Poll: Which Flame Player Will Be Bought Out?

[C_worthy]

This is exactly my thought when I heard about the buyout option. Bouwmeester and Cammy exactly.

Savvy GMs have always figured out loopholes in an effort to give their team an advantage. Unless there are restrictions on resigning a bought-out player, I would anticipate we'll see at least a few of these.

As I write this, I've had another thought. It was always unnerving to me that we didn't resign Iggy prior to the CBA expiring... but, let me float this idea now that a player buyout is a reality. If there is some contention regarding iggy's value and length of contract between feaster and iggy's agent, could the flames entertain signing Iggy to a flame-for-life contract (regardless if it's $5-$7million/year), buy him out, then resign him to a league minimum contract for the duration of his career? We would essentially eliminate our highest contract, freeing the most money to allocate elsewhere, while retaining one of our most valued players ever. Thoughts?

It's all speculation at this point of course, but the general talk seems to be something similar to what the NBA did, meaning a one-time buyout, only to players that were already on the roster, and the player couldn't be re-signed during the duration of the original contract.

None of the suggestions in those posts would fly under that scenario. Also, considering how hard the NHL is fighting to close cap-circumvention loopholes, the chances of them allowing things like the Iginla suggestion above are extremely remote IMO.

Finally, it isn't just a case of how much salary you save, you also have to factor in how much it would cost to replace the player. YOu are not going to replace Cammalleri and his 30 or so goals for less than $4 or $5M at least. And with Bouwmeester, you need to acquire another top pairing d-man.

However, Stajan can be replaced by Reinhart or Horak or whatever.

[DL44]

For the Flames, i would lean.. 'No one' since they would be at $47.9 mil with 14 players BEFORE adding cheap labor in the form of youngens.

Likely bringing back Iginla for around $6ish mil, they could fill out the roster alright...

BUT... if they wish to add better quality depth and attempt to break the mediocre cycle they're in...

Buying out Cammy's single yr at $6mil would be the logical route.

Most cap created, giving the flexibility to add multiple mid-tier talent or better with UFAs and other buyout victims becoming available.

Chipping off smallish contracts of a Stajan, Sarich or Stempy would result in lateral moves and just be a waste of owner's money for what room they would create...

[C_worthy]

For the Flames, i would lean.. 'No one' since they would be at $47.9 mil with 14 players BEFORE adding cheap labor in the form of youngens.

Likely bringing back Iginla for around $6ish mil, they could fill out the roster alright...

BUT... if they wish to add better quality depth and attempt to break the mediocre cycle they're in...

Buying out Cammy's single yr at $6mil would be the logical route.

Most cap created, giving the flexibility to add multiple mid-tier talent or better with UFAs and other buyout victims becoming available.

Chipping off smallish contracts of a Stajan, Sarich or Stempy would result in lateral moves and just be a waste of owner's money for what room they would create...

How do you think they get better by dropping Cammalleri and replacing him with mid-tier talent? I would argue they have plenty of mid-tier talent. They need a top C and a top pairing D.

Stajan's salary would actually be saved because he can be replaced by a rookie ELC, like Reinhart

[Flyerfan52]

Buying out Cammy's single yr at $6mil would be the logical route.

Most cap created, giving the flexibility to add multiple mid-tier talent or better with UFAs and other buyout victims becoming available.

How do you think they get better by dropping Cammalleri and replacing him with mid-tier talent? I would argue they have plenty of mid-tier talent. They need a top C and a top pairing D.

Stajan's salary would actually be saved because he can be replaced by a rookie ELC, like Reinhart

I think the "or better" parts refers to a better player that might be bought out by his current team to get under next years lower cap. If he's already benefiting from a 2/3s buyout it's possible a previously $5 million man could be had for $3 million in the short term. If he's better then Cammy it improves the team.

[C_worthy]

I think the "or better" parts refers to a better player that might be bought out by his current team to get under next years lower cap. If he's already benefiting from a 2/3s buyout it's possible a previously $5 million man could be had for $3 million in the short term. If he's better then Cammy it improves the team.

Dream on.

Who, that's better than Cammy, is going to get bought out? And let's say that someone is - why would they sign for $3M?

Absolutelly 0% chance that they would give one moment's thought to buying out Cammy.

[kehatch]

Dream on.

Who, that's better than Cammy, is going to get bought out? And let's say that someone is - why would they sign for $3M?

Absolutelly 0% chance that they would give one moment's thought to buying out Cammy.

I agree today. But that could change depending on how the season goes and where the cap actually ends up.

[C_worthy]

I agree today. But that could change depending on how the season goes and where the cap actually ends up.

Of course, everything will change as this season plays itself out.

However, if things go poorly for the Flames, I would expect a scenario whereby they looked to trade Iginla and Kipper. I think that a scenario whereby Cammalleri gets bought out is extremely remote.

However, it is all a shortened season away and lots can and will happen by then.

[C_worthy]

The whole prpose of an amnesty buyout, by the way, is to give teams an opportunity to make a one-time adjustment to their cap situation in order to avoid chaos in a decliining cap environment.

In that regard, what I would really like to see is a one-time opportunity to EXTEND contracts, whereby the remaining current contract, plus the extension, get blended for the cap hit.

For example, Bouwmeester has another year at $6.68M (we are talking for the 13-14 season here). Sign an extenstion of 4 years at $4m for example. Then, instead of one year at $6.68M and then 4 at $4m (that is what would happen under the current CBA), blend the two and have 5 years at $4.42M

What I like about this idea is that it creates immediate cap relief while not having to buy players out and potentially end their careers or cause a chaotic period where there are a bunch of bought out players seeking new homes.

[Flyerfan52]

The whole prpose of an amnesty buyout, by the way, is to give teams an opportunity to make a one-time adjustment to their cap situation in order to avoid chaos in a decliining cap environment.

In that regard, what I would really like to see is a one-time opportunity to EXTEND contracts, whereby the remaining current contract, plus the extension, get blended for the cap hit.

For example, Bouwmeester has another year at $6.68M (we are talking for the 13-14 season here). Sign an extenstion of 4 years at $4m for example. Then, instead of one year at $6.68M and then 4 at $4m (that is what would happen under the current CBA), blend the two and have 5 years at $4.42M

What I like about this idea is that it creates immediate cap relief while not having to buy players out and potentially end their careers or cause a chaotic period where there are a bunch of bought out players seeking new homes.

I like that idea. The blended cap leaves the original $s in place while bringing down the cap hit to comply.

There would need to be a clause limiting the years left on the original contract to prevent a scenario where NJ adds a further 4 or so years to Kovalchuk's contract to further decrease the hit (just a handy example. I could have used Bryz or Luongo among others.).

Most teams have a player they like but regret the cap hit so this allows them to keep the player rather then resort to a buyout.

[ConnorFutureGM]

The whole prpose of an amnesty buyout, by the way, is to give teams an opportunity to make a one-time adjustment to their cap situation in order to avoid chaos in a decliining cap environment.

In that regard, what I would really like to see is a one-time opportunity to EXTEND contracts, whereby the remaining current contract, plus the extension, get blended for the cap hit.

For example, Bouwmeester has another year at $6.68M (we are talking for the 13-14 season here). Sign an extenstion of 4 years at $4m for example. Then, instead of one year at $6.68M and then 4 at $4m (that is what would happen under the current CBA), blend the two and have 5 years at $4.42M

What I like about this idea is that it creates immediate cap relief while not having to buy players out and potentially end their careers or cause a chaotic period where there are a bunch of bought out players seeking new homes.

This system would somewhat benefit the players and the GMs but not the owners. The new salary would still count against the players' share but the owners would be spending more.

[C_worthy]

This system would somewhat benefit the players and the GMs but not the owners. The new salary would still count against the players' share but the owners would be spending more.

No, the owners wouldn't be spending more.

The players' share calculation uses actual salary, not cap hit. And it is structuresd so that the players' share equals the agreed percentage of revenues, regardless of what salaries actually are (i.e. escrow adjusts so that they get what they were supposed to get regardless)

My proposal would have zero impact on total dollars spent by the owners.

Actually, that's not true: it would SAVE them money. The current buyout proposal costs the owners money as the buyout amount is not counted in players' share and is therefore outside the system. My proposal would keep them within the system.

[ConnorFutureGM]

No, the owners wouldn't be spending more.

The players' share calculation uses actual salary, not cap hit. And it is structuresd so that the players' share equals the agreed percentage of revenues, regardless of what salaries actually are (i.e. escrow adjusts so that they get what they were supposed to get regardless)

My proposal would have zero impact on total dollars spent by the owners.

Actually, that's not true: it would SAVE them money. The current buyout proposal costs the owners money as the buyout amount is not counted in players' share and is therefore outside the system. My proposal would keep them within the system.

I'm pretty sure the last proposal had buyouts count against the players share.

In the example you used, you extended Bouwmeester decreasing his cap hit for one season but increasing it for the following four. I doubt that there are many GMs that would want to increase a player's cap hit.

Conversely, a team could greatly lower a players cap hit and would allow the team to spend more money which is something the league seems to be trying to avoid.

I just don't think the league wants any cap hit manipulation.

[C_worthy]

I'm pretty sure the last proposal had buyouts count against the players share.

In the example you used, you extended Bouwmeester decreasing his cap hit for one season but increasing it for the following four. I doubt that there are many GMs that would want to increase a player's cap hit.

Conversely, a team could greatly lower a players cap hit and would allow the team to spend more money which is something the league seems to be trying to avoid.

I just don't think the league wants any cap hit manipulation.

The example I gave had the cap hit dropping in the key year, and then being mnarginally higher than it would have been in the following years. Pretty straight-forward and a trade any team that is tight to the cap in the short term would give serious consideration to.

The point of the buyout is cap compliance in 2013-14 when the cap drops. The point of my proposal was to address the same issue. It isn't about cap manipulation, it;s about smoothing the impact to changes in the cap over the next couple years.

It doesn't lower cap hits - it spreads some of the first year into the following contract - no cap manipulation and no cap avoidance.

[cross16]

I like the idea and personally i'm a fan of having something like that being in the new CBA permanantly but I know they would never go for it. I actually can't see the players liking it, it lowers their market value. They are going to negotiate based on market value in the offeason which coming off a CBA is likely to be less than it will be as the CBA sorts itself out, ust like the last time. Not going to be a big different but just can't see the PA going for anything that potentially lowers the market value of their players.

[andymo]

I can see Wideman struggling. With his contract it could be very tempting to buy him out if he struggles defensively and fails to put up numbers. Hopefully he'll prove me wrong and make his fat contract look like a steal.

[JTech780]

Since each gets 2 buyouts I can see Stajan getting bought out and one of either Bouwmeester or Cammalleri depending on preformance this year. If either have subpar years I think they could be targets as they both make over $6mill and both only have 1 year left after this year.

[andymo]

...

[cross16]

Since each gets 2 buyouts I can see Stajan getting bought out and one of either Bouwmeester or Cammalleri depending on preformance this year. If either have subpar years I think they could be targets as they both make over $6mill and both only have 1 year left after this year.

I can't see either Jbow or Cammy getting bought out regardless of their seasons with only 1 year left. The likelihood they could replace those guys for much less money is very remote. Stajan makes sense more becuase they need the roster spot than anything else and he is replaced internally whereas Flames can't replace either Jbow or Cammy internally IMO.

Becuase the buyouts can be used either the 2013 or 2014 offseason, I wouldn't rule out Denis Wideman now. If Wideman is a bust both for this upcoming short season and then next season as well the Flames hold that "get out of jail free" card that I could see them using to get out of that deal. Really only Stajan and or Wideman would make sense to me in terms of a buyout, maybe Stempniak. The rest of their deal are either fair or would be too hard to replace.

[C_worthy]

I can't see either Jbow or Cammy getting bought out regardless of their seasons with only 1 year left. The likelihood they could replace those guys for much less money is very remote. Stajan makes sense more becuase they need the roster spot than anything else and he is replaced internally whereas Flames can't replace either Jbow or Cammy internally IMO.

Becuase the buyouts can be used either the 2013 or 2014 offseason, I wouldn't rule out Denis Wideman now. If Wideman is a bust both for this upcoming short season and then next season as well the Flames hold that "get out of jail free" card that I could see them using to get out of that deal. Really only Stajan and or Wideman would make sense to me in terms of a buyout, maybe Stempniak. The rest of their deal are either fair or would be too hard to replace.

I completely agree with this.

However, my understanding (not entirely sure though) was that the buyouts were available for this year and next, not next and the one after.

[JTech780]

I can't see either Jbow or Cammy getting bought out regardless of their seasons with only 1 year left. The likelihood they could replace those guys for much less money is very remote. Stajan makes sense more becuase they need the roster spot than anything else and he is replaced internally whereas Flames can't replace either Jbow or Cammy internally IMO.

Becuase the buyouts can be used either the 2013 or 2014 offseason, I wouldn't rule out Denis Wideman now. If Wideman is a bust both for this upcoming short season and then next season as well the Flames hold that "get out of jail free" card that I could see them using to get out of that deal. Really only Stajan and or Wideman would make sense to me in terms of a buyout, maybe Stempniak. The rest of their deal are either fair or would be too hard to replace.

Getting rid of Cammalleri's 6mill makes you cap compliant very quick. I don't think he is a top line player so I don't think he should be paid like one.

I also believe that the buyout is only for this year and next offseason.

[Zirakzigil]

Flames wont buy out any big name players. Stempniak and Stajan make be considered, but they would be easy to trade to a team trying to make the cap floor, especially Stajan. The Flames are at 43.3mil next year, with the only major players needing to be resigned being Iginla (decrease), Backlund (raise or neutral), Butler (raise), Brodie (raise). They will easily be able to fit under teh 64.3mil cap.

[cross16]

I completely agree with this.

However, my understanding (not entirely sure though) was that the buyouts were available for this year and next, not next and the one after.

Just to clarify I thought the buyouts were for the 2013 offseason (summer of 2013) and then the 2014 offseason(after the 13/14 season)? My understanding is that the shortneded season is not going to be operated under the new CBA most of it will be used for the up coming offseason but perhaps i'm mistaken..

Getting rid of Cammalleri's 6mill makes you cap compliant very quick. I don't think he is a top line player so I don't think he should be paid like one.

I also believe that the buyout is only for this year and next offseason.

Flames stand at 47 million next offeason with a cap of 64 and really only iginla to re sign. Even if Iginla were to get his 7 mill again they would have no problem being cap compliant. Cap is not really an issue for the Flames anymore they are structured pretty well against it moving forward for the next several years so I don't see where you gain anything by buying out Cammy. You would have to replace him and to replace him, even at his current production, is going to cost you 3-4 million so you save a few million and lose a player like Cammy in the process doesn't make sense to me.

[freerider-316]

I don't think there's any player your team needs to buy out.

[C_worthy]

However, my understanding (not entirely sure though) was that the buyouts were available for this year and next, not next and the one after.

Not 100% certain, but apparently the buyouts are in fact for the 2013 season and then the 2014 season.

Looks like you had it right Cross.

[oldschool17]

I think it'll all be a matter of who is UFA next year and if we can get a Getzlaf or Perry scenario(unlikely I know) then they will consider Stajan, or even if a trade for Filpulla or Bernier or a good top Dman becomes available, they may want to free up cap space as such. Especially if we make it into second or third round this year and we choose to re-up Iggy, depending on where we are trade deadline time.