[Speculation] Leafs were after Dumba in Free Agency but had to settle with Klingberg

[Coconuts]

Robidas island? Leafs may be better for it.

 

 

 

[canucklehead53]

15 hours ago, Alflives said:

Eastern media are jealous of our climate. They will always hate us because they freeze in winter while we grow flowers. They are loser scrub buds. 

 

Hey now Alf

 

Canucks are BC's team and not all of BC avoids winter. Some of embrace and love it!

 

My perspective anyway  

 

But yes, best climate in Canada for the players who don't like winter. 

[elvis15]

On 11/9/2023 at 2:28 PM, VegasCanuck said:

They can't even get rid of Reaves cap hit by sending him to the AHL. Because it's a multi-year 35+, it stays with the main team.

Well, there's a 35+ contract in general, and there are 35+ contracts that can't benefit from reduced cap hits. The latter are when the contract is two or more years long *and* either have a signing bonus, or are front loaded.

 

Reaves' contract is three years but doesn't have any bonuses in any year, nor any front loading. So they should still get the cap relief if sending him to the minors or if he retires.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/faq#:~:text=for this player.-,What is a 35-plus contract%3F,year of the effective contract).

 

What is a 35-plus contract?

A contract is designated a 35+ contract if the players age on the first year of the contract is 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the year of the effective contract).

 

35+ contracts that are two years in length or longer and:

1. Have a signing bonus in the 2nd or later year, OR

2. Are front-loaded

Will not benefit from a reduced cap hit regardless of the players location of play, termination, retired status, or a buyout. This rule was introduced by the NHL to prevent teams from backloading contracts past when the player was expected to retire. An exception to this rule is that a team will receive a $100,000 cap hit reduction if the player is on the 2nd or later year of the contract and assigned to the minors

[VegasCanuck]

11 hours ago, elvis15 said:

Well, there's a 35+ contract in general, and there are 35+ contracts that can't benefit from reduced cap hits. The latter are when the contract is two or more years long *and* either have a signing bonus, or are front loaded.

 

Reaves' contract is three years but doesn't have any bonuses in any year, nor any front loading. So they should still get the cap relief if sending him to the minors or if he retires.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/faq#:~:text=for this player.-,What is a 35-plus contract%3F,year of the effective contract).

 

What is a 35-plus contract?

A contract is designated a 35+ contract if the players age on the first year of the contract is 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the year of the effective contract).

 

35+ contracts that are two years in length or longer and:

1. Have a signing bonus in the 2nd or later year, OR

2. Are front-loaded

Will not benefit from a reduced cap hit regardless of the players location of play, termination, retired status, or a buyout. This rule was introduced by the NHL to prevent teams from backloading contracts past when the player was expected to retire. An exception to this rule is that a team will receive a $100,000 cap hit reduction if the player is on the 2nd or later year of the contract and assigned to the minors

Thanks for the clarification!