Sign in to follow this  
Battlemonger

[Speculation] Could Coronavirus Lead to the Return of Compliance Buyouts?

Recommended Posts

I like the Louie and Luuuu buy outs.

People are crazy to suggest Myers. He has been very solid for us, and we need him.

If Luongo contract can't be bought out, then Louie and either Sutter or Baer. I'm not sure if we could trade either of those two at this point.

We'd keep Ferland in my mind, because he either sits on LTIR, where we can access his hit against the cap, or he plays, so he's fine to stay where he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Erickson-- 2 yrs x 6

Luongo - 3 x 3 million

 

Ferland would long term insurance so not against cap.

Edited by wildcam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Nope :)

 

You don't buy out perfectly capable and needed (PK and dzone starts), NHL players.

Like Sutter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Beagle>>>>>>>Sutter.

 

We also need PKers on the 4th line. Beagles been doing a good job at that.

:huh:

 

You guys realize Sutter does everything Beagle can do but can jump up to 3rd line matchup as well if necessary right? I love beagle but his contract isn't great let's face it. I'd rather they get rid of term rather than a 1 year contract.

  • Vintage 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

Good points @Canuck Surfer and @oldnews regarding Myers...…..I have to admit, I am not a fan, but your points were valid, and I may have to rethink my opinion.

 

It is that 6 million, I have trouble swallowing...……..

 

If we were looking at what these guys would cost...…..Myers (6.0 M), Tanev (5.25 M), Tryamkin (3.25 M) Rafferty (1.00 M) is that an acceptable cost for your RHD?

 

Is 15.5 Million for your RHD  low enough cost?

 

With a LHD of Hughes (7.0 M), Edler (6.0 M), Juolevi (1.0 M) and Fantenberg (1.0 M) = 15.0 M

 

That is 30.5 Million for your defense...………...I think that would be the highest in the league...……...and far from the best

 

So what gives?

Its a function of not having RHD prospects to elevate on ELC's. So we got Myer as a UFA. I almost never go backwards, i liked the deal at the time. We traded the pick that became Rasmus Andersson (If I'm not mistaken) for Baertschi. But the point is you still need to draft RHD, and often enough you nail it. Because all will not hit!

 

Hughes wont be on $7 mill next year yet. And if it is 2021/22, who says that Edler, near 35, and no longer collecting PP points will command $6 mill?  Mind you, Hughes will command more...

 

If we carry 8 D on a 23 man roster? Benning's preferred configuration. 34.78% of the cap should be D. Or $28.34 mill.  So $30 is not over by much.

 

And if u are to spend overspend?  Competent RHD are the rarest & hardest to fill slots in the NHL. 

 

Its not perfect. Just what it is.

 

 

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:

We can just LTIR Ferland if it doesn't work out. Why waste a buy out?

Because you can’t just LTIR him... he has to retire, otherwise you can’t spend the money that his salary would take up.

 

He plans on coming back next season, so you wouldn’t be able to retain/sign another player, and you end up losing the player you would otherwise have retained, and then not having Ferland in that spot.

 

No way they buy out Myers this soon... so it would be Eriksson plus one of Sutter/Beagle/Roussel/Baertschi/Ferland

 

 Sutter and Baertschi expire next year and that is money we can’t really spend this year anyways as we need to save it for Petterson/Hughes extensions.

 

That leaves Roussel/Beagle/Ferland who have the term left to make a buyout worth it.  Ferland is the least useful player and has the most term of any of them.

 

There is also the possibility they allow a player to get buried in the minors with their full cap coming off the books.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Vanuckles said:

Like Sutter?

I wouldn't be buying out Beagle or Sutter.

 

Eriksson and Baer. Beyond that we don't have seas of 'bad' contracts the media and some of CDC seem to think we do.

 

Again, we don't need to buy out perfectly capable, useful, actual NHL caliber, players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rick Blight said:

Eriksson and then argue that we should have the recapture penalty for Luongo either waived or argue that it could be paid off similar to a compliance buyout.

Should be waived I’m pretty sure Luongo deal was signed before the rule was in place. However we’re still getting penalized for the rule passing after we already had the contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, oldnews said:

The difference between Sutter 4.4 and Baertschi 3.4 is 1 million

Solely based on salary is a really poor, reductive way to look at it.

 

Baertschi is 'dead cap' in the AHL

 

Sutter is your #7 forward

Principal penalty killer

2nd lowest ozone starts on the team (to Beagle).

Positive goal diffentilal 5 on 5 in that role.

Lowest goals against per 60 (2.2) on the team

17 pts in 44 games

 

Even Baertschi - or Luongo recrap aside - there are other players I'd buy out before Sutter (who I'd name if pressed, but they aren't the point).

 

 

Sutter has been mailing it in for the better part of 3 years. I don’t want that anywhere near any of our players. If he doesn’t get bought out, I’m on board for trading him for a 7th round pick. 
 

Sure, he’s on the PK. We also have Motte, Miller, Beagle, Roussel, Bo etc... that are great fits there.

 

If I have to witness another moment of Sutter half-a£€ getting off the ice on a line change, I’m gonna go crazy. Guy’s supposed to be a leader. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it might be in the league and Bettmans best interest to allow the Penalty recapture for Luongo to be bought out. It gives them an option to back peddle with Webber. As it currently stands Nashville and Montreal to a lesser extent are in a whole world to SH!t if Webber retires. This would allow everyone to save face and not make a farce of this ridiculous situation. How on earth Nashville could possibly manage to find the money to pay $12M or $24 M for Webbers retirement without wiping out the team is anyones guess.

Its a good opportunity to start with a clean slate and more level playing surface.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, oldnews said:

why buy out a 3.4 million contract in the AHL when you can buy out the guy playing the 3rd most minutes on the team?

 

the player with the 2nd most combined hits and blocked shots?

your 2nd leading D goal scorer?  3rd in D scoring.

2nd most takeaways on the team?  (rare for a defenseman, btw) - I believe he's 12th among NHL D in that category.

second unit penalty killer.

Likewise with the proposals to buyout Beagle, or Sutter.  CDC gonna CDC.

 

 

 

I'm talking about a worst case cap scenario where 1 mil actually makes a difference. We don't know what the cap situation is going to be. Of course Sutter has merit, but teams have had to dump good players for cap reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, aGENT said:

I wouldn't be buying out Beagle or Sutter.

 

Eriksson and Baer. Beyond that we don't have seas of 'bad' contracts the media and some of CDC seem to think we do.

 

Again, we don't need to buy out perfectly capable, useful, actual NHL caliber, players.

unless due to bonus overage, a static cap and new UFA negotiations you really need that extra 1 mil. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

unless due to bonus overage, a static cap and new UFA negotiations you really need that extra 1 mil. 

There's other, easy ways to get that extra mil without hacking off C depth and one of your top penalty killers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aGENT said:

There's other, easy ways to get that extra mil without hacking off C depth and one of your top penalty killers.

such as? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

such as? 

Waive someone. Trade a winger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, aGENT said:

I wouldn't be buying out Beagle or Sutter.

 

Eriksson and Baer. Beyond that we don't have seas of 'bad' contracts the media and some of CDC seem to think we do.

 

Again, we don't need to buy out perfectly capable, useful, actual NHL caliber, players.

i think I know which way this is headed.

 

Agree to disagree :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Waive someone. Trade a winger.

OK so waiving someone doesn't save you 4.375 mil. 

 

There isn't a winger that makes more (other than Loui) that saves you more cap that you'd want to move over Sutter. 

 

I'm not anti-Sutter, but if you need 10+ mil there's only one way to do it via compliance buyout. 

Edited by Jimmy McGill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If 2 buyouts Eriksson is gone. and I think I'd wait to see how Pete and Hughes next contracts shake out. Meyers might be my next target especially if Tryamkin returns and is better defensively. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

OK so waiving someone doesn't save you 4.375 mil. 

 

There isn't a winger that makes more (other than Loui) that saves you more cap that you'd want to move over Sutter. 

 

I'm not anti-Sutter, but if you need 10+ mil there's only one way to do it via compliance buyout. 

Completely agree on the principle - that could be the difference in retaining all our free agents or having someone walk. I disagree about the guy.

 

Sutter has only 1 year left after this year. Beagle has 2. They both provide a similar skill set and we needed a couple of matchup centers prior to Gaudette's arrival. But now that AG is here and producing (although he's not a checking center), one of them is replaceable. Beagle is the candidate for me because he has another year left on his deal (Hughes, Petey contracts...) whereas Sutter has only 1 more year left so we'll have both of them off the books by end of next year in this scenario. We can choose to re-sign Sutter to a cheaper deal because we definitely need a good faceoff RHC that can matchup against top 6 lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Vanuckles said:

Completely agree on the principle - that could be the difference in retaining all our free agents or having someone walk. I disagree about the guy.

 

Sutter has only 1 year left after this year. Beagle has 2. They both provide a similar skill set and we needed a couple of matchup centers prior to Gaudette's arrival. But now that AG is here and producing (although he's not a checking center), one of them is replaceable. Beagle is the candidate for me because he has another year left on his deal (Hughes, Petey contracts...) whereas Sutter has only 1 more year left so we'll have both of them off the books by end of next year in this scenario. We can choose to re-sign Sutter to a cheaper deal because we definitely need a good faceoff RHC that can matchup against top 6 lines.

for me, I'd keep Beagle over Sutter but thats why we have a discussion board. I just don't see Sutter ever being back to form, he hasn't been healthy for 3 years. If he is tho, he's very effective. 

 

 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.