Guy's gonna sign a league minimum deal somewhere, play the best hockey of his life again, and win a cup

Buying out OEL was the only option to overhaul the defense. If they were serious about it, they wouldn't have waited 4 years until his contract expired which is exactly what happened.

Frees up a roster spot too which I noticed wasn't mentioned a lot in social media :lol trade would've been ideal but he has a NMC which he was reportedly unwilling to waive.

Well let's see what the follow-up moves are...

Lol William Karlsson so hammed

https://twitter.com/taj1944/status/1...VrJA-GWS58K4yA

More proof that hockey players are the toughest athletes in the world.

https://clutchpoints.com/panthers-ne...njuries-bruins

Ekblad played through multiple injuries, including a broken foot, Maurice told TNT on Tuesday night. He also suffered two separate shoulder dislocations and a torn oblique this postseason.

Maurice says Ekblad's foot broke all the way back in the opening round against the Boston Bruins. In fact, he wasn't the only injured Panthers player in that series. “The vast majority of our injuries came in the Boston series,” the Panthers head coach revealed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

safe to say fuck boston lol

Travis Green joins NJD as assistant coach

Interesting..

Hearing that Boston might be interested in OEL ... obvious question is why? I thought he was like an anchor ... even at vet minimum ... is he usable as 3rd line D?

At league minimum, it's a low risk signing for someone like OEL even if he's a 7th d-man

Boston was his only other choice to waive his NMC

MAYBE if his broken foot is recovered??? I mean it's still a huge risk if you ever put him on the ice and he gets worked the entire game.

His on-ice stats last year were absolutely atrocious.

watch him join Boston for $1-2M and absolutely fucking light us up. tis the canucks way...

He had a bad year last year but he also had a significant foot injury in the offseason. He was okay the year before and even managed to make Myers look respectable. If BOS gets the OEL that made Myers respectable then he'll be a bargain if he's signed for cheap.

what happens when a player gets bought out and signs with another team?

they get the buyout and the new contract?

should be that if the player signs a new deal the buy out team get's a reduction on the cap hit. i'd say it should also reduce the payout based on the new contract but then they new contract would just be league min so wouldn't help the original team much but anything would help

^agreed. a player's salary cap shouldn't be on 2 teams but NHL doesn't work on common sense.

To discourage the signing of large ridiculous contracts that need to be bought out.

If theres no cap penalty for buyout, then the richest owners would be able to throw money at any player they want knowing they would be able to buy them out.

If you can reduce the cap penalty, you'd be able to game the system and buy cap space back by offering to pay a team to sign the player to a higher new contract.

With a cap penalty, teams have to think twice about buyouts because it will hurt them for years. Otherwise a contending team that doesn't have cap space to add McDavid could say to the Oilers, you buy him out, I'll pay the buyout amount for you, then I'll sign him for 1 yr $1mil. He comes back after he wins the cup and gets paid, I win the cup, you get a boatload of assets. And all it cost us was money.

No ... sorry, no one thinks like this. You can always put in some wording to prevent this kind of collusion loophole.

?? It's the reason why there's a cap today....

C'mon man ... wth is going to say to another team, "You buy him out, we pay you under the table the amount, then my team will sign player $1M and then player comes back to you after the one year ... c'mon man, put your thinking cap on.

You're focused on the ridiculous example that you've missed the point.

No cap penalty give rich teams an advantage because there's no consequences to giving out big contracts. You bet you ass teams will game the system, obviously not like the exaggerated scenario I gave. I thought it was pretty obvious that that was an over the top unrealistic example. The NHLPA would never allow mcjesus to sign for $1mil. The player doesn't have to go back to a team, I only said that because if youre the oilers, you would never agree to let him go.

you just keep on digging a deeper stupid hole bro. Please stop.

Chill, gentlemen.

If there was no salary cap, or a soft cap who do you think the top spenders would be these days? Do we have the cash to buy a championship? Lol

Team 123 has player X at $5mil cap hit entering the last year of contract. Player X can play and contribute, but is only worth $3mil and is not needed for a team that's retooling. Team 123 needs all $5mil cap space and wants to get rid of this contract, but no one wants to take on this player at $5mil without some serious sweeteners (draft picks you dont want to give up).

Currently, Team 123 would only be able to trade and retain (but have to keep some cap hit) or buyout the player and have a cap penalty for some years. Neither is optimal because they need the cap space.

Team 789 is a contending team that wants player X, but can only take the player at $3mil cap hit. Unless team 123 retains (and therefore, keep some cap hit), team 789 can't do the deal.

If there's no cap penalty for buying out a player, Team 789 with its deep pockets can trade peanuts for player X, buy them out with 0 consequences to their cap, and then sign them to a new contract for $3mil. Why would team 789 do this? Because they can get the player they want at the cap they need, and it only cost a few extra million bucks for the buyout. Why would team 123 do this? Because they wanted to get rid of the contract to make cap space to begin with and the cheap owner doesnt have to pay for the buyout.

Teams already game LTIR to stack the roster for playoffs and utilize other team's retaining slots to reduce cap hits. They would 100% do this.

Why wouldn't the league want this? Because it will give rich teams an advantage. Because teams will sign inflated contracts to get the player they want knowing that they could get out of it scott free down the road. More OEL contracts.

But hey, it's a stupid hole.

Your theories only work so long as the NHLPA doesn’t exist.

The NHLPA will step in and pressure any member signing under value to not fuck up average valuations for other equivalent players.

I agree there needs to be a cap, but not for the reasons you’re stating, it’s a non starter with the union.