Trading Cap Space

[Chris-Suffolk]

Hi All,

I proposed a question to Glenn Re: Cap Space Trades. We want to get a league-wide opinion of this question.

QUESTION: Can we trade Cap Space in Trades?

Scenario - Team 1 trades Players A & B to Team 2. Team 2 trades Players C & D plus $750,000 in Cap Space to Team 1.

( This can only be done if the team sending the Cap Space, actually has that amount to send. )

Affect 1- This Cap Space is now added to Team 1, whose Cap Space is now increased by the agreed upon amount, in this case $750,000.

Affect 2- This Cap Space is now deducted from the team sending the money, In effect reducing the money that this organization once held.
____________________________________________________
What say you? Do we allow such trades? Does Team 1 recieve the Cap Space or does Team 2 just get a reduction in Cap Space?

Let us know your opinions!

[Dan-Toronto]

I'm not really sure if I'm in favor of this. Kinda on the fence of this right now. I wouldn't mind the idea of possibly taking a player and putting them on waivers in order to free up cap space.

How would this affect the team receiving the money come the off season?

[Chris-Suffolk]

Waivers is something that we havent discussed yet, so I dont know how we could do that unless it is done as it is in the NHL.

I would propose, that the money agreed upon by the parties involved, be added to Cap Space Available for the team it is being sent to.

For ex: ( in the above scenario )

Team 1 originally ZERO Cap Space, but after the trade, they now have $750,000. Team 2 originally had $1 mil in Cap Space, now has $250,000.

The monies would have to be represented somewhere. I would think the team that negotiates the cash, should be able to use it. It should be available once a deal has been consumated and approved by the parties involved.

[Dan-Toronto]

I guess this scenario would work for this season since we are getting things ironed out and it is hard to make trades with our tight cap spaces, but I would like to see the waiver scenario be implemented for next season and have it work like it does in the NHL.

[Chris-Suffolk]

We would have to have diff types of contracts then. We would need to have 1-way and 2-way contracts, with players on 1-way contracts having to clear waivers if sent down to minors.

It could be done...but I think it can only be done if we have owners for all of the teams so that they can sort out their contracts/terms.

[Chris-Suffolk]

Im not sure I explained the differences properly. Here goes again,

In Affect 1- Team 1 gains $750,000 in Cap Space, and Team 2 loses the same.
This helps Team 1 in the Off Season to sign Free Agents while effecting Team 2 at same time.

In Affect 2- Team 1 does not gain any Cap Space, and Team 2 loses the Cap Space. It becomes a tool to lesson the ability of Team 2 to sign Free Agents in the Off Season.

In both cases, Team 2 loses Cap Room. So, the question really is:

1- Do we allow these type of deals?
2- Which do we prefer to be the result? Do we prefer to get Cap Space, or do we prefer to hamper those with Cap Space?

My Vote would be : Yes, we allow these type deals.
And I would say the Cap Space negotiated be added to the team that bargained for it. ( Team 1 )

[Brian-Cleveland]

I'm in favor of not trading cap space. If we're looking to keep this as realistic as possible then I believe we should follow the same rules as the NHL (when possible).

My question deals with your scenario in trading $750K in cap space between teams. Personally, if cap space is traded, it should only be for this season. Having $750K in extra space may be nice at the trade deadline. However, you mentioned that it would be in effect for this offseason. At what point would the salary cap revert back to the rest of the league?

[Chris-Suffolk]

I agree Brian-Cleveland, we should try as much as possible with what transpires in the NHL as far as policies go. At least it is a good model to follow.

I think trades like I proposed, could be easier to handle when we have an Official AHL Affiliate attached to our club. Then, we can just send players down to cover the Cap Policy, or whatever we decide is the best way to handle the Cap Trade possibility.

[Michael-Pittsburgh]

Guys, I view the cap space as the same as cash because we can spend up to 60 mil for players. Thus, if I'm under the cap by 5 mil then I should have 5 mil available to spend to add players. This would be of great benefit when trading with another team. If you didn't want to trade a pick you could substitute cash instead and if there was a need to add cash to balance out the cap issue during a trade it would be possible. Obviously, my vote would be to allow the trading of cap space, although I don't see it as cap space like it's being discussed, I see it as each team having $60 mil in cash to spend for their rosters.