GMs seek a one-time cap free buyout clause with new CBA

[Kovy27]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012 ... h-new-cba/

Wonder if the Isles and Habs asked for this.

[columbia]

holmgren has to make a decision. bryz or pronger

lol

[bhaw]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/11/report-gms-seek-one-time-cap-free-buyout-with-new-cba/

Wonder if the Isles and Habs asked for this.

Probably the Caps. Need to get that scrub AO off the books.

I wonder if the Isles can afford to buy out DiPietro. He has 8 or 9 years left. They may want to buy him out but that will be a nice chunk of change, which they don't really have.

[columbia]

If they buyout DiPietro, he can move to a non-salaried, assistant GM postion.

Win/win

[ExPatriatePen]

I hope this doesn't pass... What a joke. You made the deal, live with it.

[the wicked child]

Crosby.

[Fire0nice228]

I hope this doesn't pass... What a joke. You made the deal, live with it.

[JeffDFD]

Pens should have done this with Neal last year

Spoiler:

[KG]

Vote no to that proposition....

[shmenguin]

Doesn't really make sense. It's more useful in the NBA since one player can take up much more space on a payroll.

The rangers seemed to already have figured out how to do this without the cba being touched with the wade redden situation, right?

[Gaucho]

I hope this doesn't pass... What a joke. You made the deal, live with it.

[Fire0nice228]

Doesn't really make sense. It's more useful in the NBA since one player can take up much more space on a payroll.

The rangers seemed to already have figured out how to do this without the cba being touched with the wade redden situation, right?

Not every team can afford to bury an albatross deal in the minors like the rangers, although its funny how the teams that even have those contracts are the teams with huge money in the first place..TOR(Jeff Finger) NYR (Redden) Hawks (Huet) etc

[the wicked child]

Doesn't really make sense. It's more useful in the NBA since one player can take up much more space on a payroll.

The rangers seemed to already have figured out how to do this without the cba being touched with the wade redden situation, right?

Not every team can afford to bury an albatross deal in the minors like the rangers, although its funny how the teams that even have those contracts are the teams with huge money in the first place..TOR(Jeff Finger) NYR (Redden) Hawks (Huet) etc

Aren't buyouts usually like 60-75% of the remaining money at once? Only the teams with huge money could afford the buyouts in the first place.

I am very against this as it lets stupid GMs off the hook.

[DropEmJayBird]

Passing this sets the game back, you made rules, teams knew the rules, and made these deals anyway. I say no bailout

[Kraftster]

Had been hearing rumblings about some sort of amnesty provision. Hard to see it getting enough support among ownership.

[Malkamaniac]

So all those GMS that made those long deals are now worried because the players didn't live up to potential to begin with. I'm sorry, but you made those deals, you get stuck with those deals.

[Pensfan2010]

I dont really care either way about the issue. It'll make some organizations make some tough decisions (TB & Lecavalier, Van & Luongo) It'd actually be pretty interesting.

[Kaizer]

if it happens, make sure it cant be used on any existing contracts. that'll shut them up and force impulse buyers to stop making it rain on every tom, dick, and tyler kennedy that hits 20g in a season.

[JS©]

Doesn't really make sense. It's more useful in the NBA since one player can take up much more space on a payroll.

The rangers seemed to already have figured out how to do this without the cba being touched with the wade redden situation, right?

Not every team can afford to bury an albatross deal in the minors like the rangers, although its funny how the teams that even have those contracts are the teams with huge money in the first place..TOR(Jeff Finger) NYR (Redden) Hawks (Huet) etc

Aren't buyouts usually like 60-75% of the remaining money at once? Only the teams with huge money could afford the buyouts in the first place.

I am very against this as it lets stupid GMs off the hook.

I think it's 2/3s of the contract's value spead through the remaining years.

[Froggy]

if it happens, make sure it cant be used on any existing contracts. that'll shut them up and force impulse buyers to stop making it rain on every tom, dick, and tyler kennedy that hits 20g in a season.

Yeah. Stick it to those players signing reasonable contracts at a manageable term instead of bumping up their value in free agency. Wait... What?

[ExPatriatePen]

Well, if this becomes codified in the CBA in a manner where it's a reoccurring event every five years or so, then you really don't have a true "hard cap".

If you're a deep pocketed team you just sign your rivals superstar to a ridiculously long term deal that extends beyond his career expectations (think Yashin). Now it's a simple matter of waiting for the next buyout amnesty to roll around and the slate gets wiped clean.

Sort of defeats the purpose of a hard cap, which is to level the playing field among big and small markets.

[columbia]

No, sir, I do not like it.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

I hope the Pens fight to not have this rule applied.

[Rylan]

I hope the Pens fight to not have this rule applied.

NHLPA would never agree to this. But even if if did happen, it would ruin everything the first lockout accomplished.

[Pitt87]

I hope the Pens fight to not have this rule applied.

NHLPA would never agree to this. But even if if did happen, it would ruin everything the first lockout accomplished.

I'm not sure this adversely effects players. They get paid and play somewhere else. Seems like the benefit to players would also allow GM's to take a chance on a big deal for someone they may otherwise offer shorter terms/fewer $.

Its the NHL that should shut this down. Its more cap circumvention. Without looking a the rules, is there anything that would stop GMPH from paying off Bryz and resigning him?