Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9794
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Topper » Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:21 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Topper wrote: The existing contract is bought out - gone - extinguished - swimming with the fishes - wear cement golf shoes - holidaying in Italy with it's kid.

Pick a euphemism.

New team, new contract, with nothing to blow back on the old teams plate of spaghetti.
We circumvented the cap big time for 3 years.

Not to sound like Spuds and Coco at an S & M convention but...

WE NEED TO BE PUNISHED!!
why compliance buyouts are limited to two and why they were only a very late addition to the CBA
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17351
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:37 pm

Mondi wrote:
Strangelove wrote:
Mondi wrote: I read your link, I'm aware of Reinprecht and Luko, and hiding a few vets in the minors. I just think those are relatively small fish when compared to what you're proposing.
What have I proposed exactly? :mex:
You are proposing, that every rich team WILL do it.

I presume that includes YOUR Vancouver Canucks. :shock:
Yes, every rich team, including YOUR Vancouver Canucks will use both compliance buyouts.
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17351
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:42 pm

Topper wrote:
Strangelove wrote:
Topper wrote: The existing contract is bought out - gone - extinguished - swimming with the fishes - wear cement golf shoes - holidaying in Italy with it's kid.

Pick a euphemism.

New team, new contract, with nothing to blow back on the old teams plate of spaghetti.
We circumvented the cap big time for 3 years.

Not to sound like Spuds and Coco at an S & M convention but...

WE NEED TO BE PUNISHED!!
why compliance buyouts are limited to two and why they were only a very late addition to the CBA
The Compliance Buyouts was designed to help teams get under a shrinking cap.

The Cap Recapture Penalty was designed to punish teams which circumvented the cap.

Your Vancouver Canucks circumvented the cap.

If I had to guess I'd say using a Compliance Buyout would erase past transgressions.

But I wouldn't be surprised either way.
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Vader
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 10:37 pm

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Vader » Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:45 pm

From CapGeek
Per the CBA reached in January 2013, teams receiving a “cap advantage” from long-term contracts (defined as seven years or more) will be penalized in the event the player retires or “defects” from the NHL before the contract expires. A team receives a “cap advantage” when the player’s actual salary exceeds his cap hit in a given year. Please note, contracts that fall under the "over-35" rule do not qualify for cap benefit recapture, the NHL has confirmed. In these cases, the team is charged with the player's full cap hit. CapGeek's recapture calculator helps determine whether a team is on the hook for a recapture penalty and if it is, how much:
Parameters
Which player?

If Roberto Luongo retires or defects in the 2018 off-season (age 39 as of July 1 that year), and was traded to the Florida Panthers in the 2013 off-season, following is an estimated breakdown of the recapture penalties for the involved teams.
Team Benefit
Penalty
Vancouver Canucks (2018-19 through 2021-22) $7,430,000 $1,857,500
Florida Panthers (2018-19 through 2021-22) $6,903,333 $1,725,833

IMPORTANT NOTES [ Edited June 2, 2013 ]: Teams do not receive a credit for net negative cap benefit (where cap hit exceeds salary over the course of the contract prior to retirement). However, in calculating net "cap advantage," teams do receive a credit for seasons in which cap hit exceeds salary ... Calculations for players who have been traded during the season are rough estimates based on best information available and may differ from actual league numbers.
Now, if Luongo is bought down the road you'd have to assume no cap recapture as he didn't retire or defect from the contract
Last edited by Vader on Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aaronp18
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2897
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:36 pm

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Aaronp18 » Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:46 pm

I like your theory about using the buyouts to gain assets there doc.

That is exactly how the Canucks should use their buyouts. Screw buying out Ballard or Booth, they have value even if it's for a shitty prospect or late round pick.

Taking DiPietro and buying him out in order to get Bailey, Niederreiter or a high pick is the type of move Gillis needs to manufacture with these buyouts!

User avatar
BurningBeard
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by BurningBeard » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:02 pm

Topper wrote:The existing contract is bought out - gone - extinguished - swimming with the fishes - wear cement golf shoes - holidaying in Italy with it's kid.
I think Larry Brooks used this as an argument why the Rags may be put in a position where they consider buying out Brad Richards rather then face the Cap Recapture penalty. If Richards retires before his contract is up, they're probably going to be facing a 4 to 6 million dollar cap hit, depending on when he does it. Then again, most seem to assume LTIR is where these players will end their careers. It's an interesting situation. The Cap Recapture penalty appears to be poorly written.

This is a nice tool to use to figure out the various possibilities.
http://capgeek.com/recapture-calculator/
Every time I look out my window, same three dogs looking back at me.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17351
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:16 pm

Vader wrote: Now, if Luongo is bought down the road you'd have to assume no cap recapture as he didn't retire or defect from the contract
Thanks Vader, but at sites like this it reads...
http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/inde ... -different

.... "retirement, “defection” from the NHL or otherwise (such that he is not playing and is not receiving Salary pursuant to the terms of his SPC)"
So yeah, it's not so clear amirite?
Last edited by Strangelove on Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17351
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:21 pm

BurningBeard wrote:
Topper wrote: The existing contract is bought out - gone - extinguished - swimming with the fishes - wear cement golf shoes - holidaying in Italy with it's kid.
I think Larry Brooks used this as an argument why the Rags may be put in a position where they consider buying out Brad Richards rather then face the Cap Recapture penalty.
Yeah, I read that and some of the debates that followed.

But I'm gonna need more than just Brooksie's early take on the Cap Recapture Penalty.

Torts may have done well in writing off Larry Brooks as an idiot. :drink:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17351
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:24 pm

Aaronp18 wrote:I like your theory about using the buyouts to gain assets there doc.

That is exactly how the Canucks should use their buyouts. Screw buying out Ballard or Booth, they have value even if it's for a shitty prospect or late round pick.

Taking DiPietro and buying him out in order to get Bailey, Niederreiter or a high pick is the type of move Gillis needs to manufacture with these buyouts!
Right on Aaron, keep the fan-interest high, bring in some exiting young players, and it will pay off for you.

A wise business investment. :thumbs:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Vader
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 10:37 pm

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Vader » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:30 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Thanks Vader, but at sites like this...
http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/inde ... -different

.... it reads "retirement, “defection” from the NHL or otherwise (such that he is not playing and is not receiving Salary pursuant to the terms of his SPC)"
So yeah, it's not so clear amirite?
No, it's not crystal clear, but the player wouldn't be receiving salary or playing pursuant to the SPC because the SPC would no longer exist....

Better question: What if the player retires for a year and comes back? Does the recapture penalty disappear? You would assume so, but I'd be surprised if the CBA covers that scenario

Vader
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 10:37 pm

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Vader » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:32 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Torts may have done well in writing off Larry Brooks as an idiot. :drink:
He wouldn't have been the first

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17351
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:49 pm

Vader wrote: No, it's not crystal clear, but the player wouldn't be receiving salary or playing pursuant to the SPC because the SPC would no longer exist....
.... which means it would fall into the same category as "retirement, “defection”... no?

Not sure why we care because no way are they gonna buyout Luongo.

It's just I remember this question being asked early after the signing of the new CBA.

The answer at the time was that we won't know until all the details come out.

And I still can't find anything to date which answers that question definitively.
Vader wrote: Better question: What if the player retires for a year and comes back? Does the recapture penalty disappear? You would assume so, but I'd be surprised if the CBA covers that scenario
Quick, someone tweet Dreger! :lol:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
BurningBeard
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by BurningBeard » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:25 pm

Strangelove wrote:Torts may have done well in writing off Larry Brooks as an idiot. :drink:
You'll receive no argument from me on that one. I still remember the rumor he started in the NY Post about Burke trading Bertuzzi.
Every time I look out my window, same three dogs looking back at me.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17351
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:28 pm

Okay, found this...
Bob McKenzie said on TSN Radio Wednesday that Brad Richards was destined to be bought out the day the cap recapture clause was put into the CBA.

McKenzie said, “If Richards doesn’t play the final three years of his contract, the Rangers will be hit with a cap recapture penalty is going to get dinged and dinged pretty good. The final three years are bogus years and he isn’t playing them. There is going to be a cap penalty for the Rangers if Brad Richards retires before that contract is up. I think it’s a given that they will buy him out.”
So McKenzie also believes a buyout wipes out any future Cap Recapture penalty.

Then I checked at Capgeek, Les Canadiens are not getting dinged with any kind of penalty after the Gomez buyout.

So yeah, a buyout wipes out any future Cap Recapture penalty.

Nothing to see here folks.... :oops:

Although... maybe your Vancouver Canucks should buy out Luongo. Image
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9794
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, so buy me out baby...

Post by Topper » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:28 pm

Clearly the SPC has been bought out. Doc could advise Feaster.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

Post Reply