TSN: Sabres use compliance buyout on Christian Ehrhoff/Signs 1 Year w/Pens

[Paxon]

If it weren't for the recapture, more than likely he would have been dealt away and it would still be a signing that didn't really work long term.

I agree that the approach failed, yes

 

[Rowley Birkin]

Genuinely shocked by this. Unbelievable that they couldn't at least move him for something.

As I understood it, the recapture risk was not all that bad if he was moved in advance of his cheap years & if salary was retained.

 

[Beerz]

Who really cares about "bad asset management" when the Sabres already have assets upon assets upon assets?

But, White is a guy that is so detached from reality that he thought that trading Myers+ for the 3rd overall pick was "likely".



On second thought, they should have traded Ehrhoff for a 2016 1st so they would have back to back drafts with multiple 1sts again.

And just the other day he was calling for Myers +2 for the number 24 pick.

 

[dotcommunism]

Genuinely shocked by this. Unbelievable that they couldn't at least move him for something.

They surely could have, but not enough to make it worth taking the risk of recapture penalties.

As I understood it, the recapture risk was not all that bad if he was moved in advance of his cheap years & if salary was retained.

The recapture penalty is actually milder if he is moved during his cheap years, however by the point he wouldn't really have much in the way of trade value.

As for retaining salary, even if Buffalo were to retain 50%, it'd only cut the recapture penalty down to $6.5M in the scenario that Ehrhoff retired with one season left on his contract, as opposed to $10M. In return for that $3.5M saving, they'd have $2M in dead cap for as long as he was playing.

Salary retention was never really a great way to deal with the recapture issue

 

[Sabretooth]

Salary retention was never really a great way to deal with the recapture issue

Yes, and no matter how many times this was explained, certain posters who shall not be named would continually offer Ehrhoff @ 50% retained on the trade boards to "help with recapture".

Thankfully this nonsense is finally over!

 

[Zip15]

Ehrhoff (7th) and Leino (9th) are both in the top-10 most expensive buyouts. Nearly $20m between the two of them. Between those guys, the golden parachutes for Ruff and Regier, and the LaFontaine hush money, Uncle Terry is spending a lot of money to fix his mistakes.

http://capgeek.com/buyouts/

Yes, and no matter how many times this was explained, certain posters who shall not be named would continually offer Ehrhoff @ 50% retained on the trade boards to "help with recapture".

Thankfully this nonsense is finally over!

Don't forget the illegal, CBA circumventing side agreements with other owners that would've likely resulted in 1st round picks being taken from us at most inopportune times.

 

[Jim Bob]

And just the other day he was calling for Myers +2 for the number 24 pick.

That's better than Schopp who was ready to dump Myers for a 2nd rounder.

 

[enthusiast]

Again, IMO it's conservative to expect a doomsday scenario with no out, but I suppose the decision's made, over, and done with.

 

[Paxon]

That's better than Schopp who was ready to dump Myers for a 2nd rounder.

That value is basically the same. #24 - 2nd rounder = 2nd rounder at most.

Both are insane. These people are clowns. Schopp is about as bad as I can imagine a sports radio guy.

 

[haseoke39]

Again, IMO it's conservative to expect a doomsday scenario with no out, but I suppose the decision's made, over, and done with.

How conservative?

What do you think the odds are he plays out the entire deal? The odds he retires in a given year?

 

[flashsabre]

Hypothetically imagine Ehrhoff with this situation on the 2007 Blackhawks with the current recapture rules in place.

They just have gotten Toews and Kane and are starting their build. Ehrhoff informs them he doesn't want to be there and they decide to trade him even with the recapture penalty, for prospects. Fast forward 7 years to 2014 and at 38 and with only a $1 million contract for his final year, Ehrhoff decides to go home to Germany. The Hawks are up against the cap and want to sign both Toews and Kane to $10 million dollar deals. Suddenly they are hit with at $ 10 million dollar recapture cap hit and now Kane has to be moved. You cannot take any salary back for Kane or you have to strip other significant pieces in order to try and make it work which weaken your Cup chances significantly.

Nightmare! It is unpopular, but it was the best move to make for the Sabres.

 

[KennyFnPowers*]

That value is basically the same. #24 - 2nd rounder = 2nd rounder at most.

Both are insane. These people are clowns. Schopp is about as bad as I can imagine a sports radio guy.

Ya, didn't even bother commenting on posts about that + wanted to reach into the car stereo and pistol-whip Schoopy - because it seemed bat **** crazy. Somebody from the Sabres organization (or even WGR maybe) ought to bring him up to speed on how the world of pro hockey functions. Or, replace him w/ someone who has a clue.

 

[enthusiast]

How conservative?

What do you think the odds are he plays out the entire deal? The odds he retires in a given year?

Slim. But I don't expect the all-out worst scenario either, because it's logically inconsistent to expect him to retire at 38 yo rather than make 1 million but play at 36 and 37 for the same. If he were to move back home after his salary takes a steep drop from 3 to 1 million per, it'd be a cap penalty of 3 million per year. With a cap that'll probably rise to 75/80 in the next 3/4 years that hit is entirely manageable, especially with the number of ELC or bridge guys that'll be in the NHL.

This is even without considering the fact that NHL teams will act irrationally to help teams in cap trouble. Look at the Brendan Bollig trade for recent evidence of that. Add that to the NHL's tendency to retroactively lift punishments as with New Jersey's pick and it's hardly shortsighted to assume Ehrhoff retiring would have been manageable.

From a cap perspective, I think that all makes this move awfully conservative.

 

[Beerz]

Slim. But I don't expect the all-out worst scenario either, because it's logically inconsistent to expect him to retire at 38 yo rather than make 1 million but play at 36 and 37 for the same. If he were to move back home after his salary takes a steep drop from 3 to 1 million per, it'd be a cap penalty of 3 million per year. With a cap that'll probably rise to 75/80 in the next 3/4 years that hit is entirely manageable, especially with the number of ELC or bridge guys that'll be in the NHL.

This is even without considering the fact that NHL teams will act irrationally to help teams in cap trouble. Look at the Brendan Bollig trade for recent evidence of that. Add that to the NHL's tendency to retroactively lift punishments as with New Jersey's pick and it's hardly shortsighted to assume Ehrhoff retiring would have been manageable.

From a cap perspective, I think that all makes this move awfully conservative.

I'm not sure why there is any justification in taking a risk at this point. We're loaded with assets and talent as it is...

 

[DixonWard15]

Hypothetically imagine Ehrhoff with this situation on the 2007 Blackhawks with the current recapture rules in place.

They just have gotten Toews and Kane and are starting their build. Ehrhoff informs them he doesn't want to be there and they decide to trade him even with the recapture penalty, for prospects. Fast forward 7 years to 2014 and at 38 and with only a $1 million contract for his final year, Ehrhoff decides to go home to Germany. The Hawks are up against the cap and want to sign both Toews and Kane to $10 million dollar deals. Suddenly they are hit with at $ 10 million dollar recapture cap hit and now Kane has to be moved. You cannot take any salary back for Kane or you have to strip other significant pieces in order to try and make it work which weaken your Cup chances significantly.

Nightmare! It is unpopular, but it was the best move to make for the Sabres.

I think the recapture bit is overstated for two reasons:

1. Quite simply, the NHL makes up the rules as it goes along. They retroactively punished the Devils for a "illegal" contract that they approved and then rescinded the punishment...sorta. There is no way the Sabres were going to get hit with a $10 million penalty.

That said, if the "rules" were still in effect:

2. If Ehrhoff did in fact play until age 37 and wanted to retire, thus inflicting maximum pain on the Sabres, the Sabres could have signed him to another contract and let him play in Germany. This would be similar the Kotalik deal.

 

[joshjull]

I think the recapture bit is overstated for two reasons:

1. Quite simply, the NHL makes up the rules as it goes along. They retroactively punished the Devils for a "illegal" contract that they approved and then rescinded the punishment...sorta. There is no way the Sabres were going to get hit with a $10 million penalty.

That said, if the "rules" were still in effect:

2. If Ehrhoff did in fact play until age 37 and wanted to retire, thus inflicting maximum pain on the Sabres, the Sabres could have signed him to another contract and let him play in Germany. This would be similar the Kotalik deal.

No they could't have done this to avoid recapture.

As for #1 its pure folly to hope for the NHL to bail you out later on down the road.

 

[enthusiast]

I'm not sure why there is any justification in taking a risk at this point. We're loaded with assets and talent as it is...

Do you really consider that a risk, though? It's not logical to assume the penalty would be of the magnitude to affect the team by any major measure.

As to why not to do it, he's lost for nothing. If he doesn't fit here, move him out. Would you trade "future considerations" for Rene Borque and a 1st right now, even if he never touched the ice?

 

[joshjull]

Do you really consider that a risk, though? It's not logical to assume the penalty would be of the magnitude to affect the team by any major measure.

As to why not to do it, he's lost for nothing. If he doesn't fit here, move him out. Would you trade "future considerations" for Rene Borque and a 1st right now, even if he never touched the ice?

Actually its quite logical to assume having to clear out 5 or 10mil in cap space will have an impact on the team you can ice.

 

[ZZamboni]

On vacation. Haven't read much regarding the Sabres since Saturday.



When I read this, I was frankly shocked. I honestly thought ....

1. He wanted to be here
2. He would be a Sabre at least 3-5 more years
3. Murray liked him and thought he fit well with his blueprint going forward


Boy was I wrong. Damn. I like Ehrhoff.


Hope he succeeds elsewhere.

 

[Beerz]

Do you really consider that a risk, though? It's not logical to assume the penalty would be of the magnitude to affect the team by any major measure.

As to why not to do it, he's lost for nothing. If he doesn't fit here, move him out. Would you trade "future considerations" for Rene Borque and a 1st right now, even if he never touched the ice?

Of course it's logical to assume the penalty will affect the team...how can you not?

Yes I would move future considerations for Borque and a 1st because future considerations don't amount to squat..they never have...

 

[enthusiast]

Actually its quite logical to assume having to clear out 5 or 10mil in cap space will have a decent impact on the team you can ice.

Check the above post. It's not logically consistent to assume Ehrhoff would go home before the final year of his contract rather than play for 1m while having done the exact same for two years previous.

 

[enthusiast]

Yes I would move future considerations for Borque and a 1st because future considerations don't amount to squat..they never have...

That's the point. Moving Ehrhoff would be like trading a cap hit of ~3m for a 1st, the years would just come later.

 

[Paxon]

Check the above post. It's not logically consistent to assume Ehrhoff would go home before the final year of his contract rather than play for 1m while having done the exact same for two years previous.

It's not unreasonable to think that he might.

 

[dotcommunism]

I think the recapture bit is overstated for two reasons:

1. Quite simply, the NHL makes up the rules as it goes along. They retroactively punished the Devils for a "illegal" contract that they approved and then rescinded the punishment...sorta. There is no way the Sabres were going to get hit with a $10 million penalty.

That said, if the "rules" were still in effect:

2. If Ehrhoff did in fact play until age 37 and wanted to retire, thus inflicting maximum pain on the Sabres, the Sabres could have signed him to another contract and let him play in Germany. This would be similar the Kotalik deal.

This is patently false. The Devils were punished for Kovalchuk's original contract, which was rejected on the grounds of salary cap circumvention. The punishment was not for the second contract which was approved. Furthermore, how was such punishment "retroactive"? There were rules in place which gave the NHL a degree of latitude in assessing what counts as salary cap circumvention and their ruling was upheld by an arbitrator on appeal.

The lessening of punishment was rather arbitrary, and most likely based on the fact that Kovalchuk didn't play out the second contract (which was approved), but assuming that the NHL would necessarily lower or eliminate the recapture penalties based on that is rather questionable logic.

 

[Beerz]

That's the point. Moving Ehrhoff would be like trading a cap hit of ~3m for a 1st, the years would just come later.

Except Ehrhoffs penalty is dead cap. With Borque you're getting a player..an asset..that can be removed from your books. Ehrhoffs hit can not be removed.