NHL Closes a Loophole The Leafs Might Have Used

[Fanatic]

t is believed the Lightning and Maple Leafs had discussed such a maneuver regarding Vincent Lecavalier, who has seven years and $45 million remaining on his contract, with the buyout thus worth slightly more than $30 million.

The amnesty buyout period begins Wednesday night at 11:00, and lasts through July 4, one day before the opening of this year?s free agent market.

The clubs theoretically would have concocted a swap in which Tampa Bay would have sent an asset ? perhaps a draft pick ? to rolling-in-dough Toronto along with Lecavalier, who would have re-signed a more modest deal with the Lightning after being bought out by the Leafs.


Full Article

 

[Zee]

I hate Bettman. Forget about creating excitement in the off season with some creative GM moves.

 

[Kin]

I'm fine with that. Unless the draft pick involved would have been the #3 overall, which it wouldn't, I don't want the Leafs to help out another team in their conference to that extent just for a second round pick or marginal player.

Compliance buyouts were meant to help teams get under the cap, not to use their financial pull to add assets. While the "Hey man, it should be legal if it's in the rules" mindset might appeal to some, I don't want to see another lockout down the road because NHL GM's take the attitude that they should do whatever they can to undermine the plain aims of the CBA.

 

[Fanatic]

I'm fine with that. Unless the draft pick involved would have been the #3 overall, which it wouldn't, I don't want the Leafs to help out another team in their conference to that extent just for a second round pick or marginal player.

Compliance buyouts were meant to help teams get under the cap, not to use their financial pull to add assets. While the "Hey man, it should be legal if it's in the rules" mindset might appeal to some, I don't want to see another lockout down the road because NHL GM's take the attitude that they should do whatever they can to undermine the plain aims of the CBA.

I cannot disagree with you at all. I feel the same thing...... and yet, as a Leafs fan, it would have been a lot of fun.

 

[Kin]

I feel the same thing...... and yet, as a Leafs fan, it would have been a lot of fun.

It would have been a lot of fun to buyout Lecavalier and add a marginal asset? Well, I guess there are rollercoasters at all speeds.

 

[AvroArrow]

Just get a 3rd team involved.

TB trades to CGY, CGY trades to TO, TO buys him out, he signs with TB.

 

[KoHo]

Just get a 3rd team involved.

TB trades to CGY, CGY trades to TO, TO buys him out, he signs with TB.

Smart thinking, but somehow I don't think that would be approved by league offices.

 

[Zee]

I feel the same thing...... and yet, as a Leafs fan, it would have been a lot of fun.

It would have been a lot of fun to buyout Lecavalier and add a marginal asset? Well, I guess there are rollercoasters at all speeds.

You don't know what the asset would have been. Doubt the Leafs would agree to spend $30M on only getting something "marginal"

 

[AvroArrow]

I'm fine with that. Unless the draft pick involved would have been the #3 overall, which it wouldn't, I don't want the Leafs to help out another team in their conference to that extent just for a second round pick or marginal player.

What about their 1st next year?

 

[Champ Kind]

I'm fine with that. Unless the draft pick involved would have been the #3 overall, which it wouldn't, I don't want the Leafs to help out another team in their conference to that extent just for a second round pick or marginal player.

How can you say this (bolded above) so definitively?  On the contrary, a $30M investment for anything less than the third overall pick seem laughable.

Edit: Zee, you beat me to it.

 

[Fanatic]

I feel the same thing...... and yet, as a Leafs fan, it would have been a lot of fun.

It would have been a lot of fun to buyout Lecavalier and add a marginal asset? Well, I guess there are rollercoasters at all speeds.

A first round pick is a marginal asset? Tough crowd.

 

[Kin]

How can you say this (bolded above) so definitively?

...common sense? I'm also pretty sure they wouldn't have thrown in Stamkos.

 

[Zee]

How can you say this (bolded above) so definitively?

...common sense? I'm also pretty sure they wouldn't have thrown in Stamkos.

Common sense doesn't spend $30M for nothing. Or perhaps you have more common sense than Nonis?

 

[Kin]

Common sense doesn't spend $30M for nothing. Or perhaps you have more common sense than Nonis?

Yes, well, far be it from me to dispute the ironclad word of Larry Brooks leading off an item with the set in stone "...it is believed"

 

[Fanatic]

Common sense doesn't spend $30M for nothing. Or perhaps you have more common sense than Nonis?

Yes, well, far be it from me to dispute the ironclad word of Larry Brooks leading off an item with the set in stone "...it is believed"

But you have no problem making the leap that has the Leafs spending tens of millions for a marginal asset. Sure.

 

[bustaheims]

Just get a 3rd team involved.

TB trades to CGY, CGY trades to TO, TO buys him out, he signs with TB.

Smart thinking, but somehow I don't think that would be approved by league offices.

It wouldn't. It's essentially doing the same thing as is specifically called out by the league as illegal. The only way around this is if they get a 3rd team to sign him after he's bought out and then have them trade the player back to the original team, but, at that point, such maneuvering probably becomes prohibitively expensive, and there's a real possibility that the league would strike down a move like this, as well, depending on the timeline.

 

[Zee]

Common sense doesn't spend $30M for nothing. Or perhaps you have more common sense than Nonis?

Yes, well, far be it from me to dispute the ironclad word of Larry Brooks leading off an item with the set in stone "...it is believed"

So now you're doubting the entire report that the Leafs were prepared to do that because Brooks reported it?  Even though Claude Loiselle said in an interview that the Leafs would be open to just such a move?

 

[Kin]

But you have no problem making the leap that has the Leafs spending tens of millions for a marginal asset. Sure.

Um, no. My whole point of view is that I don't think the Leafs would do that.

 

[Kin]

So now you're doubting the entire report that the Leafs were prepared to do that because Brooks reported it?

Well, "reported" is a pretty strong word. He didn't say "Dave Nonis said" or even the still pretty weak "Sources say". He said "it is believed" which is, in a journalistic sense, about a half notch up from "I have made up..."

  Even though Claude Loiselle said in an interview that the Leafs would be open to just such a move?

Loiselle said the Leafs would contemplate using a buy-out to add an asset. Not that they'd be willing to buy out one of the worst contracts in the NHL.

 

[bustaheims]

Loiselle said the Leafs would contemplate using a buy-out to add an asset. Not that they'd be willing to buy out one of the worst contracts in the NHL.

Also, nowhere did he say they'd be open to be involved in shenanigans that would allow the original team to keep their player at a lower cap hit.