Buyout Candidates...Will we see any this year?

[CanucksJay]

50 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

This actually makes a lot of sense from a Cap savings perspective for 21-22 and in 22-23.  One positive of the larger cap hit in 22-23 is that the team will no longer have the Loungo albatross to contend with and that will offset the increased cap hit for those two players in that year.

 

 

 

Sooo looks like Holtby wont be getting bought out. Dont we need to expose him to the expansion draft?

[Bad_BOI_pete]

4 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

I'm not a fan of buying out Roussel. We would still have a cap hit of $1,733,334 for next year, and $633,334 for the following year.

 

If we had to send him to the AHL for the remainder of his contract, our cap hit on him would be $1,875,000 as buried salary. There's not enough of a difference to justify having him completely gone.

 

His first year here, before his knee injury, he was a really effective player for us, clocking in at almost .5 points per game average. Considering the difference, I'd rather give him the opportunity to prove that he can show up in camp next season and that with a summer of training, that he can recover his form from 3 years ago.

 

There's a lot who have suggested buying out Beagle, would prefer though that he recover and return to the lineup and finish out his contract. He is a fitness fanatic, which isn't a bad thing to have around young players. Also, a lot of fans are hard on him because he doesn't produce much offense, but he wasn't brought to Vancouver to produce offense, he was brought here to make it harder for other teams to score on us. He accomplishes that when he's healthy.

that is not true about  the offense, and you know it. he  wasn't expected to score 20  goals  and 35  points  but his last 4 seasons  he averaged 9g and 26 points over 82gp before he signed with us. since then he's averaged 3.5G and 14 points over 82gp. no one in their right mind would sign beagle for 4  years assuming/expecting for his goal/point totals to drop in half.

[mll]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

OK thanks thats something I'll go take a look at. So really, the Kucherov thing looks even more to me like actual calculated circumvention. 

He had surgery.  His agent said that he returned earlier than recommended.  He also said that if Kucherov was ready to play earlier Tampa would have had to clear cap space because there is just no way they would accept to sit on LTIR. 

 

The league investigated and they see no wrong doing because the timeline is within the range for that type of surgery.  Quenneville and GM Zito were also asked by LeBrun and they have no issue with it either.

 

[Kootenay Gold]

9 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

Sooo looks like Holtby wont be getting bought out. Dont we need to expose him to the expansion draft?

They will still have to expose him in order to meet expansion rule requirements. If he is claimed by Seattle his cap hit is gone completely; if not the buyout could proceed shortly afterwards. Either way, there will be Cap savings to be had.

[Fred65]

38 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

true  but if you have a player like ferland who never play again or kucherov who was "out for the  season" you can continually circumvent the cap if players like this are added every offseason. because adding a LTIR player does not recalculate the ascl, There's  always someone LTIRetired every year.

 

any team that trades for a player with a ltir status and the team already has a LTIR player and very good acsl can utilize this loop.

the canucks could do it, our acsl is like 81.492. we could trade for a LTIRetired player circumvent the cap and then trade ferland  and beagle and we would have a bonus cushion of whatever the cap hit of the traded player is. 

As I understand That's what TO/Gilman did to reduce a salary expendiyure from US$99 million down to  cap hit of US$84 mill.. Heck Gilman made the model for every one  else to follow

[CanucksJay]

3 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

They will still have to expose him in order to meet expansion rule requirements. If he is claimed by Seattle his cap hit is gone completely; if not the buyout could proceed shortly afterwards. Either way, there will be Cap savings to be had.

So you can waive him for compliance buyout and still expose him while he is on waivers for expansion?

If I was Seattle, why on earth would I pick him then? I would just wait until hes bought out and then sign him to a 2m offer while Canucks are paying him his buyout fees

I could then take one of Motte, McEwan, Lind, Gadj or even Myers of any of those guys are unprotected

[VegasCanuck]

14 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

that is not true about  the offense, and you know it. he  wasn't expected to score 20  goals  and 35  points  but his last 4 seasons  he averaged 9g and 26 points over 82gp before he signed with us. since then he's averaged 3.5G and 14 points over 82gp. no one in their right mind would sign beagle for 4  years assuming/expecting for his goal/point totals to drop in half.

He's always been a defensive specialist, yes he's had more offensive numbers at times in the league, but playing in Washington, that's going to happen.

 

It's not why he was brought in here. He was brought here primarily, to make our penalty kill better and provide mentorship to our evolving prospects.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

But this is exactly what we're taking about. We take say... Palat or Killorn, they take Beagle and Roussel on IR.

paquette is  a solid player at 1.65 and only slightly over paid.  coburn was probably only worth maybe 900K he still played 19 games this  year.

in the end ottawa came away with a 2nd, 7th and ryan dzingel  for -2ltir contacts and galchenyuk.

 

this was a win/win  trade. i don't see why we can't do the same as ottawa  or go down the TBL route.

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

We have Chris Gear who's quite capable of doing the exact same things.

I don't know the man, I believe he also does the player, coach contracts, like Pearsons and Ericksson. He worked for Blake, Cassels & Graydon in Toronto.

[JM_]

28 minutes ago, mll said:

He had surgery.  His agent said that he returned earlier than recommended.  He also said that if Kucherov was ready to play earlier Tampa would have had to clear cap space because there is just no way they would accept to sit on LTIR. 

 

The league investigated and they see no wrong doing because the timeline is within the range for that type of surgery.  Quenneville and GM Zito were also asked by LeBrun and they have no issue with it either.

 

well, I think we'd have to take the agents comments with a grain of salt. 

 

If its not calculated circumvention, its quite fortunate timing. 

[CanucksJay]

Compliance buy outs reminds me of the recession from 2008-2009.

All these bad contracts are like those bad mortgages lol

We need one of you smart guys to find out how to take these tranches of bad contracts, bundle them up nicely, put a bow on it, and sell it as a bond.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

4 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

He's always been a defensive specialist, yes he's had more offensive numbers at times in the league, but playing in Washington, that's going to happen.

 

It's not why he was brought in here. He was brought here primarily, to make our penalty kill better and provide mentorship to our evolving prospects.

nah thats just what people in denial say.  beagles 9 minutes of 5on5 play does not make up for his PK stats, I mean the PK stats aren't even very good. The best PK's dont run 2 defensive centers with no offensive pushback  on their PK. that 3 million would have been better spent  on a puck possesion veteran instead. winning games is also good for developing your youth, so i also don't buy  the  leadership. we could have easily signed a 32 year old vet for a million dollars like brad richardson or nate thompson.

 

also facceoff percentage is one of the most overrated stats in hockey, especially when the player is a 4th liner.

[Kootenay Gold]

38 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

So you can waive him for compliance buyout and still expose him while he is on waivers for expansion?

If I was Seattle, why on earth would I pick him then? I would just wait until hes bought out and then sign him to a 2m offer while Canucks are paying him his buyout fees

I could then take one of Motte, McEwan, Lind, Gadj or even Myers of any of those guys are unprotected

Virtanen would have to be waived for a buyout during the 1sr buyout period. Holtby could be waived for a buyout right after the expansion freeze is lifted if he is not chosen by Seattle in the expansion draft.

 

Seattle has no guarantee that Vancouver will buy him out after the expansion draft or that some other team may put in a claim for him. We really have know way of knowing just what Seattle will do concerning their pick from the Canucks exposed players.

 

 

 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

53 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

They will still have to expose him in order to meet expansion rule requirements. If he is claimed by Seattle his cap hit is gone completely; if not the buyout could proceed shortly afterwards. Either way, there will be Cap savings to be had.

edit i was wrong.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Petey_BOI

[Kootenay Gold]

Just now, Petey_BOI said:

but if someone does put a claim on him we are screwed, we will have to trade for another goalie thats eligible otherwise something bad happens.

It is what it is. The Canucks have to expose one goalie that meets the expansion requirements and that would be either Holtby or Demko. Demko is not going to be the one exposed. The 2nd buyout period does not happen till after the expansion is over so the Canucks have the option to either keep him and not waive him for buyout or to waive him for a buyout and see if their are any takers.

 

After re-reading your post I think you are missing the point that the Canucks do not have to waive him for a buyout prior to the expansion draft. That could occur during the 2nd buyout period after the expansion draft if they opt to do that and that Holtby is not taken by Seattle.

[Kootenay Gold]

We may need to acquire another goalie if he is either taken by Seattle or we waive him for a buyout. The Canucks might be able to find a cheaper backup option in net for a lower cap hit and cash value. IMO any pickup would probably be a 2, and max of 3 yr signing.

[CanucksJay]

50 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

It is what it is. The Canucks have to expose one goalie that meets the expansion requirements and that would be either Holtby or Demko. Demko is not going to be the one exposed. The 2nd buyout period does not happen till after the expansion is over so the Canucks have the option to either keep him and not waive him for buyout or to waive him for a buyout and see if their are any takers.

 

After re-reading your post I think you are missing the point that the Canucks do not have to waive him for a buyout prior to the expansion draft. That could occur during the 2nd buyout period after the expansion draft if they opt to do that and that Holtby is not taken by Seattle.

Oh good. Ok so we'll see if he's taken by Seattle first and then if not taken, decide whether to buy him out or not? 

[CanucksJay]

1 hour ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Virtanen would have to be waived for a buyout during the 1sr buyout period. Holtby could be waived for a buyout right after the expansion freeze is lifted if he is not chosen by Seattle in the expansion draft.

 

Seattle has no guarantee that Vancouver will buy him out after the expansion draft or that some other team may put in a claim for him. We really have know way of knowing just what Seattle will do concerning their pick from the Canucks exposed players.

 

 

 

Does Virtanen need to be waived before expansion draft because he is younger than 25?

It's too bad we can't wait to see if Seattle picks him or Holtby before buying him out. 

What a turn of events. Last year I was thinking we'd have to protect Jake for the draft. 

 

[Kootenay Gold]

10 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

Does Virtanen need to be waived before expansion draft because he is younger than 25?

It's too bad we can't wait to see if Seattle picks him or Holtby before buying him out. 

What a turn of events. Last year I was thinking we'd have to protect Jake for the draft. 

 

He would have to be waived at the 1st buyout. In order to qualify for the 2nd buyout his AAV (annual average value) would have to be 4 mil or over. Holtby fills that requirement,; Virtanen does not.

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, Petey_BOI said:

i'm so confused because tampa had a 90million playing roster this year. I believe if you have a player already on LTIR and trade for another LTIR player during the offseason  when the upper limit is 10% higher it does not adjust the ascl, allowing you to extend the 10% bonus into the season. that may  not be entirely true, but you can  circumvent the cap with LTIR players. it's how tampa and toronto did  it.

Don't worry Boi, i'm confused too lol.   It's a spin doctor move for sure what they both managed.   That's why they have guys they pay big bucks for to figure this stuff out.    Also why when JB says he doesn't see cap issues this off season i believe him.    There is data we don't have.   Beagles injury for example. JVs situation too.   And other things we probably haven't considered.   That said i don't think we can afford to add a big name without a trade.  See us playing the kids next season.   The timing is ideal.