|
TJSweens -> RE: Minnesota Wild 2021 Season / Game Day (5/18/2021 10:47:51 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ronhextall
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lynn G.
That answers a question I've had for a while - as in why doesn't a player offer to lower his salary to be able to get traded and actually play. The union influence makes sense on that.
I figured that was the case, TJSweens confirmed it. I can see why the union is against it, it would create unnecessary pressure on players to forgive salary.
Wild will have to eat a bunch of Zach's salary to grease the wheels on a trade.
The entire situation is the owner's fault, the length of those contracts was absolutely insane. He was banking on salary cap growth to absorb it.
NHL contracts are complicated as it is. Parise and Suter signed twin contracts that allowed the Wild to reduce their cap hit by backloading the contracts with lower salaries. Since the NHL calculates the cap hit based on the average salary over the contract instead of using yearly real -numbers like the NBA, they tacked low salary years in years 7 - 10 to offset the $9M salaries of years 1-6. A team that could fit Parise's cap hit might be intrigued because they won't be shelling out as much actual cash ($6M, $2M, $1M, $1M). The issue for the Wild is that if they trade Parise and he winds up retiring, the cap hit comes back to them, since they are the team that signed him to the deal. And it would come back to the Wild in even worse terms.
|
|
|
|