Amnesty Buyout

Who to pick?


  • Total voters
    84

DG93

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
4,343
2,244
San Jose
Vlasic has a much worse contract, a NMC, and is older. I also can envision him pouting when he inevitably gets demoted to a 3rd pairing role in a year or two. Maybe Jones can be a competent backup at least with Nabokov’s magic lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeThorntonsRooster

Jwec

Registered User
Dec 21, 2015
2,879
862
Finland
Jones should be the one we buy out. Buying out Jones saves us 5.75m cap space AND would give us space and slot to get a new goalie. Buying out Vlasic saves 7-million but we still would need to replace his absence from our defense which probably would cost 4-5 million to get equal level player AND we would still have Jones and his horrible contract on our books.

So let's assume we buy out Jones and get some adequate level goalie with approx. 4-million. That would save us almost 2m cap AND we would get rid of Jones. With buying out Vlasic, we would save 7-million BUT we would need to re-sign Dillon or that caliber player and it would cost at least 4-million. That saves us 3m tops. But then we still have Jones and his godawful contract and lousy performance and we need to replace him in goal with that 4-million goalie unless we want to suck next year.

So overall Capspace used 5,75+4+4=13,75 vs 7+4=11

I know which one I would pick. Besides MEV probably could have some trade value which Jones definitely wont have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phu and Sandisfan

Barrie22

Shark fan in hiding
Aug 11, 2009
24,795
5,955
ontario
Jones should be the one we buy out. Buying out Jones saves us 5.75m cap space AND would give us space and slot to get a new goalie. Buying out Vlasic saves 7-million but we still would need to replace his absence from our defense which probably would cost 4-5 million to get equal level player AND we would still have Jones and his horrible contract on our books.

So let's assume we buy out Jones and get some adequate level goalie with approx. 4-million. That would save us almost 2m cap AND we would get rid of Jones. With buying out Vlasic, we would save 7-million BUT we would need to re-sign Dillon or that caliber player and it would cost at least 4-million. That saves us 3m tops. But then we still have Jones and his godawful contract and lousy performance and we need to replace him in goal with that 4-million goalie unless we want to suck next year.

So overall Capspace used 5,75+4+4=13,75 vs 7+4=11

I know which one I would pick. Besides MEV probably could have some trade value which Jones definitely wont have.

Ok then vlasic says no i don't want to be traded. Bye bye trade. Now we are stuck with a useless 7 mil a year defensemen for the next 7 years. And then we are also forced to protect him in the expansion draft, which means one a good forward will need to be unprotected.

Jones is the only 1 out of the 2 that actually has options that does not solely rely on the players willingness to move.
 

STL Shark

Registered User
Mar 6, 2013
3,915
4,506
Nevertheless, I don't think he thinks any of those players are worth buying out at this point. ( part of which, he recently signed all of them. Not sure he can afford to admit that big of a mistake to ownership. )
That’s just conjecture and baseless opinion. He said it clear as day to the STH group (that was taped by a fan on Twitter) that goaltending is a huge issue that he’s going to be working hard to fix. Pretty clear by that comment that he knows at least one of those players is a good buyout candidate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WSS11

TomasHertlsRooster

Don’t say eye test when you mean points
May 14, 2012
33,360
25,417
Fremont, CA
When you make 7 million a year, and you can't outplay dillon or a rookie ferraro. Then yes you are useless.

*You get outplayed by Dillon and a rookie Ferraro.

That’s just conjecture and baseless opinion. He said it clear as day to the STH group (that was taped by a fan on Twitter) that goaltending is a huge issue that he’s going to be working hard to fix. Pretty clear by that comment that he knows at least one of those players is a good buyout candidate.

Would you mind sharing this taping? Thanks.
 

WSS11

Registered User
Oct 7, 2009
6,043
5,058
Vlasic has a much worse contract, a NMC, and is older. I also can envision him pouting when he inevitably gets demoted to a 3rd pairing role in a year or two. Maybe Jones can be a competent backup at least with Nabokov’s magic lol.

I agree with your assessment of Vlasic as I voted him as the buyout choice too but Jones has to go as well. 5.75MM for a backup caliber goalie isn’t viable to a team trying to contend with so many other inflated contracts on the books.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigDmitriy

Doctor Soraluce

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
7,051
4,459
Has to be Vlascic. There are options with Jones and he's young enough to actually right his ship. Pickles has done nothing but get worse, and older, and the value disparity of his contract grows everyday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigDmitriy

fasterthanlight

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 30, 2009
6,423
5,506
Seattle, WA
jones is an AHL goalie on a huge contract. it's jones hands down.

vlasic is a good second choice, but jones is actively a liability. playing him more-or-less single-handedly makes it so that we don't make the playoffs. vlasic is at least a high end 3rd pairing or decent middle pairing
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
15,716
4,975
How much are we fooling ourselves when we say that:

1) Vlasic/Jones can "rebound"
2) It is mostly on the system and not on Vlasic/Jones
3) Vlasic/Jones has(ve) value around the league or at the expansion draft?

IMO, I think you can make a case that Jones could rebound and/or it is/was the system. Similarly, you can make the case that Vlasic has value around the league.
 

themelkman

Always Delivers
Apr 26, 2015
11,392
8,377
Calgary, Alberta
How much are we fooling ourselves when we say that:

1) Vlasic/Jones can "rebound"
2) It is mostly on the system and not on Vlasic/Jones
3) Vlasic/Jones has(ve) value around the league or at the expansion draft?

IMO, I think you can make a case that Jones could rebound and/or it is/was the system. Similarly, you can make the case that Vlasic has value around the league.
Ill say this I think moving either would be tough to do, and if we get a CBO ones gotta go.
 

Doctor Soraluce

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
7,051
4,459
jones is an AHL goalie on a huge contract. it's jones hands down.

vlasic is a good second choice, but jones is actively a liability. playing him more-or-less single-handedly makes it so that we don't make the playoffs. vlasic is at least a high end 3rd pairing or decent middle pairing
Since BB took over Jones wasn't the problem. Scoring ability was. His stats since the coaching outright prove that he wasn't 100% to blame for his GAA avg.
How much are we fooling ourselves when we say that:

1) Vlasic/Jones can "rebound"
2) It is mostly on the system and not on Vlasic/Jones
3) Vlasic/Jones has(ve) value around the league or at the expansion draft?

IMO, I think you can make a case that Jones could rebound and/or it is/was the system. Similarly, you can make the case that Vlasic has value around the league.
The simple fact remains that vlassic controls his destiny. If he puts his foot down they can't trade him or send him down or expose him in the expansion draft. In fact vlacik forces the Sharks to potentially lose a player they like better in the expansion. He's clearly the bigger liability. Also even in the worst case, Jones can ride the pine while a cheaper option starts. The reality is though it would never come to that. Sharks could offer a pick and retain half his salary and that hit is far easier to swallow than having to carry Vlashic no matter what.
 
Last edited:

TheWayToRefJose

Registered User
Oct 30, 2017
3,471
3,147
I buy out Jones and sign Lehner for similar money.

Over the past two seasons, The difference between Jones and Lehners Goals Saved above average is a little over 38 goals a year.

To put that difference in perspective, this is what that would’ve changed our ranking in the western conference goals against those two years

2018-2019 - 12th > Tied for 3rd

2019-2020 - 14th > 3rd
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Ice Hockey Dude

hohosaregood

Banned
Sep 1, 2011
32,278
12,443
I think you're more likely to find a starting goalie for cheap than you are a top 3/4 defenseman. Goalies are just so hot and cold that very few of them earn truly expensive contracts. You could easily grab a guy who is on the verge of being a starter for $3m or less. So if we had to hold onto Jones, it'd be a lot easier to work around, especially considering how massive improvement in February. Vlasic at 7m for 7 years with an NMC is just gonna be really hard to work around.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,237
13,605
Folsom
I think you're more likely to find a starting goalie for cheap than you are a top 3/4 defenseman. Goalies are just so hot and cold that very few of them earn truly expensive contracts. You could easily grab a guy who is on the verge of being a starter for $3m or less. So if we had to hold onto Jones, it'd be a lot easier to work around, especially considering how massive improvement in February. Vlasic at 7m for 7 years with an NMC is just gonna be really hard to work around.

This is what it comes down to for me. I think both are tradeable in the literal sense but Jones is easier than Vlasic while on the better contract. People still think Vlasic is useful but he isn't in a cap league when they're already spending a lot on D. You stand to gain more replacing Vlasic as opposed to replacing Jones especially when you consider current internal options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigDmitriy

Nolan11

Registered User
Mar 5, 2013
3,236
334
That’s just conjecture and baseless opinion. He said it clear as day to the STH group (that was taped by a fan on Twitter) that goaltending is a huge issue that he’s going to be working hard to fix. Pretty clear by that comment that he knows at least one of those players is a good buyout candidate.

Everything on these boards are baseless opinions. We talk about what we see or writers write, but the end of the day it all goes through our individual filters. I expressed my belief, that at the end of the day, DW wont pull a compliance buyout trigger on the players listed in the poll. I may be wrong, and I suspect most on this thread hope I am, but I am allowed to speculate just as you are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

STL Shark

Registered User
Mar 6, 2013
3,915
4,506
This is what it comes down to for me. I think both are tradeable in the literal sense but Jones is easier than Vlasic while on the better contract. People still think Vlasic is useful but he isn't in a cap league when they're already spending a lot on D. You stand to gain more replacing Vlasic as opposed to replacing Jones especially when you consider current internal options.
There’s not a world that exists where Martin Jones is tradeable. Not with the way this season abruptly ended as he had played a few good games but has been a ball of suck for two full seasons.

Obviously the NMC makes a difference, but if it came to it, Vlasic could be moved pretty easily if you ate $1.5 mil. Even if you retained 50% on Martin Jones there isn’t a soul in this league that would thin it’s a good idea to have him on their team.

If an amnesty buyout comes to fruition, its very clear who it will be and that’s Martin Jones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patty Ice

Barrie22

Shark fan in hiding
Aug 11, 2009
24,795
5,955
ontario
There’s not a world that exists where Martin Jones is tradeable. Not with the way this season abruptly ended as he had played a few good games but has been a ball of suck for two full seasons.

Obviously the NMC makes a difference, but if it came to it, Vlasic could be moved pretty easily if you ate $1.5 mil. Even if you retained 50% on Martin Jones there isn’t a soul in this league that would thin it’s a good idea to have him on their team.

If an amnesty buyout comes to fruition, its very clear who it will be and that’s Martin Jones.

How is it fairly easy to trade someone that can just say no to every single deal offered?

The sharks could offer 15 1st round picks and vlasic to a team and he can't be traded if he does not want to be.

With vlasic every single magic card needs to come true. 1 vlasic needs to be willing to waive, 2 a team has to be willing to trade for him, 3 that team has to be on vlasics teams he is willing to go to, 4 the teams then have to find a deal that wotks for both teams.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,237
13,605
Folsom
There’s not a world that exists where Martin Jones is tradeable. Not with the way this season abruptly ended as he had played a few good games but has been a ball of suck for two full seasons.

Obviously the NMC makes a difference, but if it came to it, Vlasic could be moved pretty easily if you ate $1.5 mil. Even if you retained 50% on Martin Jones there isn’t a soul in this league that would thin it’s a good idea to have him on their team.

If an amnesty buyout comes to fruition, its very clear who it will be and that’s Martin Jones.

Well, unfortunately for you that's just not true. This is the same world that Scott Darling was traded. If he can be dealt or if Lucic and Neal can be dealt, Martin Jones can be dealt. So can Vlasic but on the face of it, Jones is the one that is more tradeable on the simple basis of their clause differences and their contractual differences. If you ate 1.5 mil on Jones' deal, it's a 4.25 mil contract and can be dealt for a similar contract like a Cory Schneider that is shorter. The idea that nobody would trade for him is to pretend like there aren't just as poor of a contract out there which is demonstrably false. The other thing is that while you want to talk about being a ball of suck for two full seasons, you're conveniently leaving out that Vlasic has been a ball of suck for four seasons now. They both suck at this point. It's time people who still think Vlasic is valuable come to that realization. He was terrible the three seasons after the Cup Finals run. We got rid of Braun and gave him a chance thinking that Braun was holding him back but he continues to suck. Vlasic is done as a top pairing shutdown d-man. He's borderline as a top four d-man at this point and is still trending down with an increasingly worse contract by the day.

When you look at what the team needs to be aware of moving forward, Vlasic is the easy choice for an amnesty buyout on the simple basis of that contract of his especially the NMC. If you keep Vlasic, you're forced to protect him for the expansion draft when he shouldn't be. Chances are that no team takes Vlasic prior to the expansion draft because of that. Jones is not someone you have to protect due to that monumentally important difference and there's at this point nobody worth protecting in the goalie position. So if you keep Vlasic around, you're exposing at the very least Radim Simek who is a much better value bet than Vlasic is moving forward but if the team goes out and lands a d-man that they want to lean on moving forward, that player is likely exposed as well for no good reason.

At least with keeping Jones, you're not risking anyone to the expansion draft and have a much better chance of getting a team to take him either then or at some other point given the other bad contracts recently traded. Plus the team stands to actually maneuver the cap space gained from Vlasic to areas of need much better than they will Jones. If they get rid of Jones, they need a goalie that they will have to pay similarly to address. If they get rid of Vlasic, they won't have to spend 7 mil on a similar player. They don't need a 7 mil d-man to play with Burns and Karlsson. It may be a 3-4 mil d-man that would work and the rest can be used up front where they are lacking severely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WSS11

STL Shark

Registered User
Mar 6, 2013
3,915
4,506
Well, unfortunately for you that's just not true. This is the same world that Scott Darling was traded. If he can be dealt or if Lucic and Neal can be dealt, Martin Jones can be dealt. So can Vlasic but on the face of it, Jones is the one that is more tradeable on the simple basis of their clause differences and their contractual differences. If you ate 1.5 mil on Jones' deal, it's a 4.25 mil contract and can be dealt for a similar contract like a Cory Schneider that is shorter. The idea that nobody would trade for him is to pretend like there aren't just as poor of a contract out there which is demonstrably false. The other thing is that while you want to talk about being a ball of suck for two full seasons, you're conveniently leaving out that Vlasic has been a ball of suck for four seasons now. They both suck at this point. It's time people who still think Vlasic is valuable come to that realization. He was terrible the three seasons after the Cup Finals run. We got rid of Braun and gave him a chance thinking that Braun was holding him back but he continues to suck. Vlasic is done as a top pairing shutdown d-man. He's borderline as a top four d-man at this point and is still trending down with an increasingly worse contract by the day.

When you look at what the team needs to be aware of moving forward, Vlasic is the easy choice for an amnesty buyout on the simple basis of that contract of his especially the NMC. If you keep Vlasic, you're forced to protect him for the expansion draft when he shouldn't be. Chances are that no team takes Vlasic prior to the expansion draft because of that. Jones is not someone you have to protect due to that monumentally important difference and there's at this point nobody worth protecting in the goalie position. So if you keep Vlasic around, you're exposing at the very least Radim Simek who is a much better value bet than Vlasic is moving forward but if the team goes out and lands a d-man that they want to lean on moving forward, that player is likely exposed as well for no good reason.

At least with keeping Jones, you're not risking anyone to the expansion draft and have a much better chance of getting a team to take him either then or at some other point given the other bad contracts recently traded. Plus the team stands to actually maneuver the cap space gained from Vlasic to areas of need much better than they will Jones. If they get rid of Jones, they need a goalie that they will have to pay similarly to address. If they get rid of Vlasic, they won't have to spend 7 mil on a similar player. They don't need a 7 mil d-man to play with Burns and Karlsson. It may be a 3-4 mil d-man that would work and the rest can be used up front where they are lacking severely.
TLDR. Skimmed and found enough stuff to refute below.

Darling got traded with 2 years at $4.15 mil left as opposed to 5 years at $5.75 mil left. Total apples and oranges scenario there. Darling buyout spans 4 years at a lower cap hit as opposed to 8 years at a larger one.

I don't disagree that both players suck. I just see it pretty clear that Vlasic sucks less and has a far better reputation to those outside of this incredibly small sector of the fanbase than Jones does. It was literally written that Vlasic was willing to go to Montreal this season and they were willing to trade for him, so the pretense that no one would deal for him and that he would not waive are untrue. You can get players to waive pretty easily if you want to. I.e. healthy scratch until they decide to go.

Lastly, whether you keep Jones or not, you still have to pay money to find a starting goalie. How do people not see that? The point of, "if you buyout Jones you have to spend that money on a goalie still" is totally irrelevant to any discussion on this topic of Jones vs Vlasic. Jones isn't a starting goalie. So one way or another, you have to go find one and you yourself said it is going to cost just as much to go find one.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->