Interesting concept. I’d prefer to compliance buyout De Haan though. Maatta is tradeable for a 3-5 round pick. Shaw would be a candidate too but if he’s going to LTIR that could come in handy.

I've already tried the idea of trading away a buyout and then signing them - apparently it is illegal with compliance buyouts. Read about them in the FAQ (i think it is there)

You'd have to live with buying out Seabrook and not getting him back for at least a year.

We will do it if you give us Murphy

I think De Haan would be very tradeable if we retained a mil or 2. Good player, just very banged up. I also think Smith would be tradeable as well with not too much of a sweetener to someone like the Sens. The only clear buyout candidate in my mind is Seabs

Cant resign players that were bought out with the amnesty buyouts. There is a good chance Seabrooks career is done anyways now and you cant buy out players on LTIR anyways.
De Haan >> Maatta, why would you do that?

Maatta would have the lowest cap hit of bought out players discussed on this post at 680K a season, where Seabrook would carry 6.5 million, then 5.8 or something. Maatta should not be the compliance buyout at all and it's really not even close. There are tools on this site that help you determine which buyout would cost more.

Because his buyout would be expensive compared to Maatta and he’s banged up to all hell. Not sure how valuable he is via trade. Plus his cap hit is reasonable but high for what he provides.

Why in the world would you use a buyout on Maatta? He only costs $680K for 2 years to buy him out...makes zero sense. You should never trade your biggest buyout candidate at a cost like a 2nd rounder if a compliance buyout was granted.

Maatta was just the obvious choice, Smith has one year left and could fetch something at the deadline. This was only if the Hawks wanted to bring Seabs back next year. You’d have to trade him to do so. It might not cost a 2nd rounder but it would be worth it. The hawks keep a leader and the cap hit is now under their control. You don’t have to give up too much since we always have the option to buy him out. Again, this is just a scenario if they wanted to bring him back, so yes it does make sense.

It's against the CBA rules to have another team buy him out and then the Hawks bring him back, so despite the strategy, no it does not make sense.