Sir_Boagalott Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Hmm, I read this am now I am confused. Is Burke right? He probably is though, he is a GM and has read through all the CBA malarkey. Still it makes no sense if it is true. Some teams wouldnt have had a salary cap issue if they could just send a player down to the AHL. If thats the rule I've never heard it before. Damien Cox 'Right now there really is no salary cap,' says Anaheim GM of NHL Jan 09, 2008 04:30 AM Damien Cox Hockey Columnist ANAHEIM–Brian Burke will never be mistaken for a fellow who takes his defeats with his tail between his legs. Instead, Burke almost always comes back swinging, as is the case with two of his pet projects, changing the rules of NHL trading to spur more deals and altering the controversial instigator rule. On the instigator front, last February the Anaheim GM successfully convinced his fellow managers to increase the number of instigator penalties allowed before suspension from three to five, but then saw his proposal killed by the NHL's competition committee. This time around, he's not only got it on the agenda for the GM meetings in Florida next month, he's questioning the integrity of the competition committee, which includes five players, four GMs and one owner. "I think it's a great idea to have player input, but the competition committee should report to the managers," he said. "Which players are on the competition committee? Which group do they speak for? Sixty per cent of our league plays a certain kind of hockey, 10 per cent play a certain kind of hockey ... what's the composition of that group, and what's their goal? What are they trying to accomplish? Are they trying to do what's best for their particular group?" Currently, the players on the committee are Brendan Shanahan, Jarome Iginla, Trevor Linden, Marty Turco and Rob Blake. The GMs are David Poile (Nashville), Don Waddell (Atlanta), Bob Gainey (Montreal) and Burke's arch-enemy, Edmonton GM Kevin Lowe. Philadelphia chairman Ed Snider rounds out the group. "Players don't vote for rule changes in any other sport," said Burke. "So either we're revolutionary, and it's a great idea, or we've got it bass-ackwards. And I think we've got it bass-ackwards." When it was suggested he could best advance change by getting on the competition committee, Burke said: "Never. Because it doesn't report to the managers. I have no interest in being on the competition committee. Not even a little bit." NHL vice-president Colin Campbell said the competition committee was part of the last round of collective bargaining talks, and noted that the board of governors, which includes many GMs such as Burke, has the final say on all rule changes. "Whether we like it or not, we negotiated it," said Campbell. "So we have to live with it, and I think it's worked pretty well." Burke, meanwhile, has made four of the nine NHL trades that have occurred this season, and believes his proposal to allow teams to pay for a portion of the salary of players they trade away would grease the market. Even when he reduced his proposal from $2 million (U.S.) per transaction to $1 million, however, it was turned down by the board of governors in December. "I still think that it would produce a whole slew of trades," he said. "I think (the absence of trades) has really reduced the buzz that a pro sports league needs. The trade part of it is virtually non-existent now." Burke said his proposal was "sidetracked" by concern by some teams that clubs are simply parking large, one-way contracts in the minors as a means to circumvent the salary cap. The contracts of demoted players signed under the age of 35 don't count against a team's cap. "Right now there really is no salary cap," said Burke. "It's your owner's appetite for money in the minors. That's your cap." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 that's been the rule ever since the lockout... I don't think it has been used that much. I know that NJ has taken advantage of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Isn't that also what happened with Kasparaitis? Wasn't he sent to the Rangers' farm team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Yeah, and Alexander Mogilny, Dan McGillis and Richard Matvichuk in New Jersey I believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_Boagalott Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 No, iirc thats wrong, NJ didnt do that at all. Lamerello was like a magician to solve NJ cap problem. Every GM was shocked at what he was able to pull out of his hat. afaik both of NJ Russians were over 35. Mogilny was eventually put on long term injury retirement (which exempts a player from the Cap), and the other guy was used to sell NJ 1st rnd pick that year. SJ basically paid 4 mil for NJ 1st rnd pick. So if that rule is true, then why would a financially stable team like the Habs buy anybody out which counts against the cap when they can just let players rot in the AHL not counting towards the cap? i.e. Sammy, or the 2 we traded him for, Salamanderen & Cullimore. The Habs could have 3+ more million in cap space if they had let them rot in the AHL this year instead of buying them out. I thought they bought them out to save cap room, which apparently isnt needed at all when you can demote them to the AHL and they dont count towards the cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Yeah, I don't think that's right either. The Devils wouldn't have given up a 1st rounder in order to lose Malakov's salary if they could have just put him on waivers and demoted him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Yeah, I don't think that's right either. The Devils wouldn't have given up a 1st rounder in order to lose Malakov's salary if they could have just put him on waivers and demoted him. He is right, it was something like Malakhov + NJ 1st for Alexander Koroluyk (a guy who had the same status as Perezhogin has now). Malakhov and Mogilny were over 35 so if they sent them down to the farm they would still have had to pay their full salaries and they wuold have counted against the cap. Throwing in a 1st was the only way to get out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Bass-Ackwards? :wacko: The NHL is independent and this is what the board voted for. Burke is a cry baby and I'm getting tired of him. He may be an excellent manager but he is pissed off at Lowe and was angry at Gainey for giving Rivet to SJ etc. Let me make a list of why Burke is annoying me... ...on 2nd thought I don't want to waste anymore typing energy or time on cry baby Burke. SHUT UP! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbhatt Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Bettman needs to yank Burke's leash hard and get him to check his mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Burke's absolutely right, any team can do that to any player under the age of 34 provided he clears waivers. Well, the Devils did demote Mogilny just for the heck of it then anyway. However, they sure as hell did that with 34 year old Dan McGillis in 2005-06 and 2006-07, and 33 year old Grant Marshall in 2006-07. McGillis was earning 2.2M, while Marshall was at 750k. Both spent the season almost entirely with the AHL affiliate. It's not that surprising of a practice, really - it surprises me more that not too many of you guys seem to know about it. It's 100% true according to the CBA and Spector mentions it quite often - a player who clears waivers and is demoted to the AHL (and is under 35 when contract was signed) doesn't have his contract count against the cap. The Lightning just did the same thing to Marc Denis and his salary, he's now a member of the Norfolk Admirals. As for the Canadiens not keeping Salmi and Cullimore in the minors, well, neither would be a positive influence in the AHL and would simply eat up a roster spot that a prospect could use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.