HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part XI: The "Please make it stop" edition.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2013, 07:27 AM
  #151
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
The contract term limits are 6 and 7

Quote:
The sides have agreed on such major issues as a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenues and a six-year maximum length for new contracts, with a seven-year exception for teams to re-sign their free agents.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/0...#storylink=cpy

Bruce Garrioch reported the two sides had agreed to contract term limits but he didn't have the terms. The NHL proposed 6 and 7 last week with a 10% variance. Garrioch reported the variance will be 15%-20%.

Quote:
A source added the NHL has pulled the plug on the pension plan by no longer offering up payments for players and want the players to fund any future shortfall.

The sides are close to a deal on term limits for player contracts and the year-to-year salary variance, which could be in the 15-to-20% range.

The term of the next collective bargaining agreement still has to be agreed upon. The salary cap for the 2013-14 season is also an issue. The players also desire to have at least one exhibition game if there is to be a shortened season this winter.
http://www.ottawasun.com/2013/01/02/...ching-together

The players are funding the majority of the pension with the NHL providing some funding as the $50M from the $300M make whole.

The players wanted a $67M cap. Now its $65M. Somewhere between $60M and $65M. Closer to $60M than $65M.

NHL offered 10 and 8 for CBA lenghth. NHLPA offered 8 and 6. NHLPA reportedly wants an opt out after 7. Some reports say the NHLPA will take the 10 and 8 for other concessions.

The NHL doesn't want to play preseason games. The NBA played 2 preseason games. The close rivals played each other. Knicks-Nets.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 07:33 AM
  #152
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
The league has already apparently agreed to two amnesty buyouts, rather than one, which is a small victory for the players. Those buyouts wouldn't count against the cap and would allow for more movement in the system.
http://thestar.blogs.com/thespin/201...ight-hour.html

No word on when the buyouts have to be executed. Hopefully its for the 2013 and not the 13-14 season. The Rangers amnesty Redden and everyone can move on.


Last edited by RangerBoy: 01-03-2013 at 07:39 AM.
RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 07:46 AM
  #153
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,580
vCash: 500
Big day with the PA dropping the escrow cap and not filing the disclaimer (never thought they would but hey...).

My optimism just went up a notch.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 08:48 AM
  #154
mschmidt64
Registered User
 
mschmidt64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 833
vCash: 500
Who else could we amnesty buyout?

I'd be tempted to say Brad Richards if it wasn't for the fact that we're competing for a Cup in the next year or two.

mschmidt64 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 08:55 AM
  #155
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,859
vCash: 145
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
Who else could we amnesty buyout?

I'd be tempted to say Brad Richards if it wasn't for the fact that we're competing for a Cup in the next year or two.
I don't think there's anyone on the roster that would be worth buying out. I guess you could cut ties with Rupp, who is owed $1.5M this year and next, but that just seems like making a move for the sake of it.

Jason Wilson? LOL.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 08:56 AM
  #156
haohmaru
#bdwyblueshirts
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 5,769
vCash: 500
It's ridiculous that the bigger teams are going to have to jettison players to comply with new cap #'s. There really should be a luxury tax to accommodate the way clubs have been built before this CBA. Put a limit on it (say ~10 million) and have 1/2 of that get put into revenue sharing and 1/2 towards players pensions with the luxury tax being 100% of what you're over the cap.

haohmaru is online now  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:00 AM
  #157
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
Who else could we amnesty buyout?

I'd be tempted to say Brad Richards if it wasn't for the fact that we're competing for a Cup in the next year or two.
Maybe a trade and buyout the returning player. Just throwing ideas out there. If its allowed.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:11 AM
  #158
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Buying out Richards would put us in the "omg we have no 1st line center" state again. He got stronger as the year went on. If we have to make a move and shed more than 2-3M, then you have to move Gaborik. Or, shed the fat. Move Rupp, Asham, Stralman, Pyatt, replace those players in Hartford. Still that only saves about 2M assuming we replace them with guys making the minimum.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:25 AM
  #159
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
Maybe the NHL allows teams to amnesty a player at any time during the CBA. 1 for short term. 1 for long term. If you could use a compliance buyout 4-5 years from now,Richards might be a candidate.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:25 AM
  #160
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,823
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
renaud lavoie ‏@renlavoierds
told that their is still a gap between the nhl and nhlpa on core-economic issues. We'll see today if both sides are ready to budge.
Quote:
dan rosen ‏@drosennhl
bettman says he remains "hopeful" as long as the process continues. It will today.
Quote:
dan rosen ‏@drosennhl
cba talks scheduled to resume at 10 a.m. At request of federal mediator scot l. Beckenbaugh, who was involved all day yesterday as well.
Quote:
spector's hockey ‏@spectorshockey
#nhlcba meeting slated to resume this morning at 10 am et. Player pensions & salary cap for '13-'14 believed the hot button issues.
today is the day...

BBKers is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:31 AM
  #161
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Maybe the NHL allows teams to amnesty a player at any time during the CBA. 1 for short term. 1 for long term. If you could use a compliance buyout 4-5 years from now,Richards might be a candidate.
4-5 years from now, yes. As of today though it wouldn't make any sense, unless you want Stepan as our 1C and Boyle as our 2C.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:33 AM
  #162
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,607
vCash: 500
If the buyouts happen this season, it'll be interesting to see who hits the open market. Could be some viable pickups on cheaper deals.

Just spitballing, but here are some guys that I think could be bought out:

- Gomez, but Rene Bourque is an option.
- Komisarek
- DiPietro
- Leino
- Pronger
- Heatley (Depending on where the cap is set and if a trade isn't feasible.)
- Ballard

Could be some smaller names amongst the fray as well. Not saying I'd want all of those guys, just throwing it out there.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:37 AM
  #163
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
It seems stupid, the NHL really doesn't lose anything by raising the cap to $64 mill or whatever next season. It's still subject to the 50-50 split, so if revenues don't match they'll get money back. If they're worried about the cap floor, then they should just put in a one time artificially low floor for 2013, and then it'll all auto correct in 2014 anyways once revenues from the previous year are calculated.

Levitate is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:39 AM
  #164
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,823
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
I don't think there's anyone on the roster that would be worth buying out. I guess you could cut ties with Rupp, who is owed $1.5M this year and next, but that just seems like making a move for the sake of it.

Jason Wilson? LOL.
No
I agree
But any one of/multiple choices of the following players might need to be replaced (via waivers/trade) from within if the cap goes down close to $60M next year - ie "cut the fat"
  • Anton Strålman $1,700,000
  • Taylor Pyatt $1,550,000
  • Mike Rupp $1,500,000
  • Arron Asham $1,000,000


maybe by a few of the following:
  • Dylan McIllraith $1,295,000
  • JT Miller $1,244,167
  • Christian Thomas $970,000
  • Kyle Jean $970,000
  • Jesper Fast $900,000
  • Oscar Lindberg $760,000
  • Marek Hrivik $685,000
  • Kris Newbury $600,000
  • Micheal Haley $600,000
  • Chad Kolarik $525,000 (unsigned)
  • Mats Zuccarello $??? (unsigned)

I dunno
Time will tell

BBKers is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:47 AM
  #165
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,859
vCash: 145
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBKers View Post
No
I agree
But any one of/multiple choices of the following players might need to be replaced (via waivers/trade) from within if the cap goes down close to $60M next year - ie "cut the fat"
  • Anton Strålman $1,700,000
  • Taylor Pyatt $1,550,000
  • Mike Rupp $1,500,000
  • Arron Asham $1,000,000


maybe by a few of the following:
  • Dylan McIllraith $1,295,000
  • JT Miller $1,244,167
  • Christian Thomas $970,000
  • Kyle Jean $970,000
  • Jesper Fast $900,000
  • Oscar Lindberg $760,000
  • Marek Hrivik $685,000
  • Kris Newbury $600,000
  • Micheal Haley $600,000
  • Chad Kolarik $525,000 (unsigned)
  • Mats Zuccarello $??? (unsigned)

I dunno
Time will tell
Well the prospects--McIlrath, Miller, Fast et al--don't count against the cap, so there'd be no logical reason to buy them out. Guys like Newbury will almost assuredly be below the threshold for having their salary count against the NHL cap as well, so they're probably safe.

Guys like Rupp, Stralman and Asham might be candidates. If there's a cap at $60M for 2014 then someone would have to go, and more than one if they want to keep Gaborik.

I think they settle on a number closer to $62M or $63M for 2014.

nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:50 AM
  #166
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
It seems stupid, the NHL really doesn't lose anything by raising the cap to $64 mill or whatever next season. It's still subject to the 50-50 split, so if revenues don't match they'll get money back. If they're worried about the cap floor, then they should just put in a one time artificially low floor for 2013, and then it'll all auto correct in 2014 anyways once revenues from the previous year are calculated.

Hey Lev - yeah I agree. If the floor stays the same, which it will - and the difference on the upper end is only 3-5 million (60 to somewhere say in the 63-65 range), I don't see how that's going to kill the competitive balance they are concerned about as well. (Heard that one from the league last night)

If the revenue sharing system is utilized correctly, the usual teams having trouble making the cap floor should have more resources to play with - or you can design the system in a way which forces those small market teams to use a certain percentage of that towards cap spending to bridge the gap.

I'm no capologist, but we've seen pretty decent competitive balance in this league for years (and the teams who consistently hit the cap ceiling have shown there's no direct correlation between spending and success), and now that they are planning to add revenue sharing to the mix, one would think LOWERING the previous cap number 5 million to around 65 instead of 10 to 60 really wouldn't make much of a difference.

But thats how a fan sees it, I'm not privy to all of the other inner workings and economic issues the NHL is having or has had.


Last edited by HockeyBasedNYC: 01-03-2013 at 09:55 AM.
HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:50 AM
  #167
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBKers View Post
No
I agree
But any one of/multiple choices of the following players might need to be replaced (via waivers/trade) from within if the cap goes down close to $60M next year - ie "cut the fat"
[*]Anton Strålman $1,700,000[*]Taylor Pyatt $1,550,000[*]Mike Rupp $1,500,000[*]Arron Asham $1,000,000

I think all 4 of these players can be moved for something.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:51 AM
  #168
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
Well the prospects--McIlrath, Miller, Fast et al--don't count against the cap, so there'd be no logical reason to buy them out.
I think he meant these are candidates that can replace Rupp, Asham, etc~

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 09:53 AM
  #169
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
I think all 4 of these players can be moved for something.
I would have no problem throwing Pyatts 1.55 out. Nothing really impresses me about his game, at least what I've seen. Personally i think the Rangers would benefit with more speed in his spot.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:02 AM
  #170
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,954
vCash: 500
Today is a big day. Of course the NHLPA can still file, but theyll have to put back out to vote, etc. With that immediate threat gone, there may be a little more wiggle room left for the NHL to play hardball with.

I wouldnt be surprised if the NHL baited them into this and are now prepared to dig in on some of the core economic issues again.

The way this has gone, I wouldnt be surprised if this stretches out a few more days with the NHLPA re-hashing the disclaimer talk. If I were them I'd put it right back out to vote after todays session if they see the old NHL stonewalling tactics arise.

The threat of filing the disclaimer was a good thing for the process to keep it moving.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:05 AM
  #171
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
Hey Lev - yeah I agree. If the floor stays the same, which it will - and the difference on the upper end is only 3-5 million (60 to somewhere say in the 63-65 range), I don't see how that's going to kill the competitive balance they are concerned about as well. (Heard that one from the league last night)
"competitive balance" is a ******** excuse, cuz the system will go back to normal in 2014 anyways. Having one artificially low year to force teams to tear down their rosters is disturbing

I don't think the players not filing will make a difference beyond not giving the NHL an excuse to flip out. The NHL knows if there's no deal made then the NHLPA will just vote again, there isn't much there for the NHL to squeeze out

Levitate is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:07 AM
  #172
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
I would have no problem throwing Pyatts 1.55 out. Nothing really impresses me about his game, at least what I've seen. Personally i think the Rangers would benefit with more speed in his spot.
Agreed, especially when Hagelin or Kreider are primed to be on the opposite flank with Boyle in the middle.

I think Torts wants vets though when you consider we're a team poised for a Cup run, so I don't think we're going to see guys like Pyatt, Asham, and Rupp moved and replaced internally buy guys in Hartford. Although I wouldn't hate that scenario at all.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:19 AM
  #173
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
Agreed, especially when Hagelin or Kreider are primed to be on the opposite flank with Boyle in the middle.

I think Torts wants vets though when you consider we're a team poised for a Cup run, so I don't think we're going to see guys like Pyatt, Asham, and Rupp moved and replaced internally buy guys in Hartford. Although I wouldn't hate that scenario at all.
I agree, and if you look at Sathers and Torts approach to previous years / camps, the more depth you have the better, even if its filled with redundant vets for the lower lines. If you take a look at the opening rosters compared to the last game of the season, several things change and you need to have as many options available to you from start to finish, and a lot of those players are in the 1-2 million per year range.

Except on defense, where they've been extremely lucky IMO getting away with some healthy bodies and production from rookies. I've felt theyve needed to get one more vet D-man for each of the past 3 seasons, but its a risk they had to take on their roster cap-wise and its worked out for them, specifically with Bickel and McDonaugh (and DZ) stepping up. One more injury last season with Staal and Sauer (and Eminger at times) out and they would have been royally screwed.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:19 AM
  #174
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,859
vCash: 145
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
I think he meant these are candidates that can replace Rupp, Asham, etc~
Right, my bad. Sorry, BBK.

nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:19 AM
  #175
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
I would have no problem throwing Pyatts 1.55 out. Nothing really impresses me about his game, at least what I've seen. Personally i think the Rangers would benefit with more speed in his spot.
I think it's more likely you'd see one of Rupp or Asham gone, since they are somewhat redundant. Especially with Haley's presence. Pyatt provides a much needed offensive presence (albeit a limited one) in the bottom 6. I agree they could use more speed, but I don't think he'd be bought out.

Also, remember that just because there are two buyouts doesn't mean both of them need to be used.

Tawnos is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:33 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.