HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Columbus Blue Jackets (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   Rumor: Blue Jackets pursuing Miikka Kiprusoff (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1453539)

Fro 06-25-2013 10:32 AM

Blue Jackets pursuing Miikka Kiprusoff
 
yup... "confident"

Nick Kypreos ‏@RealKyper 1m
#BlueJackets asking 4 permission speak to #Flames Kiprusoff in hopes of talking him out of retire'mt. Doesn't app' he will change his mind

CBJWennberg10 06-25-2013 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fro (Post 67962091)
yup... "confident"

Nick Kypreos ‏@RealKyper 1m
#BlueJackets asking 4 permission speak to #Flames Kiprusoff in hopes of talking him out of retire'mt. Doesn't app' he will change his mind

Um, what

KeithBWhittington 06-25-2013 10:44 AM

What is his current contract situation? I'd expect this would be to perform as a backup, or, at worst, the safety net should the extreme outside chance the Bobrovsky situation falls through. Luongo's contract is terrible, he shouldn't be an option via straight trade with Vancouver right now.

Regardless, the team needs another NHL caliber goalie in house anyways.

Kev22 06-25-2013 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fro (Post 67962091)
yup... "confident"

Nick Kypreos ‏@RealKyper 1m
#BlueJackets asking 4 permission speak to #Flames Kiprusoff in hopes of talking him out of retire'mt. Doesn't app' he will change his mind

:scared: Let the histrionics commence.

RDriesenUD 06-25-2013 11:05 AM

I agree. There are probably 3 reasons they are doing this.

1 - for him to be the #2 goaltender
2 - in case they can't sign Bobrovsky
3 - to try to have a little more leverage in the negotiations with Bobrovsky's agent

Iron Balls McGinty 06-25-2013 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RDriesenUD (Post 67964007)
I agree. Their are probably 3 reasons they are doing this.

1 - for him to be the #2 goaltender
2 - in case they can't sign Bobrovsky
3 - to try to have a little more leverage in the negotiations with Bobrovsky

Kiprusoff has a cap hit of 5.8 for the last year of his contract. Only 1.5 in actual money but there are better ways to spend your cap hit than 5.8 on a backup goalie.

Stretch Factor 06-25-2013 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RDriesenUD (Post 67964007)
I agree. Their are probably 3 reasons they are doing this.

1 - for him to be the #2 goaltender
2 - in case they can't sign Bobrovsky
3 - to try to have a little more leverage in the negotiations with Bobrovsky's agent

There is only ONE reason to do this. It's a bluff of epic proportions and I love it!

Jarmo-"I see your KHL offer Mr. Theofanous and I raise you one Kiprusoff. Your call."

Theofanous-"Fold"

Samkow 06-25-2013 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron Balls McGinty (Post 67964193)
Kiprusoff has a cap hit of 5.8 for the last year of his contract. Only 1.5 in actual money but there are better ways to spend your cap hit than 5.8 on a backup goalie.

Precisely why this is why I've officially started worrying about Bob. You don't try and bring in a guy with a 5.8 million dollar cap hit if you just want him to be a backup.

Anyways, Kiprusoff was a workhorse for many years but he sucked last year. Not the Bob-replacement I'm hoping for if one becomes necessary.

RDriesenUD 06-25-2013 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron Balls McGinty (Post 67964193)
Kiprusoff has a cap hit of 5.8 for the last year of his contract. Only 1.5 in actual money but there are better ways to spend your cap hit than 5.8 on a backup goalie.

I don't know how it would work if he is retired. If we could sign him to a new contract or if we would have to trade for him (that is what I would think). We could sign him to a lower cap number if we can sign him to a new contract. We could trade Calgary a player to offset some of his cap number if we had to trade for him.

Iron Balls McGinty 06-25-2013 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stretch Factor (Post 67964389)
There is only ONE reason to do this. It's a bluff of epic proportions and I love it!

Jarmo-"I see your KHL offer Mr. Theofanous and I raise you one Kiprusoff. Your call."

Theofanous-"Fold"

Except if I was Bob's agent, replacing my client with a 36 (almost 37) year old goalie who had a .882 save percentage and a 3.44 GAA last season along with a cap hit of 5.8 million seems pretty ludicrous.

Worst bluff attempt ever.

Iron Balls McGinty 06-25-2013 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RDriesenUD (Post 67964543)
I don't know how it would work if he is retired. If we could sign him to a new contract or if we would have to trade for him (that is what I would think). We could sign him to a lower cap number if we can sign him to a new contract. We could trade Calgary a player to offset some of his cap number if we had to trade for him.

As far as I know, a contract is a contract. If you could simply "retire" and then come back and sign a new contract with a different team, players would do that all the time. There is no way the CBA would allow that.

Roadman 06-25-2013 11:18 AM

Consider the source.

Also if the CBJ were NOT checking various (all) options, then I would be worried.

Mayor Bee 06-25-2013 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stretch Factor (Post 67964389)
There is only ONE reason to do this. It's a bluff of epic proportions and I love it!

Jarmo-"I see your KHL offer Mr. Theofanous and I raise you one Kiprusoff. Your call."

Theofanous-"Fold"

Jarmo would be forced to go with the call. Saying "I see your....and I raise..." is a string bet, which is illegal under the standard rules of poker. Instead of swaying leverage, it would mean matching the KHL offer.

RDriesenUD 06-25-2013 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron Balls McGinty (Post 67964719)
As far as I know, a contract is a contract. If you could simply "retire" and then come back and sign a new contract with a different team, players would do that all the time. There is no way the CBA would allow that.

I am not sure how the NHL works, but Derek Fisher did something like this in the NBA this year.

Nanabijou 06-25-2013 11:36 AM

Retiring and then re-signing him wouldn't be allowed.

But, the Flames could buy him out - no cap hit for them and it would 'only' cost 1 million. We could then resign him for a different contract. A small trade could be made that helped to compensate Calgary for biting the 1 million.

Socks 06-25-2013 11:36 AM

Mmmmmmmkay...

Double-Shift Lassť 06-25-2013 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadman (Post 67964803)
Consider the source.

Also if the CBJ were NOT checking various (all) options, then I would be worried.

Agreed. I'm fine with the idea of investigating the idea. I could potentially be fine with the addition, too, I guess, but I'm not going to think too much more about it until there's more smoke.

Some number of years ago, I championed the "kick every tire" mantra. To me, that's the job.

RDriesenUD 06-25-2013 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nanabijou (Post 67966019)
Retiring and then re-signing him wouldn't be allowed.

But, the Flames could buy him out - no cap hit for them and it would 'only' cost 1 million. We could then resign him for a different contract. A small trade could be made that helped to compensate Calgary for biting the 1 million.

Yeah. That is basically what happened in the NBA this year, except Dallas wasn't happy with Fisher signing with Oklahoma City.

Stretch Factor 06-25-2013 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mayor Bee (Post 67964917)
Jarmo would be forced to go with the call. Saying "I see your....and I raise..." is a string bet, which is illegal under the standard rules of poker. Instead of swaying leverage, it would mean matching the KHL offer.

Tell that to Theofanous, he's the one who's about to fold. Watch.

KeithBWhittington 06-25-2013 11:57 AM

CBJ aren't going to go out and throw a ton of money/tenue at any tender in the offseason, even Bob.

The mantra for this is: We need two goaltenders.

Mason was broken, Leighton was not a long term solution at backup, McBackup is AHL caliber only, York isn't ready for regular duty, All others (Forsberg, Dansk, Koorpisalo, Ouellette, etc) aren't likely ready for extended action at the big level here.

I'd rather we get proactive about this situation than wait to see how it shakes out, only to be left holding the bag on a scant list of options should this thing stretch out longer and higher caliber options get snatched up.

This barely registers for me as far a "The News out of Russia isn't good for us".

RDriesenUD 06-25-2013 12:11 PM

I agree. I would rather we try to fix our problems than hope they fix themselves. That is what it seemed like we used to do.

Nordique 06-25-2013 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RDriesenUD (Post 67964007)
I agree. There are probably 3 reasons they are doing this.

1 - for him to be the #2 goaltender
2 - in case they can't sign Bobrovsky
3 - to try to have a little more leverage in the negotiations with Bobrovsky's agent

Yep, yep, and yep. I think #3 is probably the big one, not a bad move for negotiations with Bob imo.

I agree with what McGinty is saying about the cap hit, but we don't have cap issues unless we are doing some serious upgrading at the forward positions.

Iron Balls McGinty 06-25-2013 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordique (Post 67968469)
Yep, yep, and yep. I think #3 is probably the big one, not a bad move for negotiations with Bob imo.

I agree with what McGinty is saying about the cap hit, but we don't have cap issues unless we are doing some serious upgrading at the forward positions.

Serious upgrading at the forward positions pretty much follows along with what we've been believing will happen with the team. If that doesn't happen and we spend a 5.8 cap hit on a backup goalie, we've got problems.

Roadman 06-25-2013 12:28 PM

They will not spend 5.8M on a back-up goalie.

Of that you can be as certain as you can be. Pretty much lead pipe lock.

Skraut 06-25-2013 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron Balls McGinty (Post 67964637)
Except if I was Bob's agent, replacing my client with a 36 (almost 37) year old goalie who had a .882 save percentage and a 3.44 GAA last season along with a cap hit of 5.8 million seems pretty ludicrous.

Worst bluff attempt ever.

If I was Bob's agent I'd say:

"So you're willing to have 5.8 million of your cap tied up in a goalie are you..."


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:07 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.