Diehard Exclusive
Unlock Your Full Philadelphia Flyers Experience
This premium content is a Philadelphia Flyers Diehard exclusive.
DIEHARD MEMBERSHIP
$79.99
/year
As a Diehard, you'll get:
Plus
Join Now
Cancel anytime. No questions asked.
Manage Membership
You're already a Diehard! Manage your subscription from your dashboard.
Already a Diehard?
Sign In
12 Comments (4 conversations)
Michael Perez
I keep wondering what the Avs culpability in this situation is. If RJ is playing through hip injury, shouldn’t the avs known this? If they did, doesn’t that need to be disclosed prior to the trade?
mbtoole
Came down here to ask the same question.
Charlie O'Connor
AuthorI have heard nothing to tell that anyone believes the Avalanche did anything wrong here. I get why people are hung up on the “Avs sold the Flyers damaged goods” concept, but I believe this is viewed by the Flyers and the NHL as a potential Johansen-driven deception. After all, Johansen was willing and able to play for the Avs. That implies that they believed he was healthy (in NHL terms of course, everyone is banged up all the time, especially players over the age of 30).
guadzilla
If they can put someone with a low cap hit on LTIR before the season starts, then putting Ellis on LTIR after the season starts gives them $6MM of cap space that they can actually use to allow for Michkov’s bonuses, etc.
Easy alternative – send a low pick to a rebuilding team to take $1MM in salary off someone. That puts them under the cap before the season starts. Then put Ellis on LTIR on Day 1 and cap issues solved.
Charlie O'Connor
AuthorNo, putting Ellis on LTIR doesn’t provide space for Michkov’s bonuses. Because when you’re using LTIR, you’re over the cap. You therefore haven’t banked anything for the end of the season when you find out what Michkov’s bonuses are, and you have to cover them.
You’re talking about something totally different — maximizing LTIR allowance.
guadzilla
I meant the case where they do something else to come under the cap at the start of the season (put someone else on LTIR, get some other team to pick up a bit of salary, etc) – IF they are cap compliant at the start of the season and THEN put Ellis on LTIR, they get the full cap relief for his salary.
Charlie O'Connor
AuthorOh yeah, that’s true, but I’m just not sure what that would be. Maybe if they found a taker for Risto?
guadzilla
What I’d do: Trade someone like Deslauriers to a team and then get him back, with the other team retaining 900k of his salary. Chuck a 3rd or 4th rounder to them for that. That gets them compliant before the start of the season.
Then they can put Ellis on LTIR once the season starts and have $6MM of space – this lets them allow for bonuses and also weaponize this cap space by taking on an expiring contract for the year from a cap-needy contender (they should be able to recoup more than what they paid for having Deslaurier’s salary reduced).
Mike Pierce
Charlie do we know how settlements are handled under the salary cap? Like it looks like the Blackhawks had no cap implications after settling with Perry, but it appears the Kings did have implications after settling with Richards. Is there a clear reason for that, or is it more of a case by case kind of thing?
Charlie O'Connor
AuthorCase-by-case. Also, the Perry situation had little to do with cap space, since the Blackhawks were way under the cap ceiling both with and without Perry. It was basically irrelevant to the dispute — all that really mattered to the NHLPA was getting Perry a financial settlement.
Whereas the Richards situation had everything to do with cap space. The Kings, if you recall, were considering straight buying out Richards that summer (and dealing with the subsequent major cap penalties that go with buying out five years of a contract). Then, he got arrested, and the Kings saw a way to get the contract nullified with no cap penalties at all.
Richards mostly cared about his money in the dispute. But OTHER NHL TEAMS really cared about the Kings finding a way to ditch a declining player with no cap penalties. So the settlement between the NHLPA and NHL was always going to include cap implications, in order to satisfy those concerns.
Other teams likely won’t be as ticked off at the Flyers for trying this, because it’s nowhere near as much money and also the Flyers aren’t a Cup contender like the Kings were back then. But they’d still all prefer the Flyers to have cap issues because it weakens them, if only a little bit, and you always want to see competitors be a bit weaker. So any settlement in this case almost certainly will include cap implications to satisfy those concerns.
Mike Pierce
Thanks Charlie! Teams might be more worried about the Preds getting off the hook haha
Chet Manley
Sorry Charlie, it doesn’t matter how many times you explain that LTIR isn’t free money, I will continue to ignore it.