View Single Post
Old
04-10-2013, 01:08 AM
  #196
shoop
Registered User
 
shoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo44 View Post
I don't know what the Canucks will do, and a buyout is still possible i suppose, all i'm saying is it doesn't seem very realistic. It's easy for us to forget and not worry about how much money this really is but it's probably a lot harder for the owner to do the same.
This is OT, and probably a good topic for another thread.

I just don't get why teams would agree to compliance buyouts in the CBA at all if they weren't going to use them. That doesn't necessarily mean that they will, but I will be a little surprised if they don't.

Luongo hasn't been moved because of his contract. He really can't be moved because of his contract. The Canucks definitely don't want another season of the Luongo circus in town. With no trade that leaves buyout or bury him as their options. Sure they could eat a ton of his contract in a trade, but that would probably not provide much savings and would hurt on the cap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nabob View Post
Buy out the captain and assistant captain eh? hmm. That should go over real well. The Oilers have lots of cap space. They dont need to sacrifice two very useful players to gain more, even if they are overpaid by a small amount in the big picture. Compliance buyouts are for useless players like Belanger and Smyth.
So Horcoff and Schultz can't be bought out because it will have an impact on the dressing room, by Smytty can be? Right...

Nick Schultz is a very useful player?

Horcoff is overpaid by a small amount? At what point isn't he over paid then? $5.3 M a year? $5.1 M a year?

Compliance buyouts are to make your team better.

shoop is offline   Reply With Quote