HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Marian Gaborik

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-26-2012, 06:27 AM
  #51
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,086
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=sunnyvale420;56803763]
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingCanadain1976 View Post
Ok i ve seen this sorta thing alot in hf "if the cap goes down .... " if it does go down the salaries will roll back the same percentage as the cap going down so if u can aford so and so at x dollar u ll still be able to afford him a a cheaper y value.

W.T.F. Is this? This is incredibly wrong, i award you no points, and let joe pesci have mercy on your soul.

Contracts are guaranteed! (ATM..) if the cap drops it does not affect anyone under contract going into the next season. It does however have an effect on how much money the teams have to give contracts out to the RFAs and UFAs on their team
Yup. A big point in the talks, has been the players' aim to earn the full value of their existing contracts, to have no salary rollbacks. The nhl's last offer was a $300m make whole provision.

The proposed $10m cap reduction + no salary rollback = less spending, fewer bidders on Gaborik's $7.5m contract.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 06:59 AM
  #52
Playmaker09
Valar Morghulis
 
Playmaker09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: West Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnyvale420 View Post

Yup. A big point in the talks, has been the players' aim to earn the full value of their existing contracts, to have no salary rollbacks. The nhl's last offer was a $300m make whole provision.

The proposed $10m cap reduction + no salary rollback = less spending, fewer bidders on Gaborik's $7.5m contract.
Are you sure? I was pretty sure there would essentially be a rollback, and that most of the money would be returned through "make whole", which wouldn't count against the cap. Or else WTF is the point of a "make whole" and how would teams at the cap just magically shed $10 million to get back under?

Playmaker09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 07:30 AM
  #53
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Playmaker09 View Post
Are you sure? I was pretty sure there would essentially be a rollback, and that most of the money would be returned through "make whole", which wouldn't count against the cap. Or else WTF is the point of a "make whole" and how would teams at the cap just magically shed $10 million to get back under?

I thought the make whole provision was to assure the players, that they wouldn't lose salary in another rollback. Can anyone confrim this?

I've read a couple of different cap proposals have been discussed..one would have the cap stay at $70m for the 2012-2013 season, then have the cap drop to $60m for the 2013-2014 season. The OP's proposal calls for Gaborik to be dealt in the summer of 2013. With the cap dropping in 2013-2014, it would limit the number of teams in the mix for Gaborik, with cheaper options available 1 week after a proposed Gaborik draft weekend trade.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 07:37 AM
  #54
jw2
Registered User
 
jw2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,591
vCash: 500
Of the 13 teams currently under 60m in cap space, which team do you see Gaborik waiving his NTC to join?

jw2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 07:50 AM
  #55
Playmaker09
Valar Morghulis
 
Playmaker09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: West Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I thought the make whole provision was to assure the players, that they wouldn't lose salary in another rollback. Can anyone confrim this?

I've read a couple of different cap proposals have been discussed..one would have the cap stay at $70m for the 2012-2013 season, then have the cap drop to $60m for the 2013-2014 season. The OP's proposal calls for Gaborik to be dealt in the summer of 2013. With the cap dropping in 2013-2014, it would limit the number of teams in the mix for Gaborik, with cheaper options available 1 week after a proposed Gaborik draft weekend trade.
They won't lose (too much) salary, but the cap hit would remain rolled back. All FA's signed after the CBA is agreed upon, however, would not have their contracts rolled back, as they would already be subject to a cap that represents a 50% share.

It's a rollback that varies in relation to how much the players current cut of revenue ($1.88 billion) is compared to 50% of total revenues. So as the league continues to grow (hopefully) the rollback would change. For example it could be 12% in year 1, 6% in year 2 and 2% in year 3. Once $1.88 billion becomes equivalent to 50% of league revenues, then current contracts are no longer subject to a rollback, and the players total share will increase as total revenue increases (where before it would remain as is, minus whatever was not returned through "make whole").

Then, a fixed amount of the money that is taken away through the rollbacks, as determined by the "make whole" agreement, would be returned to the players. At least that's how I understand it.

Gaborik's cap hit would therefore be a constant percentage of the cap (which means the cap hit would vary with the growth of the cap ceiling) until the cap returns to where it is now ($70 million), where his hit would be what it is now. So if he gets traded during the "rollback period" it doesn't make much of a difference (except to teams who can't afford to pay his real salary).

Playmaker09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 09:07 AM
  #56
sunnyvale420
Registered User
 
sunnyvale420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Playmaker09 View Post
They won't lose (too much) salary, but the cap hit would remain rolled back. All FA's signed after the CBA is agreed upon, however, would not have their contracts rolled back, as they would already be subject to a cap that represents a 50% share.

It's a rollback that varies in relation to how much the players current cut of revenue ($1.88 billion) is compared to 50% of total revenues. So as the league continues to grow (hopefully) the rollback would change. For example it could be 12% in year 1, 6% in year 2 and 2% in year 3. Once $1.88 billion becomes equivalent to 50% of league revenues, then current contracts are no longer subject to a rollback, and the players total share will increase as total revenue increases (where before it would remain as is, minus whatever was not returned through "make whole").

Then, a fixed amount of the money that is taken away through the rollbacks, as determined by the "make whole" agreement, would be returned to the players. At least that's how I understand it.

Gaborik's cap hit would therefore be a constant percentage of the cap (which means the cap hit would vary with the growth of the cap ceiling) until the cap returns to where it is now ($70 million), where his hit would be what it is now. So if he gets traded during the "rollback period" it doesn't make much of a difference (except to teams who can't afford to pay his real salary).
Thats some crude misinformation your preaching without a CBA in place. However, there are no rollbacks, what youre confusing is escrow payments (which players get back most if not more at the end of the year).

sunnyvale420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 11:43 AM
  #57
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,060
vCash: 500
I'd offer Setoguchi, Clutterbuck, and Bouchard to bring Gaborik back to the Wild, but I am not sure that is appealing for Rangers fans.

Gaborik is an upgrade over Setoguchi (if Gabby is healthy). Clutterbuck is going to want a raise. And Bouchard would pretty much be a gamble on whether he can stay healthy. But all three would be good young pieces to add to the Rangers young core.

Edit - Not sure I would even go for that as a Wild fan. Setoguchi could explode playing with Granlund.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 12:05 PM
  #58
jw2
Registered User
 
jw2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan View Post
I'd offer Setoguchi, Clutterbuck, and Bouchard to bring Gaborik back to the Wild, but I am not sure that is appealing for Rangers fans.

Gaborik is an upgrade over Setoguchi (if Gabby is healthy). Clutterbuck is going to want a raise. And Bouchard would pretty much be a gamble on whether he can stay healthy. But all three would be good young pieces to add to the Rangers young core.

Edit - Not sure I would even go for that as a Wild fan. Setoguchi could explode playing with Granlund.
Not there value-wise. Rangers dont need more 40point players. Clutterbuck would obvously be a fan favorite, and fits with Torts' style. Rangers wouldnt want Bouchard, either. Maybe add a top prospect into the deal, instead.

I still dont see the Rangers trading Gaborik unless there is an immediate upgrade for the short-run. And I don't see how you upgrade on the 3rd highest goalscorer from the previous season. Gaborik seems to be the type of player the Rangers need...

jw2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 04:05 PM
  #59
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,446
vCash: 500
And the perpetuating cycle continues....

A:"We need a big time goal scorer"
B: We bring in Marian Gaborik who lights up the league and finishes top 4 in goal scoring.
C: Lets trade Gaborik for mediocre players/prospects
D:"We need a big time goal scorer"

Garfinkel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 05:02 PM
  #60
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan View Post
I'd offer Setoguchi, Clutterbuck, and Bouchard to bring Gaborik back to the Wild, but I am not sure that is appealing for Rangers fans.

Gaborik is an upgrade over Setoguchi (if Gabby is healthy). Clutterbuck is going to want a raise. And Bouchard would pretty much be a gamble on whether he can stay healthy. But all three would be good young pieces to add to the Rangers young core.

Edit - Not sure I would even go for that as a Wild fan. Setoguchi could explode playing with Granlund.
Clutterbuck, Bouchard and one of your top prospects.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 10:23 PM
  #61
Kris Chreider
Pass Off The Pads
 
Kris Chreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 7,452
vCash: 500
Vokoun and Z. Michalek got pretty much nothing at the draft. What makes you think an upcoming UFA Gaborik would get anything more than a 2nd or a 3rd nine days before free agency?

As for the value of a signed, happy Gaborik, he'd be worth a top-six 20-30 goal scoring RW, a blue chip prospect, a first, and probably a depth player (someone like Ponikarovsky). Maybe Setoguchi+Coyle+1st+Clutterbuck for a signed Gaborik and maybe JT Miller or Christian Thomas coming to Minnesota.

Kris Chreider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 10:27 PM
  #62
Kris Chreider
Pass Off The Pads
 
Kris Chreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 7,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
Clutterbuck, Bouchard and one of your top prospects.
Now, as a dual Rangers and Wild fan, are you sure you would ask for Bouchard who plays half a season every year and not Setoguchi coming back? Now, as for Wild prospects likely to be traded, I think Phillips, Scandella, and Dumba would be the first ones to go. Granlund and Brodin would be untouchable, and Coyle, Zucker and Larsson would be somewhat tradeable.

Kris Chreider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 10:39 PM
  #63
BK201
Registered User
 
BK201's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,187
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfinkel1 View Post
And the perpetuating cycle continues....

A:"We need a big time goal scorer"
B: We bring in Marian Gaborik who lights up the league and finishes top 4 in goal scoring.
C: Lets trade Gaborik for mediocre players/prospects
D:"We need a big time goal scorer"
What's Rick Nash in for then?

BK201 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 10:40 PM
  #64
3rdlineglory
Korsi Kevin
 
3rdlineglory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Mahopac, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 416
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Chreider View Post
Vokoun and Z. Michalek got pretty much nothing at the draft. What makes you think an upcoming UFA Gaborik would get anything more than a 2nd or a 3rd nine days before free agency?

As for the value of a signed, happy Gaborik, he'd be worth a top-six 20-30 goal scoring RW, a blue chip prospect, a first, and probably a depth player (someone like Ponikarovsky). Maybe Setoguchi+Coyle+1st+Clutterbuck for a signed Gaborik and maybe JT Miller or Christian Thomas coming to Minnesota.
Gaborik is a far superior player. Of course he's going to get the Rangers more. Vokoun also didn't have a full year left on his contract. Not to mention, past trades shouldn't have any bearing on future ones. So just because Gaustad garnered a 1st it means every third line center is worth that every trade deadline?

3rdlineglory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 10:48 PM
  #65
Kris Chreider
Pass Off The Pads
 
Kris Chreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 7,452
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rdlineglory View Post
Gaborik is a far superior player. Of course he's going to get the Rangers more. Vokoun also didn't have a full year left on his contract. Not to mention, past trades shouldn't have any bearing on future ones. So just because Gaustad garnered a 1st it means every third line center is worth that every trade deadline?
No, it was serious overpayment, but it was what a gritty, elite PKer third line center is worth to a team that is gearing up for a serious playoff run and needs that leadership and playing style, so GMs are probably going to offer things of the same value for guys like Gaustad in the future. Even here on the HF trade boards, the Burns trade is still used today as a benchmark for stud PMDs.

Kris Chreider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 12:03 AM
  #66
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Chreider View Post
Now, as a dual Rangers and Wild fan, are you sure you would ask for Bouchard who plays half a season every year and not Setoguchi coming back? Now, as for Wild prospects likely to be traded, I think Phillips, Scandella, and Dumba would be the first ones to go. Granlund and Brodin would be untouchable, and Coyle, Zucker and Larsson would be somewhat tradeable.
I personally think Setoguchi is personally overrated. Speed but his hands can't match up to it. With Kreider and Hags, he is pretty redundant. Bouchard, despite being injury prone has worked the PP before and I think he gives us another scoring threat in the bottom 6, which is nice. I would want Zucker as the prospect, but I wouldn't mind Dumba or maybe Larsson.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 05:27 AM
  #67
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rdlineglory View Post
Gaborik is a far superior player. Of course he's going to get the Rangers more. Vokoun also didn't have a full year left on his contract. Not to mention, past trades shouldn't have any bearing on future ones. So just because Gaustad garnered a 1st it means every third line center is worth that every trade deadline?
It's not a question of Gaborik being more talented then Vokoun or Gaustad imo.

At the time of the proposed Gaborik trade, gms will be
A) 1 week away from the start of a strong ufa period , where they can get a scorer for cash alone.
B) Teams will be facing a $10m cap reduction going into the 2013-2014 season.
C) Players moved at the trade deadline usually bring a higher return, then players moved at the draft.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 05:29 AM
  #68
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Chreider View Post
Now, as a dual Rangers and Wild fan, are you sure you would ask for Bouchard who plays half a season every year and not Setoguchi coming back? Now, as for Wild prospects likely to be traded, I think Phillips, Scandella, and Dumba would be the first ones to go. Granlund and Brodin would be untouchable, and Coyle, Zucker and Larsson would be somewhat tradeable.
Surprised to see you list Dumba among the first ones to go. I've read he's had some rough patches this season, but it seems awful early to give up on him.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 12:44 PM
  #69
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
It's not a question of Gaborik being more talented then Vokoun or Gaustad imo.

At the time of the proposed Gaborik trade, gms will be
A) 1 week away from the start of a strong ufa period , where they can get a scorer for cash alone.
B) Teams will be facing a $10m cap reduction going into the 2013-2014 season.
C) Players moved at the trade deadline usually bring a higher return, then players moved at the draft.
1. They MIGHT get a scorer for cash alone. That's ignoring the fact that very rarely is the market flooded with players of Gaborik's caliber. Every year we hear about how great the UFA market is going to be. Rarely does it ever live up to the hype.

2. They'll have cap space to offer big money to UFA's, but not bring in a big money player in a move that will allow them to send salary back? Not likely.

3. UFA's moved at the deadline bring a higher return than UFA's moved a week before July 1st. However, Gaborik is an entirely different situation.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 01:25 PM
  #70
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
1. They MIGHT get a scorer for cash alone. That's ignoring the fact that very rarely is the market flooded with players of Gaborik's caliber. Every year we hear about how great the UFA market is going to be. Rarely does it ever live up to the hype.

2. They'll have cap space to offer big money to UFA's, but not bring in a big money player in a move that will allow them to send salary back? Not likely.

3. UFA's moved at the deadline bring a higher return than UFA's moved a week before July 1st. However, Gaborik is an entirely different situation.

1. We are in a lockout. We might not see it settled until the summer. How many yrs have we gone into a summer, with players having just lost 1/2 to a full yr's salary? With gms looking at a $10m reduction in the cap?

You seem to expect teams will have no trouble locking up their impending ufas like Getzlaf, Weiss, Clowe , Lupul, Jagr, Horton, Ignila, Elias, Alfredsson, Ryder among others. I expect some of those players to sign extensions with their old team, but others will want to test the market having lost 1/2 to a full yr's salary.

2. It's not that a team wouldn't have cap space if they are eyeing Gaborik, it's that 1 week before the start of the ufa period, I think gms will look to find a scorer on the ufa market, so they do not have to give up that 13th-22nd overall pick + a top prospect and so they are not shelling out $7.5m.

3. Really? How so?

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 03:10 PM
  #71
iamitter
Thornton's Hen
 
iamitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
3. Really? How so?
Do you think Burns would have returned more had he been traded at the deadline? Gaborik will still have a full year on his contract at the draft. If traded at the deadline, he will not be a rental.

iamitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 03:24 PM
  #72
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamitter View Post
Do you think Burns would have returned more had he been traded at the deadline? Gaborik will still have a full year on his contract at the draft. If traded at the deadline, he will not be a rental.
The conditions that Burns was traded under, are very different from the conditions Gaborik would be dealt under.

You act as if Gaborik will be the only highly paid player being shopped, as if the Rangers will be the only team trying to reduce it's payroll facing a $10m cap reduction.When Burns was traded, we did not have teams facing a $10m cap reduction and the NHL saying buyouts would count against the cap.


http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...a-new-CBA.html

But according to Larry Brooks of The New York Post, the owners are strongly against amnesty buyouts as part of the transition toward a 50-50 split of hockey related-revenue between the owners and the players.

That's because the league sees such buyouts as money being paid outside the new cap system.



If the new CBA sets a $60 million cap for next season with no amnesty buyouts, no allowance for teams to absorb salary to facilitate trades and restrictions on player demotion, the summer of 2013 could see an unusually high number of players moved
.

CREW99AW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 03:31 PM
  #73
iamitter
Thornton's Hen
 
iamitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
The conditions that Burns was traded under, are very different from the conditions Gaborik would be dealt under.

You act as if Gaborik will be the only highly paid player being shopped, as if the Rangers will be the only team trying to reduce it's payroll facing a $10m cap reduction.When Burns was traded, we did not have teams facing a $10m cap reduction and the NHL saying buyouts would count against the cap.


http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...a-new-CBA.html

But according to Larry Brooks of The New York Post, the owners are strongly against amnesty buyouts as part of the transition toward a 50-50 split of hockey related-revenue between the owners and the players.

That's because the league sees such buyouts as money being paid outside the new cap system.



If the new CBA sets a $60 million cap for next season with no amnesty buyouts, no allowance for teams to absorb salary to facilitate trades and restrictions on player demotion, the summer of 2013 could see an unusually high number of players moved
.
The Rangers are smack in the middle in payroll right now. If we need to move players to get under the cap, there's a problem. It won't be possible for all the teams to get under the cap if those conditions apply. The NHL will be flexible (at least more so than it currently is) in terms of transition.

iamitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 03:39 PM
  #74
jw2
Registered User
 
jw2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,591
vCash: 500
Gaborik wouldnt be one of those players moved, if that were the case. He has a NTC. You see him waiving it to go to Florida, Dallas, NYI, or Phoenix?

jw2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2012, 03:39 PM
  #75
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,549
vCash: 500
NYR and Minnesota might make good trade partners. The Rangers may consider moving Gaborik based on the cap, and that I personally don't think Tortorella is enamored with him. Minnesota has some top notch prospects that they might be willing to move in order to add a front line winger to go for it with the arrival of Parise and Suter. They could also afford to move some of these prospects considering their organizational strength. I think it's safe to assume that Granlund and Brodin are off the table, but I'd love to get my hands on Croyle and Larsson. Dumba is also an option, but he scares me a little bit. I'm going to shy away from any proposals at this time though: they seldom end well.

Barnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:21 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.