HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

If one player can be bought out...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-30-2012, 08:57 PM
  #1
HogtownSabresfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,146
vCash: 500
If one player can be bought out...

Looks like team will have that chance and have it not count against cap.. No doubt, if anybody got bought out, it would be Leino. At $60 million for team, his hit is big for what be brings. I assume he gets 48 games to prove himself if there is a season.

HogtownSabresfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 10:36 PM
  #2
MyersMagic57*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: South Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,420
vCash: 500
It has to be him. There isn't anyone on this roster besides him worth using the buy out on

MyersMagic57* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 11:34 PM
  #3
HogtownSabresfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyersMagic57 View Post
It has to be him. There isn't anyone on this roster besides him worth using the buy out on
I don't see anybody else at all. That said, they could keep him, if he has a decent season and there's no chance of getting something better through trade or UFA. They're at $49 million for 2013-2014 with Hodgson Enroth only real signings, depending on who replaces Leopold/ Regehr. Bigger issues 2014-2015 if they want to keep Miller, Pominville, Vanek, Ott. Real issue is 7.5% of your payroll on Leino -- you wouldn't do that based on last year. I guess much will depend on his season and cap figure going forward.

HogtownSabresfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 12:45 AM
  #4
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
I hope they buy him out so we can re-sign atleast 3 of Miller, Pommers, Vanek, Ott.
Leino will probably get 40 points in 48 games causing us to keep him. He will than get 20 points a season for the final four years of his deal

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 07:14 AM
  #5
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,039
vCash: 50
It will most definitely be Leino. With that said, if the recapture provision goes into the next CBA, Ehrhoff's contract is a major liability. He has a nice cap hit for the next few years as he goes through his prime, but the Sabres are quite literally stuck with his contract through the 2020-21 season. That's a problem, because when they signed him it is quite likely the team viewed the deal as a 7yr/$37m deal, with three team options for $1m/season. Under the current CBA formula, the Sabres could have bought him out after Year 7 for $2m (2/3 of remaining money owed), and only had $333,333 of dead cap space for six seasons (2/3 of remaining money owed spread out over twice the remaining term on the deal). Under a new CBA, Ehrhoff's cap hit is going to be $4m for every year of his deal, and the Sabres really have no out unless they buy him out before 2013-14. And the cap hit will be applied to Buffalo even if they trade him to another club.

I have little doubt they won't even contemplate buying out Ehrhoff because he is one of their better defensemen and there's a decent chance that his contract might be another GM's problem by the time the problem years (Years 8-10) roll around. But Ehrhoff should certainly be considered, else you're just kicking the can down the road.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 07:31 AM
  #6
HogtownSabresfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
It will most definitely be Leino. With that said, if the recapture provision goes into the next CBA, Ehrhoff's contract is a major liability. He has a nice cap hit for the next few years as he goes through his prime, but the Sabres are quite literally stuck with his contract through the 2020-21 season. That's a problem, because when they signed him it is quite likely the team viewed the deal as a 7yr/$37m deal, with three team options for $1m/season. Under the current CBA formula, the Sabres could have bought him out after Year 7 for $2m (2/3 of remaining money owed), and only had $333,333 of dead cap space for six seasons (2/3 of remaining money owed spread out over twice the remaining term on the deal). Under a new CBA, Ehrhoff's cap hit is going to be $4m for every year of his deal, and the Sabres really have no out unless they buy him out before 2013-14. And the cap hit will be applied to Buffalo even if they trade him to another club.

I have little doubt they won't even contemplate buying out Ehrhoff because he is one of their better defensemen and there's a decent chance that his contract might be another GM's problem by the time the problem years (Years 8-10) roll around. But Ehrhoff should certainly be considered, else you're just kicking the can down the road.
Yeah, Ehrhoff could be a problem unless the CBA says you count actual salary in calculating. But if it his $4 million hit, if he can play a bit some team trying to get to the floor might be interested in final three years if it only has to pay $1 million per season.
It doesn't sound like CBA will start using actual salaries to calculate cap which would have been amazing of Sabres because front end loaded contracts are paid up mostly.

HogtownSabresfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 07:39 AM
  #7
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,039
vCash: 50
I wonder if they'll put language in the CBA stating that a team can't re-sign the player they bought out for a certain period of time after buying him out--say, one year. Else I could see teams driving pickup trucks through that loophole by buying out their long-term players, and then re-signing them to shorter deals for much less money to avoid the recapture provision. For instance, if Buffalo bought out Ehrhoff after this year, paying him the remainder of what he's owed ($22m) for the tenure of his current deal, and they then re-signed him for 5yrs/$5m ($1m cap). Teams could then significantly reduce the overall cap hit given to their long-term contracts, and the players get a bit more money over the life of their deal in exchange for the organization removing the noose around its neck that will be those long-term deals.

Oh man, I can just see Bettman's face the first time one team did this and then several followed suit.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:35 AM
  #8
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
I actually think aslong as ehrhoff stays decent in his old age we can move him to a team that need to reach the cap floor but doesnt wanna pay actual money

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:32 AM
  #9
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,039
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheyAreGoodScaryGood View Post
I actually think aslong as ehrhoff stays decent in his old age we can move him to a team that need to reach the cap floor but doesnt wanna pay actual money
The primary concern is that he earns his $37 and then decides to take his talents to Stuttgart, in a manner of speaking. In other words, he decides he's had enough of America and decides to go home to finish his career/earn more money in Europe. It sounds like the Sabres would get caught in the recapture provision net even under those circumstances as the provision's scheme seems punitive in nature, even where a player walks away from an existing deal while an NHL club is willing to employ him.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:44 AM
  #10
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 4,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
The primary concern is that he earns his $37 and then decides to take his talents to Stuttgart, in a manner of speaking. In other words, he decides he's had enough of America and decides to go home to finish his career/earn more money in Europe. It sounds like the Sabres would get caught in the recapture provision net even under those circumstances as the provision's scheme seems punitive in nature, even where a player walks away from an existing deal while an NHL club is willing to employ him.
IIHF transfer rules prohibit him from just deciding not to play for Buffalo during this contract. If he does, Sabres mark him suspended/did not report, and he would also have to deal with the IIHF sanctions. The player, team, and national federation all get dinged if he does that.

Picking up and leaving during his deal is the least likely scenario.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:47 AM
  #11
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,039
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
IIHF transfer rules prohibit him from just deciding not to play for Buffalo during this contract. If he does, Sabres mark him suspended/did not report, and he would also have to deal with the IIHF sanctions. The player, team, and national federation all get dinged if he does that.

Picking up and leaving during his deal is the least likely scenario.
Fair enough, didn't consider that. Doesn't change the fact that the recapture provision makes that deal a major liability, though, if he decides he's made enough money after Year 7 and retires. That'd be $12m of dead cap space over three years.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:51 AM
  #12
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 4,972
vCash: 500
Yeah, it would be a drag for sure. Dead space of any sort on the cap is bad.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:58 AM
  #13
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,039
vCash: 50
In a happier iteration of the recapture provision's effects, can you imagine if the Rangers bought out the final year of Redden's contract after this season, only to see Scott Gomez retire and the recapture provision putting his $7.357m cap hit (less $625k) back on the Rangers' cap.

It'd serve them right to have $5m+ dedicated to Redden this year (deals over $625k in the AHL will count towards cap now), and then another $6.5m from Gomez on their cap next year.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 02:20 PM
  #14
Blue n Gold Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Orchard Park, NY
Posts: 192
vCash: 500
Will they really go back and retroactively change the cap hits of contracts that were put in place before the new CBA changes how things are done relative to contracts?

Blue n Gold Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 08:20 AM
  #15
Jacob582
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,130
vCash: 500
I could see the Sabres doing any of the following:

-Buy no one out
-Buy Leino out- only if he has another crappy season
-Buy McCormick out - if he has another bad season like last year
-Buy Kevin Porter out- if he is not part of their plans for next year
-Trade for a player to buy out (and get additional assets back) - if allowed, of course.

I will agree, there really aren't a lot of options at this point.

I will say that Vanek's 7 mil cap hit is a problem in a $60 million cap system.


Last edited by Jacob582: 01-01-2013 at 07:34 PM.
Jacob582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 10:34 AM
  #16
cardiffgiant
Race to the bottom!
 
cardiffgiant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Doesn't Leino's contract start to become favorable after this/the next season? I thought that his cap hit would exceed his salary after the first couple of years, making him potentially attractive to cost conscious teams operating near the cap floor.

cardiffgiant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 02:13 PM
  #17
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardiffgiant View Post
Doesn't Leino's contract start to become favorable after this/the next season? I thought that his cap hit would exceed his salary after the first couple of years, making him potentially attractive to cost conscious teams operating near the cap floor.
I believe its structured 6/6/4.5/4.5/3/3 so the last couple of years he could be moved I guess

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 04:18 PM
  #18
HogtownSabresfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob582 View Post
-Trade for a player to buy out (and get additional assets back) - if allowed, of course.
This is an EXCELLENT point. I hadn't thought of this scenario at all and could be one great loophole for Pegula bucks. Could create a major opportunity. What are the worst contracts in the NHL? Gomez? Redden? Pronger? Savard? How would long-term injury work in new CBA.

HogtownSabresfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 05:44 PM
  #19
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
I wonder what we could get for buying out dipietro, probably a pretty nice piece

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 06:14 PM
  #20
Stop Winnin
TANK ON BOYS
 
Stop Winnin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Buffalo
Posts: 8,457
vCash: 500
As much as I think Pegula is willing to pay to win, I doubt he would take on a contract like Dipietro's just to buy it out, that is a **** ton of money just down the drain.

Stop Winnin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 07:38 PM
  #21
Jacob582
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kishire View Post
As much as I think Pegula is willing to pay to win, I doubt he would take on a contract like Dipietro's just to buy it out, that is a **** ton of money just down the drain.
$36 million must be worth a few first round draft picks.

Jacob582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 07:44 PM
  #22
Jacob582
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HogtownSabresfan View Post
This is an EXCELLENT point. I hadn't thought of this scenario at all and could be one great loophole for Pegula bucks. Could create a major opportunity. What are the worst contracts in the NHL? Gomez? Redden? Pronger? Savard? How would long-term injury work in new CBA.
I would like to know if this happened in the NBA or if it imposed rules closing off this loophole.

Also, I read someone else post another scenario:
Can you buy out one of your players (let's say Vanek) and sign him to another contract with a lower cap hit?

I would think that the player would have to be waived before being bought out, so this wouldn't work


Last edited by Jacob582: 01-01-2013 at 08:01 PM.
Jacob582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 07:59 PM
  #23
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,039
vCash: 50
Re: DiPietro. No chance. I'm sure insurance would pay a decent chunk of it. Additionally, upon their move to Brooklyn, the Isles will be one of the higher revenue teams. They're not giving up top picks/prospects for us to take him off their hands.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 10:05 AM
  #24
Jacob582
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,130
vCash: 500
If two players can be bought out.....



Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun "Another detail emerging: NHL has upped its compliance buyout offer to 2 per team, up from 1 prior to 2013-14 season."

Jacob582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 10:23 AM
  #25
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 4,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HogtownSabresfan View Post
This is an EXCELLENT point. I hadn't thought of this scenario at all and could be one great loophole for Pegula bucks. Could create a major opportunity. What are the worst contracts in the NHL? Gomez? Redden? Pronger? Savard? How would long-term injury work in new CBA.
It's a terrible point.

Buyouts create dead cap space, under the current system, unless a contract is back loaded. Almost everything is front loaded these days.

Why anyone would want to create dead cap space is beyond me. That's the worst possible thing you could do.

SackTastic 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 10:09 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.