[Discussion] Compliance Buyouts, You Get Two

[qwijibo]

On 3/28/2020 at 2:35 AM, wai_lai416 said:

i honestly don't see the league giving compliance buyout to any teams unless the cap goes down lol. if it stays the same then why would they offer you compliance buyout? u fitted all the players under the cap the previous season so why would they let teams off the hooks? compliance buy out was part of the CBA it was negotiated.. it wasn't like the league all of a sudden decided oh we will give you a compliance buyout.. it was a chance for teams to fix their issue back when they were abusing it. majority of the league don't have much issue with their current contracts so obviously they will vote no to compliance buy out.. as it would benefits a few teams that they are competing against. bobrovsky weber etc would all be candidates. i don't see majority of the league would want to help those teams out.. nor would the NHLPA agree for teams to buy out their players 

I agree with most of what you’re saying, in that I don’t think compliance buyouts are likely.  I disagree on who you think might be candidates. Bobrovsky would be insanely expensive to buy out, and considering Weber’s actual salary drops considerably in 3 years (to the point where he’d likely retire) I don’t see a single reason why Montreal would buy him out 

[PuckFather]

I think Louie is a keeper. he scored two goals and had a fight in my game today. 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

4 hours ago, PuckFather said:

I think Louie is a keeper. he scored two goals and had a fight in my game today. 

 

Stop playing on beginner lol

[qwijibo]

Eklund reporting a rumour that teams will get 1 compliance buyout.  That should officially be the end of this rumour. Lol 

[iceman64]

On 3/29/2020 at 4:33 PM, PuckFather said:

I think Louie is a keeper. he scored two goals and had a fight in my game today. 

 

He fought his shadow? Did he win??

[PuckFather]

3 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

He fought his shadow? Did he win??

He was beaten like a teenager fighting Muhamed Ali. 

[Provost]

On 3/29/2020 at 9:58 AM, qwijibo said:

I agree with most of what you’re saying, in that I don’t think compliance buyouts are likely.  I disagree on who you think might be candidates. Bobrovsky would be insanely expensive to buy out, and considering Weber’s actual salary drops considerably in 3 years (to the point where he’d likely retire) I don’t see a single reason why Montreal would buy him out 

The fact Weber’s goes down a lot actually makes him more of a buyout candidate than otherwise.

 

At some point in the next 6 coming years, Montreal hopes to be a team able to go deep in the playoffs and maybe even contend for the Cup.   Having an almost $8 million cap hit for a 40 year old defenceman during those years would absolutely destroy those chances.  They took their chances with Weber because they though they were close, and figured the early years of success would make up for the later years of the albatross contract.  That didn’t work out.

 

Compliance buyouts only cost cash, 2/3rds of remaining money owed.  So Weber having been paid more up front makes a buyout beneficial compared with the huge looming cap hit.

 

There is another consideration to be had.  Presumably a compliance buy out erases future cap recapture penalties.  It would actually be in Nashville’s beer interest to trade for Weber and buy him out, or give Montreal a huge sweetener to buy out Weber to avoid the massive penalty they are facing down the road.

 

 

[qwijibo]

3 hours ago, Provost said:

The fact Weber’s goes down a lot actually makes him more of a buyout candidate than otherwise.

 

At some point in the next 6 coming years, Montreal hopes to be a team able to go deep in the playoffs and maybe even contend for the Cup.   Having an almost $8 million cap hit for a 40 year old defenceman during those years would absolutely destroy those chances.  They took their chances with Weber because they though they were close, and figured the early years of success would make up for the later years of the albatross contract.  That didn’t work out.

 

Compliance buyouts only cost cash, 2/3rds of remaining money owed.  So Weber having been paid more up front makes a buyout beneficial compared with the huge looming cap hit.

 

There is another consideration to be had.  Presumably a compliance buy out erases future cap recapture penalties.  It would actually be in Nashville’s beer interest to trade for Weber and buy him out, or give Montreal a huge sweetener to buy out Weber to avoid the massive penalty they are facing down the road.

 

 

Weber is still a top pairing D and he’s their best d, not to mention he’s their Captain  They don’t have cap issues and buying him out creates a massive hole in the lineup.  He’ll probably lay another 2/3 years and then he either retires or they trade him back to Nashville so they can try to keep him on contract and avoid their massive cap recapture penalty. Either way it makes no sense for Montreal to but him out 

[Junkyard Dog]

3 hours ago, Provost said:

The fact Weber’s goes down a lot actually makes him more of a buyout candidate than otherwise.

 

At some point in the next 6 coming years, Montreal hopes to be a team able to go deep in the playoffs and maybe even contend for the Cup.   Having an almost $8 million cap hit for a 40 year old defenceman during those years would absolutely destroy those chances.  They took their chances with Weber because they though they were close, and figured the early years of success would make up for the later years of the albatross contract.  That didn’t work out.

 

Compliance buyouts only cost cash, 2/3rds of remaining money owed.  So Weber having been paid more up front makes a buyout beneficial compared with the huge looming cap hit.

 

There is another consideration to be had.  Presumably a compliance buy out erases future cap recapture penalties.  It would actually be in Nashville’s beer interest to trade for Weber and buy him out, or give Montreal a huge sweetener to buy out Weber to avoid the massive penalty they are facing down the road.

 

 

There's absolutely no way they use that on Weber. Unless they can keep the buyout till later on when he actually digresses and have someone that can replace what he brings but that's years down the road.

 

In terms of Nashville, they could but Habs gonna ask for stuff. I would be upset if they didn't get anything.

[Provost]

3 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

There's absolutely no way they use that on Weber. Unless they can keep the buyout till later on when he actually digresses and have someone that can replace what he brings but that's years down the road.

 

In terms of Nashville, they could but Habs gonna ask for stuff. I would be upset if they didn't get anything.

I am not suggesting it is an easy slam dunk, but I think they also have to be thinking long term as well.

 

There is nothing to suggest that they will be contending for the next 2-3 years, the exact window that you can expect Weber to be performing at a good level.  Keeping him to help them a little in the short term will almost certainly cost them big time in the long term when they might be looking better and closer to a Cup. 
 

I also think a savvy GM could really leverage Nashville’s looming recapture disaster, to get a big asset in return for buying out Weber.

[qwijibo]

16 minutes ago, Provost said:

I am not suggesting it is an easy slam dunk, but I think they also have to be thinking long term as well.

 

There is nothing to suggest that they will be contending for the next 2-3 years, the exact window that you can expect Weber to be performing at a good level.  Keeping him to help them a little in the short term will almost certainly cost them big time in the long term when they might be looking better and closer to a Cup. 
 

I also think a savvy GM could really leverage Nashville’s looming recapture disaster, to get a big asset in return for buying out Weber.

Bergevin wants to remain competitive. They had a decent showing last season, this year injuries devastated their season. They have a very good prospect pool (plus a top 10 pick being added this summer). There is next to no chance they consider buying out Weber. Nashville’s impending disaster is meaningless to Montreal atm 

[wai_lai416]

On 3/29/2020 at 9:58 AM, qwijibo said:

I agree with most of what you’re saying, in that I don’t think compliance buyouts are likely.  I disagree on who you think might be candidates. Bobrovsky would be insanely expensive to buy out, and considering Weber’s actual salary drops considerably in 3 years (to the point where he’d likely retire) I don’t see a single reason why Montreal would buy him out 

sure weber's salary will drop but does montreal want to take the risk of carrying 8mil worth of cap for another 6 years for a declining player? i don't think he will retire lol.. or they might as well fold nashville as a franchise lol his last year on cap recapture is almost 25mil. bobrovsky is insanely expensive to buy out.. but he's going to be untradeable and he's going to impact the team ability to win anything in the next 10 years. while it'll be expensive i can see florida cutting him.. i mean at the end of the day it's the other nhl team that's paying thru profit sharing anyways.

[mll]

9 hours ago, Provost said:

I am not suggesting it is an easy slam dunk, but I think they also have to be thinking long term as well.

 

There is nothing to suggest that they will be contending for the next 2-3 years, the exact window that you can expect Weber to be performing at a good level.  Keeping him to help them a little in the short term will almost certainly cost them big time in the long term when they might be looking better and closer to a Cup. 
 

I also think a savvy GM could really leverage Nashville’s looming recapture disaster, to get a big asset in return for buying out Weber.

Weber is Montreal property and Nashville has no say on what they do with him - just like the Canucks had no say on Luongo.  Would think that either team could face serious penalties for collusion.   Can't imagine it would have been allowed for Florida to contact Vancouver and suggest a made-up trade to have Luongo go on LTIR instead of retiring.  

 

Doubt the league would enforce it as it is - they'll likely find another formula to spread out the amount due over more years.  Think it was LeBrun that mentioned it.  For example cap the recapture at say 4M per year at most and then calculate the number of years it needs to be spread over.  The lowest end of season cap projection is NJD at 72.8M per CapFriendly.  Don't see the league asking a team to try and operate 12 or 24M under the cap.  Doubt the NHLPA would want that either - it's money not put into salary.

 

Edited April 1, 2020 by mll

[qwijibo]

39 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

sure weber's salary will drop but does montreal want to take the risk of carrying 8mil worth of cap for another 6 years for a declining player? i don't think he will retire lol.. or they might as well fold nashville as a franchise lol his last year on cap recapture is almost 25mil. bobrovsky is insanely expensive to buy out.. but he's going to be untradeable and he's going to impact the team ability to win anything in the next 10 years. while it'll be expensive i can see florida cutting him.. i mean at the end of the day it's the other nhl team that's paying thru profit sharing anyways.

Thing is, Weber isn’t declining right now.  He’s a top pairing D. Weber’s actual salary is $6m for 2 more seasons, then it drops to $3m for 1 year, then $1m for the last 3 years.  I think there’s a very good chance that he retires in that last 3 years (much like Luongo did when his salary dropped to $1m) 

 

The buyout on Bob will be roughly $40m. Do you think the owner of Florida will sign off on that?  I’d love to be a fly on the wall when the GM goes in and explains that despite signing him to a 7 year/ $70m contract they aren’t happy with him and they’d like the owner to pay $40m to erase his mistake so he can spend that $10m a year on someone else.  Lol.  I can’t imagine that goes well. 

[wai_lai416]

2 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Thing is, Weber isn’t declining right now.  He’s a top pairing D. Weber’s actual salary is $6m for 2 more seasons, then it drops to $3m for 1 year, then $1m for the last 3 years.  I think there’s a very good chance that he retires in that last 3 years (much like Luongo did when his salary dropped to $1m) 

 

The buyout on Bob will be roughly $40m. Do you think the owner of Florida will sign off on that?  I’d love to be a fly on the wall when the GM goes in and explains that despite signing him to a 7 year/ $70m contract they aren’t happy with him and they’d like the owner to pay $40m to erase his mistake so he can spend that $10m a year on someone else.  Lol.  I can’t imagine that goes well. 

i don't see weber retiring the last 3 years just to fuk over nashville at 8.3mil cap recapture per year chances are he'll limp around in the last couple years and montreal is going to have a 8mil cap hit for a bottom 6 defenseman. as for florida... sure the florida owner won't be happy about it but at the end of the day this would be their only chance if there is a compliance buyout and he's not even using money out of his pocket.. it's gonna be out of the other teams pocket anyways with the revenue share. hell we wanted to buy out eriksson after 1 year if it wasn't his contract is unbuyoutable. 

[qwijibo]

16 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

i don't see weber retiring the last 3 years just to fuk over nashville at 8.3mil cap recapture per year chances are he'll limp around in the last couple years and montreal is going to have a 8mil cap hit for a bottom 6 defenseman. as for florida... sure the florida owner won't be happy about it but at the end of the day this would be their only chance if there is a compliance buyout and he's not even using money out of his pocket.. it's gonna be out of the other teams pocket anyways with the revenue share. hell we wanted to buy out eriksson after 1 year if it wasn't his contract is unbuyoutable. 

You’re not thinking logically at all. No team owner is going to rubber stamp a $40m buyout.  And you’re assuming Weber will go from a top pairing D to a bottom pairing D in 3 years.  He may. He may not.  His value right now is that of a top D. You don’t buy him out right now for what might happen in 3 years.  Especially when you currently have zero cap issues 

 

Let me put it another way. Large sections on Montreal’s fan base have been calling for Bergevin‘s heaf after missing the playoffs for 3 consecutive seasons.  He needs to have the team show improvement sooner rather than later.  The team is much worse off if they get rid of their top D and captain. They create a hole in the lineup that is next to impossible to fill.  All to create cap space for a team that hasn’t spent to the cap in 3 seasons.  He does that he may as well hand in his resignation at the same time. 

Edited April 1, 2020 by qwijibo

[Ballisticsports.]

10 hours ago, qwijibo said:

You’re not thinking logically at all. No team owner is going to rubber stamp a $40m buyout.  And you’re assuming Weber will go from a top pairing D to a bottom pairing D in 3 years.  He may. He may not.  His value right now is that of a top D. You don’t buy him out right now for what might happen in 3 years.  Especially when you currently have zero cap issues 

 

Let me put it another way. Large sections on Montreal’s fan base have been calling for Bergevin‘s heaf after missing the playoffs for 3 consecutive seasons.  He needs to have the team show improvement sooner rather than later.  The team is much worse off if they get rid of their top D and captain. They create a hole in the lineup that is next to impossible to fill.  All to create cap space for a team that hasn’t spent to the cap in 3 seasons.  He does that he may as well hand in his resignation at the same time. 

 

11 hours ago, qwijibo said:

The buyout on Bob will be roughly $40m. Do you think the owner of Florida will sign off on that?  I’d love to be a fly on the wall when the GM goes in and explains that despite signing him to a 7 year/ $70m contract they aren’t happy with him and they’d like the owner to pay $40m to erase his mistake so he can spend that $10m a year on someone else.  Lol.  I can’t imagine that goes well. 

If I could weigh in on your conversations with each other

 

But someone is telling someone that they aren't thinking logical, while saying in the next comment that they would love to be a fly in the room?

I find this funny, as to why would a fly be interested in hockey talk and even understand english and probably be swatted to death (if one was to remain logical) 

[qwijibo]

49 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

 

If I could weigh in on your conversations with each other

 

But someone is telling someone that they aren't thinking logical, while saying in the next comment that they would love to be a fly in the room?

I find this funny, as to why would a fly be interested in hockey talk and even understand english and probably be swatted to death (if one was to remain logical) 

Not sure if you’re just trying to be funny or if you genuinely aren’t familiar with the phrase “fly on the wall”

Edited April 1, 2020 by qwijibo

[FutureFilm]

On 3/26/2020 at 5:52 PM, Amebushi said:

Apparently I see it differently than most on here. Ok slightly different. LE is a clear buyout candidate and I don’t think that need an explanation. Past that I see the argument for Sutter and I’ll lump in Beagle and Myers here. They are overpaid for their on ice contribution. The big difference is that they are NHL players. LE is not. He is a 6 million dollar AHL player right now. 
So who would I consider for a second buyout. How about another overpaid AHL player?  Baertschi couldn’t crack our roster despite all the injuries and opportunities there were...and cleared waivers. He still costs cap due to his contract and doesn’t even play in Vancouver. 
Ferland is a contributing player on a reasonable contract if he is healthy and a LTIR if he isn’t. It gives better flexibility if he’s not under contract, but it’s not my money. I say cut the pure dead weight before looking for streamlining opportunities 

If we were to only get one, LE is the perfect choice. I totally agree with Baertschi. No point paying guys to play in the AHL. For me Beagle is a bit of a surprise, yes he has a meh contract, but he brings a ton to the team. Outside of Horvat/Edler I think him and Miller bring the most leadership/on/off the ice experience. 

 

Other choices is Sutter or Ferland though Ferland can be put on LTIR (if not healthy)

[KKnight]

If you were given two I would definitely choose Eriksson. Luongo's deal I would look to get out of. I would look to trade Baertschi even at half retention. Sutter at retention as well. Sounds as if Tryamkin is coming, so Benn is potentially gone as well.