It doesnt matter to you.

Many people feel that exact opposite. I completely understand how the cap recapture clause works, I was saying that it could be implemented with rule changes to LTIR and "forced retirement" (career ending injuries) as a way to discourage teams from signing older players to longer deals (something they want to limit anyway).

Here's a question for ya..

What happens if an active player dies?
- jak521

As morbid as it sounds, that player would go on LTIR. It's not about what matters to me, it's about how it works, and what makes sense.

Cap recapture is not in any way tied to LTIR, so how could it be possibly implemented into LTIR? All LTIR is, is an exemption to spend over the cap to replace an injured player, IF replacing the player causes a team to go over the cap.

A team is only required to obtain insurance on it's top 5 contracts. The NHL has an injury exemption built in on the cap. It's called LTIR.

They've already corrected some of the things that they felt was not done right, with adding cap recapture.
- MJL

OK fine the CBA is all unicorns and rainbows.

I don't like penalizing a team when the contract was in good faith. Not talking about contracts that circumvented the cap. Pronger, Savard and even a guy like Horton were signed with intent to play out their deals. they didn't just wake up one day and say I don't feel like playing anymore. I personally feel like the player should be able to get their money but also retire and get off the books when its a career ending injury and not have the charade of trading contracts to help teams get to the floor.
- nastyflyergirl

The team is not penalized with LTIR. It's there to help teams. In business terms, which is what the cap is about, none of what you're stating here, has anything to do with anything. It's not a sentimental thing. Nor is it about what was intended. By the way, any player can wake up and decide they don't want to play anymore. Nothing is stopping Pronger, Savard, or Horton from retiring.

Any money paid to players, has to be accounted for on the cap, or it is circumvention.

OK fine the CBA is all unicorns and rainbows.
- dragonoffrost

There is many issues with the cap that I don't personally like. I hate the cap as a whole, but I'm a fan of one of the big money teams. I keep my personal feelings out of it, and look at it from the perspective of what it is designed to do, and what it's purpose is.

I'm completely open to an idea or opinion on why LTIR is so bad and needs to be changed. I've yet to read one, in my opinion.

As morbid as it sounds, that player would go on LTIR. It's not about what matters to me, it's about how it works, and what makes sense.

Cap recapture is not in any way tied to LTIR, so how could it be possibly implemented into LTIR? All LTIR is, is an exemption to spend over the cap to replace an injured player, IF replacing the player causes a team to go over the cap.
- MJL

He wouldn't be getting paid so I think he'd come off the cap.

He wouldn't be getting paid so I think he'd come off the cap.
- Feanor

Contracts in the NHL are guaranteed his estate would be paid the money.

Contracts in the NHL are guaranteed his estate would be paid the money.
- dragonoffrost

Where in the CBA does it say they are guaranteed in the event a player dies?

The team is not penalized with LTIR. It's there to help teams. In business terms, which is what the cap is about, none of what you're stating here, has anything to do with anything. It's not a sentimental thing. Nor is it about what was intended. By the way, any player can wake up and decide they don't want to play anymore. Nothing is stopping Pronger, Savard, or Horton from retiring.

Any money paid to players, has to be accounted for on the cap, or it is circumvention.
- MJL

I disagree

The team is not penalized with LTIR. It's there to help teams. In business terms, which is what the cap is about, none of what you're stating here, has anything to do with anything. It's not a sentimental thing. Nor is it about what was intended. By the way, any player can wake up and decide they don't want to play anymore. Nothing is stopping Pronger, Savard, or Horton from retiring.

Any money paid to players, has to be accounted for on the cap, or it is circumvention.
- MJL

Actually teams that are normally up against the cap can be punished by the LTIR.

I've seen those at games

Then again there are a lot of Rico jerseys too.

My jersey collection is an odd mix.

Desjardins
McGillis
VanRiemsdyk
Simmonds
Gostisbehere
Giroux (50th)

Soon to be added
Provorov (Stadium)
Konecny
- dragonoffrost

I still have my Timmy Kerr jersey, it's a bit tight though
😜

I still have my Timmy Kerr jersey, it's a bit tight though
😜
- BiggE

My dad has an old Parent jersey that is hilariously tight on him.

My dad has an old Parent jersey that is hilariously tight on him.
- mickel25

I had one as a kid in the 70s, have no idea what happened to it, or my Holmgren one too. For the last 20 years, I've only bought plain ones, no names or numbers, but I think I see a #9 Provorov jersey in my near future

Isles waive Halak

Isles waive Halak
- nastyflyergirl

Well pick him up!

Well pick him up!
- mickel25

hell no just passing it along. He has fallen off a cliff this year. Greiss has been the much better goalie

Isles waive Halak
- nastyflyergirl

Agent finally got Snow to give in. Three goalies and two practice nets is a recipe for a mess.

hell no just passing it along. He has fallen off a cliff this year. Greiss has been the much better goalie
- nastyflyergirl

I agree. However, I just thought since our goalies are soooooo awful.......

I agree. However, I just thought since our goalies are soooooo awful.......
- mickel25

There is awful (our guys) and then there is (Halak)

That even looks like it's saying his name.

will the alumni game be televised?

As morbid as it sounds, that player would go on LTIR. It's not about what matters to me, it's about how it works, and what makes sense.

Cap recapture is not in any way tied to LTIR, so how could it be possibly implemented into LTIR? All LTIR is, is an exemption to spend over the cap to replace an injured player, IF replacing the player causes a team to go over the cap.
- MJL

Maybe I am not being clear here.

In my proposed idea, anyone who suffers a CEI but has remaining term on their current contract enters into a "forced retirement" which means that because of a health reason they are no longer fit to play. "Forced Retirement" allows the player to collect the remainder of their owed salary as was set up in their current contract, however they come off the salary cap of their current team.

A special LTIR could be implemented to contract signed AFTER the player turns 35. If a player aged 35 on the day he signs, signs for longer than 2 years, the signing team may have the option of keeping the player on the roster and using an LTIR spot for him, or see the "forced retirment" out and be issued a cap recapture penalty of some sort....



That was my proposition.

He wouldn't be getting paid so I think he'd come off the cap.
- Feanor

LOL, correct. Why didn't I think of that. Thanks

Actually teams that are normally up against the cap can be punished by the LTIR.
- mickel25

The only way that it could be considered a punishment, is that a team using LTIR is not banking any cap space. They can change that by waiving, demoting, trading other players. No team is forced to spend up to the cap limit. Ultimately, the team is responsible for it's cap position.

I disagree
- nastyflyergirl

If LTIR and how these contracts are handled under the CBA, why are teams like Arizona and Florida trading for these contracts. The question is rhetorical. I understand why.

Maybe I am not being clear here.

In my proposed idea, anyone who suffers a CEI but has remaining term on their current contract enters into a "forced retirement" which means that because of a health reason they are no longer fit to play. "Forced Retirement" allows the player to collect the remainder of their owed salary as was set up in their current contract, however they come off the salary cap of their current team.

A special LTIR could be implemented to contract signed AFTER the player turns 35. If a player aged 35 on the day he signs, signs for longer than 2 years, the signing team may have the option of keeping the player on the roster and using an LTIR spot for him, or see the "forced retirment" out and be issued a cap recapture penalty of some sort....



That was my proposition.
- jak521

No, you were clear, and I understand what you're saying There is simply no reason why the special LTIR rule you propose is needed. What would that accomplish?

Again, I'll ask why is there a salary cap, and what is it's true purpose.

Here is a simple and fundamental rule of the salary cap, and it's purpose. All money paid to players, must be accounted for under the salary cap. The last lockout was about the 50/50 split, and the players share of revenue. New rules were put in place to avoid the front loaded contracts, as well as recapture rules to make up for the issues and loopholes that were used under the previous CBA. All done to get the revenue split as close to 50/50 as possible, and to ensure that at the end of a players contract, cap hit paid, is equal to salary paid.

What you're suggesting shows a lack of understanding of the salary cap, and what it's function is. The Owners and the League would never agree to paying players money outside of the system.

No, you were clear, and I understand what you're saying. You're still confusing the over 35 contract rule, and LTIR rule. They are completely unrelated, and have zero to do with each other to be clear. There is simply no reason why the special LTIR rule you propose is needed. That does not address the issue.

Again, I'll ask why is there a salary cap, and what is it's true purpose.

Here is a simple and fundamental rule of the salary cap, and it's purpose. All money paid to players, must be accounted for under the salary cap. The last lockout was about the 50/50 split, and the players share of revenue. New rules were put in place to avoid the front loaded contracts, as well as recapture rules to make up for the issues and loopholes that were used under the previous CBA. All done to get the revenue split as close to 50/50 as possible, and to ensure that at the end of a players contract, cap hit paid, is equal to salary paid.

What you're suggesting shows a lack of understanding of the salary cap, and what it's function is. The Owners and the League would never agree to paying players money outside of the system.
- MJL

I understand how it works. Im suggesting changes. I know why a salary cap is there in the first place. Parity and prevention of soaring salaries... However, there SHOULD be changes made that would help in the case of a player being forced to retire due to injury.

I fully understand what you are saying. I am not lacking understanding of the salary cap and its function, I am challenging it with the proposed IDEA of helping teams who have lost a MAJOR contributor to their teams success.

Losing a key player (they are usually the ones signed to long term deals ya know) to a CEI is already a tough blow, but having them cost against your salary cap is an even bigger blow. There SHOULD be ways around that aside from trading their cap hit to a team who needs to reach the cap floor.

THESE ARE ALL PROPOSITIONS.

Cap recapture is a punishment to teams who sign guys to long term deals only to have them retire (Kovalchuk) early and save a boatload on them. I understand it, but was SUGGESTING something a bit different.

Sometimes I swear youre Data from Star Trek.