HOrc will be the only contract that will be bought out. The rest are all to small and we wont be in a bad cap situation. You have to remember that Khabi, Sutton, Souray buy out and Gilbert are also UFAs and then after next year Belanger and Eager will both be gone. This frees up the money to carry on though.
I did not know we got Gilbert back . I must have been asleep .
Any proof to that ? It would seem to me more likely . As much as we all rag on Horcoff for be a bad hockey player for what he is being paid , he has never been one to complain , as far as i know . He has been a good hard working player . He just lacks the skill .
I was joking, but come to think of it he was complaining at one point in the year about how he was told he could get ice-time with the kids.
Think it was more he was told you do well you get a shot to play with the kids. He took it as you will play with the kids.
As for IATL. I don't know whether he's right or not. I know there was some debate with Smyth about his role going forward, but as far as who complained on the PP about ice-time, I just don't know.
They story on tsn is saying ... TSN Hockey Insider Pierre LeBrun of ESPN.com says that the NHL has upped its compliance buyout offer to two players per team, up from one prior to the 2013-14 season.
However, the buyouts would still count against the players' share, which the Players' Association disapproves of. They prefer that the dollars were outside the system.
The players share means the players' 50% (if the owners get their way) I believe. That doesn't necessarily mean they will count against the cap. It could just end up impacting the escrow money players get back instead. At least this is how I understand it.
For the question of the 2nd buyout. If we assume that horcoff is bought out, would people consider buying out dubnyk at 3.5mil cap? Now ofcourse, he is our only goalie but with a new CBA, a verteran goalie who is roughly of the same level could be had for cheaper could they not?
For the question of the 2nd buyout. If we assume that horcoff is bought out, would people consider buying out dubnyk at 3.5mil cap? Now ofcourse, he is our only goalie but with a new CBA, a verteran goalie who is roughly of the same level could be had for cheaper could they not?
Why buy out Dubnyk if Khabibulin's 3.75M contract ends this season anyway? I recognize the 3.5M is buy out worthy but I think it's a better idea to buy him out ONLY if we find a true #1 either through trade or free agency.
For the question of the 2nd buyout. If we assume that horcoff is bought out, would people consider buying out dubnyk at 3.5mil cap? Now ofcourse, he is our only goalie but with a new CBA, a verteran goalie who is roughly of the same level could be had for cheaper could they not?
I put him in my wild card slot, but it's a wild card for a reason. He'd have to have just an outright brutal year and we'd have to have a proven replacement before the buyout would happen.
I doubt it happens, mainly because not only would we need to find his replacement, but we don't really have anyone even as a backup. Not sure I can see this team going into a season with 2 new goalies.
I was joking, but come to think of it he was complaining at one point in the year about how he was told he could get ice-time with the kids.
Think it was more he was told you do well you get a shot to play with the kids. He took it as you will play with the kids.
As for IATL. I don't know whether he's right or not. I know there was some debate with Smyth about his role going forward, but as far as who complained on the PP about ice-time, I just don't know.
I never heard that , but i now live in Halifax NS so i miss a lot of Oilers news . I never lived in Edmonton ,ever . I spent 20 years in Calgary and always hated the Flames . But that was the Mike Vernon years . I drove to Edmonton to watch the Oilers . It kind of fun spent most of my years in Calgary and could never stomach cheering for the Flames or Stamps .
I never heard that , but i now live in Halifax NS so i miss a lot of Oilers news . I never lived in Edmonton ,ever . I spent 20 years in Calgary and always hated the Flames . But that was the Mike Vernon years . I drove to Edmonton to watch the Oilers . It kind of fun spent most of my years in Calgary and could never stomach cheering for the Flames or Stamps .
The best part was ever time he'd get more minutes his back would get sore, so it's not like he'd be able to handle top 6 minutes even if he was good enough to get them.
For the question of the 2nd buyout. If we assume that horcoff is bought out, would people consider buying out dubnyk at 3.5mil cap? Now ofcourse, he is our only goalie but with a new CBA, a verteran goalie who is roughly of the same level could be had for cheaper could they not?
why would they buy out a guy they just signed right before the lockout?
obviously as it's a very recent signing, the Oilers are happy with the player and happy with the terms. I would not consider buying out DD at all.
why would they buy out a guy they just signed right before the lockout?
obviously as it's a very recent signing, the Oilers are happy with the player and happy with the terms. I would not consider buying out DD at all.
Would a 10-28 season with a GAA of 3.23 and SPCT of .875 change your mind?
I read on TSN today that they're negotiating 2 buyouts per team prior to the start of next season. So besides Horcoff......who else do you guys think we should buy out?
Would a 10-28 season with a GAA of 3.23 and SPCT of .875 change your mind?
I'm not a big fan of DD (the player), but I would bet his gaa is under 3 and save % is over .900 no way he has a record anywhere near your hypothetical stats. (but yes, if he indeed did have those stats, I would say I was wrong and he should get consideration to be bought out.)
Oilers don't need to buy out anyone this year because the NHL/NHLPA agreement (if/when it happens) will use a $70.2 million cap level for the shortened 12/13 season (again... if/when it happens).
Therefore the only players the Oilers can buyout are those with contracts beyond the 12/13 season...
Hall... 7 more years at $6 million
Eberle... 6 more years at $6 million
Horcoff... 2 more years at $5.5 million
Hemsky... 1 more year at $5 million
N Schultz... 1 more year at $3.5 million
Dubnyk... 1 more year at $3.5 million
Smyth... 1 more year at $2.25 million
Petry... 1 more year at $1.75 million
Belanger... 1 more year at $1.75 million
Eager... 1 more year at $1.1 million
Potter... 1 more year at $0.775 million
Every other player is either a UFA/RFA or still on an ELC after this 12/13 season, so those 11 players up above are the only buyout options.
Obviously they aren't going to buyout Hall or Eberle... so that leaves 9 players remaining.
Only 1 of those remaining 9 players have more than 1 year left on their contracts and he just happens to have the highest cap hit as well... so it's obvious who should be bought out 1st.
If the new CBA dictates that 2 players can be bought out and IF the Oilers need to actually do another buyout to get under the new cap ceiling... the 2nd buyout is more of a debate.
Hemsky would be the most obvious as they are arguably strongest on the wings and he is being paid $5 million... highest cap hit after Horcoff. Of course if they only need to get under by $1-2 million more then someone like Belanger/Eager/Smyth could make more sense.
It all depends on the cap level for 2013/14 in the CBA agreement. $65 million and they probably don't even need to do a buyout at all. $60 million and it's likely only Horcoff would have to be bought out.
I really don't see any scenario where they'd likely have to buy out 2 players unless the cap ceiling for 13/14 was lower than $60 million but no one is really talking about anything that low at this point.
We do not know what the CBA will look like. But it is highly unlikely that there is a rolol back on the face value of existing contracts. This would be a deal breaker for the NHLPA and the NHL has already said it would not ask for this.
None of these teams need to take on Horcoff's salary to make the floor. As such they would only claim him on waivers as a pure hockey move. At that point the issue would be his value at $4M per year. If he was FA right now would you want the Oilers to pick him up at $4M and $3M even excluding cap considerations.
As I have said before, until recent;y I would have said that there was 0% chance of the Oilers buying him out. But if the cap does come in in the low $60M's I think they may take advantage of the opportunity. The issue for me is not really the 2013-2014 season but possibly the 2014-2015 season. It is possible that the lockout hits the NHl hard and that the cap may not rise that much in the first few years.
The 300M in escrow being offered by the owners is to soften the blow in salary loss to the players. To get from 57% to 50% the players are going have to take a cut, fact.
The 300M in escrow being offered by the owners is to soften the blow in salary loss to the players. To get from 57% to 50% the players are going have to take a cut, fact.
Current proposal has no roll backs on existing contracts.
The 300M in escrow being offered by the owners is to soften the blow in salary loss to the players. To get from 57% to 50% the players are going have to take a cut, fact.
Of course the palyers will get less money. But in this case, rollback is in reference to their existing cap hits, and at this stage of the negotatitions they remain the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeridAl
Then how do they get down to the 50/50 revenue sharing.
Well no one knows what the revenue streams are going to look like for the next 10 years in the NHL anyway... so beyond this "make whole" amount of ~$300 million... the players will be at the mercy of revenue maintenance/growth over the next 7-10 years (whatever length the CBA is).
There won't be salary rollbacks BUT when/if revenues drop in future years the escrow will make certain that the players do indeed see a pay cut even though their contracts will still show they are signed for the original amount.
Drastic example scenario... if someone is signed at $6 million for the next 6 years and revenues drastically fall in half... they'll be making $3 million per year when all is said and done after escrow etc is taken into account. In the beginning the make whole amount from the owners will help cushion the blow from going from 57% to 50%... but if revenues drop instead of rise... obviously the players won't be making what they are now. Both sides are assuming revenues will go up moderately each year and that may or may not actually happen.
Personally I think they've **** the bed badly on this whole deal and the fans and their collective apathy will make them suffer at least for a couple years. Both sides are dreaming if they think they'll have steady and consistent 2-5% revenue growth each year going forward (which is obviously what each side is currently assuming which would also help cushion the blow of the players getting 50% instead of 57%).
Last edited by nexttothemoon: 01-04-2013 at 12:10 PM.
