a year and a half.
The contract changes everything for Richards, and it has consequences.

It's one thing if one franchise thinks the 925 of cap savings is worth more than he is on the roster, it's another when he's so expensive that he can't even be traded. People want him to play, they just can't bring themselves to pay like that.
He has 23 (+ this year) million reasons why he'll be okay at the end of the day. He made his own bed, I don't think he was screwed at all.

 

I think a team will trade if they can get LA to pay at least 75% of the salary. For LA that is better than paying him for doing basically nothing. And it also beats the cap hit they would take if he ups and retires. That would kill LA if they had to take that big of a hit.

 

Max is 50%.

I think Lombardi would eat the contract rather than pay for somebody else to have them play against him.
Unless they go into a rebuild/retool/suck for a year or two mode, I don't see them eating salary for nothing. I could see them taking on somebody else's bad money for a shorter term if given the choice.

 

I have a question about Richards' contract, which I'm pretty sure was signed when he was with the hockey team from Philadelphia. If he retires before the end of the term I do not believe that the LAK would be on the hook for the cap penalty. Does anyone know for sure?

I know the main reason BUF used the amnesty on Ehrhoff was to avoid a big cap hit if he retired early - even off another team's roster. That's why they didn't trade him. At $4MM per he was not being overpaid - that was under the market value. It was a bad contract for two reasons: it was ridiculously front-loaded, but mostly the cap time bomb that made him untradable for BUF. But the LAK would not take the hit - as I understand it - if Richards retired early. That would be Philly's problem.

Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong.

 

i hope you're not. good question, i have no idea.

 

Hope this helps Bob:

 

Why would Richards' contract be different than Ehrhoff's?

 

Dan Not sure but from I'm reading the difference is LA picked up the bulk of the contract during the trade . Since he spent most of his contract with the Kings and the remainder of the contract stays with LA then the Kings are on the hook.

 

Thanks, but that explanation doesn't cut it for me. Ehrhoff was bought out after three years of a ten year contract. Richards was also trading fairly early in his current. Of course, if your counting payment and not duration then this may be the answer. Ehrhoff had already banked well over half of his $40MM, 10-year contract after only two years. I do not know the payout structure for Richards' contract.

 

As you know, I place the hockey team from Philadelphia down there as low as the hockey team from Boston. But for the betterment of the game (fiscal sanity) I hope I'm wrong.

Does anyone question anymore who was responsible for the recent lock out? It was the owners that abused the '04 CBA. They then had the audacity to blame the PA for the financial morass. (This was just a sidebar mini-rant.)

 

Big trade just went down: I just traded my student ticket to the Kentucky/Mizzou basketball game to a dude named Blake for beer.

 

from what i interpret from the cba, the kings have only one suck contract and that is richards. lombardi does not do contracts that don't benefit the frucks. i think philly gets a wash due to trade finalization. once a trade is stamped by the nhl, you can't go back for more money from the phylers.

 

It's not money; it's a cap hit penalty. I know that the risk that Ehrhoff could retire early is the reason he was not traded. It's not that he wasn't considered a good value at $4MM per that prompted them to use the amnesty buy-out.

(They used that on Leino because he sucked.)

 

Each team is on the hook for any advantage (salary over the cap hit) gained over the course of the contract should the player retire before its completed.
Richards was traded 3 years into his contract in PHI. The advantage PHI gained sticks with PHI...unless he was traded prior to the 13' CBA. Since he was traded prior to the current CBA, PHI has no recapture liability. It would have only been 150K anyway.
LA will have 4 years of Richards and they've gained about 5.3 million in cap advantage. They're on the hook for that should he choose to retire at the end of the year but they can pay that amount back over what would have been the length of his contract.

PHI is NOT stuck with all of 150K or anything else because he was traded prior to the CBA. LA is at 5.3ish and he still makes a little over cap hit next year.

Vancouver is at a huge number on Luongo and it's theirs until that contract expires for example, even though they're still paying 15%. He was traded AFTER the CBA was signed. CLB had nothing to worry on Carter either.


Ehrhoff was a compliance buyout, like Leino. The entire cap hit obligation goes to 0. Gerbe was a regular buyout so he's still on the Sabre caphit for around 300k or so for this year. Compliance buyouts were special, to allow gms the ability to navigate out of the reduced cap for 14 and 15'. Gms were allowed to use compliance buyouts in a designated window in the summer of 13' and 14' and were limited to 2 per team. Compliance buyouts are gone now,LA would have to use a regular buyout.