Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What's wrong with Smith? Experts weigh in
#21
Maybe that was just to avoid paying the full salary that they would have had to if Brouwer played in the minors?
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
-Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply
Thanks given by:
#22
(2019-01-13, 01:39 PM)Nanuuk Wrote: Maybe that was just to avoid paying the full salary that they would have had to if Brouwer played in the minors?
They still have to pay him, but a reduced amount.

They needed the cap space to sign Neal and Czarnik, and re-sign Hanifin and Lindy.
That 9th goal really took the wind out of our sails. - J. Tortorella, Columbus
Reply
Thanks given by:
#23
FF, my take was that if Brouwer had cleared waivers (and cap space of some degree) they still would have had to pay him his $4.5M for the next four years. A normal buy-out (vs. a compliance buyout) let them gain cap space, but were only on the hook for $1.5M for the next four years saving the organization $12M in total.
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
-Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply
Thanks given by:
#24
All of that is understood, but we are talking cap space not dollars.

To reiterate, if you send a 5 million dollar contract to Stockton, only 1 mil comes off cap space. The other 4 mil stays.

So no, you cant send Smith to the minors and go out and buy another 4 mil goalie.
That 9th goal really took the wind out of our sails. - J. Tortorella, Columbus
Reply
Thanks given by:
#25
Somebody needs to update Wiki to the new CBA requirements to protect old fools like me.

Ok then! A different tact. At what point can a player be placed on LTIR for cap space, i.e. how many games must they miss?

If Stone remains on IR for the remainder of the season (presumably giving us cap room) do you think the Flames waive Smith (to gain another mill in space) and go out and acquire a mid tier goalie with some term?

Steinberg notes 5 possible candidates:

Lehner, Griess, Howard, McBackup, Keumper (hmmm, maybe ARI would take Smith back)

While I have posted that I think Smitty can bounce back I'm not sure having him around next season should be the plan.
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
-Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply
Thanks given by:
#26
I do not believe you can just transfer someone from IR to LTIR without medical evidence.
"What's the first thing a lion does after he wakes up?" Badger Bob Johnson
"He licks his balls" Kent Nilsson
Reply
Thanks given by:
#27
Of course. The presumption is the blood clot issue won't be resolved for the foreseeable future. So at what point can that determination be made or to allow a team some relief. Number of games missed? Prognosis for a return in a specific time frame? Stone has missed 35 games or so (not sure how many healthy scratches there has been) and there are only 36 games to go. Blood clots are very tricky especially if there is a lot of flying going on.
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
-Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply
Thanks given by:
#28
(2019-01-13, 01:07 PM)Nanuuk Wrote: So I thought I'd bump this thread as the Flames are going into the last half of the season precariously leading the Pacific Division.

To-date our goalies records are:


PLAYER GP W L OTL GA GAA SA SV% SO MIN
Rittich, David 27 17 4 3 60 2.45 746 .920 1 1471
Smith, Mike 23 12 9 1 66 3.09 578 .886 2 1281

Mike will be playing tonight and I hope he can regain his form. But what if he can't and is done. The Flames would need to acquire another goalie and cap space might be a problem. If they can trade Mike they would clear up cap room. But what if they waive him?

From what I've read on Wiki, if they did waive him his cap hit would go away. He would still get paid though.

Might this be an option? And before you say he's over 35 and that changes things according to Wiki...

"Under the 2005 CBA, if an NHL player is being sent to an NHL affiliate team in the AHL and is put through waivers and clears successfully, then his salary will not count against the respective NHL team's salary cap. The player is still paid his full salary. There is an exception to this rule; if the player has a contract that took effect after a player's 35th birthday, then that player's salary would still count against the NHL cap. Under the 2013 CBA, a team only derives a specific savings from demoting a player on a one-way contract to the AHL. This savings is calculated as league minimum plus $375,000."

If this is indeed an option it gives Tre another arrow in his Quiver.

No, his cap hit doesn't go away.

Under the current CBA, if a player on a one-way contract is sent to the AHL, the cap savings is equal to the league min (currently $650K) plus $375K - there is only a cap savings of $1,050,000.
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)