First of all I don’t think marleau goes for this and secondly I don’t think you can buy out a 35+ contract but I may be wrong.

i understand he probably wouldnt go for thi i was just an idea, brook orpiks was traded and bought out by avs and resigned by caps and he was 38, plus if he did marleau could get 2 million extra salary in his last year, again i doubt some trade like this could work

Orpik’s contract was not a 35+.

you are right sorry it looks like his contract ran through past his 35, it was just an idea and thats why we do these fantasy trades

hi, what i have read into is that it looks like you are taking the full salary cap hit every year for the player you buy out of a 35+ contract with no relief over multiple years, i found this in buyout faqs, hope it may help because i wasnt sure also


35-plus Contracts
There is a significant amount of confusion on whether 35-plus contracts do or do not receive a cap benefit from being bought-out. It was originally believed that there is no cap-benefit; however, later in 2013 it became widely thought that there is a benefit.

The most recent understanding is that bought out 35-plus contracts do not receive a cap hit benefit, as is explained by Michael Russo. All other details of the buyout remain the same as any other buyout; therefore, what buying a 35-plus contract does do is decrease the teams salary expenses.

For example, Chris Phillips was signed to a 2-year 35-plus contract which began in 2014-15 and expires in 2015-16. His salary is $2.5M and his cap hit is $2.5M for both season. If Chris were to be bought out during the summer of 2015, the buyout would last twice the length of his remaining contract - 2 years, and the buyout cost each year would be $833,333. His cap hit would be $2.5M in 2015-16, and $0 in 2016-17. However, the salary expenses in 2015-16 would decrease by $1.67M from $2.5M to $833k

By rules it could happen. Yes. you can have buyouts, you just get don't cap relief for a plus 35 buy out. So how could work. Leafs pay the summer bonus, then trade Marleau to Arizona, Arizona buys him out which costs very little money since the Leaf have already paid the bonus, but the Coyotes still have his 6.25m cap hit. Marleau then resigns with another team.
But none of this happens, but the procedure is there.

If I understand the previous comments about buyout rules for 35+ contracts, Marleau could theoretically be traded to another team and be bought out. The team that traded for him would not receive any cap relief, but Toronto would be free of his contract, and Marleau would be an unrestricted free agent. Correct?

Even if that’s the case, I don’t think the league would allow Toronto to resign Marleau. They would argue that it falls under the umbrella of collusion.

I think Colorado tried to flip Orpik to another team before buying him out, which is why the league did not step in to prevent Orpik from resigning with Washington. I could be totally wrong because there hasn’t been much published about what went on behind the scenes, but that’s how it appears on the surface.

I’m fascinated by the idea of teams using their cap space as an asset in transactions like this, but I think the NHl sees too many opportunities for collusion/corruption behind the scenes to allow these type of trades to happen on a regular basis.

I think you’re exactly right. The leafs wouldn’t do it for the same reason that no teams make offer sheets. They want to keep the peace between themselves and the other 30 execs.