Caps Send For Reinforcements
by J.P. on Nov 26, 2008 10:16 AM EST
64 comments
Per the team:
"The Washington Capitals have recalled defensemen Karl Alzner and Sami Lepisto and forwards Chris Bourque and Graham Mink from the Hershey Bears of the American Hockey League (AHL), vice president and general manager George McPhee announced today."
How do they have cap room for those moves? Chris Clark to LTIR.
1 recs |
64 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Poor Clarkie
Two rough seasons in a row, it appears :(
by OvechkinLaichsSemin on Nov 26, 2008 10:18 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Screw it, this is too weird. I’m reading the CBA to see if I can make sense of this…
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 10:19 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
1) Anyone still disappointed that Nylander wasn’t traded last week? Suddenly his presence in the lineup looks quite important to a decimated group. Without him that 2nd line would look pretty dam weak.
by Fauxrumors on Nov 26, 2008 10:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Okay the CBA section on this is in legalese that I’m not sure I’m 100% percent qualified to evaluate (damn it, I knew I should have gone to law school!), but I think that it works like this:
Each team has a team-specific upper limit that is based off the league’s total cap. The team total can be adjusted upwards to account fo rinjuries, letting teams replace a guy on IR with someone who makes the same, or less, per year.
So, for example, the Capitals team upper limit is 59.2M (56.7M + 2.5M for Pothier on LTIR). If Pothier had been hurt halfway through the season, the Caps upper limit would be 57.95M (56.7M + 1.25M). The salary cap is computed daily though, so what you’re really talking about is the daily savings of having a guy on LTIR
We know Schultz has gone on LTIR (which specifies either 4 weeks or 10 games) because he’ll be out 4-6 weeks. But, per my understanding, the Capitals would have had to place someone else on the LTIR to get under the cap/raise their individual team ceiling (however you want to think about it). My personal guess is that Fedorov’s now on LTIR. Ankle injuries are tricky, but getting his $4M off the books for the time being means a savings of ~$17,750 per day, which should be more than enough to cover the recalls the team made since the combination of Alzner, Bourque, Mink, and Lepisto is about $3,508,333 or $15,600/day.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 10:33 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Funny how I ready that right after I posted that long thing about my understanding of the CBA. But at least now we know. Plus now I have a better idea how the cap is computer on a day-to-day basis, so it wasn’t all for naught.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 10:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ahem
by OvechkinLaichsSemin on Nov 26, 2008 10:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Clark's Injury
Chris Clark has a sprained point-scoring bone, with twisted forchecking tendon, and a strained left confidence muscle. Get better soon Chris!
by marks4java on Nov 26, 2008 10:42 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Actually I think Clark has a stress fracture in his forearm, and his groin injury had clearly deprived him of his speed.
I don’t know what Nyls has to do with all the injuries that hit the team out West. I’d still be happy to see the right deal.
I don’t know if you can put a guy on LTIR retroactively anyway (I doubt it), but if 91 hadn’t played the other night, ATL would be his 10th game out.
Alzner could get 20 minutes on his first night in the NHL.
by TylerG on Nov 26, 2008 10:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
My understanding is that since the CBA is calculated daily, you can’t place a guy on LTIR retroactively, as it wouldn’t really make a difference.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 10:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wasn’t Kari Lehtonen placed recently retroactively just recently? I don’t know what impact it has on the cap, but I do believe it impacts when the player can come back.
by OvechkinLaichsSemin on Nov 26, 2008 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And wow, i should read what I type before I hit post, what terrible english.
by OvechkinLaichsSemin on Nov 26, 2008 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It might be the case that a player can be placed retroactively in terms of when he’s able to come back, i.e he may have been a scratch for five games, then put on LTIR for five games so that he could come back after that period off, but his cap hit would have still been applied for the games he was active but scratched.
There’s also a difference between IR and LTIR. IR opens up a roster spot and a player can’t play for seven days. LTIR opens up cap space and the player can’t play for 30 days or 10 NHL games, whichever is shorter.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 11:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking of waivers, it’s 24 days AND 10 games before they can come off LTIR
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Alzner
I know I’m getting ahead of myself, but if Alzner impresses what’s going to happen when Schultz and Clark come off LTIR? Do you send him back down or do you let a high priced guy go?
by b.orr4 on Nov 26, 2008 10:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
1) Not the way the caps probably intended to see Alzner get his debut, but will be interesting to see.
2) Nylander is pertinent in that if he was dealt last week the team would be in even more dire circumstances in icing a competitive NHL lineup. Just an opinion of course, but doubt that he was ever close to being traded anyway
3) Yes, the whole salary cap issue is hard for even those who are on the dark side(lawyers) to understand. ; ) The NHL could choose to be more fan friendly by publishing daily what each teams’ salary cap number is, adjusting it to reflect trades, demotions, call ups, and LTIR exemptions
by Fauxrumors on Nov 26, 2008 10:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Even if Nylander were gone the second line would be Laich, Flesichmann and Fehr, and I’d be okay with that.
On the other hand, Alzner’s promotion makes Sopel (the most likely player they’d get in return) less needed for the time being.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 10:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But could/can they put Semin/Green on LTIR? Even if they don’t call anyone up, it would give them some flexibility later this season.
by Toddra on Nov 26, 2008 10:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Putting Green or Semin on LTIR wouldn’t free up cap space later on in the season, only for the time they’re on IR.
For example, if Green at $5,250,000 were to miss ten percent of the team’s game (mathematically impossible but simpler for the sake of discussion), the team wouldn’t get 525,000 in cap relief. Rather what they can do is have their daily cap raised by the amount of Green’s cap hit (about $23,500). Once he comes off LTIR, their daily cap number goes back to what it was when he was healthy.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As always, I need to throw in the caveat that this is my understanding of the CBA. I’m not an expert by any means.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They might just be waiting to see when they may or may not come back. If Sasha and Greenie are gonna be out 10 games they may place them retrocactively on LTIR…on second thought that might not do any good since the “savings” doesn’t really matter in the past, unless they plan on having them out longer and need to call more people up…
by wittcap79 on Nov 26, 2008 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tarik says here that Semin and Green are currently on IR, eligible to return on Friday. Whether they will is something else again.
(formerly this space for rent)
by gotsparkly on Nov 26, 2008 11:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Green and Semin are on IR but (I don’t think) not LTIR.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, and I just learned what the difference was. Thanks.
by gotsparkly on Nov 26, 2008 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My understanding (from reading this site, I might add, given that the Post refuses to report on any of this) is that because the Caps are over the cap and are only ‘under’ it because of the Pothier LTIR, they can’t ‘bank’ LTIR.
by TylerG on Nov 26, 2008 11:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely correct – teams do not bank anything if they’re over the cap due to a player or players on LTIR.
by J.P. on Nov 26, 2008 11:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry if I’m being a bit dense here. So that means that if the Caps were below the cap (without Pothier being on LTIR), that for every day that someone was on LTIR that would reduce their overall cap hit and free up space for later in the season (if wanted/needed).
However, since the team would be over the cap without Pother being on LTIR that means that putting people on LTIR only frees up cap space so that that player can be replaced on the roster without going over the cap.
Right?
by Toddra on Nov 26, 2008 11:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What putting a player on LTIR does is actually raise the permissible daily cap number for a team. At 56.7M per year the daily max for a team is about 283,500 (that number comes from a 200 day cap season, I don’t know what the real number is but I think it’s fairly close to that).
With Pothier at 2.5M, his daily hit would be 12,500, so in his case the Capitals can actually be at 296,000 per day each day he’s on LTIR (283,500 + 12,500 = 296,000).
With Schultz (3,819/day) and Clark (13,167/day) on LTIR the Capitals daily cap is 312,986, still counting Pothier. This serves to allow a team to call up/sign/trade for a player who makes the same amount or less than the player(s) on LTIR.
Once players come back, they count towards the cap again. So if Pothier were to become activated today, the Capitals daily cap would go to 300,486 (312,986 – 12,500); assuming Pothier stays out the team’s daily cap when Schultz returns will be 309,167, etc.
If you ask me, it’s a pretty clever way to do the cap give the length of the season and the number of games.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re-reading this I think I need to clarify this way of calculating the cap only applies when teams get LTIR exemptions, which is why teams can send a player to the minor for a half a season to cut his salary cap number.
For example, if a team were $2M under the cap, they’d be $10,000 per day under, which would accumulate. So at the halfway point the team daily cap would be 293,500 going forth, rather than 283,500. It’s just that when teams would be over the cap were it not for the exemption they are considered to be at the cap maximum and thus cannot “bank” salary cap savings for later on in the season.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
minor correction
Cap Numbers are actually divided by 186, not 200, to determine the daily cap hit. The NHL season this year is 186 days long.
by Sombrero Guy on Nov 26, 2008 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I appreciate it, Sombrero. As I mentioned, I wasn’t sure what the number was so I just tried to ballpark it. Where did you find it – I couldn’t manage to track it down online.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 2:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It is a bit annoying that the capitals are are the cap limit but regardless the depth the organization has to fill in the holes during this rash of injuries is that way it is going to have to be with teams near the cap.
by usiel on Nov 26, 2008 11:30 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Please stop with the romanticizing of Nylander. I’d rather have the cap space (permanently) and have a younger guy playing.
by macvechkin on Nov 26, 2008 11:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Same
If Nylander were playing well, that would be one thing. But right now, I’d rather have the roster spot and cap room to keep Bourque and Alzner up permanently (and get back a player in return, one would hope). I wonder if Chicago has realized that Nylander isn’t worth the trouble they were going to.
by grapejoos on Nov 26, 2008 11:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Still?
Wow. Hard to understand this—so you, DMG, and Macvechkin and a host of others are saying that our best lineup has the pivots (with current injuries factored in) as: Laich, Steckel, Backstrom, and…who? Bourque is a LW, not a C. And before you get to Kozlov, have look back at last year when he was forced into the C role after Nyls went down. Not pretty. Folks, you can’t just throw anyone in the dot.
by bigonetimer on Nov 26, 2008 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You make a good point
The reason why I’m in favor, even now given the injury situation, is that I think Nylander is an asset that will become harder to move as the season goes on, given the quality of his play. But you make a good point. With Gordon out, there is no clear extra center on the roster, and it’s not a deep position in the minors. Until Fedorov or Gordon are back, we only have 3 real centers other than Nylander. That is assuming, of course, that we wouldn’t get a center back in any trade.
I definitely don’t think this move would produce a positive short-term benefit, but I think by the end of the season/going into the playoffs, it will have paid dividends.
by grapejoos on Nov 26, 2008 1:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nyls has a track record. GMs know what kind of player he is and can be. Does his slow-down game necessarily fit within the ‘new’ BB-led go-go- Caps? No. But he’d fit within lots of other systems…
by TylerG on Nov 26, 2008 2:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think, for a handful of games, it really matters who is centering Mink and Brashear? LOL.
by macvechkin on Nov 26, 2008 1:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
agreed...
for 1-2 games max. After that, I don’t think you’re laughing so much.
by bigonetimer on Nov 26, 2008 3:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To be honest, I had forgotten that Gordon was hurt. But I was just addressing Faux Rumors comment about the second line – I think that Laich is fine as a second line center, especially in a pinch, but I wasn’t really thinking of the depth.
Still, even if the team had traded Nylander last week I wouldn’t be throwing my hands up and cursing the decision (provided the Caps had received a decent return). If the team had dealt Nylander they could make do with Aucoin, Giroux, or Wilson for a few games. If the team’s at a point where they need to call up Mink to get bodies in the lineup, I could live with one of those guys on the fourth line for a few nights.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 2:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose it's the timing...
…that bothers me even more than the trade. I frankly hoped Nyls would have adapted quicker, and so I get the sentiment behind trading him, but if CHI is not going to pony up more than a 250 lb RW (whom I question would fit in BB’s end to end style, as well) and/or a 2/3rd pair D, then GM should tell’em to go pound salt.
by bigonetimer on Nov 26, 2008 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I believe it’s pound sand…but we understand ;)
by wittcap79 on Nov 26, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can agree with that sentiment – a lot of people have suggested Nylander should be traded to free up cap space but Kozlov, Fedorov and Morrisonn all have contracts expiring after this year and that will be more than 8 million coming off the books. Erskine’s extension notwithstanding, I don’t think the Capitals are in such a desperate cap crunch that they need to move Nylander now. At this point it’d basically be moving him to get Alzner up to NHL and at least now we’ll get a preview as to whether that’s a good idea.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well maybe not agree with, but understand…there aren’t too many 22 year olds who’ve scored at a 20 goal pace for a full season and there aren’t too many 245 forwards, so to get two in one player is pretty valuable…which is probably why Tallon said DB was never part of any trade discussion.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 4:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like the new digs, but it’s really hard to tell where one post ends and the next one begins — maybe some darker outlining?
I think this injury must be connected to the “wrist” injury that he had a couple of weeks ago. But poor Clark — is he freakin’ snakebit or what?
by DrinkingPartner on Nov 26, 2008 11:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I wish all the best for Clark, after this injury heals in 12 -16 weeks and a lengthy rehab in Hershey, I’m eager to see what he’ll have for 2009-10. ;-)
by macvechkin on Nov 26, 2008 11:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Can’t wait for the NHL Debut of King Karl! The circumstances aren’t the greatest but I guess ya gotta do what ya gotta do.
JP – like the new digs. Thatsa Nice! High-Five
by wittcap79 on Nov 26, 2008 12:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Anybody going to RFD’s after the game?
by wittcap79 on Nov 26, 2008 12:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RFD's? Planning on it
hoping its not a complete mad house
by Sombrero Guy on Nov 26, 2008 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It will be
With all the hype Elliot is providing, I think it was a good decision for me to skip that :) Especially if they win tonight.
by OvechkinLaichsSemin on Nov 26, 2008 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that’s my take too. I’ll go if it’s not completely batshit crazy, but I’m afraid it will be…my n key is sticking, stupid Dell
by wittcap79 on Nov 26, 2008 2:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm, the threaded responses is nice, but it’s a pain to find the last posts, there have been like 15 more posts and for the life of me I can’t find ’em
by wittcap79 on Nov 26, 2008 2:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The new comments should be in yellow, no?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Nov 26, 2008 2:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It did it this time…but when I refreshed before it didn’t do it…It doesn’t seem to do it when it’s a reply to a thread already there
by wittcap79 on Nov 26, 2008 3:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It may be the refreshing
Comments should auto-refresh when you have the page open (a box will popup saying they have). When you refreshed, it probably marked everything that appeared while you had the page open as read.
There is also a keystroke to skip to the next new comment, but I can’t recall what it is.
by grapejoos on Nov 26, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Clarification
Not auto-refresh, but auto-update. A new comment will appear while you have the page open to read older ones.
by grapejoos on Nov 26, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“z” tabs to the next new comment and marks the previous one as read.
jrwendelman
The Artist Formerly Known as "Junior", who blogs at http://www.heroesinrehab.ca/blog
"But if someone so eager to engage into fist talk, we can always meet after season end in Minsk." (Mikhail Grabovski and a well-meaning but not particularly skillful translator)
by jrwendelman on Nov 26, 2008 4:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The hotkeys are your friend. Especially during game threads they’ll make navigation very easy.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
by PPP on Nov 26, 2008 5:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why is this joke still the captain?
His play has been abysmal and he’s hurt all the time. Give Ovi the C and stop this embarrassment.
by wesvenis on Nov 26, 2008 3:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps Ovechkin doesn’t want the C. Besides, changing a captain midseason is the type of thing that upset a locker room – you just don’t do it. Especially as a punishment for poor play.
by David M. Getz on Nov 26, 2008 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
still don’t think Ovi should have the C quite yet.
by ns on Nov 26, 2008 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ovie is an incredibly selfless player. That kinda speaks captain to me, but Laich has shown that too, and if Ovie doesn’t want the C, I say it’s Laich next season. The guy’s been stellar, a stud.
by Hazardous on Nov 26, 2008 8:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
22 | 13 | 5 | 4 | 30 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
19 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 23 |
|
Atlanta
|
18 | 10 | 6 | 2 | 22 |
|
Florida
|
20 | 9 | 9 | 2 | 20 |
|
Carolina
|
21 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 13 |
(updated 11.21.2009 at 8:36 AM EST)
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
