Toggle sidebar

NHL News/Notes Part XV

Status
Not open for further replies.
LadyStanley

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,863
19,798
Sin City


Appeal goes to Bettman. Have to think he won't reduce it.

(There could be a second appeal, to a neutral arbitrator.)
 
Barrie22

Barrie22

Shark fan in hiding
Aug 11, 2009
25,007
6,254
ontario
The flames should get a hefty fine for this entire wideman thing.

They admitted he had a concussion but he still played right after the incident basically on his next shift.
 
hohosaregood

hohosaregood

Banned
Sep 1, 2011
32,427
12,650
Barrie22 said:
The flames should get a hefty fine for this entire wideman thing.

They admitted he had a concussion but he still played right after the incident basically on his next shift.
Click to expand...

Apparently the concussion spotters even told the flames to give him a lookover and calgary refused. Definitely deserve a fine.
 

stator

Registered User
Apr 17, 2012
5,037
1,026
San Jose
Barrie22 said:
The flames should get a hefty fine for this entire wideman thing.

They admitted he had a concussion but he still played right after the incident basically on his next shift.
Click to expand...

Is this the appeal where they are saying he was innocent due to temporarily insanity because he was hit in the head just prior?


rangerssharks414 said:
http://espn.go.com/blog/craig-custance/insider/post?id=7033

Top 20 trade targets (paywall)

Marleau is #11.
Click to expand...

Stupid paywall, but who will take a 36 year-old forwarding, turning 37 this year, that is underperforming and with a $6+M cap hit that will not want to move a similar player back to the Sharks to free up cap room? I cannot find one, and I've been searching for a fit, largely in the East.

Bag of pucks, guys, unless a playoff contending team suffers a significant injury to their forwards before TDL. DW better hope for a season ending injury back east. I'd take a 2nd round draft pick plus a good prospect on defense or goalie, and not keep any of the cap hit if I was DW. I would consider a 1st round pick with keeping some of the cap hit. This is not a year to go for it as I cannot see the Sharks making it to conference or cup finals with Martin Jones not reaching his potential this year as it seems.

I wonder if there will be a compliance buyout this year if the cap shrinks.
 
Last edited:
Pavelski2112

Pavelski2112

Bold as Boognish
Dec 15, 2011
14,556
9,294
San Jose, California
stator said:
Is this the appeal where they are saying he was innocent due to temporarily insanity because he was hit in the head just prior?




Stupid paywall, but who will take a 36 year-old forwarding, turning 37 this year, that is underperforming and with a $6+M cap hit that will not want to move a similar player back to the Sharks to free up cap room? I cannot find one, and I've been searching for a fit, largely in the East.

Bag of pucks, guys, unless a playoff contending team suffers a significant injury to their forwards before TDL. DW better hope for a season ending injury back east. I'd take a 2nd round draft pick plus a good prospect on defense or goalie, and not keep any of the cap hit if I was DW. I would consider a 1st round pick with keeping some of the cap hit. This is not a year to go for it as I cannot see the Sharks making it to conference or cup finals with Martin Jones not reaching his potential this year as it seems.

I wonder if there will be a compliance buyout this year if the cap shrinks.
Click to expand...

GMs don't have the "what have you done for me lately" attitude we have here. Marleau has a big resume, and any team looking to contend would do well to at least try kicking the tires on him.
 
rangerssharks414

rangerssharks414

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
32,311
1,648
Long Island, NY
stator said:
Stupid paywall, but who will take a 36 year-old forwarding, turning 37 this year, that is underperforming and with a $6+M cap hit that will not want to move a similar player back to the Sharks to free up cap room? I cannot find one, and I've been searching for a fit, largely in the East.

Bag of pucks, guys, unless a playoff contending team suffers a significant injury to their forwards before TDL. DW better hope for a season ending injury back east. I'd take a 2nd round draft pick plus a good prospect on defense or goalie, and not keep any of the cap hit if I was DW. I would consider a 1st round pick with keeping some of the cap hit. This is not a year to go for it as I cannot see the Sharks making it to conference or cup finals with Martin Jones not reaching his potential this year as it seems.

I wonder if there will be a compliance buyout this year if the cap shrinks.
Click to expand...

I don't want to turn this into a Marleau thread, but wasn't the rumor he only wanted to go to LA, Anaheim or the Rangers?

If he does approve a trade, I bet the Sharks eat some of his cap hit.
 
Pinkfloyd

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,474
13,913
Folsom
stator said:
Stupid paywall, but who will take a 36 year-old forwarding, turning 37 this year, that is underperforming and with a $6+M cap hit that will not want to move a similar player back to the Sharks to free up cap room? I cannot find one, and I've been searching for a fit, largely in the East.

Bag of pucks, guys, unless a playoff contending team suffers a significant injury to their forwards before TDL. DW better hope for a season ending injury back east. I'd take a 2nd round draft pick plus a good prospect on defense or goalie, and not keep any of the cap hit if I was DW. I would consider a 1st round pick with keeping some of the cap hit. This is not a year to go for it as I cannot see the Sharks making it to conference or cup finals with Martin Jones not reaching his potential this year as it seems.

I wonder if there will be a compliance buyout this year if the cap shrinks.
Click to expand...

Well one, you'll have a tough time finding anyone within the team or among the league that thinks Marleau is underperforming. Two, the Sharks aren't going to trade him unless Marleau asks for it and that likely wouldn't happen until the off-season anyway if at all (unlikely). Three, you seriously underrate Marleau's performance this year and his importance to the team.

And no, there will not be a compliance buyout. That kind of stuff doesn't happen unless the CBA is being negotiated. The PA has no reason...none...to give the owners a compliance buyout.
 

Sysreq

Registered User
Apr 9, 2015
2,958
1,220
Pinkfloyd said:
And no, there will not be a compliance buyout. That kind of stuff doesn't happen unless the CBA is being negotiated. The PA has no reason...none...to give the owners a compliance buyout.
Click to expand...

Compliance buy-out are great for players. Player's get more money overall plus the freedom to sign pretty much anywhere else in the league. Take a look at Zubrus for example. He is getting paid basically 600k extra this year plus he gets to partner with a coach he enjoys and enjoys him. Without the buy-out, he would be stuck on a team that didn't value him while constantly being pressured to live up to his cap hit.

Not to mention the increase in available cap space caused the compliance buy-out circumventing the cap. While this might not increase my salary directly, more cap simply leads to more favorable comps when it comes time to negotiate later.

If I was the PA, I would almost never vote against cap circumventing buy-out. If anything its the owners that would vote against them.
 
Barrie22

Barrie22

Shark fan in hiding
Aug 11, 2009
25,007
6,254
ontario
Sysreq said:
Compliance buy-out are great for players. Player's get more money overall plus the freedom to sign pretty much anywhere else in the league. Take a look at Zubrus for example. He is getting paid basically 600k extra this year plus he gets to partner with a coach he enjoys and enjoys him. Without the buy-out, he would be stuck on a team that didn't value him while constantly being pressured to live up to his cap hit.

Not to mention the increase in available cap space caused the compliance buy-out circumventing the cap. While this might not increase my salary directly, more cap simply leads to more favorable comps when it comes time to negotiate later.

If I was the PA, I would almost never vote against cap circumventing buy-out. If anything its the owners that would vote against them.
Click to expand...

Compliance buy outs means more money is spent on players yes. But then at the end of the year when the leagues financials are done and it comes time to split the shae between nhl and players. More buy outs there are in a year equals more money taken off of the players salaries.
 
Pinkfloyd

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,474
13,913
Folsom
Sysreq said:
Compliance buy-out are great for players. Player's get more money overall plus the freedom to sign pretty much anywhere else in the league. Take a look at Zubrus for example. He is getting paid basically 600k extra this year plus he gets to partner with a coach he enjoys and enjoys him. Without the buy-out, he would be stuck on a team that didn't value him while constantly being pressured to live up to his cap hit.

Not to mention the increase in available cap space caused the compliance buy-out circumventing the cap. While this might not increase my salary directly, more cap simply leads to more favorable comps when it comes time to negotiate later.

If I was the PA, I would almost never vote against cap circumventing buy-out. If anything its the owners that would vote against them.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you believe a player being forced to take less than what he's owed for no cap punishment is great for the player. What's great for the players is the ability to collect on the contracts they sign and for owners to be deterred from wanting to buy them out. Compliance is just a free way to pay out a fraction of what they owe on a deal. Zubrus is getting paid less than what he would've if he was able to finish but at least the Devils are paying on the cap for doing so. A compliance buyout would prevent them from doing so. I think Zubrus would be fine with the pressure of living up to the cap hit when he was making 3.1 mil instead of being bought out and making a fraction of that mark in his current situation...about half.

And I don't really agree that more cap space created by the compliance buyout leads to better comps unless it was available every year which would be dumb on the players' part because they'd be cutting themselves out of part of their share of the revenue by allowing it.
 

stator

Registered User
Apr 17, 2012
5,037
1,026
San Jose
Pavelski2112 said:
GMs don't have the "what have you done for me lately" attitude we have here. Marleau has a big resume, and any team looking to contend would do well to at least try kicking the tires on him.
Click to expand...

I agree about GMs having a different attitude. My point was that any team that wants to kick the tires with Marleau will want the Sharks to retain salary cap. I think that's a bad deal unless it's for a first round. Even then, it will likely be a low 1st round, so I believe in not retaining much.

In this league, the prizes are 1st and worst, then everyone else due to the salary cap that gets tighter every year. The Donald (Fehr) is going to have a field day in the next CBA negotiation, but he needs to control concussion and PEDS from becoming bigger issues to not waste negotiation power on those.
 
weastern bias

weastern bias

worst team in the league
Feb 3, 2012
10,415
5,647
SJ
Byfuglien signs a 5 year extention for $7.6M/year

Looking at that number, man, Burns' inevitable extention is going to be PAINFUL
 
KirbyDots

KirbyDots

Registered User
May 10, 2011
11,628
3,193


Tweet from our friend 210.

T.J. Galiardi also happens to play for the Malmo Redhawks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom