Tkachuk Disappointed With Cap

[tom_servo]

I talked to some giys who said the written war between Keith and JR back February on the source message board was legendary...

I assume everyone agrees that we must get ahold of this somehow.

 

[Tekneek]

Players run off at the mouth because they still think they are standing up for Joe Hardhat.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

I feel so horrible for poor Keith. Poor guy. It really is sad.

Question for you, dude.

Where does Tkachuck imply or say that he wants anyone to feel sorry for him.

Nowhere.

So why don't you just delete your silly post, and we'll move on to the next baseless attack on the players.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Boy the sour grapes from newsguyone are getting to the point of fermentation, aren't they...



Baseless? LOL...

 

[Mess]

Question for you, dude.

Where does Tkachuck imply or say that he wants anyone to feel sorry for him.

Nowhere.

So why don't you just delete your silly post, and we'll move on to the next baseless attack on the players.

In fact one could look at the exact opposite way ..

Tkachuck is making noise now so THAT HE WILL BE BOUGHT OUT ..

A buyout is almost like getting paid for last year as you get the money up front and are not required to work for it ..

A bought-out player with a good agent .. could get his client more money next year them his old contract less 24% .. He is guaranteed at least 2/3 rds and if he signs for more then will benefit from it ..

He also as an UFA gets his pick of the other 29 teams to sell his services to and in fact I see this as the NHL creating its own Hard Cap end-around for Big Market teams as they would be ideal canidates for Cap friendly contracts in the new NHL ..

A Holik or Guerin or Peca etc that have a Clint Eastwood's "Fist full of Dollars" have the luxury of really taking advantage of this with both market and price ..

What this means is a summer of suspense and intrigue such as we've never seen before in the NHL. When the dust settles, a lot of rosters could look quite different than they did prior to the lockout.

 

[WC Handy*]

Tkachuk will NOT BE BOUGHT OUT.

Bill Laurie has no reason to spend the extra money.

The sooner poeple grasp this the less I have to tell people...

 

[Mess]

Tkachuk will NOT BE BOUGHT OUT.

Bill Laurie has no reason to spend the extra money.

The sooner poeple grasp this the less I have to tell people...

If I am a wise GM .. If buying out Tkachuk allows me the ability to keep Pronger in a blues jersey you have to consider it .. no matter how bad your finances are ..

 

[WC Handy*]

If I am a wise GM .. If buying out Tkachuk allows me the ability to keep Pronger in a blues jersey you have to consider it .. no matter how bad your finances are ..

First of all, Tkachuk being on the roster doesn't prevent the Blues from re-signing Pronger.

Secondly, it's the owner of the team that sets the budget. Not the GM. If Laurie gives Pleau a $38M payroll and he uses $5M of that to buy out Tkachuk, then he's got to work with a $33M payroll.


And last of all, it simply doesn't even make sense to buy out Tkachuk. They can pay him $5M for absolutely nothing. Or they can pay him $2.6M more (his $7.6M salary) for his 35-40 goals. Unless they're going to find a 40 goal scorer for $2.6M, then it would be foolish to buy him out.

And one factor not even discussed here is his option year for 06-07. He'll only cost $3.8M. That's another reason to keep him.

 

[Mess]

First of all, Tkachuk being on the roster doesn't prevent the Blues from re-signing Pronger.

Secondly, it's the owner of the team that sets the budget. Not the GM. If Laurie gives Pleau a $38M payroll and he uses $5M of that to buy out Tkachuk, then he's got to work with a $33M payroll.


And last of all, it simply doesn't even make sense to buy out Tkachuk. They can pay him $5M for absolutely nothing. Or they can pay him $2.6M more (his $7.6M salary) for his 35-40 goals. Unless they're going to find a 40 goal scorer for $2.6M, then it would be foolish to buy him out.

And one factor not even discussed here is his option year for 06-07. He'll only cost $3.8M. That's another reason to keep him.

Fair enough .. but this sounds all like your own opinion alone on the subject.

Do you have any Laurie quotes that support this??

The Blues according to Forbes were dead last in the NHL bringing in $66 mil in revenue and spending $68.7 mil on player contracts for a net loss of $28.8 mil .. That doesn't scream of a team or owner that sticks to closely to a budget as you are implying here ..

The losses may however prevent the buyout more then common sense will in this case ..

The sale of the franchise may play into this as well as that compounds the situation .. Would a new owner want so many CAP Heavy contracts like Tkachuk and Weight towards his new team and purchase. In that light it might make sense to get some heavy costs off the books to make the sale easier .. but that is just my opinion..

$3.8 mil wil buy you quite a hockey player in the new NHL..Blues might be better off giving that to a player like Nikolai Khabibulin (G) and shore up that area on the team.. Stopping 40 more goals against is sometimes a better successful plan then scoring them for the same money ..

 

[Mess]

First of all, Tkachuk being on the roster doesn't prevent the Blues from re-signing Pronger.

Secondly, it's the owner of the team that sets the budget. Not the GM. If Laurie gives Pleau a $38M payroll and he uses $5M of that to buy out Tkachuk, then he's got to work with a $33M payroll.


And last of all, it simply doesn't even make sense to buy out Tkachuk. They can pay him $5M for absolutely nothing. Or they can pay him $2.6M more (his $7.6M salary) for his 35-40 goals. Unless they're going to find a 40 goal scorer for $2.6M, then it would be foolish to buy him out.

And one factor not even discussed here is his option year for 06-07. He'll only cost $3.8M. That's another reason to keep him.

In fact in the most recent Hockey News dated June 24, 2005 it names your boy Keith in fact ..

BUYOUTS GALORE?

The pending CBA signing is expected to lead to a flurry of free-agent activity later this summer. It may also start a rash of contract buyouts, if rumors about a window of opportunity for teams to rid themselves of 'bad' contracts are true.

According to several sources, NHL clubs may be allowed to buy out two players each at 2/3 of their projected salary (after the proposed 24% rollback kicks in). This could lead to an even greater number of unrestricted free agents than expected. Among the contracts most susceptible to getting bought out, there's Bobby Holik of the New York Rangers (2 more years, $9 million/year before 24% rollback), Alexei Yashin of the New York Islanders (6 more years, $10/year), John LeClair (2 more years, $9 million/year) and Tony Amonte (1 more year, $6 million) of the Philadelphia Flyers, Keith Tkachuk of the St. Louis Blues (2 more years, $9 million/year), Bill Guerin of the Dallas Stars (2 more years, $9 million/year) and Owen Nolan of the Toronto Maple Leafs (1 more year, $6 million).

http://www.thehockeynews.com/en/headlines/detail.asp?id=27954&cat=954945254360

 

[Hockeyfan02]

Baseless? LOL...

Well I see his point. Everyone is bashing Tkachuk here and think that by his quotes he wants people to feel sorry for him when all he's saying is he doesn't agree with a cap. Like Newsguy, I don't get why people are making the sarcastic remarks like "I feel so bad for him" from the comments he made when he never said anything about how people should feel sorry for him.

 

[WC Handy*]

Fair enough .. but this sounds all like your own opinion alone on the subject.

Do you have any Laurie quotes that support this??

The Blues according to Forbes were dead last in the NHL bringing in $66 mil in revenue and spending $68.7 mil on player contracts for a net loss of $28.8 mil .. That doesn't scream of a team or owner that sticks to closely to a budget as you are implying here ..

The losses may however prevent the buyout more then common sense will in this case ..

The sale of the franchise may play into this as well as that compounds the situation .. Would a new owner want so many CAP Heavy contracts like Tkachuk and Weight towards his new team and purchase. In that light it might make sense to get some heavy costs off the books to make the sale easier .. but that is just my opinion..

$3.8 mil wil buy you quite a hockey player in the new NHL..Blues might be better off giving that to a player like Nikolai Khabibulin (G) and shore up that area on the team.. Stopping 40 more goals against is sometimes a better successful plan then scoring them for the same money ..

Jesus Christ. How dense are you? I didn't give you my opinion. I gave the reasons why it doesn't make sense to buy Tkachuk out. If you want to ignore common sense simply because Bill Laurie hasn't commented on it (when there's no chance in hell such a quote would ever exist anyway) then it's only because you're as clueless as everyone here already knows you are.

In fact in the most recent Hockey News dated June 24, 2005 it names your boy Keith in fact ..

Hockey news also lists his salary at $9M a year for the next two years when in reality his salary is $10M for 05-06 and then the Blues have a team option for $5M for 06-07. Yea.. they sure sound like they know what they're talking about.

 

[dedalus]

Question for you, dude.

Where does Tkachuck imply or say that he wants anyone to feel sorry for him.

Nowhere.

So why don't you just delete your silly post, and we'll move on to the next baseless attack on the players.

Well I disagree with the suggestion for deletion, but I'm always up for another attack on the players!

 

[dedalus]

Well I see his point. Everyone is bashing Tkachuk here and think that by his quotes he wants people to feel sorry for him when all he's saying is he doesn't agree with a cap. Like Newsguy, I don't get why people are making the sarcastic remarks like "I feel so bad for him" from the comments he made when he never said anything about how people should feel sorry for him.

He didn't merely express his position on the cap; he went into his personal feelings when he said he's disappointed. Under many normal circumstances, saying you feel sorry for a person who has suffered a disappointment would be perfectly valid. e.g. At the Special Olympics a couple of years ago, a wheelchair racer's vehicle went over. He expressed disappointment, and I doubt that I was the only one thinking, "Ah, that's too bad for the guy. That's a shame." The guy wasn't asking for anyone's sympathy, but sympathy is what he got because people empathized with him.

People don't empathize with Tkachuk for several reasons, and they're expressing that through their sarcasm. This has nothing to do with a supposed plea for pity on Tkachuk's part. It has to do with Tkachuk's relationship with the fans and more broadly with the NHLPA's relationship with the fans.

 

[Tekneek]

You would have thought that they paid attention to the backlash the MLBPA got after 1994, which had a lot to do with the comments those guys were making. 11 years later, the player reps who couldn't shut their idiotic mouths still get booed (the ones that are left in the game).

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

It's not the same. Sandler doesn't expect taxpayers to fund $250 million dollar arenas so that his employer can pay his exhorbitant A lot of people are forced to help pay for Tkachuk's salary through taxes, whether they want to or not. The same is not true of Sandler.

Wow.
Somehow you managed to bring up the tax breaks that OWNERS get, and say that Tkachuk deserves public scrutiny because of them.

Bravo.

 

[kdb209]

Jesus Christ. How dense are you? I didn't give you my opinion. I gave the reasons why it doesn't make sense to buy Tkachuk out. If you want to ignore common sense simply because Bill Laurie hasn't commented on it (when there's no chance in hell such a quote would ever exist anyway) then it's only because you're as clueless as everyone here already knows you are.

It seems so oddly unnatural to come out in defense of Messenger, but I agree that there are compelling reasons to buy out KT - the difference may be significantly more than yout $2.6M/yr. It all depends on where you see the Blues payroll being. If they think they will spend up to or near the cap, bye bye Keith.

If they keep KT, they are on the hook for his whole $7.6M salary, all of which will count against the cap, plus potentially an add'l $7.6M in luxury tax. With KT eating up 20% of the cap, there is no way they can afford to keep Pronger also.

If they buy out KT, they pay out $10M over the next 4 years (assuming buyout terms similar to the last CBA), which will not count against the cap (at least that is the speculation for a one time transition period). They will free up $7.6M in cap space to help keep Pronger and sign a cheaper KT replacement and reduce a potentially significant dollar-for-dollar luxury tax liability.

 

[WC Handy*]

It seems so oddly unnatural to come out in defense of Messenger, but I agree that there are compelling reasons to buy out KT - the difference may be significantly more than yout $2.6M/yr. It all depends on where you see the Blues payroll being. If they think they will spend up to or near the cap, bye bye Keith.

If they keep KT, they are on the hook for his whole $7.6M salary, all of which will count against the cap, plus potentially an add'l $7.6M in luxury tax. With KT eating up 20% of the cap, there is no way they can afford to keep Pronger also.

If they buy out KT, they pay out $10M over the next 4 years (assuming buyout terms similar to the last CBA), which will not count against the cap (at least that is the speculation for a one time transition period). They will free up $7.6M in cap space to help keep Pronger and sign a cheaper KT replacement and reduce a potentially significant dollar-for-dollar luxury tax liability.

The Blues can afford Pronger while keeping Tkachuk. At least look it up before going on and on about something you clearly know nothing about.

And again... what motivation does BILL LAURIE have to spend $5M beyond the cap?

 

[octopi]

The most overpaid player in the league doesn't agree with a salary cap.

Well color me shocked! SHOCKED I say!

Oh come on, the MOST overpaid player in the league? He's probably about second or third

 

[me2]

The Blues can afford Pronger while keeping Tkachuk. At least look it up before going on and on about something you clearly know nothing about.

And again... what motivation does BILL LAURIE have to spend $5M beyond the cap?

You are missing kdb209's point. It is not where they CAN afford him, but rather do they WANT to. Let's say Pronger leaves, the Blues decide to rebuild a bit and the salary is sitting at $29m with KT outstanding. Do they pick up KT even though they won't be a good team? That is $15m out of the owners pocket assuming a $1 for $1 ($7.6m salary + $7.6m taxes).Is he really worth spending $15m dollars if you are not competing for the cup?

If they do want to compete maybe there are 3+ guys they can get for that $7.6m (+ tax) on the UFA market and those 3+ make the Blues a better team than just 1 player in KT.

 

[WC Handy*]

You are missing kdb209's point. It is not where they CAN afford him, but rather do they WANT to. Let's say Pronger leaves, the Blues decide to rebuild a bit and the salary is sitting at $29m with KT outstanding. Do they pick up KT even though they won't be a good team? That is $15m out of the owners pocket assuming a $1 for $1 ($7.6m salary + $7.6m taxes).Is he really worth spending $15m dollars if you are not competing for the cup?

If they do want to compete maybe there are 3+ guys they can get for that $7.6m (+ tax) on the UFA market and those 3+ make the Blues a better team than just 1 player in KT.

Exactly.

 

[Takeo]

There seems to be all these underlying grumblings where greed still supercedes sanity. I think people are getting excited prematurely about a potential agreement. We deserve disappointment once again for being so gullible.

 

[kdb209]

Originally Posted by kdb209
It seems so oddly unnatural to come out in defense of Messenger, but I agree that there are compelling reasons to buy out KT - the difference may be significantly more than yout $2.6M/yr. It all depends on where you see the Blues payroll being. If they think they will spend up to or near the cap, bye bye Keith.

If they keep KT, they are on the hook for his whole $7.6M salary, all of which will count against the cap, plus potentially an add'l $7.6M in luxury tax. With KT eating up 20% of the cap, there is no way they can afford to keep Pronger also.

If they buy out KT, they pay out $10M over the next 4 years (assuming buyout terms similar to the last CBA), which will not count against the cap (at least that is the speculation for a one time transition period). They will free up $7.6M in cap space to help keep Pronger and sign a cheaper KT replacement and reduce a potentially significant dollar-for-dollar luxury tax liability.

The Blues can afford Pronger while keeping Tkachuk. At least look it up before going on and on about something you clearly know nothing about.

And again... what motivation does BILL LAURIE have to spend $5M beyond the cap?

Well Bill Laurie and his Wal-Buck$ may be able to afford both KT's and Pronger's salary in $$$'s, but can their GM afford them both in cap space? How much do you think it would take to sign Pronger? Do you think he'll sign for less than KT - I don't. Paying KT $7.6M may actually up the cost of signing Pronger. Assuming the Pronger also is willing to sign for $7.6M, would a sane GM commit 40% of his entire cap space to just two players and ice the Nashville Predators (or equivalent) for the rest of the team - $23M or less for 22 players.

And even if Laurie is willing to eat the $$$'s in Salary and Luxury Tax, what makes you thing a new owner would - why hamstring the sale of the team.

 

[me2]

Well Bill Laurie and his Wal-Buck$ may be able to afford both KT's and Pronger's salary in $$$'s, but can their GM afford them both in cap space? How much do you think it would take to sign Pronger? Do you think he'll sign for less than KT - I don't. Paying KT $7.6M may actually up the cost of signing Pronger. Assuming the Pronger also is willing to sign for $7.6M, would a sane GM commit 40% of his entire cap space to just two players and ice the Nashville Predators (or equivalent) for the rest of the team - $23M or less for 22 players.

That's a bit unfair on Nashville since they have a good team for cheap. There is no way the Blues could aquire as much talent as Nashville has for Nashville's payroll in a short time. They might be able to get the Pitts Pengs rejects for that kind of money.

 

[WC Handy*]

Well Bill Laurie and his Wal-Buck$ may be able to afford both KT's and Pronger's salary in $$$'s, but can their GM afford them both in cap space? How much do you think it would take to sign Pronger? Do you think he'll sign for less than KT - I don't. Paying KT $7.6M may actually up the cost of signing Pronger. Assuming the Pronger also is willing to sign for $7.6M, would a sane GM commit 40% of his entire cap space to just two players and ice the Nashville Predators (or equivalent) for the rest of the team - $23M or less for 22 players.

And even if Laurie is willing to eat the $$$'s in Salary and Luxury Tax, what makes you thing a new owner would - why hamstring the sale of the team.

As I've already told you...

1. Tkachuk is only set to make $7.6M this year.

and

2. If you look at the numbers, based on who the Blues already have under contract and who they need to sign, the Blues can afford to sign Pronger w/ Tkachuk and Weight already under contract. Is it something you'd want to do over a long period of time? Certainly not. But it's plausible this year and then next year Tkachuk will only make $3.8M.

To further illustrate my point...

One of the other threads suggests that 04-05 contracts are still a sticking point in these discussions. If the owners end up having to honor 04-05 contracts the Blues will have the entire roster that they went into the lockout with (including Pronger, Tkachuk, and Weight) under contract) at $33.4M, after the rollback.

They would be able to retain those same players for about that amount if we start off with 05-06 contracts. The only problem then is that it will be a matter of whether or not Pronger wants to sign since he'd probably be unrestricted.