[Discussion] Bad Contracts

[JM_]

1 minute ago, mll said:

Revenue sharing is limited and doesn't cover all their losses.  Ownership is taking the hit.

I think I'd need to see proof of this. I think his losses are mitigated by moving to the college rink. 

[mll]

Just now, JM_ said:

I guess he could be sent to Abby and maybe placed on IR and not LTIR? at least we'd get the savings from sending him down. 

Can't demote someone on IR without their consent.  There's no escrow in the AHL so maybe he would prefer it.  Still gives a residual cap hit of 1.375M + Ferland is already on LTIR.  Other teams will do their possible to avoid LTIR.

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, mll said:

Can't demote someone on IR without their consent.  There's no escrow in the AHL so maybe he would prefer it.  Still gives a residual cap hit of 1.375M + Ferland is already on LTIR.  Other teams will do their possible to avoid LTIR.

the LTIR rules seem really unfair to me, almost punitive. For a legitimate career ending issue like Ferland, I don't understand why the team cap has to suffer for it, its not under anyones control. 

[BlastPast]

&^@# that.

[Angry Goose]

2 hours ago, Angry Goose said:

 

 

Poolman isnt terrible by any means. Maybe 1mill too high in terms of efficiency but if he can get healthy, we all know how valuable a RH shot can be.  Now that Hamonic is gone though, and if the Canucks move someone like Meyers who they can net + value for, Canucks may need to hang onto Poolman (if healthy).  But if the contract is viewed as onerous who knows.  

 

 

1 hour ago, mll said:

Poolman is a LTIR risk with his migraines which could make his contract difficult to trade.  Teams lose cap space if they operate in LTIR - creates bonus overages and limits roster flexibility.  Hard also on roster construction when someone could be in and out of the lineup.  

 

[mll]

59 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I think I'd need to see proof of this. I think his losses are mitigated by moving to the college rink. 

Moving to that rink is going to lower the operating costs - not the same security, ticketing procedure, maintenance work etc.  They are also in a location that is more easily accessible.

 

Arizona would still be losing money - revenue sharing allows teams to mitigate their losses but it doesn't make them necessarily break-even.

 

The revenue sharing pool is 6.055% of the league's HRR.  For a 5 billion HRR - the revenue sharing pool is roughly 300M.  Typically the 10 teams with the highest revenue will contribute to that pool and the NHL will supplement it with playoff gate receipts to reach that percentage set in the CBA.  That pool is then distributed to the remaining teams according to a key.  

 

Bettman confirmed that Arizona was the team receiving the largest share and also commented that moving to the smaller rink wasn't going to change what they receive.  It could impact HRR and the revenue sharing pool, but the distribution key wouldn't change even if they lose more money.

 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, mll said:

Moving to that rink is going to lower the operating costs - not the same security, ticketing procedure, maintenance work etc.  They are also in a location that is more easily accessible.

 

Arizona would still be losing money - revenue sharing allows teams to mitigate their losses but it doesn't make them necessarily break-even.

 

The revenue sharing pool is 6.055% of the league's HRR.  For a 5 billion HRR - the revenue sharing pool is roughly 300M.  Typically the 10 teams with the highest revenue will contribute to that pool and the NHL will supplement it with playoff gate receipts to reach that percentage set in the CBA.  That pool is then distributed to the remaining teams according to a key.  

 

Bettman confirmed that Arizona was the team receiving the largest share and also commented that moving to the smaller rink wasn't going to change what they receive.  It could impact HRR and the revenue sharing pool, but the distribution key wouldn't change even if they lose more money.

 

man, that makes it even worse. I suspect AZ is actually close to break-even with that scenario, or at least the owner is able to absorb the operating losses enough with an eye to cash in with a sale down the road - thats where I think this is leading. I don't care what the owners public statements are, he's positioning this for sale. 

 

So not only is AZ benefiting from HRR, that owners is shrinking the pie for everyone else. Oh and taking some of the best prospects in the meantime. Man some owners must be quite pissed off. 

[Angry Goose]

5 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

 

 

As for Poolman, it's a bit trickier - he hasn't really had a decent chance to show us what he's got. He may still pan out and become the top shutdown RD we need but we didn't see enough last year. Granted he sucked when the rest of our team sucked under Green and he barely played under Bruce, and when he did he wasn't fantastic but he wasn't dreadful either under Boudreau. We could give him a bit more of a chance but I'd much rather we try and flip him to anyone and try to find a top young RD elsewhere. 

 

I really do think if Poolman is gtg for next year, and the Canucks move Meyers (who I think they can get value back for) then the Poolman is staying.  He has a high compete level and defensively I think he’s better than Meyers.  Hes an above average skater imo as well. Boudreau’s system is much better for clearing the d zone than Green.  Id like to see how he does.  

 

Hughes Schenn

OEL Poolman

McD/Rathbone Burroughs/McD

 

Sign some cheaper depth guys. Maybe Brady Keeper is healthy and ready to compete. See how competition for spots pans out then if a move needs to be made, cross that bridge when u get there. 

[J.I.A.H.N]

11 hours ago, JM_ said:

why shouldn't 1/2 the league do this. Lets turn the whole thing into a joke. Move the Canucks to UBC for the next 4 years and clean up on top picks. 

All seriousness aside Jimmy..............

 

Do you know how much heat "Team Tank" has taken over the years................with all the experts saying it never happens

 

I mean Edmonton has done it, Toronto has done it, pretty sure Ottawa did it...................so why so sour on Arizona?

[Phil_314]

If Poolman's not healthy or fit to play then IR/ LTIR it is.  Dickinson's hardly an issue, and if he's out of contention for a roster spot we can always bury him, and a buyout only tacks on $991k for each of the following years after.

 

Poolman costs even less in the event of a buyout at $916k


If it costs a 4th line guy to buy them out, then 11/10 times we should do it (if there's no takers - and we shouldn't be trading early to mid round picks to dump them).  

[JM_]

9 hours ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

All seriousness aside Jimmy..............

 

Do you know how much heat "Team Tank" has taken over the years................with all the experts saying it never happens

 

I mean Edmonton has done it, Toronto has done it, pretty sure Ottawa did it...................so why so sour on Arizona?

because its being abused. Not only are they tanking for a ridiculous amount of time (like 5-6 years when its all over) they will be playing in a &^@#ing college rink. Its a disgrace to the game, and only being allowed by the grace of Bettman. 

 

Its just another example of Bettman letting the US teams do what they want. 

Edited June 9, 2022 by JM_

[ABNuck]

Both Dickie's and Poolman's contracts are easy to keep on the roster if they compete and win a spot...if they get outplayed by a player on an ELC then waive them through to Abby. If they get claimed then it costs us nothing to move their contract off the books, if they waive through then they're available for injury replacements. I don't see any need to pay out assets to get rid of contracts that can still play and contribute, even if it's only as a couple game injury replacement.

[BPA]

Maybe something like this…

 

1st 2022 (15th pick) + 4th 2023 (NYR pick) + Ferland 

 

for

 

Crouse

 

VAN gets a gritty top 6 forward and cap space (at least remove $3.5M from LTIR…unless we can trade Ferland elsewhere).

 

ARI gets another 1st (mid 1st is better than a late 1st) in the upcoming draft.

 

BUT would really suck not drafting in the 1st round 3 years in a row.

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, BPA said:

Maybe something like this…

 

1st 2022 (15th pick) + 4th 2023 (NYR pick) + Ferland 

 

for

 

Crouse

 

VAN gets a gritty top 6 forward and cap space (at least remove $3.5M from LTIR…unless we can trade Ferland elsewhere).

 

ARI gets another 1st (mid 1st is better than a late 1st) in the upcoming draft.

 

BUT would really suck not drafting in the 1st round 3 years in a row.

Likely would cost us more.  Ferland’s contract isn’t insured.  Benning signed it even though no insurer would cover it.  Stupid, yes, so the Coyotes won’t want it.  

[wai_lai416]

it's gonna cost an arm and a leg to offload dickinson and poolman to arizona.. yes they are interested in bad contracts.. but they are more interested in bad contracts with low money. dickinson and poolman literally have all the money remaining on their contract.. that's like 13-14mil worth of cash

[IBatch]

On 6/8/2022 at 3:34 PM, JM_ said:

the LTIR rules seem really unfair to me, almost punitive. For a legitimate career ending issue like Ferland, I don't understand why the team cap has to suffer for it, its not under anyones control. 

Yes it is something the NHL and NHLPA need to re-evaluate.   NHLPA hates escrow ... what i don't get is aren't these contracts insured?   Who's actually paying the wages?   The teams or insurance.   If it's insurance then it's a bit of a messy situation.   The cap does need to stay within range for the system to work.   

[IBatch]

On 6/9/2022 at 10:33 AM, JM_ said:

because its being abused. Not only are they tanking for a ridiculous amount of time (like 5-6 years when its all over) they will be playing in a &^@#ing college rink. Its a disgrace to the game, and only being allowed by the grace of Bettman. 

 

Its just another example of Bettman letting the US teams do what they want. 

For me at least, ARI is his ugly sin child that he's kept hanging onto for way, way too long.   He told Quebec they need and arena - they built one (state of the art at the time, since collecting dust - now a decade or so old) and instead it's the "market" or it's "ownership".    I really want a Canadian running the NHL badly.    For all his warts Eagleson at least stood up for Canadian hockey and made the Canada Cup and Summit series something special.   Bettman has done nothing but expand the league and make it very, very tough for Canadian teams to compete.