News Article: Prior to Holland’s hiring, the Oilers were considering a Milan Lucic buyout

ThreeOfAPerfectPair

Registered User
Oct 26, 2017
7,148
8,951
Edmonton
QXQ1nzL.png


31 Thoughts: Intrigue around NHL Draft starting to take shape - Sportsnet.ca
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KYams17

yukoner88

Registered User
Dec 16, 2009
19,870
24,040
Dawson City, YT
Does Friedman not understand how buyouts work? There is no cap relief in years 5-8 but rather a cap penalty.

Usually the penalty is significantLy lower than the cap hit of the contract though, which is why it would be referred to relief. I don't think.most people realize how bad those cap hits would be though in a lucic buyout. There's no relief at all.

If Chia was the one pondering to do the buy out, I wonder if that's when Katz told Nicholson to turf him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B33K33PING

BarDownBobo

Registered User
Oct 19, 2012
6,444
3,090
City of Champions
Usually the penalty is significantLy lower than the cap hit of the contract though, which is why it would be referred to relief. I don't think.most people realize how bad those cap hits would be though in a lucic buyout. There's no relief at all.

If Chia was the one pondering to do the buy out, I wonder if that's when Katz told Nicholson to turf him.
There's relief in years 1 and 3 of the buyout, but having only the 625k in years 4-8 is manageable. If I'm not mistaken had the contract just been the standard 6m per year a buyout would leave 2m as a cap hit for 8 years. I think there's a certain angle that might make the structure of his contract more palatable to buyout......
 
Last edited:

48g90a138pts

Registered User
Jun 30, 2016
10,388
5,724
OMG! Management thought buying out his contract would have been a good thing!

Year 2 and 4 of the buyout is a complete waste.

If a deal can't be done this year, next offseason he'll be massively easier to move. The mistake has been made. Live with it.

The savings in year 1 and 3 doesn't offset the lack of savings in year 2 and 4. Years 5-8 are chump change but still doesn't justify it. There's a reason everyone saying the contract is buyout proof.

If this info is legit I might start worrying management is back in desperate gotta win now mode, which is the whole reason Chiarelli's plan bombed in the first place.

If management is worried their jobs are on the line f***ing get rid of them. If they're desperate their judgment is clouded.
 

McDNicks17

Moderator
Jul 1, 2010
41,673
30,111
Ontario
Yeah, I thought that was funny too.

Says the true cap relief is in years 5 to 8 when those are actually the only years of the buyout where they’d be paying more than if they didn’t buy him out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jet Walters

Faelko

Registered User
Aug 11, 2002
11,880
4,938
So he gets bent over in just about every deal he makes but plays hard ball when it comes to moving Lucic?

“One year ago, other clubs said Edmonton’s asks were unrealistic.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 780il and KYams17

McTonyBrar

Registered User
Apr 2, 2018
18,482
19,274
I feel a lot more confident with Holland at the helm instead of Chiarelli. Lord only knows what stupidity Chia was trying to peddle when it came to Lucic.
His number 1 priority would likely be to try and save face.

I have no idea why our ask for this garbage bin was high in the first place. He's finished. Take the best deal possible, without asking for a lot, and get rid of that hideous contract
 

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,032
12,667
Does Friedman not understand how buyouts work? There is no cap relief in years 5-8 but rather a cap penalty.

Good point.
I was focusing more on the reported unrealistic ask for Lucic (by Chia) when it came to a trade.
I honesly dont think a buyout is (or ever was) an option here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nabob

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,032
12,667
I have no idea why our ask for this garbage bin was high in the first place. He's finished. Take the best deal possible, without asking for a lot, and get rid of that hideous contract

I think the best case scenario for Lucic is to trade for another bad contract and gamble that the player coming back has some potential to turn things around.
Lucic might turns things around (likely not) with another team but he definitely wont be turning things around in Edmonton.
He has to go.
 

McTonyBrar

Registered User
Apr 2, 2018
18,482
19,274
I think the best case scenario for Lucic is to trade for another bad contract and gamble that the player coming back has some potential to turn things around.
Lucic might turns things around (likely not) with another team but he definitely wont be turning things around in Edmonton.
He has to go.
Bobby Ryan or Loui Eriksson look like good candidates
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad