Confirmed with Link: TDA trade dead, bought out by Flyers

[A Star is Burns]

Aside from all the stuff pointed out already, the only reason the trade was made in July is that the league year was f***ed up the last few years recovering from covid. In a normal year, the trade we made would have been right about now as it was before the draft. Last year, the draft was like July 8 and free agency was July 13. There also isn't any more benefit gained by doing it now versus a couple of weeks from now.

 

[Chrispy]

That'd be some major bullshit. That's WAY less "cap circumvention" than TBL and other teams have been doing for playoffs in recent years...hell nothing in this scenario is even "bending the rules" like they did. I know you can't trade a guy, get the other team to retain, and trade him back within a year, but this was 100% a different contract so that shouldn't matter.

Hell, it's less cap circumvention than the Jordan Staal contract where it's obvious to just about everyone he probably will retire after July 1, 2026.

That said, I'm guessing it's an automated flag in the NHL's contract system that it's < 1 year with retained salary. Automated flags do weird things when you mess with a normally fixed calendar. I think it will be passed this week.

 

[Svechhammer]

Of course the only way the league thinks twice about cap circumvention is if its automatically triggered because they didn't have the foresight to amend some rules to be based on the league year rather than calendar year during COVID, which f***ed dates to hell. Can't do anything about Vegas or Tampa blatantly using LTIR to circumvent, but this? Oh yeah, this definitely is. Especially for a guy like TDA, definitely the kind of player the league is tripping over to circumvent the cap for.

 

[Borsig]

More anti canes bullshit bias.

Maybe we can just ltir him then activate him on the First day of July or whatever

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

im okay with or without TDA so if the league wants forego the spirit of that rule to pretend to care about cap circumvention, *shrugs shoulders*.

 

[mikeyfan]

If this is considered a circumvention, then why is trading a player and not getting qualitative compensation back, i.e. cap dump, not considered circumventing the cap?

 

[Svechhammer]

If this is considered a circumvention, then why is trading a player and not getting qualitative compensation back, i.e. cap dump, not considered circumventing the cap?

Hey, future considerations was a vital role player to Vegas winning the Cup this year. Don't you dare besmirch his name

 

[Lempo]

Hell, it's less cap circumvention than the Jordan Staal contract where it's obvious to just about everyone he probably will retire after July 1, 2026.

That said, I'm guessing it's an automated flag in the NHL's contract system that it's < 1 year with retained salary. Automated flags do weird things when you mess with a normally fixed calendar. I think it will be passed this week.

For what it's worth, there is an explicit prohibition in the CBA for a Club to:

Reacquire within one (1) calendar year from the date of that Retained Salary Transaction an SPC the Averaged Amount and Player Salary and Bonuses of which that Club agreed to retain as part of a Retained Salary Transaction;

A crazyman could argue this is a bit like that but the other way around. PHI *did* sign Tony on the same day the trade was made.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

For what it's worth, there is an explicit prohibition in the CBA for a Club to:

Reacquire within one (1) calendar year from the date of that Retained Salary Transaction an SPC the Averaged Amount and Player Salary and Bonuses of which that Club agreed to retain as part of a Retained Salary Transaction;

A crazyman could argue this is a bit like that but the other way around. PHI *did* sign Tony on the same day the trade was made.

yea the spirit of the rule is team A signing the player before all this motion is started but since it doesnt say that, nuances will be argued.

 

[Svechhammer]

For what it's worth, there is an explicit prohibition in the CBA for a Club to:

Reacquire within one (1) calendar year from the date of that Retained Salary Transaction an SPC the Averaged Amount and Player Salary and Bonuses of which that Club agreed to retain as part of a Retained Salary Transaction;

A crazyman could argue this is a bit like that but the other way around. PHI *did* sign Tony on the same day the trade was made.

It is so dumb that this says its within the same calendar year when it should be the same league fiscal year.

Because the way its worded now, in a season where there is a long work stoppage, like COVID, you could conceivably reacquire a player you traded away at the beginning of the FY and have him for the playoffs, assuming the pause happened before the deadline.

 

[Chrispy]

For what it's worth, there is an explicit prohibition in the CBA for a Club to:

Reacquire within one (1) calendar year from the date of that Retained Salary Transaction an SPC the Averaged Amount and Player Salary and Bonuses of which that Club agreed to retain as part of a Retained Salary Transaction;

A crazyman could argue this is a bit like that but the other way around. PHI *did* sign Tony on the same day the trade was made.

Nothing crazy, this reads like exactly the opposite of this TDA trade.

"Reacquire within 1 calendar from the date of THAT Retained Salary Transaction..."

That implies a team did a retained salary move, then reacquired the player. In this case, the player was traded with no contract, a contract was signed, and now the player is traded back for less almost a year later.

It's obviously not cap circumvention because the Flyers aren't getting anything out of it other than a year of TDA. They lose 3 picks and gain an unsigned prospect.

 

[Lempo]

Nothing crazy, this reads like exactly the opposite of this TDA trade.

"Reacquire within 1 calendar from the date of THAT Retained Salary Transaction..."

That implies a team did a retained salary move, then reacquired the player. In this case, the player was traded with no contract, a contract was signed, and now the player is traded back for less almost a year later.

It's obviously not cap circumvention because the Flyers aren't getting anything out of it other than a year of TDA. They lose 3 picks and gain an unsigned prospect.

Yes. But NHL.

 

[Lempo]

It is so dumb that this says its within the same calendar year when it should be the same league fiscal year.

Because the way its worded now, in a season where there is a long work stoppage, like COVID, you could conceivably reacquire a player you traded away at the beginning of the FY and have him for the playoffs, assuming the pause happened before the deadline.

To play Bettman's advocate, Tony was traded to and signed by PHI on Jul 8th 2022, 5 days prior to league year 22022-23 starting on Jul 13th. League year 2023-24 starts on Jul 1st.
Plans of trading Tony back 50% retained came public... just or right before the one year milestone calculated from the Free Agency.

I don't know if PHI actually have to benefit from it for it to be considered cap circumvention by Canes, or if Canes even need to have done any of it intentionally. The fact is, Canes is re-acquiring a player they had arguably less than a year ago and another team is paying a part of his salary for 2023-24.

 

[FlyingSquirrels]

So with retained salary TDA can't be traded at all?
Or just can't be traded to the Canes before 7/9?

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

So with retained salary TDA can't be traded at all?
Or just can't be traded to the Canes before 7/9?

the 2nd one

 

[Lempo]

So with retained salary TDA can't be traded at all?
Or just can't be traded to the Canes before 7/9?

Tony is not currently a party of a retention. If he was to be retained, there would need to be a trade where the retaining happens.

The question is can PHI retain in a trade to CAR due to Tony's previous recent trade history between the two.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

To play Bettman's advocate

Counterpoint: f*** that motherf***er

 

[DaveG]

the 2nd one

And we're not even sure about that part yet

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

And we're not even sure about that part yet

arent we? It seems like the trade is a go minus the whole "cap circumvention" thing

 

[Svechhammer]

Counterpoint: f*** that motherf***er

Now there's a visual

 

[DaveG]

arent we? It seems like the trade is a go minus the whole "cap circumvention" thing

I mean we'll find out after discussions in Nashville this week.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

I mean we'll find out after discussions in Nashville this week.

the discussions are to determine if it truly is "cap circumvention" and we have to wait until July 9th or it isnt and it can be completed immediately.

 

[Stickpucker]

Get them biches in a call on Slack/Teams whatever the NHL uses (probably webex) and sort dis shit oot.

 

[Negan4Coach]

The Regulatory State assuming its finally form within the NHL's CBA. ugh.

 

[WreckingCrew]

For what it's worth, there is an explicit prohibition in the CBA for a Club to:

Reacquire within one (1) calendar year from the date of that Retained Salary Transaction an SPC the Averaged Amount and Player Salary and Bonuses of which that Club agreed to retain as part of a Retained Salary Transaction;

A crazyman could argue this is a bit like that but the other way around. PHI *did* sign Tony on the same day the trade was made.

What they're probably looking at is this:
(C) Under no circumstances may a Club:
(4) Reacquire as part of a Retained Salary Transaction the SPC of a Player who was on that Club's Reserve List within the past calendar year;

Problem for the NHL is, he's now on a DIFFERENT SPC...it's not the same contract, so that shouldn't apply?