Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

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


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, drummer4now said:

Anything to get rid of that plug Loui Ericksson. 

I honestly think a compliance buyout would be better used on Myers.

 

If the cap ends up staying flat for 2-3 years we’ll need more cap flexibility moving forward. Plus I don’t think Myers brings anything that can’t be replaced for half the price.

 

Risky using one on Eriksson if he ends up retiring in the offseason or even next year.

 

Edited by DeNiro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does the virus C-19 impact the NHL talks on a new USA broadcast contract. IMHO Bettman was already in a strong position and now that people are spending huge time in their homes it should get stronger. Content is king and USA broadcasters are desperate for that content. I am hoping that each NHL club will end up with new broadcast revenue in the $5 to $10 million range. 

 

As ambitious as that sounds the teams have to be playing. The loss of revenue in the NHL could be huge. We can only hope that they will be playing by fall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

I don't understand why we need a buyout? lol

Benning has a plan remember?

Did he manufacture the virus to get Covid19 to get buyouts, as his plan?

 

Sutter,Beagle,ErIcksson, Russell,Baer, Ferland,Myers, etc were part of the plan, has everyone giving up that there was no plan? ;)

Are you daft?

 

The cancellation of the season has created a drop in revenue, prior to which the cap was expected to move up at LEAST a few million in which case we would have been fine with the 'plan'.

 

However, with the drop in revenue, the cap is now expected to stay flat or even potentially drop as it's based on revenues. Most teams will require a buyout (or some other tools) to function under that cap reality as most teams are already at/near the cap and with players to re-sign and/or holes to fill.

 

Trying to make this about Benning is :picard:

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, DeNiro said:

I honestly think a compliance buyout would be better used on Myers.

 

If the cap ends up staying flat for 2-3 years we’ll need more cap flexibility moving forward. Plus I don’t think Myers brings anything that can’t be replaced for half the price.

 

Risky using one on Eriksson if he ends up retiring in the offseason or even next year.

 

I agree I'd buy out Myers. As much as I dislike Loui he'll fade out right in time for the big Russian.

 

I'd drop Myers and sign Dillion. Then I'd target time for some prospects. 

Edited by Chris12345
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

I agree I'd buy out Myers. As much as I dislike Loui he'll fade out right in time for the big Russian.

 

I'd drop Myers and sign Dillion. Then I'd target time for some prospects. 

You don't use buyouts on perfectly capable NHL players you could trade (retention or otherwise). They're for cap waste, not cap 'maybe this guy should make a little less'.

 

People seem to be forgetting that next year is our only real 'pinch' year for cap and that we're also going to lose a player, and their cap, next summer with the ED (possibly even Myers!).

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

You don't use buyouts on perfectly capable NHL players you could trade (retention or otherwise). They're for cap waste, not cap 'maybe this guy should make a little less'.

 

People seem to be forgetting that next year is our only real 'pinch' year for cap and that we're also going to lose a player, and their cap, next summer with the ED (possibly even Myers!).

 

 

You won’t be able to trade Myers easily. You’d have an easier time convincing Eriksson to retire.

 

Compliance buyouts are to create cap flexibility. Buying out Myers would go the farthest in doing that.

 

And no one is taking Myers in the draft. He doesn’t bring nearly enough for his paycheck.

Edited by DeNiro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

You won’t be able to trade Myers easily. You’d have an easier time convincing Eriksson to retire.

 

Compliance buyouts are to create cap flexibility. Buying out Myers would go the farthest in doing that.

 

And no one is taking Myers in the draft. He doesn’t bring nearly enough for his paycheck.

Arguably, slightly over paid or not, he's a top 4, NHL, RHD. Yes we could.

 

No buying out Myers wouldn't. As you'd have to pay as much to simply replace him. How is that creating cap flexibility?

 

Las Vegas built a cup contending team by taking a bunch of Myers like players. He's nowhere near as 'over paid' as you're insinuating.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Arguably, slightly over paid or not, he's a top 4, NHL, RHD. Yes we could.

 

No buying out Myers wouldn't. As you'd have to pay as much to simply replace him. How is that creating cap flexibility?

 

Las Vegas built a cup contending team by taking a bunch of Myers like players. He's nowhere near as 'over paid' as you're insinuating.

Except he wasn’t a top 4 here he was playing on the bottom pair by the second half of the season.

 

A bottom pair guy can be replaced for much cheaper than 6 mil. Hence opening up cap.


Waste of a buyout to use it on a guy that will be gone in 2 seasons or less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DeNiro said:

Except he wasn’t a top 4 here he was playing on the bottom pair by the second half of the season.

 

A bottom pair guy can be replaced for much cheaper than 6 mil. Hence opening up cap.


Waste of a buyout to use it on a guy that will be gone in 2 seasons or less.

We don't really have a traditional 'top 4'. It's kind of an antiquated idea anyway. What's his TOI?

 

No it isn't given that's where our cap crunch is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

You don't use buyouts on perfectly capable NHL players you could trade (retention or otherwise). They're for cap waste, not cap 'maybe this guy should make a little less'.

 

People seem to be forgetting that next year is our only real 'pinch' year for cap and that we're also going to lose a player, and their cap, next summer with the ED (possibly even Myers!).

 

 

Good points.

 

So what would a Myers trade look like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, aGENT said:

We don't really have a traditional 'top 4'. It's kind of an antiquated idea anyway. What's his TOI?

 

No it isn't given that's where our cap crunch is.

We have guys like Tryamkin and Rafferty coming that need to be given a spot. Better to give them a chance and save 5 million.

 

Our D was the weakest part of our team this season. We need to make changes there regardless.

 

I’d rather save the money on D for the forwards. Guys like Roussel and Sutter can be traded if needed much easier. And Eriksson can be waived and forced into retirement if it comes to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting rid of Meyers makes no sense.  Elder isn’t going to be around for ever and while we have a lot of potentials in the system they’re just that.  If someone comes in and pushes him out fine, trade him there’s no way there isn’t a team interested in a hulking defensemen who can skate and move the puck. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Yep.

 

A buyout decision would need to be made before that though.

If those players earn spots changes will be made. JB has made moves to ice the line up he wants before this, I see no reason this time is different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Arguably, slightly over paid or not, he's a top 4, NHL, RHD. Yes we could.

 

No buying out Myers wouldn't. As you'd have to pay as much to simply replace him. How is that creating cap flexibility?

 

Las Vegas built a cup contending team by taking a bunch of Myers like players. He's nowhere near as 'over paid' as you're insinuating.

Doesn’t look that out of place to me....

1372A013-54E9-47F2-AD51-6C9B578B4CDF.png

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, DeNiro said:

I honestly think a compliance buyout would be better used on Myers.

 

If the cap ends up staying flat for 2-3 years we’ll need more cap flexibility moving forward. Plus I don’t think Myers brings anything that can’t be replaced for half the price.

 

Risky using one on Eriksson if he ends up retiring in the offseason or even next year.

 

Maybe call Eriksson's agent and inform him that LE will never be playing another shift for this organization, and will be spending the rest of his time in Utica's press box serving food.  If that's better than retiring with what little dignity that useless plug has left, then buy him out.  Myers is at least an NHL player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Maybe call Eriksson's agent and inform him that LE will never be playing another shift for this organization, and will be spending the rest of his time in Utica's press box serving food.  If that's better than retiring with what little dignity that useless plug has left, then buy him out.  Myers is at least an NHL player.

Louie’s still capable of being an NHL player.... he’s just being paid about four million too much :p 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Maybe call Eriksson's agent and inform him that LE will never be playing another shift for this organization, and will be spending the rest of his time in Utica's press box serving food.

Then lose the lawsuit that results from that action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...