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.

Players traded and not bought out

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-19-2005, 10:06 AM
  #1
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,867
vCash: 1000
Players traded and not bought out

A lot of talk is about teams buying out a player and he becomes an UFA

well

how about this

What teams do you think will either try to trade a player or aquire a player

Like Nolan--some teams may really want this guy and maybe willing to gamble and not want to wait for him and not want to fight over teams for players

so what teams may try to trade for players that we think will be bought out

and what players do you think will be traded instead of being bought out

jumptheshark is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 10:30 AM
  #2
hank_scorpio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cypress Creek
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Nolan will not be traded. He may be shopped but there will be no takers...not even at his 4+Mil salary after rollback. He doesn't bring the talent to the table that he used to given his age and knees...

I seriously doubt there will be many trades - especially for the big name (big money) players like Nolan, Federov, Holik, Kaspar, etc. etc. The salaries these guys received are so inflated, and the employer is going to have to eat these costs or buy them out as a just reward for overpaying like they did.

Most of the trades we see happen, I think, will occur with lesser established players whose salaries weren't AS inflated in the old system. I would think players along the caliber of Patrick Stefan, Marcel Goc, Lasse Pirjeta, Boyd Devereaux, etc etc and those types of players are more likely to be traded than the big named guys...the big named guys will be bought out, IMO

hank_scorpio is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 12:47 PM
  #3
p.l.f.
mvp
 
p.l.f.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, CANADA
Posts: 34,946
vCash: 500
trades at the entry draft
will there be the usual frenzy

i doubt it, why trade picks if you can pick up an affordable free agent instead?

p.l.f. is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:14 PM
  #4
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,857
vCash: 500
Nolan has no trade value at all. His contract right now isn't worth giving anything up for in a trade, especially with other UFA options.

With trading though... I expect trading in general around the league to decrease.

The NHL trade deadline has also been moved quite a bit ahead - so there will be fewer sellers at that point in the season.

Big contract players will still be dealt - but there will almost always be a big contract coming back, or they'll be even less in value than in recent years (like it has been pretty much in the NBA, with teams having to deal contracts, moreso than players).

The biggest impact to teams overall will IMO be in the FA market each year - not just this year when there are so many UFAs at once. There will probably a huge FA market again next year. I think both players and GMs will want shorter term deals, rather than committing to a long term contract, and combined with the lowering UFA age each season, until it's at 27, we should see a big market for UFAs each year... and that's where the majority of player movement will happen from season to season.

NFITO is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:14 PM
  #5
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by p.l.f.
trades at the entry draft
will there be the usual frenzy

i doubt it, why trade picks if you can pick up an affordable free agent instead?
Think of it like this - if Adam Foote was to become a UFA - you have to bid for his services against 10 other teams. If you can trade for him at .10 on the $1 because COL won't have to come up with the $'s to buy him out - it's a win/win for both teams.

I think it's pretty obvious there are some guys that absolutely won't be traded - players like Turgeon, Holik and Leclair whose production isn't anywhere close to justifying thier salary. But there might be some expensive but productive players that a big spending team has to cut lose to create cap space. Someone like Robert Lang (just as an example) might be available to create cap room in DET, and you could probably get him REALLY cheaply, if DET's other option is to buy him out.

I think the thing that people have to remember is that there aren't going to be very many Adam Foote's available. I would expect that COL could get something useful for him, because he's a winner. Another guy would be Doug Weight. Could anyone else see a small market team moving a bad contract (Brian Savage or the equivelant) to STL for Doug Weight & $1M or so? I think that would be a great trade for a small market team with cap room. Add a big name guy that could help set up some young talent on the wings.

Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:14 PM
  #6
HabsoluteFate
Registered User
 
HabsoluteFate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by p.l.f.
trades at the entry draft
will there be the usual frenzy

i doubt it, why trade picks if you can pick up an affordable free agent instead?
Trade a player and money to another team. have that team buy him out and then re-sign that player for less money to fit under the cap...

hopefully they have something that makes this illegal otherwise i think you might see it

HabsoluteFate is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:16 PM
  #7
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsoluteFate
Trade a player and money to another team. have that team buy him out and then re-sign that player for less money to fit under the cap...

hopefully they have something that makes this illegal otherwise i think you might see it
Like someone said in another post. All contract buy-out's have to be completed by July 30, and teams can't trade until August 1st. Don't think you have to worry.

Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:24 PM
  #8
ClaudeLemieux4HOF
Registered User
 
ClaudeLemieux4HOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: long island, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 642
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ClaudeLemieux4HOF
but who's to say the rangers buy holik out, work it out with him and another team like the pens to sign him for x dollars over x years and trade him back to the rangers for like an 8th round draft pick, the nba does stuff like this all the time and youre going to see it often now

ClaudeLemieux4HOF is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:32 PM
  #9
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan
Another guy would be Doug Weight. Could anyone else see a small market team moving a bad contract (Brian Savage or the equivelant) to STL for Doug Weight & $1M or so? I think that would be a great trade for a small market team with cap room. Add a big name guy that could help set up some young talent on the wings.

I've been mulling over the idea of the Oilers trading for Weight. With the 24% rollback, his salary suddenly fits within the budget. As you've mentioned, there'll be a lot of competition for the top FAs; I think that in this situation trying your luck in the free agent pool might be a big risk ...and not save much money anyway.

But if teams have to complete buyouts by July 31, and teams can't make trades until August 1, then trading instead of going for a free agent doesn't sound like an option anyway.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:34 PM
  #10
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan
Think of it like this - if Adam Foote was to become a UFA - you have to bid for his services against 10 other teams. If you can trade for him at .10 on the $1 because COL won't have to come up with the $'s to buy him out - it's a win/win for both teams.

I think it's pretty obvious there are some guys that absolutely won't be traded - players like Turgeon, Holik and Leclair whose production isn't anywhere close to justifying thier salary. But there might be some expensive but productive players that a big spending team has to cut lose to create cap space. Someone like Robert Lang (just as an example) might be available to create cap room in DET, and you could probably get him REALLY cheaply, if DET's other option is to buy him out.

I think the thing that people have to remember is that there aren't going to be very many Adam Foote's available. I would expect that COL could get something useful for him, because he's a winner. Another guy would be Doug Weight. Could anyone else see a small market team moving a bad contract (Brian Savage or the equivelant) to STL for Doug Weight & $1M or so? I think that would be a great trade for a small market team with cap room. Add a big name guy that could help set up some young talent on the wings.
it depends on the contracts overall... teams will be dealing contracts more than players from now on basically (if they haven't been doing so already).

first of all, Foote is an outright UFA... so he's got no value here... if they trade him to another team, then that team has no more rights to him than the Avs, or any other team in the league. And I doubt UFA compensation will mean anything this year, as everyteam will likely be signing someone to lose that compensation anyways.

Nolan has no value either. It's not just a matter of avoiding the market, but which team out there is going to want him at his salary - even with a rollback? He's a risk player (considering age and health concerns), and I can't think of any team that would give up anything - even for free as a UFA - to sign him for the rollback contract he has pre-buyout.

A player like Lang - possibly... but doesn't he still have 3 yrs left on his deal? That might be a risk option for any team to take as well, considering the UFA market not just this year, but in future years (where UFA age will continue to drop until 27)... in 3 yrs maybe having a $3.8 mill 38 YO Lang, wouldn't be the best thing under your salary cap, when there will likely be better players at comparable prices available.

Now a guy like Doug Weight could have more value just for the fact that he's got a 1yr deal, and a team wouldn't have to commit to an aging player at that kind of salary for more than 1 yr. However even on a 1yr deal, he's making over $5mill next season, which is a heavy price to pay for a player a 34 YO player that just had a season off.

I don't think we'll see too much movement because of this. The players that have salaries which hurt their current team's salary structure, aren't going to be too inticing to other teams around the league to begin with... the few that could have some value, might be moved, but the number of those will be relatively few - maybe 3-4 players around the league in this situation, when you factor in the few number of teams that could even be interested, or have the salary space themselves.

NFITO is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 01:54 PM
  #11
Souffle
A soupçon of nutmeg
 
Souffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Le Creuset
Country: France
Posts: 3,484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
I don't think we'll see too much movement because of this. The players that have salaries which hurt their current team's salary structure, aren't going to be too inticing to other teams around the league to begin with... the few that could have some value, might be moved, but the number of those will be relatively few - maybe 3-4 players around the league in this situation, when you factor in the few number of teams that could even be interested, or have the salary space themselves.
Nice post. Though I agree that there are few players with big contracts that are still trade-able, most of them have no-trade clauses. Blake, for instance, is still worth the 6+ million to several teams, but trading him will be hard for all the reasons you mentioned plus the additional difficulty of getting him to waive his no-trade clause (as someone pointed out to me in another thread).

If I had to make a list of those players, even with all the caveats, I would put Fedorov on it, along with Blake and Weight. Bertuzzi and Sundin could probably be traded, but I doubt either team wants to get rid of them.

Souffle is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 02:05 PM
  #12
fiveholio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 194
vCash: 500
Another question is whether teams can negotiate with each other during the buyout period, even if they can't trade. If they can, the teams might hold on to players with the intention of trading them rather than buying them out.

An example I used yesterday is the Kings with Aaron Miller and the Avs with Blake. Both potential buyout candidates, but a trade could help both teams: the Kings upgrade at D and the Avs shed a little salary, and both save the buyout cost.

fiveholio is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 02:15 PM
  #13
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
A player like Lang - possibly... but doesn't he still have 3 yrs left on his deal? That might be a risk option for any team to take as well, considering the UFA market not just this year, but in future years (where UFA age will continue to drop until 27)... in 3 yrs maybe having a $3.8 mill 38 YO Lang, wouldn't be the best thing under your salary cap, when there will likely be better players at comparable prices available.

Now a guy like Doug Weight could have more value just for the fact that he's got a 1yr deal, and a team wouldn't have to commit to an aging player at that kind of salary for more than 1 yr. However even on a 1yr deal, he's making over $5mill next season, which is a heavy price to pay for a player a 34 YO player that just had a season off.

I don't think we'll see too much movement because of this. The players that have salaries which hurt their current team's salary structure, aren't going to be too inticing to other teams around the league to begin with... the few that could have some value, might be moved, but the number of those will be relatively few - maybe 3-4 players around the league in this situation, when you factor in the few number of teams that could even be interested, or have the salary space themselves.
I agree that it's going to be relatively rare, but I think that people are being overly optimistic if they think that there will be a unlimited number of high caliber UFA's available.

You're correct on the Foote issue, but the example holds for Blake (if he waives his NT clause). I would think that COL would love to know that Blake was going to an Eastern conference team, and Blake would love to know that his contract would be honored (less the 24% rollback). If a competitive EC team came to Lacroix with any sort of offer, I would think that Lacroix would at least float it by Blake because it would potentially save the team the approx $5M buyout.

You are also correct that the longer the remaining contract term, the greater the risk involved. I would think that for guys with one or two years left, it wouldn't be that huge of an issue. And I think that Lang has 2 years left on his contract (4 yr for $20M originally), so he might be a guy that it works for.

Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 02:21 PM
  #14
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers_guy_eddie
I've been mulling over the idea of the Oilers trading for Weight. With the 24% rollback, his salary suddenly fits within the budget. As you've mentioned, there'll be a lot of competition for the top FAs; I think that in this situation trying your luck in the free agent pool might be a big risk ...and not save much money anyway.

But if teams have to complete buyouts by July 31, and teams can't make trades until August 1, then trading instead of going for a free agent doesn't sound like an option anyway.
I was thinking the same thing, and I think it would work.

Lowe tells Pleau that instead of buying out Weight, EDM would trade Laraque for Weight straight up. It's about a $5M cap hit in EDM, and a $5M cap savings in STL. STL doesn't free up quite as much salary cap room compared to a buy-out, but they don't have to shell out $4.5M (cash money) to Doug Weight to go away. It would take a little faith on Pleau's part that KL wouldn't leave him high and dry after the buy-out deadline, but I don't think there are very many GM's that would do that.

Not sure if DW has a no-trade clause. If he does, he might nix the deal to make sure that STL has to buy him out (so he get's the $4.5M), and he thinks he can sign for more than the $2M he's out on his original contract. Just a though that I'm sure an agent would tell a guy that just losts a years worth of salary.


Last edited by Beukeboom Fan: 07-19-2005 at 02:26 PM.
Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 02:33 PM
  #15
projexns
Welcome Back Jets!
 
projexns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fiveholio
Another question is whether teams can negotiate with each other during the buyout period, even if they can't trade. If they can, the teams might hold on to players with the intention of trading them rather than buying them out.
Exactly.

Let's look at another class of player, the restricted free-agent who isn't going to be bought out, but merely has to be qualified. Which RFA's would teams NOT want to
qualify, and would therefore be more than happy to get something in return for them, as little as a draft-pick.

Let's take Kristian Huselius as an example.

Keenan is not a fan of him. He'd probably rather not qualify him. The offer would
have to be $1,216,000.

Even if the qualifying offers have to be made BEFORE trading begins, it would be easy enough to convey to Keenan to qualify Huselius, and once trading is allowed, a draft-pick would be sent in exchange for his rights.

Another possibility might be Arnott in Dallas. It seems almost certain that Turgeon will be bought out. Guerin's a bit trickier because he has two years that would have to be bought out, and the 2nd year would count against the cap. If the Stars want to retain one or both of Modano and Zubov badly enough, Arnott may have to go.
Instead of not qualifying him, they could pre-arrange with some team to get assets
in exchange for him. Qualify him, then trade him.

Buffalo has Satan, Dumont, Afinogenov, Grier, and Kotalik on the right-wing, and if they decide to qualify Satan at $3.8 million, they might qualify and then move a contract like Dumont's for a draft-pick rather than not qualify him and lose him for nothing.

Most players available under this scenario would be available mainly because of high $$$ contracts relative to performance and are therefore not very attractive, but there may be some exceptions.

projexns is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 03:00 PM
  #16
p.l.f.
mvp
 
p.l.f.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, CANADA
Posts: 34,946
vCash: 500
why trade for a player with a big contract?
money is precious now
wait till he gets bought it - if you cant get 'him'
then there'll be others

p.l.f. is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 03:16 PM
  #17
fiveholio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 194
vCash: 500
For a Pronger, Blake, etc. some teams would be willing to pay the money and not risk missing out.

fiveholio is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 03:25 PM
  #18
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,679
vCash: 500
Because there might only be 10 or so first-line centers available, and there could easily be more than 10 teams with the need and cap-space to sign them. Simple math says somebody is going to come up short.

Money isn't that precious right now. Once they've signed their RFAs, I'm figuring the Oilers will have around 10 million to spend on 5 more players. $2 million apiece? In the new market, that could be 5 pretty good players... except that this summer, there will be a lot of teams competing for any player who is good enough to spend $2 million on.

So trade with the Blues to get Weight, spend the $5.7 million on Doug Weight, and use the other $4.3 million to try and fill the other 4 vacancies.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 04:05 PM
  #19
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers_guy_eddie
Because there might only be 10 or so first-line centers available, and there could easily be more than 10 teams with the need and cap-space to sign them. Simple math says somebody is going to come up short.

Money isn't that precious right now. Once they've signed their RFAs, I'm figuring the Oilers will have around 10 million to spend on 5 more players. $2 million apiece? In the new market, that could be 5 pretty good players... except that this summer, there will be a lot of teams competing for any player who is good enough to spend $2 million on.

So trade with the Blues to get Weight, spend the $5.7 million on Doug Weight, and use the other $4.3 million to try and fill the other 4 vacancies.
The other positive by going down this road is that you don't lock up your cash long term, when the FA age is still 31. Weight would be on the books for one year, and you have your cap space back next year when the guys you are signing have a larger % of the contract in their prime years.

Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
07-19-2005, 07:41 PM
  #20
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan
Not sure if DW has a no-trade clause. If he does, he might nix the deal to make sure that STL has to buy him out (so he get's the $4.5M), and he thinks he can sign for more than the $2M he's out on his original contract. Just a though that I'm sure an agent would tell a guy that just losts a years worth of salary.
Weight does have a NTC - which is why I thought in '04 the Blues could probably deal him to Detroit and get a very good return, and start the rebuilding process early. I thought DET was one of the few places Weight would be willing to waive his NTC to go to, since he grew up there.

And before I could propose the idea here....Detroit traded for Robert Lang.

AFA teams trading to get high-end players...don't expect it. I think you'll see GM's willing to screw over their neighbors and keep overpriced salaries on someone else's roster to keep more cap room available to shop for UFA's in the market. Besides...as much as teams might have needed a goalie in '03-04, *no one* was rushing to help Detroit unload $6-8 million by taking Joseph or Hasek - especially when Joseph was put on (and cleared) waivers.

Irish Blues is offline  
Old
07-20-2005, 01:56 PM
  #21
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues
Weight does have a NTC - which is why I thought in '04 the Blues could probably deal him to Detroit and get a very good return, and start the rebuilding process early. I thought DET was one of the few places Weight would be willing to waive his NTC to go to, since he grew up there.

And before I could propose the idea here....Detroit traded for Robert Lang.

AFA teams trading to get high-end players...don't expect it. I think you'll see GM's willing to screw over their neighbors and keep overpriced salaries on someone else's roster to keep more cap room available to shop for UFA's in the market. Besides...as much as teams might have needed a goalie in '03-04, *no one* was rushing to help Detroit unload $6-8 million by taking Joseph or Hasek - especially when Joseph was put on (and cleared) waivers.
I agree with what you're saying, but if I'm EDM, I'm willing to move a small asset to guarantee myself picking up Weight. He makes it to the open market, and I'm probably bidding against 5-10 other teams easy. I don't think the CuJo/Hasek analogy holds, because I don't think that GM's saw CuJo as an upgrade for the $'s. Weight at 34 is still a legit 1st line center IMO, and if you can move a bad contract to STL, the impact is even less than the $6M he'll make for one year.

That's the best of both worlds Lowe IMO. He can point to a legit 1st line center, and he has he cap space back next year when the UFA age falls to 29. I think that's a pretty good scenario for EDM. STL is happy because they free up 80+% of Weights cap space without have to right him a check for $4.5M.

Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
07-20-2005, 11:09 PM
  #22
coolguy21415
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 9,285
vCash: 500
As for DW being a legit first line center. I agree, however for low long? He won't want to be in Edmonton, and even if he ends up there (likely via free agency) how long will you have to sign him for? He isn't worth it. If you traded Laraque for him, sure I'd do that, but keep in mind the Oil are gonna end up in the lower end of that cap range.

Also, are you still allowed to trade with money being part of the transaction? I'm not up on these things. I was hoping that there would be a limit on the payroll range for trades (to avoid blatant salary dumping), but I guess that doesn't exist in the new CBA?

coolguy21415 is offline  
Old
07-20-2005, 11:39 PM
  #23
boredmale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,240
vCash: 500
I think there is another type of trading scenerio that might happen. Both team trade players they want to cut, but one team keeps the player while the other buys out the other guy at a cheaper rate.

A good example of this might be a player like Brian Savage on Pheonix, he is set to make 2.85 million but they might want to get ride of his salary(which would cost roughly 2 million). Instead of buying him out they might look for a guy another team wants to cut who makes a million or so more and says maybe we'll trade Savage for him and have the other team buy savage out(thus saving them money) while we pay player X's contract(overpaying him in today's market but getting good value in the fact they are not wasting 2 million buying Savage Out)

boredmale is online now  
Old
07-22-2005, 11:36 PM
  #24
fs77168
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 29
vCash: 500
a team like boston could make out like a bandit . any team would gladly take close to nothing rather than pay out the ^*&%#*.

fs77168 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 03:26 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.