Mëds wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 1:14 pm
I thought the general rule of thumb was that if a fired head coach was hired by another team as head coach then the former team could just pay the difference in the salary for the remainder of his tenure.
Obviously a severance package would change that. But it would also free the coach up to go wherever he wanted.
I think the specific issue with Torts was that his salary with the Canucks was exceedingly high, and Columbus didn't want to pay Torts that much. Which would mean that as you say, the Canucks would be "topping him up" on top of his CBJ salary. So the Aquilinis would be paying less to Torts, but at the same time they'd be paying Torts to coach a different team.
I think the usual rule of thumb has been the hiring team matches the previous team's salary and its not an issue. Or, if the hiring team is playing less, the coach accepts it because the opportunity to coach is so important, and ultimately more valuable to future earnings potential than sitting at home collecting a paycheque. But perhaps Torts was a special case, because he wanted to have his cake and eat it to - continue getting paid as one of the top-salary coaches in the league, while coaching a team that didn't want to pay him that much.
This comes into play with Quenneville, because he's making over $6 mil through this season and next, making him one of the highest-paid coaches in the league. If a team wants him to take over, but doesn't want to match the Hawks' salary (which is extremely unlikely - Quenneville is much more sought after than Torts), it could create a sticky situation. But that's very unlikely.