Toggle sidebar

2006 Buyouts ?

Slitty

Slitty

Registered User
Oct 23, 2005
3,875
8
Anyone think that bought out contracts counting against the cap is idiocy? It only harms NHL teams and the level of competition. Yes teams have to be a lot smarter in giving out contracts, but still, if they are willing to spend the money in order to buy a player out - whats the harm? It would not be a significant adavantage to any one team, more like the ability to overcome a Pejorative Sluring factor. The bought out player would be happy to as he gets the same exact amount of money but doesn't have to play for it, and is free to seek another contract to make even more money in that time span.

Buyouts shouldn't count against the cap.
 

RTWAP*

Guest
Slitty said:
Anyone think that bought out contracts counting against the cap is idiocy? It only harms NHL teams and the level of competition. Yes teams have to be a lot smarter in giving out contracts, but still, if they are willing to spend the money in order to buy a player out - whats the harm? It would not be a significant adavantage to any one team, more like the ability to overcome a Pejorative Sluring factor. The bought out player would be happy to as he gets the same exact amount of money but doesn't have to play for it, and is free to seek another contract to make even more money in that time span.

Buyouts shouldn't count against the cap.
Click to expand...
They have eliminated any way to transfer money from one club to another. This is to prevent teams with lots of money from getting any advantage other than their basic ability to spend to the cap.

If a rich team could pick up every other team's garbage (and picks) for nothing and then clear the garbage off their roster without affecting their cap, then they would have an additional advantage (the extra picks).

Also, a rich team could establish a budget for 'insane risks', like signing UFAs who have been massive underperformers. Give them a chance to turn it around, and if they can't then buy them out. That would be another advantage.
 
Slitty

Slitty

Registered User
Oct 23, 2005
3,875
8
RalfTheWiseNPowerful said:
They have eliminated any way to transfer money from one club to another. This is to prevent teams with lots of money from getting any advantage other than their basic ability to spend to the cap.

If a rich team could pick up every other team's garbage (and picks) for nothing and then clear the garbage off their roster without affecting their cap, then they would have an additional advantage (the extra picks).

Also, a rich team could establish a budget for 'insane risks', like signing UFAs who have been massive underperformers. Give them a chance to turn it around, and if they can't then buy them out. That would be another advantage.
Click to expand...


Is it all that bad or big of an adavantage though? So I decide to sign Alexei Zhamnov to a 5 year 30 million dollar contract... if he preforms the way he has this season I am still screwed for one year as that 5 million counts against the cap. Or if I buy him out in November, it would pretty hard to attain a replacement 5 million dollar 1st line player.

I dont like the socialist approach of a cap to begin with. Teams should choose how much they spend, and if they cant keep their payrolls down to the point that they lose money - well its their own fault. Yet at least let rich teams by their players out... the poorer teams generally have plenty of cap space remaining so if they sign an underpreformer they can always sign a replacement and keep the underpreformer on the 4th line. The richer teams close to the cap are stuck with their respective Yashin with no hope of replacing him on the 1st line unless they send him down to the minors (hopefully he is under 35).
 

Spydey629

Registered User
Jan 28, 2005
945
390
Carlisle, PA
The NHL is just following the NFL's proven system... that quite frankly, COMMUNISM WORKS!!

But only in a sports world bubble, Thank God.
 

kasper11

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,674
13
New York
Visit site
Slitty said:
Is it all that bad or big of an adavantage though? So I decide to sign Alexei Zhamnov to a 5 year 30 million dollar contract... if he preforms the way he has this season I am still screwed for one year as that 5 million counts against the cap. Or if I buy him out in November, it would pretty hard to attain a replacement 5 million dollar 1st line player.

I dont like the socialist approach of a cap to begin with. Teams should choose how much they spend, and if they cant keep their payrolls down to the point that they lose money - well its their own fault. Yet at least let rich teams by their players out... the poorer teams generally have plenty of cap space remaining so if they sign an underpreformer they can always sign a replacement and keep the underpreformer on the 4th line. The richer teams close to the cap are stuck with their respective Yashin with no hope of replacing him on the 1st line unless they send him down to the minors (hopefully he is under 35).
Click to expand...

The problem is you would create a major loophole around the cap.

Say that there was a free agent lots of teams wanted (lets use Redden for an example). If a team wanted to offer him $12M per season (more than the cap would allow) what would stop them from offering $8M per year for 5 years, and buying him out after 3? After paying 75% of the remaining 2 years, it would come out to the same thing, but they would never have been charged more than $8M under the cap, thus having more money would essentially allow a team to spend more on players.
 

OpinionatedMike

Registered User
Nov 10, 2002
300
0
Visit site
It would take one or two lines to stop rich teams from buying out lesser teams crap:

A player can only be bought out if he was on the teams roster at the end of the regular season.

So you'd never have to worry about teams unloading bad contracts from after the trade deadling to the begining of the season. Plus a team can't stack up on mildly skilled high priced players due to the cap.
 
kdb209

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
OpinionatedMike said:
It would take one or two lines to stop rich teams from buying out lesser teams crap:

A player can only be bought out if he was on the teams roster at the end of the regular season.

So you'd never have to worry about teams unloading bad contracts from after the trade deadling to the begining of the season. Plus a team can't stack up on mildly skilled high priced players due to the cap.
Click to expand...
That is pretty much already the case - players can only be bought out between June 15 and June 30 (*) - so the only players who will be bought out are players on a teams roster at the season, unless a team does something stupid like trade for a player and then buy him out.

(*)There is also a limited buyout window after arbitartion awards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom