Speculation: Armchair GM Thread - 2019/20 Season Part 2

[Rubi]

@Anglesmith... COVID-19 may be an act of God but the cancellation of the remaining part of the regular season isn't. It was an act of Gary Bettman. It was his decision to suspend play... not God's.

...................

Anyways... I can't believe I'm quoting Eric Francis:


Do they get compensation from the Oilers?

The oh-so-intriguing James Neal-for-Milan Lucic swap last summer included a provision that the Flames would also get a 2020 third-round pick from the Oilers if:

Neal scores at least 21 goals in 2019-20 and Lucic scores at least ten fewer goals than Neal. After a torrid start to the season, Neal came back down to earth and then suffered an injury that has him stalled out at 19 goals. Lucic has eight.

The Flames have 12 games remaining and the Oilers have 11. Although Neal clearly didn’t reach the 21 needed to kickstart possible compensation, an incomplete season will have the Flames urging the league to rule on this.

If the league simply pro-rated their stats over the full season, the Flames would get the pick. These are uncharted waters, however, which means both teams will likely have strong opinions on how – or if – the league should intervene.

There’s a chance the league won’t intervene at all, meaning the Flames’ string of bad luck surrounding everything James Neal continues.

Trade conditions like these have been brought up with the league, which has informed clubs they will have answers in due time. Arbitration hearings have long included a focus on stats based on a per-game basis, adjusting for games lost to injury. If so, the Flames would land that pick.

At the rate each player scored at this season, Lucic would have scored nine goals over an 82 game season and Neal, who only played 55 games, was on a pace to score 28.

Four biggest off-season questions facing the Flames - Sportsnet.ca

................................

I'm sure the Flames will be going to the league asking them to rule on this. They could lose... but then again they could win. There is precedent where the league has prorated scoring with regards to performance bonuses in a lockout shortened season. This is very similar except its a trade pick instead of bonus money.

 

[Anglesmith]

@Anglesmith... COVID-19 may be an act of God but the cancellation of the remaining part of the regular season isn't. It was an act of Gary Bettman. It was his decision to suspend play... not God's.

I know. I was pointing out that that is equally applicable to the parable being suggested. The decision to not work in rain is a matter of safety, not an inevitability.

Anyway, Bettman (more correctly, the NHL as a whole) made a decision to suspend play, but I'm not sure why it adds to the discussion to pretend that there was another option. Any alternative format to the league would require agreement with the NHLPA, who could simply refuse. And a format change had already been forced when San Jose was banned from hosting games, with more changes like this happening daily at the time.

Well, in the end I guess it is encouraging that some NHL sources apparently think there is more than a snowball's chance of hell here. I just don't personally see it happening, nor do I think it would be a fair outcome.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Anyways... I can't believe I'm quoting Eric Francis:

And this is where you jumped the shark.

 

[Rubi]

And this is where you jumped the shark.

Yeah... LOL.
Truthfully the only reason I know Francis's opinion on this is because of his published story on the Sportsnet website. He's blocked me from seeing his Twitter feed (I think I called him an asshole or something like that)... which I wear as a badge of honor.

 

[Mazatt]

I feel like, if hockey is back and there's games played before the playoffs, there's zero chance they actually count towards anything. Is it dumb to think that? Because if there's a regular season game before the playoffs that most likely means it's for condition, so why would conditioning count towards team record and the playoff picture. I'd figure at this point, unless the pandemic miraculously leaves North America, the NHL standings just are the way they are and won't be changed before playoffs.

 

[Rubi]

I just don't believe that hockey will be back until September or October. Sure, in Canada we may get a handle on COVID-19 that may allow games to be played in June or July maybe but I don't think that's a realistic prognosis for the USA and hockey cities there.
Frankly its a bit of a cluster f*** there and its going to get a hell of a lot worse in the coming weeks/months.
I'm glad I don't live in the USA. I'd rather move to Edmonton than move to the USA right now.

 

[tyflames]

Rewatching the Flames vs Canucks 04 game 7 right now on sportsnet. If hockey was still this physical, with the two line pass and the booking and slashing, Gaudreau wouldn’t score a goal all season.

 

[Nanuuk]

The Neal/Lucic conditional pick isn't the only one that league has to worry about. The question is whether a shortened season abrogates conditional transactions or whether the league can support those transactions via a pro-ration of statistics that the condition depends upon. Many industries use a "force majeure' clause to get out of contractual obligations. I do not know if that language is contained in any of the deals or even in the labour agreement itself.

 

[Anglesmith]

The Neal/Lucic conditional pick isn't the only one that league has to worry about. The question is whether a shortened season abrogates conditional transactions or whether the league can support those transactions via a pro-ration of statistics that the condition depends upon. Many industries use a "force majeure' clause to get out of contractual obligations. I do not know if that language is contained in any of the deals or even in the labour agreement itself.

Yeah, there were also conditional deals made around stuff like if a team won a playoff series. From what I can tell, it is not really possible to retcon them all. So I bet the league just goes by plain language and declares that none of the conditions are met.

 

[Body Checker]

My feeling that under normal circumstances we would be talking this morning about firing Ward, Treliving and trading any number of players as we were digesting the thought of not being in the playoffs.

 

[Deen]

Hoping all this lost Hockey pushes the CBA forward. Can't have a lockout after all the germs settle.

 

[super6646]

My feeling that under normal circumstances we would be talking this morning about firing Ward, Treliving and trading any number of players as we were digesting the thought of not being in the playoffs.

So much optimism...

But yeah, I had a bad sense this team was primed to fall out in the final month (again). Rittich playing through injuries, team having a really tough schedule, struggles at home continuing, ect.

 

[Tkachuky]

I just don't believe that hockey will be back until September or October. Sure, in Canada we may get a handle on COVID-19 that may allow games to be played in June or July maybe but I don't think that's a realistic prognosis for the USA and hockey cities there.
Frankly its a bit of a cluster f*** there and its going to get a hell of a lot worse in the coming weeks/months.
I'm glad I don't live in the USA. I'd rather move to Edmonton than move to the USA right now.

you do realize half of the States in the US have less cases than Alberta? Just saying.

We’re not going to see Nhl back to normal this season. So I agree with you there. By normal I mean fans in stands.

 

[Rubi]

you do realize half of the States in the US have less cases than Alberta? Just saying.

We’re not going to see Nhl back to normal this season. So I agree with you there. By normal I mean fans in stands.

Oh I realize that but most of those states don't have cities large enough to have hockey teams. Most NHL teams are located in high density, large population cities/metropolitan areas. Just think of all the teams in the high density eastern seaboard... Rangers, Islanders, Bruins, Flyers, Devils, Capitals, and then you have the west coast teams from high population areas such as LA, Anaheim, and San Jose. And lets not forget Chicago and Detroit.

Plus the USA has been terrible at testing for COVID-19... or should I say great at not testing. If you don't want to show a high rate of infection... don't test... which seems to be Trump's plan.

 

[Mobiandi]

See ya later Cam. Best of luck
Flames' Cam Talbot proved his worth, but return to Calgary in question - Sportsnet.ca

 

[DFF]

See ya later Cam. Best of luck
Flames' Cam Talbot proved his worth, but return to Calgary in question - Sportsnet.ca

That's fine but who in their right mind would give him a number 1 job outright?....the tandem situation in Calgary was ideal.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

He’s not gonna get offered much more than he made this year. He had a good stretch, that was it. If he’s wanting something like 4.5+ and 3 year deal, I’m happy to see him go. Ritter is more than fine and the Flames have recently said he had an injury before the paused, we need a guy who can play about 35-40% of the games. I’d like Talbot to come back and appreciate that he wants to play (if he didn’t it would be a problem), but the money and term need to make sense.

 

[Nanuuk]

And at some point you are going to have to fish or cut bait with your 'tenders on the farm. You can't let them wither on the vine (since I'm using allegories today) . I would give Gillies a shot while having Zagidulin warming up in the bullpen.

 

[Tkachuky]

Wolf kid is pretty good eh.

 

[Nanuuk]

So far so good with Wolf. Still a junior though and we'll see how he handles the speed of the game, harder shots, and quicker thinkers in the AHL. Not to mention getting run over or screened by bigger men. I'm guessing he'll be fine, but its always good to temper expectations until you see how he reacts under fire.

 

[FLAMESFAN]

Ya, I don't think any team is giving him 4 mill & starter.

 

[Rubi]

I fully expect the NHL to follow the precedent set after the 2012-2013 season and allow clubs to compliance buyout one or two of their players to help clubs meet the upcoming $81.5M salary cap.

"Compliance buyouts (sometimes referred to as amnesty buyouts) allow National Hockey League (NHL) teams to buy-out a player's contract by paying him two-thirds of the remaining value of a contract over twice the remaining length of the contract. If the player is under 26 years old, then the team may pay the player just one-third of the remaining contract value.[1] In ordinary-course buyouts, the team's NHL salary cap hit for the player is stretched over a period of twice the remaining length of the contract. Compliance buyouts follow the same formula as ordinary-course buyouts but do not count against the cap.

Due to the 2012–13 NHL lockout, the salary cap was not to increase to the projected $70.2 million, so each team was therefore granted two compliance buyouts to be exercised after the 2012–13 season and/or after the 2013–14 season that would not count against the salary cap in any further year in order to better comply with a lower than expected cap value, regardless of the player's age. After using a compliance buyout on a player, that player is prohibited from rejoining the team that bought him out for one year; the NHL deemed that the re-signing of a player following a trade and a subsequent compliance buyout would be ruled as cap circumvention.[2]

Following the 2012–13 NHL lockout each team was granted one accelerated compliance buyout in order for teams to meet the lowered salary cap. This could be used on a player with a salary cap hit of US$3 million or more before the regular season began. If an accelerated compliance buyout is used, that team will only have one more compliance buyout left, and they must use it after the completion of the 2012–13 season (and before the start of 2013–14 season). The player's cap hit is applied in full to the team's salary cap for the 2012–13 season, but for no season after, regardless of contract length.
Available during the off-season in 2013 and 2014, amnesty buyouts begin 48 hours after the conclusion of the Stanley Cup Finals.

In 2013, it began 48 hours after the conclusion of the Stanley Cup, and ended on July 4, 2013. The second NHL compliance buyout period opened on June 16, 2014, and ran through June 30, 2014, with 26 teams having one or more compliance buyout available to be used.[3]"

Compliance buyout - Wikipedia

Obviously the first player that the Flames would buy out, this summer, would be Lucic thus reducing their cap by $5.25M. My question is, if the Flames are allowed to buy out two players, who would the 2nd player likely be? Bear in mind that if the NHL follows the same rules set for the 2012-13 buyout the 2nd buyout could occur at the end of the 2020-21 season.
Backlund? Giordano? Nobody?

 

[Nanuuk]

I'm not so sure the Flames ownership will allow their money to be thrown at a problem contract. During this economic crisis, their own personal fortunes have no doubt taken a kicking. If they did, they would go for one and one where it didn't matter that they couldn't re-sign the player. For this reason they wouldn't buy out Gio or Backs. The would leave Doc Ryan who has two years left on his contract. And, I'm not sure they'd want to do that either. All of eminently tradeable and could fetch a return.

Now what would be interesting is if Looch were to retire. Would the Luongo rule of the CBA kick in resulting with Edmonton getting a cap hit they'd have to carry for x number of years? Looch's contract appears to be front end loaded at least for the first few years. I really don't know enough about the rule, so if anyone can add to the idea, have at it.

Not that Looch would retire. I honestly think he wants to be here and contribute. His teammates like him a lot from what I've read and he provides leadership and that toughness we've lacked over the years. And because he likes his new team and surroundings I wouldn't be surprised to see him waive his NMC for the team or even retire (as he mused about earlier this year) if he didn't think he could still contribute.

 

[mouser]

I fully expect the NHL to follow the precedent set after the 2012-2013 season and allow clubs to compliance buyout one or two of their players to help clubs meet the upcoming $81.5M salary cap.

Only way I see Compliance Buyouts is if the cap is dropped below $81.5m. It doesn't make financial sense to both freeze the cap at $81.5m and have compliance buyouts--the two things are counterproductive to each other.

 

[Mobiandi]

I would seriously ask the Bruins if they want Lucic