Wondering what the rules were with salary retention. In my Arm-Chair team, in which Carey Price is traded (https://www.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/110922), the retained salary on Carey Price only runs through his final year of his deal, and not the eight year extension.

@AK_tune 's Arm-Chair team, in which Carey Price is acquired (https://www.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/110923), the retained salary on Carey Price runs through the final year of his deal and the eight year extension.

Any way that you can clear this up for us? Thanks!

That's an interesting question, and one that we are not 100% sure on to be honest.

Our understanding is that, since retained salary is percentage based, that the percentage would travel all the way through both contracts. For example, if they retained 50% on Price, this year the value would be 3.25M and the remaining eight would be 5.25M

Like I said though we are not 100% certain on this.

I don't know either, but an "extension" is essentially a new SPC, that takes effect upon the expiry of the old one.
So retaining on the current contract is a non-issue.
Whether a club has the flexibility to retain on the new contract, prior to it coming into effect, is the real question.

If they are able to retain on an extension prior to the start date of that contract, the parameters could be changed, as retention is not tied to a contract, it's a separate mechanism.

So yes to retention on contract A, and no retention on contract B until there's a definitive answer I guess.

I think you guys are over thinking it. If a deal like this happened where the intent would be to retain 50% on his new contract only, both GM's would simply have that part specified in the trade agreement. I don't think there is any worry of a team trading for Price with the intent to have 50% of both contracts retained only to find out they technically didn't specify that in the official document. Thus making the retention only on the ending contract.

Is there a rule against being able to trade for a player whose signed to a new contract that hasn't started yet? If not I don't see why being able to negotiate retention on that trade would be against any rules. It would have to be a specific rule that would have to be listed in the CBA.

If it were simply a matter of the league recognizing a contract before its official start date, it probably wouldn't be an issue. It may not only be league rules which apply however.
Contract law, taxes, league HRR reporting, accounting practices, NHLPA, etc, may have specific laws or rules which prevent actions being taken on a contract which does not become legally binding until a specific date.

True. If that's the case, we should be able to look it up as these rules would apply to non NHL type contracts also, no? Any hockey related terminology will be listed in the CBA. Anything non hockey related law should be universal. Either way I'm no lawyer. Totally assuming here.

Only an NHL lawyer would have all of the information at their disposal. If it's come up before, the league will have already taken a look at it and have an internal answer, even if it was just a question posed prior to a potential deal that never materialized.

For our purposes, I don't think it hurts to make an assumption that it is possible to retain on both contracts and modify the amounts involved between those contracts, but the site itself is concerned with being as accurate as possible.

Hmm maybe CF can pull some strings on Twitter to get an answer? wink wink @Banks