ndgolden
Registered User
- Jan 9, 2009
- 1,255
- 311
Does Lou realize Parise is a shell of his former self and has a terrible contract.?
I honestly would not want him off waivers
This is completely made up. Yes, Zach has no back.
Does Lou realize Parise is a shell of his former self and has a terrible contract.?
I honestly would not want him off waivers
Haha...
To be fair, I could see the Zajac for Eberle trade happening...
Does Lou realize Parise is a shell of his former self and has a terrible contract.?
I honestly would not want him off waivers
This sounds like a Devils fan pulling people's legs. In the highly unlikely event those are somehow actually true it would mean Lou is beyond washed up as an executive to the point I would think he was suffering from dementia. So yeah, I'm calling bull shit on that.Before anyone goes nuts, what i'm about to post is NOT from a reliable source, but i thought it would be worth discussing...
Eberle for Zajac
Parise + 1st for Nelson + Lee
Donskoi for MVS & 3rd or 4th
Jagr & Stafford on camp tryouts...
Apparently these are scenarios Lou has discussed...
I'd kick a brick wall if that happened.Haha...
To be fair, I could see the Zajac for Eberle trade happening...
Before anyone goes nuts, what i'm about to post is NOT from a reliable source, but i thought it would be worth discussing...
Eberle for Zajac
Parise + 1st for Nelson + Lee
Donskoi for MVS & 3rd or 4th
Jagr & Stafford on camp tryouts...
Apparently these are scenarios Lou has discussed...
Does Lou realize Parise is a shell of his former self and has a terrible contract.?
I honestly would not want him off waivers
I recently read a rumor that the next CBA, will limit contracts to 5 yrs. I am not sure how credible this rumor is, but I prefer the current 7/8 yr max.The old 13 year contract. What could possibly go wrong?
Interesting note from Staple today in his article on Pulock/Lee/Eberle:
He stated that compliance buyouts are a 'sure thing' for the next CBA. I tried to ask him how many and who the Isles would target but he didn't answer. I'd assume Laad is gone and maybe 1 more (clutter?).
Pretty sure Ladd's contract is buyout proof, meaning the actual cap savings would be very little compared to what he's already been paid. Unless the guy is completely useless he'll just be playing as a well paid 4th liner which goes right along with our M.O.
Sheriff Woody showing off the one timer.
If you didn’t get it from @GTislanders, it’s probably not true.I recently read a rumor that the next CBA, will limit contracts to 5 yrs. I am not sure how credible this rumor is, but I prefer the current 7/8 yr max.
I am more interested in seeing the league limit signing bonuses. End these massive signing bonuses.
I recently read a rumor that the next CBA, will limit contracts to 5 yrs. I am not sure how credible this rumor is, but I prefer the current 7/8 yr max.
I am more interested in seeing the league limit signing bonuses. End these massive signing bonuses.
Pretty sure Ladd's contract is buyout proof, meaning the actual cap savings would be very little compared to what he's already been paid. Unless the guy is completely useless he'll just be playing as a well paid 4th liner which goes right along with our M.O.
He was talking about compliance buyouts. Those are buyouts only done after new labor agreements. This to allow teams to get into compliance of the new rules. Such buyouts do not count against the cap... Basically the Rick Dipietro special.
The player still gets paid, but it is as if the contract never happened from a cap perspective. All players contracts have been eligible for the compliance buyouts, but each team was limited in how many they could have.So his entire AAV would be wiped, not just the actual payout part? Seems that would only work if his contract is no longer compliant with the new structure. Not sure that stuff is all out of my pay grade.
I think signing bonuses are a problem too.
I think people are making a bigger stink out of signing bonuses then they are a problem.
Basically what is the difference if I offer somebody 10-10-5-5 or 1-1-1-1 with bonuses of 9-9-4-4 every July 1. To me front loading contracts would be a much bigger issue then bonuses
The cap is supposed to level the economic playing field.I think people are making a bigger stink out of signing bonuses then they are a problem.
Basically what is the difference if I offer somebody 10-10-5-5 or 1-1-1-1 with bonuses of 9-9-4-4 every July 1. To me front loading contracts would be a much bigger issue then bonuses
The cap is supposed to level the economic playing field.
Deeper pocketed teams being able to offer say $15m signing bonuses due every July,for the first few yrs of a contract,is hardly a level playing field.