REPORT: HUET TO BE LOANED TO SWISS LEAGUE TEAM

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=331425

_________________
Revenge is sweet... Revenge is best served cold... Revenge is ice cream.

Does anybody know how this works with regard to Chicago's cap hit?
Does Chicago get to reduce their hit by the amount that the Swiss team pays him?

_________________
This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.
--Emerson

It eliminates him from their cap hit until he comes back.

Or that's what I assume, Micheal Nylander was assigned to a Swiss team last year from the Capitals, and on NHLnumbers, his cap hit didn't count.

_________________

Sending players with ridiculous contracts over to Europe sure sounds like another form of cap circumvention to me. Should be investigated.

_________________
mechaphil

But that would be too logical.

_________________
Revenge is sweet... Revenge is best served cold... Revenge is ice cream.

that sounds like a good way for teams to get cap relief .... does it really not count though? no percentage of.... or subtract what the swiss pay him... a complete relief of his cap hit... maybe we can loan stafford to the swiss league... but who would we bring in...

_________________

no different then sending players to the minors.

_________________
Check out my website: http://www.artistzero.com

"That wasn't very nice...I do believe you killed my hat."

Driver of the FIRE LINDY RUFF Bandwagon since 2008.

I think it has to be of certain clauses, because if you don't plan to play them starter when they should be a starter, you can do such a thing.

Or the player has to agree to it maybe?

_________________

It's very different.

_________________
mechaphil

Phil, that's exactly what I was thinking.
Woz, I don't know the rules, but here's what I was thinking. That Swiss team can't possibly be taking the entire contract as is ($5.625M/year). I'd like to think that whatever the Swiss team does pay can be removed from Chicago's cap hit, but the Hawks still have the remainder count against their hit. For example, if the Swiss team agrees to $1 mil., then the Hawks hit is $4.625/year.

Too much cap shenanigans lately - the league needs to get this under control.

_________________
This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.
--Emerson

I'll have to re-read the cap sections, but yeah, this is basically no different than stashing a playing in the AHL. He no longer counts against your cap at all if you do that. The only difference here is the Swiss team pays him now, and not Chicago.

Exactly - that's him being ENTIRELY off the books, cap and salary. That's why this is very different than just an AHL stashing. Chicago's operating costs just dropped by millions of dollars.

_________________
mechaphil

Yeah, it's sketchy in appearance for the operating cost thing, but it's not really a cap circumvention. It came up last year how the NYR were thinking of stashing someone in the AHL purely for cap relief.

It's another crappy advantage for the big markets to have, but it's always been there.

Also, this smacks of Nylander and the Caps (who sent him to Switzerland, too)

_________________
mechaphil

depends on the loan agreement. from what i understand chicago would still technically be paying huet but his cost would be offset buy whatever "rent" the swiss pay

_________________
Check out my website: http://www.artistzero.com

"That wasn't very nice...I do believe you killed my hat."

Driver of the FIRE LINDY RUFF Bandwagon since 2008.

Well Nylander was aging, hes 38 or something right now, and they wanted to go with a different route, instead of buying him out he got loaned in case they wanted him back before his contract runs out.

This is also different as Huet can't play in the NHL until his loan is up also.

Filatov was loaned, but he was only loaned because he couldn't go in the AHL and his Junior eligibility was gone or whatever he did before getting drafted.

I just looked at the numbers for the Nylander deal on NHLnumbers.

He had a cap hit of 1.844 million and his salary was 5.5 million, his original cap hit was 4.875 million. He was first assigned in the AHL, then to Jokerit.

I can't find the deal Jokerit gave Nylander though.

_________________

I don't think that's true. Every player that's assigned to the AHL is there on a loan, and is subject to recall by the NHL club that owns that players rights. This situation is no different. A loan is a loan is a loan, regardless of who they're being loaned to.

Chicago could recall Huet at any time. He'd be subject to whatever waivers apply, and it would also depend on how the loan agreement with the Swiss club is worded. The Swiss club may be forced to release him if Chicago wants him back, or they may be able to say no.

As they say, "there's more than one way to skin a cat". I'll have to look up the loan stuff, but I know that you can pay a % of the salary on the loans. Not sure how that % would be reflected on the cap. Anywho's, it is circumvention, which will require more interdiction from Buttman, and further shame to the NHL. Whoever dictated the terminology of this agreement sure wasn't a future Thomas Jefferson. That's for sure. The funny part is, the guy is probably filthy rich.

It's not circumvention.

Loaning a player to a foreign league club is no different than loaning a player to the AHL.

Then circumventing isn't circumventing. It seems they avoided the language of the clause.



...oh ya, I'm sure the Devils(and there arbitrator) will be happy to lead the next witch hunt.