4 Bruins' players exempt from expansion draft
- Thread starter Fenway
- Start date
DaveFromNB
Registered User
Jorah Marshmont
Long may he reign
- May 10, 2012
- 4,698
- 3,123
Danton Heineken
Howard Potts
Montecristo
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2012
- 6,932
- 2,162
Over the volcano
Registered User
On June 16 Rasks turns into a limited No Trade . Bruins did this 'in case' they wanted to move him in the future.
smithformeragent
Moderator
Curious to see how the Vegas roster shapes up.
It's amazing how much the expansion rules have changed over the years.
It's amazing how much the expansion rules have changed over the years.
Danton Heineken
Howard Potts
Dr Quincy
Registered User
- Jun 19, 2005
- 29,368
- 11,679
Montecristo
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2012
- 6,932
- 2,162
I think it means that insurance pays the salary and his status makes his cap hit navigable
Not necessarily. Not all contracts are insured. As a matter of fact only a few per team.
LTIR means thats the sum the team can spend over the max. The max must be reached first.
It has nothing to do with insurance of contract.
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,297
- 24,196
While I wouldn't call Krejci's contract "good", he's only got 4 years left, and there are absolutely worse contracts.
Loui Eriksson and Andrew Ladd just to name two from this past summer.
Dustin Brown's doesn't look to be very good right now, although he's played better this season.
Perhaps you would like to swap Krejci's contract for Dan Girardi's?
DominicT
Registered User
Right.
There are three different insurances.
1) The league's contract insurance policy which teams can opt into. But it's so expensive to the teams that they typically insure the top 3 or 4 contracts on the squad.
2) Teams can take out their own contract insurance on others but again, the cost limits teams as to how many players' contracts they insure.
3) The leagues general policy in which all players are insured up to $500,000 in case of career ending injury.
It is my understanding that the team policies are non transferable so once a player is on LTIR and is being paid by insurance and that player is traded, that insurance is no longer responsible for paying that player.
Vegas is getting a better shake because they allegedly paid $500 million for the franchise which many believe is not the case.
talkinaway
Registered User
Nope. Assuming Horton remains sufficiently injured so that he's unable to play (and IIRC he has pretty debilitating back pain, at least from an article I read last year), he won't take up a spot on Toronto's protected players because he's "medically unable to play". At least that's my impression of what the article said.
Now, I don't know exactly how it would work technically. Would the Leafs still be forced to protect Horton because of the clause, but would be given an extra spot, so they could protect 7-3-1 players PLUS Horton? Or would they be allowed to let him dangle so that Vegas could pick him? (Not that Vegas would pick him, of course.)
Of course, the simpler route would be for the Leafs to ask Horton to waive his clause. I have no idea if it's even in the realm of possibility that Horton comes back, but from what I remember in the Toronto/Columbus trade, it was basically a dump to Toronto of Horton with nothing positive for Toronto other than getting Clarkson off their roster. I think in theory Horton would be amenable to being "traded" if he's not coming back. It's not without precedent - we did it with Savard.
Over the volcano
Registered User
Fossy21
Nobel Prize Deke
- Mar 14, 2013
- 20,262
- 2,343
Still doesn't make the contract better. Just means the team "lucked out" of it somewhat.
I for one wouldn't mind it all backfiring on them. They got rid of it (Clarkson's contract) way too easily (just like Detroit).
b in vancouver
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2005
- 7,863
- 5,720
You should go to the polls board as they're counting down the worst contracts.
Boston hasn't had a player nominated yet.
If you think that (or even that it's a 'bad' contract)- not sure you've been paying much attention to contracts lately.
ChargersRookie
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2014
- 1,900
- 109
Media often uses words in the wrong situation/circumstances.
There is nothing exempt about these players, they are must protect.
Couldn't anybody say that players with NMC count against the teams protect list. No, because they want to write on explaining what they say.
There is nothing exempt about these players, they are must protect.
Couldn't anybody say that players with NMC count against the teams protect list. No, because they want to write on explaining what they say.
RedeyeRocketeer
Registered User
We're at a point where I'm not even 100% we need to use all our protections, lol. Our final guys to protect you could argue may not need it (Belesky etc...)
Like our D? I guess take your pick on your #3. Barely matters. K Miller? I guess.
Like our D? I guess take your pick on your #3. Barely matters. K Miller? I guess.
Pia8988
Registered User
- May 26, 2014
- 14,659
- 9,232
Sounds like Boston will be in a position to make trades with a team that has excess. Boston has a lot of depth prospects. Could package some into a single piece. One team gets exempt value, Boston gets NHL value.
