Buyout clause - Do we use it?

[ginner classic]

I can't believe we're considering buying out Booth. The guy was pretty damn good for us, but kept getting injured when he started to roll. Plus, he was playing on a team where all of our core offensive players essentially had terrible years, yet he's somehow expected to have a career high? Booth gets another season, that's for sure.

He gets this season if there is one. After that, cap compliance drives all decision making.

 

[lush]

Considering we are currently debating whether to buyout Ballard or Booth you have to admit that's a pretty good problem to have.

To me, given the Canucks have deeper pockets than most teams there is probably a team out there with 2 bad contracts they want to get rid of, and would be willing to trade one of them to the Canucks along with a prospect/pick or other positive value assets that the Canucks can turn around and use their buyout on.

I haven't read this whole thread but I'm sure someone else has presented this idea as well. I say this with the expectation that whatever the cap ends up being, teams will have the 10% or whatever it is leeway next summer and this whole sequence of events would occur then because I don't see this working during a shortened season with the cap going down unless it involved Luongo and even then it might not be possible.

 

[y2kcanucks]

If we could find a taker for Ballard for a 7th round pick or whatever, we could trade Luongo to Florida for some nice prospects and take their worst contract off their hands and subsequently amnesty that player...

 

[Scottrockztheworld*]

If we could find a taker for Ballard for a 7th round pick or whatever, we could trade Luongo to Florida for some nice prospects and take their worst contract off their hands and subsequently amnesty that player...

Thats what I've been thinking. Maybe someone like Jovo? Think the suggestions of Vinny & DiPietro are a little bit too out there. Heck maybe even Komi

 

[Seatoo]

If we could find a taker for Ballard for a 7th round pick or whatever, we could trade Luongo to Florida for some nice prospects and take their worst contract off their hands and subsequently amnesty that player...

Ballard is worth more than a 7th but I agree with the rest of what you are saying! With the amnesty buyout I could stomach one of Komi, Jovo, Upshall or Kopetchky type salary dump along with more significant pieces.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Ballard is worth more than a 7th but I agree with the rest of what you are saying! With the amnesty buyout I could stomach one of Komi, Jovo, Upshall or Kopetchky type salary dump along with more significant pieces.

Well I was just throwing the 7th out there for arguments sake, but I agree he's probably worth more.

I wonder if this would be enough to put is back into Bjugstad+ territory or Huberdeau territory? Doubt it but would be interesting.

 

[MISC*]

I wonder if this would be enough to put is back into Bjugstad+ territory or Huberdeau territory? Doubt it but would be interesting.

We were never in that territory. Only you think we have been.

More like Jovo and Ellerby for Luongos contract.

 

[dave babych returns]

We were never in that territory. Only you think we have been.

More like Jovo and Ellerby for Luongos contract.

That is just as crazily off in the other direction.

 

[MISC*]

That is just as crazily off in the other direction.

Obviously.

 

[dave babych returns]

Indeed.

 

[Proto]

Well I was just throwing the 7th out there for arguments sake, but I agree he's probably worth more.

I wonder if this would be enough to put is back into Bjugstad+ territory or Huberdeau territory? Doubt it but would be interesting.

Bjugstad +??

If the Canucks could get Bjugstad and a decent NHL bottom-six forward for Luongo + I'd be ecstatis -- and I'm a huge Luongo fan. I think Bjugstad is going to be a difference maker.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Bjugstad +??

If the Canucks could get Bjugstad and a decent NHL bottom-six forward for Luongo + I'd be ecstatis -- and I'm a huge Luongo fan. I think Bjugstad is going to be a difference maker.

Be careful not to overrate Bjugstad. It seems like people value picks and prospects more than proven elite NHL talent. Such a shame.

 

[m9]

I agre with this. I think it'll be realtively easy to find a taker for Ballard. If Booth sucks, we are stuck with him. My vote is for Booth (if any).

In order of liklihood:

• Booth
• Ballard
• A player included in the trade return from Luongo
• Garrison
• Burrows

Nobody else is potentially overpaid

Garrison and Burrows, two guys that have yet to play a game under their new contracts, have no business being on this list. Malhotra would easily be ahead of either of those guys. Just crazy that these guys are even brought up in this thread.

 

[Proto]

Be careful not to overrate Bjugstad. It seems like people value picks and prospects more than proven elite NHL talent. Such a shame.

It has nothing to do with that. Luongo has decent-but-not-exceptional trade value because it's hard to trade goaltenders. There's a much higher risk for the receiving team than a team trading for an elite forward/defenseman. If you trade for an elite forward/defender and the player loses a step, you can still find a utility for them. For a goaltender there's the one spot and that's it. It's just not the same sort of trade.

And Bjugstad looks like something special from what I've seen of him. I think he's an impact player.

 

[Proto]

As per earlier discussion about buying out another team's player before next summer. If it were possible, I'm sort of curious what value people would put on basically trading 10 million dollars to another team. Or 20. And whether another team would do it, or if the blowback from their own fans would be too high.

 

[opendoor]

Why would the League put rules in place that hurt struggling teams weighed down by bad contracts on them? Why would the PA be opposed to more salary cap space opening up?

Each team gets one player to amnesty in the current proposal and Vancouver is one of the few rich teams who is in a position where they wouldn't have to use theirs. We're likely the only team capable of executing this scenario.

Because nothing the NHL has offered in these negotiations suggests to me that they're interested in allowing rich teams to effectively buy assets from poorer teams cap free. There's a reason they designed the 2005 buyouts to avoid this very scenario and I suspect they'll put rules in place this time as well. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong but I've seen very little evidence that the NHL negotiating committee is interested in allowing that kind of thing.

 

[Wisp]

Because nothing the NHL has offered in these negotiations suggests to me that they're interested in allowing rich teams to effectively buy assets from poorer teams cap free. There's a reason they designed the 2005 buyouts to avoid this very scenario and I suspect they'll put rules in place this time as well. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong but I've seen very little evidence that the NHL negotiating committee is interested in allowing that kind of thing.

Nothing suggests this? really? You might want to think about your answer a bit more next time, because you're obviously not paying attention.

the current CBA proposal turns salary and cap space into tradeable assets. This is something both players and owners want..They want player movement to be less restrictive than it is, and want to give poor teams mechanisms that let them trade more competively.

 

[opendoor]

Nothing suggests this? really? You might want to think about your answer a bit more next time, because you're obviously not paying attention.

I have been paying attention and I'm very well versed on the ins and outs of the CBA and the negotiations.

the current CBA proposal turns salary and cap space into tradeable assets. This is something both players and owners want..They want player movement to be less restrictive than it is, and want to give poor teams mechanisms that let them trade more competively.

The ability to retain cap space and salary in a trade still maintains a system where cap and salary paid are related to one another. A poorer team can retain some of the cap hit to facilitate a trade but they also have to pay the salary. It's not like rich teams can just buy players under that scenario which would be the case with what people are suggesting with the buyouts.

I guess we'll see, but I'll be shocked if the NHL lets teams trade a player for the sole purpose of a compliance buyout. They designed the 2005 ones to expressly eliminate this possibility. Perhaps more importantly, the elimination of the ability of rich teams to use their cash for off cap spending to create an advantage (front loaded deals and buried salary are the two biggest examples) has been one of the biggest driving forces of this CBA's negotiations.

I've been wrong many times before, so who knows. But I don't really see the logic in thinking that the NHL will set their contract variance and off cap spending rules in stone but then turn around and allow rich teams to spend tens of millions of dollars that aren't subject to the cap in order to effectively buy valuable assets from poor teams.

 

[Proto]

Because nothing the NHL has offered in these negotiations suggests to me that they're interested in allowing rich teams to effectively buy assets from poorer teams cap free. There's a reason they designed the 2005 buyouts to avoid this very scenario and I suspect they'll put rules in place this time as well. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong but I've seen very little evidence that the NHL negotiating committee is interested in allowing that kind of thing.

Keep in mind that all of the amnesty buyouts will come 100% off of the players' HRR share.

 

[ginner classic]

Garrison and Burrows, two guys that have yet to play a game under their new contracts, have no business being on this list. Malhotra would easily be ahead of either of those guys. Just crazy that these guys are even brought up in this thread.

Have you been following along?

Compliance buyouts would not take place until the summer of 2013. So if Malhotra, Lappiere, Higgins, Edler, Raymond are UFA.....what does this leave? Sedins? Kesler? Hamhuis? Bieksa?

I put them in order of most likely....I did not say the last few options were likely...just more likely than Dan and Hank. To be clear....Bieksa would be the next name on that list.

 

[Nona Di Giuseppe]

Have you been following along?

Compliance buyouts would not take place until the summer of 2013. So if Malhotra, Lappiere, Higgins, Edler, Raymond are UFA.....what does this leave? Sedins? Kesler? Hamhuis? Bieksa?

I put them in order of most likely....I did not say the last few options were likely...just more likely than Dan and Hank. To be clear....Bieksa would be the next name on that list.

Why bother talkign about something that's so unlikely, it pretty much has zero chance.

From the top of your list. Booth. Fans all over scream for years that Kesler needs a big forward to play on his wing that can keep up and drive the net and when we get him, after less than a season with the team, he's number one on a buy-out list.

This is the list, IF there even was a list:

Ballard





That's it.

 

[Proto]

2 compliance buyouts per team on the table from NHL now.

 

[Canucker]

Michael Grange‏@michaelgrange

A couple of encouraging details: #NHL has agreed to two compliance buyouts/team in 2013-14; and variance on contracts in 20% range now

Makes things a little more interesting if true. Nice to see the NHL actually moving...makes me laugh at all their blowhard threats earlier in the process (and at all the people who took them serious).

 

[ItsAllPartOfThePlan]

2 compliance buyouts per team on the table from NHL now.

Wow...could use one for ourselves and one from a trade. Or both from trades if Aqua is willing to pony up the money. Could really set ourselves up nicely here.

IF a small market team needs to unload a contract, we could get picks (i.e a first round) or a great prospect for buying out that contract.

 

[Jumex]

Per @Real_ESPNLeBrun
Another detail emerging: NHL has upped its compliance buyout offer to 2 per team, up from 1 prior to 2013-14 season.

Edit...Way too Late