Friedman: Weber could be traded to a team looking to hit the salary floor

[yianik]

Habs have more incentive to do this if they think chance Price is on LTIR next year also. Only allowed 10% over. If both are on LTIR, Habs have to move a player. Or not sign a player

If that is the case, or if Montreal just doesn't want to deal with LTIR, then is there not another option ?

Weber gets paid $3M next season, and then $1M for the following 3 years. After next season Montreal offers Weber a coaching job for 3 years at $1.2M a year. So if Weber wants to coach, he retires from hockey, makes a bit more as a coach than he actually gets as a player, and Montreal is off the hook the rest of the contract.

I have no idea if this is legal and within the CBA rules, but it seems reasonable for the player if he wants to be active in hockey as best he can, to be a coach and retire as a player.

 

[thebonscott]

I'm glad he got the 411 on why Weber to Minnesota was a terrible idea.

I didn't understand the need to activate part.....Tampa didn't need to activate Seabrook...it works for tampa

 

[RangerBoy]

I didn't understand the need to activate part.....Tampa didn't need to activate Seabrook...it works for tampa

Seabrook was traded to TB in the summer. TB also moved Johnson's $5M in the trade. The NHL season has 6-7 weeks remaining.

 

[Colezuki]

I didn't understand the need to activate part.....Tampa didn't need to activate Seabrook...it works for tampa

Maybe was a rule change during Covid?

I think the only team that this makes sense for is arizona with the arena situation and their time horizon Ottawa is like 2/3 years away from needing the cap. If there’s another team who goes full scorched earth rebuild and needs to hit the floor that may change it though.

also would expect an asset back but like a 6th/7th wouldn’t give up anything to do it

 

[Colezuki]

WAITT A GOSH DARN MINUTE,

webers cap penalty is based on his contracts back diving nature. I wonder if the Minnesota angle that was brought up was originally tied to that? Like if they pay him 5 million over the next three while he’s on LTIR and he retired that may alleviate their penalty as they’d get a cap helper of 16 million?

 

[thebonscott]

Seabrook was traded to TB in the summer. TB also moved Johnson's $5M in the trade. The NHL season has 6-7 weeks remaining.

So during the summer when Minnesota has 11M in cap room....they could do it then?

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

So during the summer when Minnesota has 11M in cap room....they could do it then?

Sure but it doesn’t help them.

 

[Akrapovince]

If that is the case, or if Montreal just doesn't want to deal with LTIR, then is there not another option ?

Weber gets paid $3M next season, and then $1M for the following 3 years. After next season Montreal offers Weber a coaching job for 3 years at $1.2M a year. So if Weber wants to coach, he retires from hockey, makes a bit more as a coach than he actually gets as a player, and Montreal is off the hook the rest of the contract.

I have no idea if this is legal and within the CBA rules, but it seems reasonable for the player if he wants to be active in hockey as best he can, to be a coach and retire as a player.

That’s crap circumvention, you can’t offer a player any real money or huge compensation to retire.

For any cap related stuff, if you guys are looking for a knowledgeable person on Twitter this guy @MtlfanSakic is a wizard.

Thought your proposition was really clever and asked him. Not sure how they could determine that he was “paid” to retire though.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

I don't understand. In order for a cheap team to take advantage of paying his minimal salary while absorbing his high cap hit, wouldn't Weber have to be listed on the active roster or on IR? But because his career is done, doesn't he have to be put on LTIR, and thus not count towards the cap while insurance pays his contract?

Or would the Coyotes be allowed to just blatantly circumvent the cap floor (which is insane to even type out) by keeping a retired guy's $8m cap hit on the books while paying a fraction of that.

LTIR rules allow a team to replace an injured player's cap hit, it does not erase the cap hit. In fact, that's most likely why Montreal is trying to trade Weber's contract. I guess Montreal is thinking they can fix their team by spending a lot of money in the offseason?

 

[powerstuck]

Just so we are clear. The Habs won't be paying an asset they will receive one. Not a big one but still. The Habs have no real need to move him. He is on the LTIR likely for good.

From a business stand point, Arizona doesn't need Weber as much as Habs would like to get rid of his contract. I don't see how in that world Habs get a sweetener while another team gets a cap burden.

 

[GAGLine]

I don't understand. In order for a cheap team to take advantage of paying his minimal salary while absorbing his high cap hit, wouldn't Weber have to be listed on the active roster or on IR? But because his career is done, doesn't he have to be put on LTIR, and thus not count towards the cap while insurance pays his contract?

Or would the Coyotes be allowed to just blatantly circumvent the cap floor (which is insane to even type out) by keeping a retired guy's $8m cap hit on the books while paying a fraction of that.

Players on LTIR still count against the cap. It's not circumvention. They are using LTIR as it is defined in the CBA. It's not the first time they have done it and it probably won't be the last.

The nhl usually gives the smaller teams in this league more leeway. If the tables were turned and we were in a bizarre land where montreal was looking to hit the cap floor by acquiring Weber, I think the league would scrutinize the transaction much harder.

It has nothing to do with smaller teams. The rule is the rule. That's how LTIR works.

Activating a player on LTIR just starts their daily cap hit, yes? It doesn’t mean their entire cap hit must be compliant?

They don't need to activate him. They just need to be under the cap with all of their other players, which they absolutely will be. Arizona won't be anywhere close to the cap ceiling and therefore won't generate LTIR cap space. To Arizona, him being on LTIR will be no different than if he were on regular IR. In both cases, it frees up a roster spot. They would need to be within 7.9 mil of the cap ceiling (including Weber's cap hit) to increase the cap ceiling. They won't be.

 

[GAGLine]

From a business stand point, Arizona doesn't need Weber as much as Habs would like to get rid of his contract. I don't see how in that world Habs get a sweetener while another team gets a cap burden.

I wouldn't say that is true. There are negatives to Montreal having that contract, but Arizona has to get to the cap floor somehow, and acquiring Weber's contract gets them a large chunk of the way there with minimal cost in real money.

Both teams will benefit by that deal. We'll see what else ends up being part of the deal, but I wouldn't expect Montreal to have to give up much, if anything, to offload it.

 

[powerstuck]

I wouldn't say that is true. There are negatives to Montreal having that contract, but Arizona has to get to the cap floor somehow, and acquiring Weber's contract gets them a large chunk of the way there with minimal cost in real money.

Both teams will benefit by that deal. We'll see what else ends up being part of the deal, but I wouldn't expect Montreal to have to give up much, if anything, to offload it.

I agree with that. But as much as I don't expect Mtl to have to give anything to trade Weber, they shouldn't be getting much back either. It's a kind of Weber for 6th pick...helps both teams involved.

 

[SensFactor]

Arizona and Ottawa hearing this:

Ottawa will have no issue hitting the floor next year. In fact, Buffalo, Anaheim and Detroit have lower team cap hits than Ottawa.

 

[GAGLine]

So during the summer when Minnesota has 11M in cap room....they could do it then?

Why would they want to? By itself, Weber's contract doesn't help them. It would only help them if they are trying to move out another contract and the only way to do it would be to take back Weber. Swapping a non-LTIR cap hit for an LTIR cap hit will create cap space. Simply adding someone who is on LTIR won't.

 

[Habs Halifax]

WAITT A GOSH DARN MINUTE,

webers cap penalty is based on his contracts back diving nature. I wonder if the Minnesota angle that was brought up was originally tied to that? Like if they pay him 5 million over the next three while he’s on LTIR and he retired that may alleviate their penalty as they’d get a cap helper of 16 million?

Not sure I understand completely what you are saying but there is no penalty to the Wild if they acquire Weber (regardless of him retiring or not). I'm assuming you are talking about cap recapture? That is basically math. In his first 4 seasons with the Preds, he was paid $14M x 4 years where his cap hit was $7.86M for those 4 years. That's a total cap advantage of $24.6M which is the cap recapture. $14M - $7.86M (x4). Bettmam warned teams from circumventing the cap but some still did it and when the next CBA came out, they introduced the cap recapture. It's actual salary - cap hit and if the player retires early, the recapture penalty is divided into how many years they retire early. With the Preds, they are on the hook for a total of $24.6M (divided by how many years he retires early). Then in the latest CBA, they altered the rules where the year/year cap recapture penalty can't be more than the Cap hit.

After the this season, the Habs have a potential of cap recapture as well. I think it's a total of $857k.

* If Weber retires this summer, the Preds have $6.15M of cap hits for 4 years (Habs have $214k)
* If Weber retires after next season or any other season after that, the Preds have $7.857M of cap hits for 1-3 years (Habs have none)

The cap recapture only applies to the Preds and Habs. If a team trades for Weber, there is no advantage (none). The only time you see those LTIR contracts being moved is where teams want to save money (cap hit vs actual salary) and reach the cap floor or try to get an asset by doing it.

 

[CDN24]

I agree with that. But as much as I don't expect Mtl to have to give anything to trade Weber, they shouldn't be getting much back either. It's a kind of Weber for 6th pick...helps both teams involved.

Habs already picked up Future considerations for Mcniven- best they could hope for here is his one of his brothers (Potential or No). Realistically Coyotes could use him to get to floor but will probably try to extract a small asset from mtl. Moving him is mutually beneficial but probably helps Mtl more so they pay something- late pick

 

[MakeTheGoalsLarger]

Do teams have to be under the cap during the offseason?

 

[Mersss]

Habs already picked up Future considerations for Mcniven- best they could hope for here is his one of his brothers (Potential or No). Realistically Coyotes could use him to get to floor but will probably try to extract a small asset from mtl. Moving him is mutually beneficial but probably helps Mtl more so they pay something- late pick

How does it helps MTL more? They are rebuilding, Weber's cap isn't an issue at all

 

[Habs Halifax]

So during the summer when Minnesota has 11M in cap room....they could do it then?

There is zero advantage and it only complicates the Wild's situation. I'm shocked that Friedman doesn't know this. LTIR contracts are very tricky to manage around and the timing of when you have to move that contract to LTIR is the most important (before or after the season). If you need to move the contract to LTIR before the season starts to be cap compliant, you then can't accrue any cap space during that season unless someone else goes on LTIR after the season starts. Kind of like this season with Weber on LTIR before the season started and Price on LTIR after the season started. If Price was not on LTIR all season long, the Habs would not have much cap space today and would not be able to retain 50% on Chiarot (for example).

LTIR contracts increase your cap ceiling yes but it also subtracts the same cap hit resulting in a 0 cap space difference. There are many other little detailed rules to follow and it's more complicated to understand to the full extent. But the main point is some think it increased cap space which is not true.

 

[Shultzyfeelinirie25]

Detroit?? they have lots of money freed up

 

[Habs Halifax]

How does it helps MTL more? They are rebuilding, Weber's cap isn't an issue at all

Agreed. Weber's contract only affects the Habs if they have plans to spend in UFA and be up against the cap where they have to move Weber's contract to LTIR before the season starts (like what Tampa did with Seabrook but today, they only have $100k of cap space that did not grow all season long).

Weber's contract may be moved but we are a bit premature on this today. Friedman is a idiot. The only team it makes sense for is the Coyotes where it helps them reach the cap floor but even without Weber's contract, they can still do other things to reach that floor. They might consider it if they rather not give term to a UFA and prefer to save money (cap hit vs actual salary).

Depending on how long it takes the Habs to rebuild and they are a playoff team, this might be something they look at moving in 2-4 years time.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Detroit?? they have lots of money freed up

The only way I see Yzerman doing it is if he gets an asset to take on the contract. The Habs are not going to be up against the cap so I don't see a reason why the Habs would be desperate to move the contract and give an asset to do it. The circumstance is just not there

 

[Habs Halifax]

Do teams have to be under the cap during the offseason?

You are allowed to go over the cap by 10% in the offseason but once the season starts, you need to be cap compliant.

All these little context rules are about the 50/50 revenue split and escrow to balance it out. Think of it this way, all 32 teams can't go over the cap by 10% cause how do they move a contract to another team when they are over as well? The 10% is to allow the teams to manage their potential moves during the off season but it's impossible for all teams to do it cause then you get stuck and the overall formula of 50/50 revenue split is messed up. I really do think the NHL CBA, the escrow year/year and all the other little altercating rules is genius.

 

[GAGLine]

Do teams have to be under the cap during the offseason?

Agreed. Weber's contract only affects the Habs if they have plans to spend in UFA and be up against the cap where they have to move Weber's contract to LTIR before the season starts (like what Tampa did with Seabrook but today, they only have $100k of cap space that did not grow all season long).

Weber's contract may be moved but we are a bit premature on this today. Friedman is a idiot. The only team it makes sense for is the Coyotes where it helps them reach the cap floor but even without Weber's contract, they can still do other things to reach that floor. They might consider it if they rather not give term to a UFA and prefer to save money (cap hit vs actual salary).

Depending on how long it takes the Habs to rebuild and they are a playoff team, this might be something they look at moving in 2-4 years time.

If they are using LTIR cap space, any performance bonuses that are earned get deferred to the following year. So that's one reason to dump Weber's contract.

There was a report that Montreal plans to be active in free agency this summer.