Jump to content

[discussion] trading Poolman’s contract


Recommended Posts

First of all, hoping Tucker all the best in his recovery.

 

Second, a recent Canucks Army article suggested we may trade him (and confirmed you can trade an injured player on LTIR):

 

Poolman is expected to essentially enter LTIRetirement, earning the rest of his contract from the sidelines due to ongoing concussion-related symptoms. He can thus be placed on LTIR from the get-go this season and be exchanged for up to $2.5 million in cap relief.
 
But the Canucks would find themselves in a much more flexible position if they didn’t have to bother with that LTIR placement in the first place. Removing Poolman from the equation allows them much more wiggle room; enough to…run a 23-player roster that is genuinely below the salary cap…as in, at the point where the Canucks can actually accrue cap space as the year goes on.
 
This would be ideal, and all it would cost another team is the cap space, as Poolman’s contract is almost certainly insured. It would cost them two years of cap space, but perhaps that is negotiable for a somewhat reasonable price.
Injured players can be traded, by the way, despite a popular misconception.
 
What might they get back?: This is as pure a cap dump as it gets, and so the Canucks would have to pay up. But how much? The Anaheim Ducks, for example, still have dozens of millions of dollars in cap space, and don’t seem eager to use it. Wouldn’t they be better off using that cap space and picking up a third or a couple fourth round picks for their trouble, especially if it won’t cost them an actual dollar?
 

Would a team like Toronto want his (guaranteed) LTIR cap relief? They are $13.25M over the cap, with $10.3M in LTIR eligible relief.

 

Seems like that may buy them some time to start the season. Not sure if we’d get a late pick or future considerations, but it would allow us to accrue cap space this year, which could make a big difference at the TDL…

 

Anyone knowledgeable about this? @SISMIM? @Provost?

 

 

Edited by Huggy Bear
Added article
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thrago said:

You don't gain anything by taking on LTIR contracts, they take up the cap space then allow you to go over the cap the same amount so not sure how that would help anyone.


don’t you gain cap relief, allowing you to spend over the cap by up to that amount? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

First of all, hoping Tucker all the best in his recovery.

 

Second, a recent Canucks Army article suggested we may trade him (and confirmed you can trade an injured player on LTIR).

 

Would a team like Toronto want his (guaranteed) LTIR cap relief? They are $13.25M over the cap, with $10.3M in LTIR eligible relief.

 

Seems like that may buy them some time to start the season. Not sure if we’d get a late pick or future considerations, but it would allow us to accrue cap space this year, which could make a big difference at the TDL…

 

Anyone knowledgeable about this? @SISMIM? @Provost?

 

 

I don’t think it really helps Toronto. Were they to acquire Poolman, they’d have to add his AAV to their cap, which would then be offset by his LTIR. So it’s pretty much neutral. It doesn’t give them more space.

 

Without looking at the numbers, but just going off what you posted, adding Poolman would put them $15.75M over the cap (13.25 plus 2.5 for Poolman), and give them $12.8M in relief (10.3 + 2.5), so it doesn’t really improve their situation.

 

OTOH, if a team is going to be over the cap already, and rely on LTIR, it doesn’t hurt them to take on another LTIR contract. Especially one that’s likely getting paid by insurance. It’s doesn’t give them more space, but it doesn’t give them less space either (since you basically just would add the contract amount to their overall cap hit and to their overall cap relief).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SISMIM said:

I don’t think it really helps Toronto. Were they to acquire Poolman, they’d have to add his AAV to their cap, which would then be offset by his LTIR. So it’s pretty much neutral. It doesn’t give them more space.

 

Without looking at the numbers, but just going off what you posted, adding Poolman would put them $15.75M over the cap (13.25 plus 2.5 for Poolman), and give them $12.8M in relief (10.3 + 2.5), so it doesn’t really improve their situation.

 

OTOH, if a team is going to be over the cap already, and rely on LTIR, it doesn’t hurt them to take on another LTIR contract. Especially one that’s likely getting paid by insurance. It’s doesn’t give them more space, but it doesn’t give them less space either (since you basically just would add the contract amount to their overall cap hit and to their overall cap relief).

 

1 minute ago, Thrago said:

No cause first you the players cap goes against your cap, then lets you spend the same amount over the cap so it's a wash.


thank you both…much appreciated.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll give you 2 beers and a can of SPAM for it if I can make him my official Pool Boy. 

 

How cool would it be to have a pool boy named Poolman???

 

Seriously though, I'm glad he's taking his health seriously and not trying to make a comeback here. Sometimes you just have to respect your doctors opinion.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think LTIR confused a lot of people (including many in the media) when Toronto was actively trading to acquire injured players and working to create a relief pool that would allow them to fit Marner’s extension, if he were to be signed after the season opened, or if the Leafs had to match an offer sheet. But that was a rather unique situation. Their roster was set up in a way that acquiring Clarkson allowed the Leafs a near “perfect capture” to maximize their LTIR relief. Without Clarkson, their cap hit was actually too low for them to easily maximize their LTIR. Many people mistook the move as creating something out of nothing, when it came to cap space, but it was more about just making all the numbers line up, so they could maximize LTIR relief (I think with Clarkson added, and some paper transactions, they ended around $15K off of a “perfect capture” IIRC).

Edited by SISMIM
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

 

Just now, SISMIM said:

I think LTIR confused a lot of people (including many in the media) when Toronto was actively trading to acquire injured players and working to create a relief pool that would allow them to fit Marner’s extension, if he were to be signed after the season opened, or if the Leafs had to match an offer sheet. But that was a rather unique situation. Their roster was set up in a way that acquiring Clarkson allowed the Leaf a near “perfect capture” to maximize their LTIR relief. Without Clarkson, their cap hit was actually too low for them to easily maximize their LTIR. Many people mistook the move as creating something out of nothing, when it came to cap space, but it was more about just making all the numbers line up, so they could maximize LTIR relief (I think with Clarkson added, and some paper transactions, they ended around $15K off of a “perfect capture” IIRC).


Thanks Ghosts & Sid.

 

Yeah, I thought teams could create LTIR pool by adding the contract, in some specific circumstance. That Leaf’s example may have been the one that confused me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, qwijjibo said:

A team CAN benefit if they trade an excess healthy roster player for a ltir player.  Vegas did that when they swapped Dadonov for the Shea Weber contract. But since Vancouver doesn't have the cap space to do that it's not an option in this case 


Yes, I remember the LTIR contract having value with this example…thanks Q!

 

So possibly after more cap clearing trades, there may be options to move his contract?

Edited by Huggy Bear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

What if a team is at (or close to) the cap, but wants to spend over? 

you don't get to "overspend" the team that trades for him have the cap added to their current cap.. so if u have 80mil add 2mil.. it'll put u at 82mil.. then put the player on ltir u get 2mil back so you are back at 80mil again. the cap remains the same

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair proposal, but I think unless the cost is really reasonable it is likely better to keep the pick and just hold onto him until it expires. 

 

We do have a few Dman on the edge, so maybe if they wanted like Rathbone + Poolman for a 7th rounder or future considerations then sure (mainly cause Rathbone is fighting against a lot of guys to make the team already). 

 

Otherwise unless we desperately need the space to fit everyone, I say keep the 3rd or 4th it would cost to move him and wait it out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

you don't get to "overspend" the team that trades for him have the cap added to their current cap.. so if u have 80mil add 2mil.. it'll put u at 82mil.. then put the player on ltir u get 2mil back so you are back at 80mil again. the cap remains the same

 

Thanks….finally got it. For some reason, I thought the acquiring team could just acquire the relief without the initial cap hit in some cases.

 

This is what a lack of sleep does to my brain. Like a dog chasing it’s own tail…

 

Dog Chasing GIF by Maryanne Chisholm - MCArtist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Huggy Bear said:


Yes, I remember the LTIR contract having value with this example…thanks Q!

 

So possibly after more cap clearing trades, there may be options to move his contract?

 

Tampa was over the cap and traded Tyler Johnson to Chicago for Brent Seabrooks' LTIR contract.  So, this trade allowed Tampa to be cap compliant because instead of being over the cap, they now were in LTIR so they were technically cap compliant.  So, there is value to an LTIR contract if it involves a team already over the cap.  However, the team that is trading the LTIR contract has to be under the cap to make it work, so it wouldn't work in Vancouver's case...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Tampa was over the cap and traded Tyler Johnson to Chicago for Brent Seabrooks' LTIR contract.  So, this trade allowed Tampa to be cap compliant because instead of being over the cap, they now were in LTIR so they were technically cap compliant.  So, there is value to an LTIR contract if it involves a team already over the cap.  However, the team that is trading the LTIR contract has to be under the cap to make it work, so it wouldn't work in Vancouver's case...


Thanks EP…I knew there was a second scenario where these could be a positive asset (aside from reaching the cap floor).

 

Same as the example @qwijjibo gave above, correct?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, qwijjibo said:

A team CAN benefit if they trade an excess healthy roster player for a ltir player.  Vegas did that when they swapped Dadonov for the Shea Weber contract. But since Vancouver doesn't have the cap space to do that it's not an option in this case 

But we don’t have the craperolla LTIR guys like the Haberoos have. Bad comparison. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...