Moonshinefe Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Why does everyone get so worried about his surgery? Drew Brees had the same injury and procedure on his throwing arm for god sake and that turned out fine. Old Kesler will be back and continue to thrive with a gay orca on his chest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noheart Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 I'm more concerned that Kesler is starting to become injury prone. He plays a pretty reckless style of hockey and I hope it isn't starting to catch up with him. I hope he's just been unlucky and that's it. The Canucks are pretty screwed if he starts getting injured frequently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 I think we have already been screwed because he gets injured frequently. I just don't think he has ever given himself time to heal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Sure it's possible, but whats to say we don't buy him out then he resign's for the same amount of cash on a different team. Plus it's not the Canucks MO to exploit loopholes of such Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goblix Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 What loophole are you talking abou being exploitedt?? The signed CBA that is going to have that clause that has been agreed to by both sides? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n00bxQb Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 The agreed upon clause in the CBA is only that a buyout is possible without any cap penalty to the team The loophole I am talking about is to buyout a player making big dough and signing him on a cheaper cap hit, thus the player makes more money, and the team has the same player at a reduced cap hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Calm down everyone. I see what the OP is saying. He/she is not necessarily saying that Kesler sucks so the Canucks should buy him out, rather he/she is inquiring about a potential cap circumventing loophole. Basically he/she is suggesting that the Canucks buy out Kesler, which means they'd still be paying him his $5 million per year salary but it wouldn't count against the cap, then sign him for league minimum, which would only be a cap hit of $800K (or whatever the new league minimum is). The answer is no, though. The league would axe this in a second and penalize the Canucks heavily. It's kind of a clever idea though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goblix Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 You haven't been allowed to do that since 2005. What makes you think they will remove that language from the CBA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trade Deadline Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chowder Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 You haven't been allowed to do that since 2005. What makes you think they will remove that language from the CBA? Moreover, a Player that has been bought out under the Compliance Buyout provisions of this Agreement shall be prohibited from rejoining the Prior Club that bought him out (via re-signing, trade Assignment or otherwise) for the 2005-06 League Year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Kesler is a bargain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Kesler is an embelishing douche. Until he stops doing that, he's not worth his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Kesler may need to clean up his act, yes, but the guy is a Selke winner and a runner-up twice, and he has two 70+ point seasons under his belt, including a 41 goal season. He's on the level of Patrice Bergeron. In what world is the guy not worth $5 million? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n00bxQb Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Kesler may need to clean up his act, yes, but the guy is a Selke winner and a runner-up twice, and he has two 70+ point seasons under his belt, including a 41 goal season. He's on the level of Patrice Bergeron. In what world is the guy not worth $5 million? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanKeslord17 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Jesus Christ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Yeah they argue over the new cba for 4 months. First thing you want to do is a slimy workaround of the new cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noheart Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Luongo is an embellishing douche. Until he stops doing that, he's not worth his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Kesler may need to clean up his act, yes, but the guy is a Selke winner and a runner-up twice, and he has two 70+ point seasons under his belt, including a 41 goal season. He's on the level of Patrice Bergeron. In what world is the guy not worth $5 million? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noheart Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 So who should get the 2nd line center job in your opinion? I'm thinking Higgins is the safe bet at this point, but it's a hard decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.