SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Abusing the CBO

Créé par: Kyle_Davidson
Équipe: 2020-21 Blackhawks de Chicago
Date de création initiale: 31 mars 2020
Publié: 31 mars 2020
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Description
I'm sure I'm not the first person to think of this idea, (well perhaps this SPECIFIC IDEA), but the premise is probably not new. Anyways, if the league approved this trade knowing the intentions, I think everyone would be happy with how this plays out.












Dont sweat the lines.
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
LISTE DE RÉSERVEANSCAP HIT
3925 000 $
RFAANSCAP HIT
23 000 000 $
34 500 000 $
31 500 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
57 000 000 $
CRÉÉANSCAP HIT
SayBrooke, Breent
22 000 000 $
Transactions
1.
CHI
  1. Ryan, Bobby
Détails additionnels:
Bobby Ryan signs in Ottawa for whatever they need to get to the cap floor (IF that's even an issue, IDK)
OTT
  1. Seabrook, Brent
Détails additionnels:
Brent Seabrook signs for a modest 2 mil (X whatever years we are comfortable with) with performance bonuses. (No he would not sign for a league minimum contract nor should he, he is still a viable NHL defenseman)

Both teams keep their veteran players, and no one is negatively affected as a result of coronavirus.
2.
CHI
OTT
  1. Ryan, Bobby
Détails additionnels:
CBO
3.
CHI
  1. Choix de 4e ronde en 2020 (EDM)
Détails additionnels:
Matta for a pick makes sense. Who wants him.

(4th round pick is to be transferred to the Chicago Bears as compensation for the nick foles trade)
DET
  1. Määttä, Olli
Détails additionnels:
I saw this earlier and no one said it was terrible.
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2020
Logo de CHI
Logo de PIT
Logo de CHI
Logo de CGY
Logo de CHI
Logo de EDM
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
2021
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de MTL
2022
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2381 500 000 $72 984 539 $1 090 244 $4 282 500 $8 515 461 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
10 500 000 $10 500 000 $
C
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
5 000 000 $5 000 000 $
AG, AD
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
6 400 000 $6 400 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 3
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance2 500 000 $$2M)
C, AD
RFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
2 625 000 $2 625 000 $
AD
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
863 333 $863 333 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
AD, AG
RFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
4 500 000 $4 500 000 $
C
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
3 900 000 $3 900 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
3 250 000 $3 250 000 $
AG, C
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
AD, C
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
C
UFA - 1
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
5 538 462 $5 538 462 $
DG
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
894 167 $894 167 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
DD
RFA - 2
7 000 000 $7 000 000 $
G
UFA - 5
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
4 550 000 $4 550 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
3 850 000 $3 850 000 $
DD
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
G
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
925 000 $925 000 $
DD
RFA - 3
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
792 500 $792 500 $ (Bonis de performance82 500 $$82K)
DG
RFA - 1
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
SayBrooke, Breent
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
1 500 000 $1 500 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
880 833 $880 833 $
AG
UFA - 1

Code d'intégration

  • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
  • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

Texte intégré

Cliquer pour surligner
31 mars 2020 à 23 h 13
#1
Kyle from Chicago
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2018
Messages: 9,785
Mentions "j'aime": 5,744
I think its also worth mentioning that we don't know anything about what the NHL is doing with the cap/ if there will be a CBO. Scott Powers and Mark Laz said they hadn't heard anything on their last podcast which was interesting.
31 mars 2020 à 23 h 14
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 37,914
Mentions "j'aime": 19,293
Are you getting this Breent SayBrooke guy from the KHL? whats his potential?
31 mars 2020 à 23 h 30
#3
Démarrer sujet
Kyle from Chicago
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2018
Messages: 9,785
Mentions "j'aime": 5,744
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Are you getting this Breent SayBrooke guy from the KHL? whats his potential?


he used to be a superstar defenseman, but the game became younger and faster so that he couldn't keep up as well. He's a great guy to have in the locker room, and on the third pair with an experienced partner.

His potential is 7D exact.
31 mars 2020 à 23 h 49
#4
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2018
Messages: 1,247
Mentions "j'aime": 727
Teams can’t buy out injured players
31 mars 2020 à 23 h 55
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2020
Messages: 1,708
Mentions "j'aime": 414
Quoting: Newgod77
Teams can’t buy out injured players

I’m assuming your talking about Seabrook. He should be healthy by next season. So he would be eligible for buyout. If his career is over then there is no sense to trade him or buy him out, just put him on LTIR. But yeah he should be healthy. If Seabrook isn’t the guy being bought out, I would see Shaw as a buyout candidate, though his career is up in the air too.
1 avr. 2020 à 0 h 7
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 20,030
Mentions "j'aime": 12,187
League won’t allow this

There won’t be a cbo either, this is just fans of teams in cap hell wet dreams
1 avr. 2020 à 7 h 4
#7
B
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2016
Messages: 7,862
Mentions "j'aime": 1,423
Quoting: coga16
League won’t allow this

There won’t be a cbo either, this is just fans of teams in cap hell wet dreams


Because of the bad timing, teams already had plans with cap. There could very well be 1 Cbo. Highly unlikely cap goes down, even doubt it stays flat!
1 avr. 2020 à 8 h 26
#8
exo2769
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 15,536
Mentions "j'aime": 9,582
Quoting: Newgod77
Teams can’t buy out injured players


I'm pretty sure the Hawks did last time. Steve Montador had serious concussion issues.
1 avr. 2020 à 8 h 32
#9
exo2769
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 15,536
Mentions "j'aime": 9,582
Quoting: coga16
League won’t allow this

There won’t be a cbo either, this is just fans of teams in cap hell wet dreams


What's stopping them? (CBO specifically) It's a great idea. It's not like any team planned for this situation and there are 20 teams with $80M+ in cap already. Heck, Daly said that cap would increase to $84-$88...but I see that being even less likely. The owners against CBOs like Melnyk...enjoy increasing the cap even less. I understand this doesn't help Colorado that much, but it helps the players, owners, and the majority of the league.
1 avr. 2020 à 9 h 58
#10
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 20,030
Mentions "j'aime": 12,187
Quoting: DoubleADoubleK
Because of the bad timing, teams already had plans with cap. There could very well be 1 Cbo. Highly unlikely cap goes down, even doubt it stays flat!


the NHL just cant magically grant a CBO, they need to amend the CBA with the NHLPAs approval. And the NHLPA is not goign to let this happen right when the current CBA is expiring
1 avr. 2020 à 9 h 59
#11
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 20,030
Mentions "j'aime": 12,187
Modifié 1 avr. 2020 à 10 h 8
Quoting: exo2769
What's stopping them? (CBO specifically) It's a great idea. It's not like any team planned for this situation and there are 20 teams with $80M+ in cap already. Heck, Daly said that cap would increase to $84-$88...but I see that being even less likely. The owners against CBOs like Melnyk...enjoy increasing the cap even less. I understand this doesn't help Colorado that much, but it helps the players, owners, and the majority of the league.


Something called the CBA, thats stopping them
You think you are goign to get the NHLPA to accept an emergency amendment to the CBA that only benefits the owners and not the players. There is nothing in it from the players side...guys get bought out and pushed out of the game to be replaced by younger ELC guys and would not give a team any time to player scout a bought out player to see if they would like to sign them for a cheaper contract giving them a 2nd chance. Nothing benefits the NHLPA here, so they wont agree to it.

Only way I can see them allowing this to happen is if they get something significant in the CBA they are negotiating, do they get the Olympics bc they agreed to a CBO....Owners and League have to pony something up for them to agree to it

People are really over estimating the cap situation bc of pandemic. The seasons isnt cancelled, it will resume at some point in time. Empty arena games (to begin with, they will eventually be allowed to have people attend) do not impact the league revenue dramatically, will impacts some playoff team owners or city revenue based on their lease agreements with their respective arenas. Games are still going to be broadcast on TV when they resume, NHL will still make money in a restart season.

The cap may flat line, wont drop dramatically 6m based on where its at now
1 avr. 2020 à 10 h 48
#12
exo2769
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 15,536
Mentions "j'aime": 9,582
Quoting: coga16
Something called the CBA, thats stopping them
You think you are goign to get the NHLPA to accept an emergency amendment to the CBA that only benefits the owners and not the players. There is nothing in it from the players side...guys get bought out and pushed out of the game to be replaced by younger ELC guys and would not give a team any time to player scout a bought out player to see if they would like to sign them for a cheaper contract giving them a 2nd chance. Nothing benefits the NHLPA here, so they wont agree to it.

Only way I can see them allowing this to happen is if they get something significant in the CBA they are negotiating, do they get the Olympics bc they agreed to a CBO....Owners and League have to pony something up for them to agree to it

People are really over estimating the cap situation bc of pandemic. The seasons isnt cancelled, it will resume at some point in time. Empty arena games (to begin with, they will eventually be allowed to have people attend) do not impact the league revenue dramatically, will impacts some playoff team owners or city revenue based on their lease agreements with their respective arenas. Games are still going to be broadcast on TV when they resume, NHL will still make money in a restart season.

The cap may flat line, wont drop dramatically 6m based on where its at now


Except there's a larger benefit to the players than the owners...and it's not even close too. The owners aren't looking to pay extra money out of charity...which is what would happen. Take just about ANY player. Seabrook is likely the single most egregious example...he's owed $20.5M over the next 4 years. 40% is his drop...so $8M is his loss. He'll likely be able to get a lot of that back because he's a UFA. He can get $2M per. BUT the real kicker is that the NHLPA needs to fight for all players....Hall, Pietrangelo, Krug...not just Seabrook. SO, from the NHLPA point of view...the players in general just got an extra $6.875M * 4 = $27.5M. That's how the NHLPA would look at this. They've going to take an OVERALL viewpoint...that the NHL players will gain money in the aggregate by this move.

Also, the NHLPA knows that they have zero ability to move the cap up/down. That's based on revenue…so, they only have one option to better their clients position. They're going to advocate for this. It's the OWNERS that don't like CBOs. Owners like Melnyk have been vocal about being against CBOs. Why? Because the players win anytime a CBO is offered. It's free money.

Let's go back to the OTHER players like Pietrangelo, or even more important...they guys like Scandella or Hainsey. They're no more OR LESS important to the NHLPA than Seabrook. The likelihood that Pietrangelo gets his true value are ZERO. The likelihood that Scandella or Hainsey play in the NHL next year...hard to see that happening.
CD282 a aimé ceci.
1 avr. 2020 à 10 h 51
#13
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 20,030
Mentions "j'aime": 12,187
Quoting: exo2769
Except there's a larger benefit to the players than the owners...and it's not even close too. The owners aren't looking to pay extra money out of charity...which is what would happen. Take just about ANY player. Seabrook is likely the single most egregious example...he's owed $20.5M over the next 4 years. 40% is his drop...so $8M is his loss. He'll likely be able to get a lot of that back because he's a UFA. He can get $2M per. BUT the real kicker is that the NHLPA needs to fight for all players....Hall, Pietrangelo, Krug...not just Seabrook. SO, from the NHLPA point of view...the players in general just got an extra $6.875M * 4 = $27.5M - $8M = $19.5M. That's how the NHLPA would look at this. They've going to take an OVERALL viewpoint...that the NHL players will gain money in the aggregate by this move.

Also, the NHLPA knows that they have zero ability to move the cap up/down. That's based on revenue…so, they only have one option to better their clients position. They're going to advocate for this. It's the OWNERS that don't like CBOs. Owners like Melnyk have been vocal about being against CBOs. Why? Because the players win anytime a CBO is offered. It's free money.

Let's go back to the OTHER players like Pietrangelo, or even more important...they guys like Scandella or Hainsey. They're no more OR LESS important to the NHLPA than Seabrook. The likelihood that Pietrangelo gets his true value are ZERO. The likelihood that Scandella or Hainsey play in the NHL next year...hard to see that happening.


the NHLPA has a big part of the cap, they have the ability to inflate it based on their escrow amount. Right there just shows a major flaw in your thinking. Its not a 1 person dance with a CBO.

Its not happening, the CBO really is just a wet dream for cap strapped teams, I get it youre a hawks fan and you hope this happens to get out of that contract. But the league is not going to allow this and neither is the NHLPA.

The CBA is expiring in September 2020, they arent goign to amend it for a buyout now right before they need to extend it, they allow this CBA to run its course, and they will do whatever they have to do in the next one for the offseason of 2021 to deal with cap issues if anything
1 avr. 2020 à 11 h 29
#14
exo2769
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 15,536
Mentions "j'aime": 9,582
Quoting: coga16
the NHLPA has a big part of the cap, they have the ability to inflate it based on their escrow amount. Right there just shows a major flaw in your thinking. Its not a 1 person dance with a CBO.

Its not happening, the CBO really is just a wet dream for cap strapped teams, I get it youre a hawks fan and you hope this happens to get out of that contract. But the league is not going to allow this and neither is the NHLPA.

The CBA is expiring in September 2020, they arent goign to amend it for a buyout now right before they need to extend it, they allow this CBA to run its course, and they will do whatever they have to do in the next one for the offseason of 2021 to deal with cap issues if anything


BOTH the NHLPA and NHL owners agreed to not opt out. So...Not sure what you're talking about with the expiring CBA... That decision was made on September 1st 2019. So it's 2022. That's why an amendment is needed in the 1st place. AND the NHL gets the last say in the Cap Ceiling.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2019/9/16/20869079/nhl-nhlpa-collective-bargaining-agreement
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/2019/09/16/nhl-players-stay-with-cba-labor-peace-set-to-at-least-2022/40158611/

If you're opinion is that it won't happen. That's fine. It's just like to use facts and talk about how these things would affect each side. The FACT is...it's really is a win win. No team planned for this. AND if Sakic played his cards right...I would think COL could be the biggest winner of all. Melnyk isn't CBOing anyone. Not ever and certainly not Bobby Ryan. That's $9M he won't have to spend on Bobby Ryan AND AN ADDITIONAL $14.5M to replace his cap hit. This isn't an insurance policy like Callahan. COL is one of the FEW teams that doesn't really have any buyout candidates. I'd be willing to be ALOT that OTT would send over Shane Pinto and one of their 12,000 picks for COL to Pay $9M over 4 years and it would have zero affect on COL's cap too.
CD282, Fox_Czar_Cup et RamonDaze a aimé ceci.
1 avr. 2020 à 11 h 47
#15
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 20,030
Mentions "j'aime": 12,187
Quoting: exo2769
BOTH the NHLPA and NHL owners agreed to not opt out. So...Not sure what you're talking about with the expiring CBA... That decision was made on September 1st 2019. So it's 2022. That's why an amendment is needed in the 1st place. AND the NHL gets the last say in the Cap Ceiling.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2019/9/16/20869079/nhl-nhlpa-collective-bargaining-agreement
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/2019/09/16/nhl-players-stay-with-cba-labor-peace-set-to-at-least-2022/40158611/

If you're opinion is that it won't happen. That's fine. It's just like to use facts and talk about how these things would affect each side. The FACT is...it's really is a win win. No team planned for this. AND if Sakic played his cards right...I would think COL could be the biggest winner of all. Melnyk isn't CBOing anyone. Not ever and certainly not Bobby Ryan. That's $9M he won't have to spend on Bobby Ryan AND AN ADDITIONAL $14.5M to replace his cap hit. This isn't an insurance policy like Callahan. COL is one of the FEW teams that doesn't really have any buyout candidates. I'd be willing to be ALOT that OTT would send over Shane Pinto and one of their 12,000 picks for COL to Pay $9M over 4 years and it would have zero affect on COL's cap too.


youre also overlooking a big component int his....expansion draft.

having. CBO prior to teams needing to create their protection list would majority impact the quality of team Seattle could pick. They are not going to allow teams to exploit the CBO which sets Seattle off on the wrong foot

There are just way to many factors in play here, a CBO would be the last thing the NHL and NHLPA would agree to.
1 avr. 2020 à 12 h 3
#16
exo2769
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 15,536
Mentions "j'aime": 9,582
Quoting: coga16
youre also overlooking a big component int his....expansion draft.

having. CBO prior to teams needing to create their protection list would majority impact the quality of team Seattle could pick. They are not going to allow teams to exploit the CBO which sets Seattle off on the wrong foot

There are just way to many factors in play here, a CBO would be the last thing the NHL and NHLPA would agree to.


Maybe I'm overlooking something. Sure that could be true, but I don't think this example is one of them. Jerry Bruckheimer didn't plan for COVID-19 unless you have other news you want to share. He technically doesn't even have a vote right now...AND technically has zero players. So I don't think the NHLPA is going to make decisions off non-existent players and I don't think the owners are going to vote based on people that don't currently have any votes.

You're 100% correct that there are A LOT of things that would need to happen. Should be helpful that we've already done this once before.
1 avr. 2020 à 12 h 10
#17
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 20,030
Mentions "j'aime": 12,187
Quoting: exo2769
Maybe I'm overlooking something. Sure that could be true, but I don't think this example is one of them. Jerry Bruckheimer didn't plan for COVID-19 unless you have other news you want to share. He technically doesn't even have a vote right now...AND technically has zero players. So I don't think the NHLPA is going to make decisions off non-existent players and I don't think the owners are going to vote based on people that don't currently have any votes.

You're 100% correct that there are A LOT of things that would need to happen. Should be helpful that we've already done this once before.


this has nothing to Seattle ownership having a vote or players, this is about the NHL ensuring a lucrative market they are expanding into has the best change to succeed, which will generate revenue for them like Vegas if they are successful early

CBO bc a couple teams might be in cap trouble for 1 year vs potentially impacting the launch of a new NHL team. Need to think bigger picture here when it comes to this CBO talk.
They are going to protect the long term success of the league over a cap that has yet to be formally announced impacted by the league.

What if the cap went down organically which it can, do you think the league would allow CBOs then? No they wouldnt
exo2769 a aimé ceci.
1 avr. 2020 à 12 h 31
#18
exo2769
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 15,536
Mentions "j'aime": 9,582
Quoting: coga16
What if the cap went down organically which it can, do you think the league would allow CBOs then? No they wouldnt


I'm not saying you're wrong here. I just don't think this situation applies to the situation we're in. There's a real reason here. It's not just a little loss in revenue because less fans are watching/buying tickets.
1 avr. 2020 à 12 h 34
#19
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 20,030
Mentions "j'aime": 12,187
Quoting: exo2769
I'm not saying you're wrong here. I just don't think this situation applies to the situation we're in. There's a real reason here. It's not just a little loss in revenue because less fans are watching/buying tickets.


just cant look at the CBO in a vacuum, it impacts the league moving forward in a variety of ways thats why they wont do it unless its the mandatory their very last resort. 1. year of a cap dip (small if not will just be the same after they do all available cap inflaters under the current CBA) isnt enough of a reason
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage