Confirmed Signing with Link: [TOR] D Chris Tanev signs extension with the Maple Leafs (6 years, $4.5M AAV)

[FerrisRox]

For sure but recent years have shown you can be on LTIR and the league will let you retire at the same time without problem. (Didn't Pronger even get to be in the HHOF and on roster at the same time, if im remembering correctly?

What I meant by them not being the same thing is, a retired player does not draw a salary and does not effect his teams salary cap (unless he signed his deal at an advanced age.) A player on LTIR is still drawing a salary and still something that has to be dealt with in terms of your salary cap and managing that LTIR money.

 

[Nothingbutglass]

And so have the Leafs prior …several times (Lupol , Joffrey among the other Rhonda island inhabitants ) …

Yes, in 2016 and it was sketchy then. Other cases have happened since. You still need the player to "agree" to be injured. Even that is sketchy and what NHL will come down on. Leafs will be dumb enough to be the new precedent setter and have the rules become more strict. Thanks Leafs

 

[Leaf Fans]

Yes, in 2016 and it was sketchy then. Other cases have happened since. You still need the player to "agree" to be injured. Even that is sketchy and what NHL will come down on. Leafs will be dumb enough to be the new precedent setter and have the rules become more strict. Thanks Leafs

Nonsense. What was sketchy in 2016? What new precedent?

 

[TheKrebsCycle]

Yes, in 2016 and it was sketchy then. Other cases have happened since. You still need the player to "agree" to be injured. Even that is sketchy and what NHL will come down on. Leafs will be dumb enough to be the new precedent setter and have the rules become more strict. Thanks Leafs

That’s not true. Lupol tried to sue them claiming he could play . Doctors dissagreed . Many examples since

 

[Nothingbutglass]

That’s not true. Lupol tried to sue them claiming he could play . Doctors dissagreed . Many examples since

Which part isnt true? Lupul suing seems to suggest he thought he could play. I think this part is what will be cracked down on. It wont be a viable cap strategy to rely on LTIR. Are you saying Tanev will be medically declared unable to play when the Leafs need him to?

 

[Leaf Fans]

That’s not true. Lupol tried to sue them claiming he could play . Doctors dissagreed . Many examples since

For sure, it is the same with Hossa. Fan driven nonsense.

 

[Seanaconda]

I don't like the leafs but tanev is a really good defenseman and I think as long as he can drag his body on the ice he will be decent defensively .

Seen him hobbled plenty of times and he is still good

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

For sure but recent years have shown you can be on LTIR and the league will let you retire at the same time without problem. (Didn't Pronger even get to be in the HHOF and on roster at the same time, if im remembering correctly?

He got his full salary and his cap hit never disappeared...

 

[HockeyVirus]

The penalty will happen down the line when he is ineffective and they try to put him on LTIR. Leafs fans seem to think LTIR is a given because other teams have done it.

Right after they are fined their first for flying out early, and after they are stripped picks for letting their players use their facilities in the summer, etc I assume?

I don't like the leafs but tanev is a really good defenseman and I think as long as he can drag his body on the ice he will be decent defensively .

Seen him hobbled plenty of times and he is still good

If we get 3 good years of top 4 minutes it will be worth it. By then the price of a good #5 will be 4M.

 

[TheGroceryStick]

Was LTIR talked about this much when Arizona collected them like trading cards? And Tanev has remained healthy recently.

Haha.

 

[Jared Dunn]

Which part isnt true? Lupul suing seems to suggest he thought he could play. I think this part is what will be cracked down on. It wont be a viable cap strategy to rely on LTIR. Are you saying Tanev will be medically declared unable to play when the Leafs need him to?

No, but it's basically a guarantee that they expect that's probably where his career will trend by the final season or two and they're making a bet on that. Problem is Tanev has never really had any long term injuries to my knowledge, so if he continues to be injury prone the way he has been in previous years he could end up being a grossly overpaid bottom pairing D that only plays 50-60% of the season by the end of it

 

[Nothingbutglass]

Right after they are fined their first for flying out early, and after they are stripped picks for letting their players use their facilities in the summer, etc I assume?

No? What are you even talking about?

 

[Golden_Jet]

No? What are you even talking about?

just whining because the leafs broke the Christmas 3 day break rule, by flying out on night 2 and got a fine.

 

[Nothingbutglass]

just whining because the leafs broke the Christmas 3 day break rule, by flying out on night 2 and got a fine.

Persecution is a terrible thing to endure.

 

[HockeyVirus]

No? What are you even talking about?

just whining because the leafs broke the Christmas 3 day break rule, by flying out on night 2 and got a fine.

And in those threads Leaf fans dealt with the same thing with fans telling them they would be punished. Go look up the threads yourself lol

 

[Nothingbutglass]

And in those threads Leaf fans dealt with the same thing with fans telling them they would be punished. Go look up the threads yourself lol

What does that have to do with Tanev's contract? They aren't nearly the same transgressions. If you cant tell the difference between breaking minor technical rules negotiated with the players association and a contract that is clearly designed to skirt the salary cap rules, that's on you. Though it does seem to suggest an organizational disregard for following the rules.

 

[HockeyVirus]

What does that have to do with Tanev's contract? They aren't nearly the same transgressions. If you cant tell the difference between breaking minor technical rules negotiated with the players association and a contract that is clearly designed to skirt the salary cap rules, that's on you. Though it does seem to suggest an organizational disregard for following the rules.

It has everything to do with the folks insisting there is some punishment coming and the Leafs are doing terrible rule breaking things. Because this is deja vu all over again.

People hate the Leafs and conflate their wishes of the league punishing them with reality.

 

[Leaf Fans]

What does that have to do with Tanev's contract? They aren't nearly the same transgressions. If you cant tell the difference between breaking minor technical rules negotiated with the players association and a contract that is clearly designed to skirt the salary cap rules, that's on you. Though it does seem to suggest an organizational disregard for following the rules.

What transgression are the Leafs committing with Tanev's contract?

 

[Nothingbutglass]

It has everything to do with the folks insisting there is some punishment coming and the Leafs are doing terrible rule breaking things. Because this is deja vu all over again.

People hate the Leafs and conflate their wishes of the league punishing them with reality.

Or you could look at what the transgressions were and how they were punished individually and not through a persecution lens. It's tiresome.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Persecution is a terrible thing to endure.

Is it? It sounds like it would be. Were you persecuted for your hockey beliefs? Something else?

 

[mouser]

What transgression are the Leafs committing with Tanev's contract?

The accusation would be tacking on extra years the team doesn’t expect will be fulfilled to lower the AAV. If true that would be a de facto bad faith contract and cap circumvention a la Kovalchuk.

Of course you never know, maybe Taney will play out the full contract. And this contract, while suspicious, isn’t nearly as blatant as some past contracts, primarily due to contract variance rules introduced in the 2013 and 2020 CBAs.

 

[Leaf Fans]

The accusation would be tacking on extra years the team doesn’t expect will be fulfilled to lower the AAV. If true that would be a de facto bad faith contract and cap circumvention a la Kovalchuk.

Of course you never know, maybe Taney will play out the full contract. And this contract, while suspicious, isn’t nearly as blatant as some past contracts, primarily due to contract variance rules introduced in the 2013 and 2020 CBAs.

Yes, that is the accusation. Some fans (Leaf fans primarily) have used that idea to justify the contract. However, a play cannot be put on LTIR without being injured though I suppose a team could not activate a player on LTIR if they don't have the cap space, but anything like that is speculation 5 years or so down the road. I understand it is August but the allegations are complete nonsense.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Was LTIR talked about this much when Arizona collected them like trading cards? And Tanev has remained healthy recently.

Haha.

The fly in the ointment ?

Arizona collected them to reach the cap floor, not to gain an on-ice advantage.

Apples and oranges...

 

[Leaf Fans]

The fly in the ointment ?

Arizona collected them to reach the cap floor, not to gain an on-ice advantage.

Apples and oranges...

Not meeting the cap floor and being over the cap are both prohibited.