|
|
Post by Rimmer on Nov 15, 2005 20:37:20 GMT -5
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - The Columbus Blue Jackets acquired six-time All-Star center Sergei Fedorov and a fifth-round pick in 2006 on Tuesday from the Anaheim Mighty Ducks for forward Tyler Wright and rookie defenseman Francois Beauchemin.--more--R.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Nov 15, 2005 21:09:11 GMT -5
Salary and attitude dump all in one move. Burke didn't like Sergei's brother when he was in Vancouver and looks like he didn't much care for Sergei either.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Nov 15, 2005 22:06:04 GMT -5
Still, this shows you what some trades will be like in a Cap world - from a hockey point of view, they make no sense whatsoever, but they work because of the cap.
I'm gonna sound like a broken record eventually, but all this goes to show is how the Habs should always minisize payroll, with an eye to keeping enough cap room to add a 5+ million dollar player for peanuts around the deadline. It's perfectly possible that a very expensive rental will be so expensive we're the only ones who can take him on, among the playoff teams.
I'm thinking along the lines of Streit for Ozolinsh here.
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Nov 15, 2005 23:09:53 GMT -5
Unless you've got a source that says otherwise, I still think that, as per NHL.com, no matter what our payroll is now, we won't be able to go over the cap on deadline day.
|
|
|
|
Post by sergejean on Nov 16, 2005 7:07:14 GMT -5
Teams have to be within the cap when you average the 82 games. That's why a team like the Devils were allowed to be over the cap and eventually dump some salary (Friesen) earlier this season. I'm not sure but they may still be a little bit over the cap.
The way it works, you could have a team with a payroll of $34M for the first 41 games and $44M for the last 41 for an average of $39M...
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Nov 16, 2005 9:46:59 GMT -5
I'm thinking along the lines of Streit for Ozolinsh here. Yeah. Ozolinsh is a UFA at the end of the year so there is less incentive to dump his salary, but this move clearly demonstrates that Anaheim has no designs on being competitive this year. I would think the Ducks would be VERY inclined to entertain offers for a player they probably have no plans on signing next year. I floated this idead on the trade board and would still love to swing a deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Nov 16, 2005 11:39:47 GMT -5
Who in their right mind would want to commit to paying an old man like Federov $6,000,000 in 2008. Sure it's a salary dump, but it's a good one. By the way, I do like Beauchemin. He's steady and consistant. Better reflexes and smarter than Komisarek. (then again, the posts and crossbar are smarter than Komisarek)
Komisarek and Kastitsyn the elder still have tremendous potential to improve, but they are improving very slowly.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Nov 16, 2005 17:05:24 GMT -5
By the way, I do like Beauchemin. He's steady and consistant. Better reflexes and smarter than Komisarek. (then again, the posts and crossbar are smarter than Komisarek) What do you base this on - Beauchemin's one NHL game for the Habs or his short stint with Columbus? Unless you have a dish and a Blue Jackets cable package and have actually seen him play there isn't much basis for this assessment. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Nov 16, 2005 21:00:06 GMT -5
Teams have to be within the cap when you average the 82 games. That's why a team like the Devils were allowed to be over the cap and eventually dump some salary (Friesen) earlier this season. I'm not sure but they may still be a little bit over the cap. The way it works, you could have a team with a payroll of $34M for the first 41 games and $44M for the last 41 for an average of $39M... Source? The Devils were allowed to be over the cap because it was preseason.... Besides, as I've pointed out before, doing it that way would be too complicated. If a team has a $44M payroll for the first half of the season, how (and at what point) do you force them to cut payroll? And why on earth would the NHL want a CBA that encourages playoff rentals? |
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Nov 16, 2005 21:43:26 GMT -5
Federov gets Brian Burke: Wright, Beachemin...and most importantly, a bunch of salary cap room with which he can go shopping and bring in his own kind of guy or guys. Burke even admitted that this trade is not the end of the "deal", as he now can go looking to see what else is out there. Federov at over $6M, is a pricey addition to your salary cap, as the Blue Jackets now know forcing them to dump Marchant....supposedly a character guy and popular guy in the room. Hmmm.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Nov 16, 2005 22:47:24 GMT -5
Source? The Devils were allowed to be over the cap because it was preseason.... Besides, as I've pointed out before, doing it that way would be too complicated. If a team has a $44M payroll for the first half of the season, how (and at what point) do you force them to cut payroll? And why on earth would the NHL want a CBA that encourages playoff rentals? You can keep on asking for sources, but several of us have gotten the same impression from various sources. I don't think you can be over the cap, or if you can, it'll be for a very short while if at all - I think the Devils were OK only because it was pre-season. The key thing is payroll over a whole season. So right now the Habs are paying for 36 million or so, but by the deadline at (say) 75% of the season, a guy making 4 million will only have 1 million left, so adding him to the 36 million roster, with no other changes, means you're at 37 million, not 40. The 37 million dollar will be allowed, the 40 million won't be. It's actually pretty easy to do it this way. A team can have callups, send up or send down players, make trades, etc, you just have to look at how much that one particular team pays out over the course of the season. It's also good for the players, in that the cap is cumulative, so if part of the cap-room isn't used at one point it's still available elsewhere. For example, at 36 million at the deadline the Habs could also sign someone out of the NHL (say Owen Nolan for sake of argument) for their remaining cap room - the type of deal that wouldn't be possible under a rigid system where it's 39 million total payroll for each pay period, with no buildup of unused bucks. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Nov 16, 2005 22:49:00 GMT -5
Federov gets Brian Burke: Wright, Beachemin...and most importantly, a bunch of salary cap room with which he can go shopping and bring in his own kind of guy or guys. Burke even admitted that this trade is not the end of the "deal", as he now can go looking to see what else is out there. Federov at over $6M, is a pricey addition to your salary cap, as the Blue Jackets now know forcing them to dump Marchant....supposedly a character guy and popular guy in the room. Hmmm. What's really interesting is that Columbus didn't send Marchant in return for Fedorov... |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Nov 16, 2005 23:52:41 GMT -5
Source? The Devils were allowed to be over the cap because it was preseason.... Besides, as I've pointed out before, doing it that way would be too complicated. If a team has a $44M payroll for the first half of the season, how (and at what point) do you force them to cut payroll? And why on earth would the NHL want a CBA that encourages playoff rentals? You can keep on asking for sources... ...I will.  I would really like to see the actual CBA which is supposedly going to be made public eventually. So did I, perhaps from the number of posters who were asserting it as fact. At the moment this is just speculation and the only hard information I've seen is the CBA FAQ at nhl.com, which says that that impression is wrong. I know that there was a lot of misinformation about the CBA reported over the summer, but I don't think people should be saying "it works like this" as though they've read the CBA.... I guess the CBA FAQ doesn't clearly say whether it would be counted that way or not, although the way I read it suggests not. However, it would only mean that we'd need to have a payroll under 38 million on deadline day - in the interim we can go right up to the cap if we want and it won't matter, as long as we're able to dump some salary before the deadline. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Nov 22, 2005 11:18:37 GMT -5
I guess he freed up the Cap space to bring in Marchant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Nov 22, 2005 13:37:42 GMT -5
Une question?
What happens if a team is over the cap and nobody wants to trade with them? What is the penalty if they are over the cap at the end of the season?
Actually that's two questions.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Nov 22, 2005 14:54:56 GMT -5
Une question? What happens if a team is over the cap and nobody wants to trade with them? What is the penalty if they are over the cap at the end of the season? Actually that's two questions. One answer fits all.  Judging by the absence of a copy of the current CBA on both the NHL and NHLPA Web sites it's on a need-to-know basis—and apparently we don't need to know. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Nov 23, 2005 22:23:46 GMT -5
I guess the CBA FAQ doesn't clearly say whether it would be counted that way or not, although the way I read it suggests not. Suppose a player makes 4 million per year and is paid monthly for 8 months. That makes $500k per month that he contributes to his team's payroll. My assumption is that the statement that team payrolls may not exceed the cap at any point during the season means that a team's monthly payroll can't exceed one eighth of the annual cap for any month. Actually, I guess I'm assuming that the annual cap is divided by the appropriate number to come up with a daily cap. So what matters is a player's daily rate of pay, not the amount remaining on their contract. |
|
I would really like to see the actual CBA which is supposedly going to be made public eventually.
