mll Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 1 hour ago, aGENT said: Yeah... but then they're not paying the buyout plus the replacement player. I'd imagine it's largely a wash. Might even be cheaper with back diving contracts like Eriksson's (I'd have to do the math). I'd also imagine it would be accompanied by some sort of salary percentage cut back to make it all work. Those two things likely adjust the cap/revenue drop to the new reality. I'm not sure how else they make this work. I don't see how a percentage cut does it alone but I guess we'll find out soon enough. They are still adding a new salary for the replacement player as they park the other. Buyouts are 2/3rds of the base salary. Keeping the guy around has them paying the full base salary. Dreger and Seravalli believe flat cap with a mechanism to make up the losses over time. There were already discussions to keep the cap somewhat flat once the new TV deal kicks in, to allow revenue to catch up with the salary cap to mitigate/eliminate the escrow issue. There's now more catchup to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 5 minutes ago, mll said: They are still adding a new salary for the replacement player as they park the other. Who say's they park them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 1 hour ago, mll said: The owners are against buyouts because they don't want the extra cost. This would cost them even more money. I would imagine its a mix of opinions, some would want it. Others simply don't have to use it, like when we passed on buying out Lu. I can see some influential clubs wanting at least one compliance buyout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 16 minutes ago, aGENT said: Who say's they park them? Aren't you parking that player. For example remove say Eriksson's cap hit from the cap and sign Toffoli. 2 hours ago, aGENT said: As a compromise, I wouldn't hate the alternate idea I've heard that the league simply allow each team one contract that doesn't count against the cap. Effectively the same result as the buyout to the cap but the player is still available if needed, the owners don't need to buy them out/pay someone to not play for them, player still gets paid... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 1 hour ago, mll said: Aren't you parking that player. For example remove say Eriksson's cap hit from the cap and sign Toffoli. I think you might want to re-read that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 18 minutes ago, aGENT said: I think you might want to re-read that. So you are thinking Eriksson as part of the 23 player roster but his contract not counting (as it's the highest on the team). Aren't you trying to use up 81.5M for the other 22 players? vs 23 player roster + Eriksson's buyout not counting against the cap and not part of the 23 player roster. Don't see how solution 1 is not more expensive than approach 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 11 minutes ago, mll said: So you are thinking Eriksson as part of the 23 player roster but his contract not counting (as it's the highest on the team). Aren't you trying to use up 81.5M for the other 22 players? vs 23 player roster + Eriksson's buyout not counting against the cap and not part of the 23 player roster. Don't see how solution 1 is not more expensive than approach 2. Either way is largely a wash to ownership. Erriksson + 22 guys or 2/3 of Eriksson plus 23 guys. Whether teams spend the full $81.5 would be up to them/their owner. Either way I never said we'd 'park' Eriksson in that scenario, which is what your previous comment was. That said, here's hoping he just retires Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanfor42 Posted May 24, 2020 Share Posted May 24, 2020 On 3/24/2020 at 11:01 AM, Jimmy McGill said: why the hate on Myers? he's pretty effective with the right partner. Zero chance Myers is bought out. He's an effective player 1 year into a brand new 5 year contract. Slightly overpaid as he was acquired as a UFA. Benning: Hey AQ can we buy out Myers? AQ: Yes as long as you write the check. Lol. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanfor42 Posted May 24, 2020 Share Posted May 24, 2020 On 3/24/2020 at 11:01 AM, Jimmy McGill said: why the hate on Myers? he's pretty effective with the right partner. Zero chance Myers is bought out. He's an effective player 1 year into a brand new 5 year contract. Slightly overpaid as he was acquired as a UFA. Benning: Hey AQ can we buy out Myers? AQ: Yes as long as you write the check. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nostalgia Posted May 25, 2020 Share Posted May 25, 2020 Myers is similar to a less established Edler. Let him figure out his role with the team and get comfortable in Vancouver before the fan base is ready to ship him out. I can't be alone in seeing he was crucial in times this past season. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted May 25, 2020 Share Posted May 25, 2020 On 5/23/2020 at 12:59 PM, aGENT said: Either way is largely a wash to ownership. Erriksson + 22 guys or 2/3 of Eriksson plus 23 guys. Whether teams spend the full $81.5 would be up to them/their owner. Either way I never said we'd 'park' Eriksson in that scenario, which is what your previous comment was. That said, here's hoping he just retires I will be absolutely shocked if we have anything close to 81.5 million cap next season. Its likely 18 months until fans are allowed to return to games. Considering how badly everyone's businesses have been ravaged by this so far, owners aren't going to let things roll with the league taking huge losses. The CBA is constructed to balance spending against revenue. When revenue is up, both sides benefit, when its down, both sides feel it. The only way we get close to 80 million next season, is with 50% escrow (possible). The money has to come from somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 25, 2020 Share Posted May 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said: I will be absolutely shocked if we have anything close to 81.5 million cap next season. Its likely 18 months until fans are allowed to return to games. Considering how badly everyone's businesses have been ravaged by this so far, owners aren't going to let things roll with the league taking huge losses. The CBA is constructed to balance spending against revenue. When revenue is up, both sides benefit, when its down, both sides feel it. The only way we get close to 80 million next season, is with 50% escrow (possible). The money has to come from somewhere. I don't see how the cap goes down though, teams have made commitments that will cripple their teams going forward if say it drops to 70 mil or something like that. I can see a flat cap for several years along with some creative accounting solutions like having "cap exempt" players or compliance buyouts both of which have their issues but I can't see a cap drop or status quo getting it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 25, 2020 Share Posted May 25, 2020 1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said: I will be absolutely shocked if we have anything close to 81.5 million cap next season. Its likely 18 months until fans are allowed to return to games. Considering how badly everyone's businesses have been ravaged by this so far, owners aren't going to let things roll with the league taking huge losses. The CBA is constructed to balance spending against revenue. When revenue is up, both sides benefit, when its down, both sides feel it. The only way we get close to 80 million next season, is with 50% escrow (possible). The money has to come from somewhere. I was just referencing the figure the other poster used. I have no idea what the cap will actually be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted May 25, 2020 Share Posted May 25, 2020 3 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: I don't see how the cap goes down though, teams have made commitments that will cripple their teams going forward if say it drops to 70 mil or something like that. I can see a flat cap for several years along with some creative accounting solutions like having "cap exempt" players or compliance buyouts both of which have their issues but I can't see a cap drop or status quo getting it done. At the end of the day, owners won't settle for anything that doesn't equate to an equal split of revenue. However that gets accomplished, either through rollbacks on existing contracts or increased escrow. What might make an interesting thread, is unique and Interesting ways to increase revenue, as the league likely has a huge hole to fill for the next few seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 25, 2020 Share Posted May 25, 2020 2 hours ago, VegasCanuck said: At the end of the day, owners won't settle for anything that doesn't equate to an equal split of revenue. However that gets accomplished, either through rollbacks on existing contracts or increased escrow. What might make an interesting thread, is unique and Interesting ways to increase revenue, as the league likely has a huge hole to fill for the next few seasons. more expansion maybe? 650 million from a Quebec group might look pretty good right now. A 2nd Toronto team? It might be awesome to double the hate on TO If you crunch the numbers on attendance and somehow squeeze out even an extra $3-5 per person per game thats a massive amount of revenue. I think if you can find ways of getting people to the rink early with special events you might be able to do that. I bet if you can get people to come for 1 extra hour they simply buy more stuff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted July 1, 2020 Share Posted July 1, 2020 From the sounds of things the league and the NHLPA are closing in on a deal to extend the CBA with modifications. There hasnt been a single mention of compliance buyouts by anyone reporting on the negotiations. Anyone still dreaming of a compliance buyout should probably put that one to bed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted July 2, 2020 Share Posted July 2, 2020 Compliance buyouts will be back right after Loui's contract expires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted July 2, 2020 Share Posted July 2, 2020 16 hours ago, playboi19 said: Compliance buyouts will be back right after Loui's contract expires. Great just in time to use on Myers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted July 2, 2020 Share Posted July 2, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted July 2, 2020 Share Posted July 2, 2020 No sense in using a compliance buyout on Myers. His NTC is up just in time for the expansion draft. He can be one of the players left available for Seattle to grab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now