HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Buyout clause - Do we use it?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-31-2012, 03:40 PM
  #76
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
I think we all know & can agree that the Aqualini's want to win & at any cost. If they don't mind spending to the cap (and over the last few seasons) & don't mind spending for the extra things (sleep doctors, all the dressing room improvements...etc) I would have to think they wouldn't mind spending money on a buy out with a lower cap.
I'm sure he'd probably be ok with it too, but it would obviously depend on the return and how much he wanted to spend on said return. Eating one year of Steven Reinprecht's $2+m salary might have been worth the 3rd rounder from Florida, but who knows if he wants to spend the kind of dollars to buyout a long term contract like DiPietro's, that would take some serious picks/prospects.

Canucker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 03:46 PM
  #77
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
I'm sure he'd probably be ok with it too, but it would obviously depend on the return and how much he wanted to spend on said return. Eating one year of Steven Reinprecht's $2+m salary might have been worth the 3rd rounder from Florida, but who knows if he wants to spend the kind of dollars to buyout a long term contract like DiPietro's, that would take some serious picks/prospects.
Totally agree. The bigger the buy out the better the package.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 03:49 PM
  #78
oceanchild
Registered User
 
oceanchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
Buying out Malhotra would be an absolute waste in a shortened season where his contract is up at the end of it. Won't happen.

I forget who suggested it, but I like the idea of trading for a potential buyout (Rick DiPietro, Upshall, Gomez, etc), in return for picks/prospects...of course Aqualini would have to approve of spending that kind of money on futures and we would have to be in a situation where we didn't need to buyout one of our own players.
Agreed. I think you maximize value by trading loungo for DePietro and a good young player and prospect and then buying him out

oceanchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 03:53 PM
  #79
JanBulisPiggyBack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 372
vCash: 500
Some things I don't get

1. Why do the owners act like they are bleeding money from every orifice then create rules that will allow them to spend x amount of millions of dollars to release a player from his contract and get nothing in return, what if the teams collectively buy out 100 million in contracts to get under the new cap......averaging 3.3 million per team this year ( some more some less )


2. The latest "proposal" from the NHLPA which I do like, but its a little late in the game to bring to the table: the collective revenue and the NHL's expansion and relocation ( wrong thread but I will touch on it here ) is that just a big F YOU to Bettman alone

can somebody clarify this

3. If we bought out lets say Kesler, could we resign him for lets say league minimum for the remainder of his contract and have his 4 million off the cap?????? Is this a rule that can get brutalized

JanBulisPiggyBack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 03:56 PM
  #80
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
DiPietro is stilled owed more than $36,000,000. Lecavilier is owed around $60, 000, 000.


Anchors for their respective franchises, especially for Tampa who could get hit with an ugly cap crunch with all their young stars. Whats it worth in packaged trade to get rid of them? Strome? Brett Connolly?


Could Aquilini carry that? Likely. Does he want to? Maybe, but is an awful lot of money.

Wisp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 04:28 PM
  #81
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,310
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JanBulisPiggyBack View Post
Some things I don't get

1. Why do the owners act like they are bleeding money from every orifice then create rules that will allow them to spend x amount of millions of dollars to release a player from his contract and get nothing in return, what if the teams collectively buy out 100 million in contracts to get under the new cap......averaging 3.3 million per team this year ( some more some less )
The buyouts in the league's latest proposal count against player salaries.

So they would be buying out the cap space without paying out more (as a group) in player salaries.

dave babych returns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 04:30 PM
  #82
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,310
vCash: 500
I don't think teams are going to give away handfuls of first round picks or high end prospects to get rid of their boat anchor contracts.

Maybe we can get a Kyle Okposo or a handful of second drawer picks and prospects, or maybe there's a deal to be made for a Scottie Upshall type (part of the Luongo trade?) but I don't think we're going to get Travis Hamonic or Nino Niderreiter or anyone like that in exchange for, essentially, cash.

dave babych returns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 04:45 PM
  #83
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
DiPietro is stilled owed more than $36,000,000. Lecavilier is owed around $60, 000, 000.


Anchors for their respective franchises, especially for Tampa who could get hit with an ugly cap crunch with all their young stars. Whats it worth in packaged trade to get rid of them? Strome? Brett Connolly?


Could Aquilini carry that? Likely. Does he want to? Maybe, but is an awful lot of money.
I would ask should a team like Tampa be even spending anywhere close to the cap given their estimated operating losses per year?

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 05:05 PM
  #84
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
I don't think teams are going to give away handfuls of first round picks or high end prospects to get rid of their boat anchor contracts.

Maybe we can get a Kyle Okposo or a handful of second drawer picks and prospects, or maybe there's a deal to be made for a Scottie Upshall type (part of the Luongo trade?) but I don't think we're going to get Travis Hamonic or Nino Niderreiter or anyone like that in exchange for, essentially, cash.
You don't think if you give a team the equivalent of 20-30 million dollars you won't get some premium assets along with that? I think some teams would be willing to pay to get out from under a contract (DiPietro...).

Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 06:34 PM
  #85
RandV
It's a wolf v2.0
 
RandV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,218
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
I think we all know & can agree that the Aqualini's want to win & at any cost. If they don't mind spending to the cap (and over the last few seasons) & don't mind spending for the extra things (sleep doctors, all the dressing room improvements...etc) I would have to think they wouldn't mind spending money on a buy out with a lower cap.
It's only going to be to a certain point though. Aqualini has spent money beyond the salary cap on this team, but exactly how high will he go? And don't forget that for all he's spending the team is raking in the cash, so rather than how much does he spend it's more how much less does he want to make.

Don't forget that we let Ehrhoff walk when Buffalo gave him a deal that would pay $20 million in the first two years. Could that deal have been pushing the upper limit of the teams payroll? If Aqualini wanted to 'win at all costs' then we should have been willing to pay him the same.

RandV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 06:41 PM
  #86
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandV View Post
It's only going to be to a certain point though. Aqualini has spent money beyond the salary cap on this team, but exactly how high will he go? And don't forget that for all he's spending the team is raking in the cash, so rather than how much does he spend it's more how much less does he want to make.

Don't forget that we let Ehrhoff walk when Buffalo gave him a deal that would pay $20 million in the first two years. Could that deal have been pushing the upper limit of the teams payroll? If Aqualini wanted to 'win at all costs' then we should have been willing to pay him the same.
An amnesty'd contract does not carry the same risk as Ehrhoff. His cost is cost against the salary cap.

Such a contract compromises us competitively in other areas in both the short term AND the long term. You can argue it may not be a smart choice and actually compromises the "winning at all cost" mentality.

Wisp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 06:42 PM
  #87
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
I would ask should a team like Tampa be even spending anywhere close to the cap given their estimated operating losses per year?
That puts them in an even worse position than I described. I don't even think they can afford to keep paying Lecavalier NOW. Going forward, it gets worse.

Wisp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:53 PM
  #88
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
There's some humane reasons for it. You can identify if the bear is a mother with cubs or not and can get a cleaner, less painful kill.

That said, there's much less sport in bear bating, and it greatly increases the chances of a bear dying anyways (as opposed to being eluded and going home empty handed, which is often the case).

I'm not in a favour of hunting, but I enjoy my steaks enough to know I'd be a colossal hypocrite for criticizing anyone for it.
No one eats bear. It tastes like greased crap. Bear hunting is 100% trophy hunting.

Disclosure - I have hunted in the past, just don't have time for it anymore. Not opposed to hunting, opposed to trophy hunting.

Anyways - enough OT.

Ballard is the obvious buyout.

Luongo is just plain silly. There is no way Gillis goes from wanting an elite prospect and picks to tossing him to the curb for cap space.

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:11 PM
  #89
LiquidSnake
Agent of Chaos...
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,697
vCash: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
You don't think if you give a team the equivalent of 20-30 million dollars you won't get some premium assets along with that? I think some teams would be willing to pay to get out from under a contract (DiPietro...).
Especially considering the Owner is losing tons of money. Wang would pull the trigger

LiquidSnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:36 PM
  #90
The Big Foot
Registered User
 
The Big Foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Bhutan
Posts: 2,596
vCash: 500
I doubt many people remember but Ballard was actually playing quite well before his injury last year. Providing a spark and playing with a chip on his shoulder. Buying him out, if it meant incurring a cap penalty, would not be a smart move.
I'm not a fan of Booth really but he did show flashes of being a solid offensive contributor. Just needs to be put with players he can mesh with. He's got the worst passing instincts on the team, that needs to be acknowledged by the coaches (worse than Bitz, Weise, Malhotra).

The Big Foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:59 PM
  #91
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post
Especially considering the Owner is losing tons of money. Wang would pull the trigger
That team is running out of excuses (aside from the obvious inept management teams that would make some of the awful GM's we Canuckfans have had to deal with in the past seem "ok" by comparison); however, I tend to think their new home should make a noticeable improvement in their bottem line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Foot View Post
I doubt many people remember but Ballard was actually playing quite well before his injury last year.
As been said a number of times; was actually one of the few D that didn't play that bad in the Kings playoff series; hopefully that'll attract some trade interest (rather than having to resort to a buyout).

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:18 PM
  #92
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Foot View Post
I doubt many people remember but Ballard was actually playing quite well before his injury last year. Providing a spark and playing with a chip on his shoulder. Buying him out, if it meant incurring a cap penalty, would not be a smart move.
I'm not a fan of Booth really but he did show flashes of being a solid offensive contributor. Just needs to be put with players he can mesh with. He's got the worst passing instincts on the team, that needs to be acknowledged by the coaches (worse than Bitz, Weise, Malhotra).
Ballard played reasonably well in the last half of the season and in the LA Series and Booth shows lots of hustle with flashes of skill but neither played well enough to justify their contracts. Unless the NHL BoG has a major brain fart at the last minute, we are heading into a much more strict salary cap regime. In such a regime, you can't afford to have guys who under perform their cap number.

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 12:34 AM
  #93
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,604
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
You don't think if you give a team the equivalent of 20-30 million dollars you won't get some premium assets along with that? I think some teams would be willing to pay to get out from under a contract (DiPietro...).
I agree but would aquilini really want to spend 25m just to buy 5-15 range pick?

me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 12:48 AM
  #94
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
I agree but would aquilini really want to spend 25m just to buy 5-15 range pick?
I don't think anyone would pay that much for a pick in that range...but for a decent package including a good 1st rounder and some other picks/prospects? Worthy of thought for a wealthy owner with a lack of talent in the system.

Canucker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 11:02 AM
  #95
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
I agree but would aquilini really want to spend 25m just to buy 5-15 range pick?
If he's getting a franchise player, the return on that investment he could be immense.

Wisp is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 11:11 AM
  #96
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
If he's getting a franchise player, the return on that investment he could be immense.
Pretty big risk of not getting a franchise player with a pick in the 5-15 range (probably a greater chance of said prospect being a complete bust let alone franchise player). It's not like getting a top three pick is a sure thing either. Don't think the Aquini's have that kind of money to take that kind of chance on.

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 11:38 AM
  #97
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
Ballard played reasonably well in the last half of the season and in the LA Series and Booth shows lots of hustle with flashes of skill but neither played well enough to justify their contracts. Unless the NHL BoG has a major brain fart at the last minute, we are heading into a much more strict salary cap regime. In such a regime, you can't afford to have guys who under perform their cap number.
Agreed. I'm fine with keeping Booth because I believe he'll be a great performer as he gets used to AV's X's and O's but we can't also keep Ballard. His style of play simply doesn't fit and he's destined to be in our bottom pairing whenever we're healthy in the back end. Waste of $4.2 million

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 01:25 PM
  #98
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by struckmatch View Post
Can we buyout Malhotra even though he has a NMC?

If so, I buyout Manny. It's just painful to watch the player he is now.

$2.5 Million for a 4th line player?

Ballard's contract isn't the greatest either, but I choose Manny if I'm buying someone out.
Manny's contract runs out after this season, there is no reason/need to buy him out.

Peter Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 01:30 PM
  #99
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,267
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
I would buy out Keith Ballard and not bring back Malhotra, Raymond and Higgins. I like Higgins but we simply can't afford him going forward (13-14), and it would be easier to do this than swallow giving away Luongo for free.

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 01:40 PM
  #100
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I would buy out Keith Ballard and not bring back Malhotra, Raymond and Higgins. I like Higgins but we simply can't afford him going forward (13-14), and it would be easier to do this than swallow giving away Luongo for free.
Wait... what? You're planning to hold onto Lu through 13/14 now? Jesus.

Scurr 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 11:23 PM.

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.