| Author |
 Topic  |
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
 Posted - 07/13/2010 : 13:01:34
|
Wanted to ask what you would do as GM of the Hawks to relieve cap issues, especially after matching the Hjarmalsson offer sheet?
Be specific!
Would you move Huet, Campbell, Sharp, or maybe dangle a big name?
Or would you bury someone in the minors at risk of losing them for nothing on waivers?
Maybe you would skip signing Niemi, and trade him for picks?
Either way, find a way to get rid of the cap issues.
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 13:32:13
|
good topic.
First thing I'd do is un-match Hjalmarsson 
It depends what tools Bowman has at his disposal, and how much money CHI ownership is willing to eat.
If I were Bowman and had carte-blanche, I would:
- send Huet off to Europe, and pay a portion of his salary to have him play the rest of his time there.
- put Campbell on waivers, with the intention of never bringing him back on re-entry waivers and if no one claimed him have him play in the minors. CHI cannot afford to pay even half his salary really, so they cannot risk it on re-entry. Honestly, I think CHI would be willing to lose him for zero in return at this point.
Those 2 moves alone free up 12M in salary - so now I have 12.1M to play with. Additional trades I would consider:
- trade Sharp for cheaper roster players + prospects (net savings in contracts of 2M), and hope that Bolland can do what Sharp used to do
I now (hopefully) have 14M in cap space to sign 9 or 10 players
- sign Niemi for 4M or less per year on a 4 year deal (4M)
- bring Hannu Toivenen up to the NHL as backup (550K) or sign a cheap backup for Niemi (Raycroft perhaps, 700K)
- resign Bickell, 600K
- hope like hell that dman Vishnevskiy is ready to play in the NHL (800K)
- hope like hell that dman Jassen Cullimore is ready to play in the NHL (600K)
- sign or trade for a dependable top-6 dman that can be had for 1.2-ish
- do some other stuff
Thats about as far as I can go really - they've dug themselves such a deep hole that it is beyond my vision to see the whole way out.
I still think the odds are going up that they'll have to move one of Hossa/Toews/Kane. And we know which one of those 3 will be the first to go (Hossa) |
 |
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 13:41:15
|
I would just buy out Huet to being with according to Capgeek in a buy out Huet only costs you 1.825million over 4 years against the cap and that frees up 3.75 million on the cap, enough to get Neimi under contract at least.
Sharp is absolutly not on the Market if i'm calling the shots, he is under a very good contract for the next 2 season,, for example a Two way player of his offensive abilities and size roughly comparable is Thomas Plekanec,, now how many of you would take Plekanec over Sharp? not many and Plekanec and other comparables like say Ryan Kesler come with a 5millon $ cap hit Sharp's 3.9 is very manageable,,, and basicly it comes down to can you replace sharp for Less,, and to be quite frank you can't make your team any better with his 3.9 million than it would be with him on the team. So Sharp is not moving imo.
Basicly i would be in talks with a team like the Islanders about Brian Campbell, His salary would be tough to move, so i would not play hard ball for long and basicly let it be known i would be willing to move him for next to nothing just to dump the cap hit. Campbell unlike Huet is still very moveable his contract is high yess but take him off the Blackhawks roster he is still a number 1 d man on a lot of teams and he is a very good d man and can handle and i think maybe wants more minutes than he is getting now in chi town
if all of this can be accomplished the Hawks are back in very good cap space and still have a very competative team to ice,,
If this can't be accomplished the next guy i put out there as available is Hossa 5.25 is a friendly cap hit for a player of his calibre and i would rather keep and extend Sharp than Hossa,, but this is only a last resort
Pasty |
|
|
|
Jumbo Joe Rocks
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
410 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 13:42:22
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by nuxfan[/i]
[br]good topic.
First thing I'd do is un-match Hjalmarsson
It depends what tools Bowman has at his disposal, and how much money CHI ownership is willing to eat.
If I were Bowman and had carte-blanche, I would:
- send Huet off to Europe, and pay a portion of his salary to have him play the rest of his time there.
- put Campbell on waivers, with the intention of never bringing him back on re-entry waivers and if no one claimed him have him play in the minors. CHI cannot afford to pay even half his salary really, so they cannot risk it on re-entry. Honestly, I think CHI would be willing to lose him for zero in return at this point.
Those 2 moves alone free up 12M in salary - so now I have 12.1M to play with. Additional trades I would consider:
- trade Sharp for cheaper roster players + prospects (net savings in contracts of 2M), and hope that Bolland can do what Sharp used to do
I now (hopefully) have 14M in cap space to sign 9 or 10 players
- sign Niemi for 4M or less per year on a 4 year deal (4M)
- bring Hannu Toivenen up to the NHL as backup (550K) or sign a cheap backup for Niemi (Raycroft perhaps, 700K)
- resign Bickell, 600K
- hope like hell that dman Vishnevskiy is ready to play in the NHL (800K)
- hope like hell that dman Jassen Cullimore is ready to play in the NHL (600K)
- sign or trade for a dependable top-6 dman that can be had for 1.2-ish
- do some other stuff
Thats about as far as I can go really - they've dug themselves such a deep hole that it is beyond my vision to see the whole way out.
I still think the odds are going up that they'll have to move one of Hossa/Toews/Kane. And we know which one of those 3 will be the first to go (Hossa)
Andrew Raycroft was already signed by Dallas.
GO SHARKS GO |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 13:44:30
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by nuxfan[/i]
[br]good topic.
First thing I'd do is un-match Hjalmarsson
It depends what tools Bowman has at his disposal, and how much money CHI ownership is willing to eat.
If I were Bowman and had carte-blanche, I would:
- send Huet off to Europe, and pay a portion of his salary to have him play the rest of his time there.
- put Campbell on waivers, with the intention of never bringing him back on re-entry waivers and if no one claimed him have him play in the minors. CHI cannot afford to pay even half his salary really, so they cannot risk it on re-entry. Honestly, I think CHI would be willing to lose him for zero in return at this point.
Those 2 moves alone free up 12M in salary - so now I have 12.1M to play with. Additional trades I would consider:
- trade Sharp for cheaper roster players + prospects (net savings in contracts of 2M), and hope that Bolland can do what Sharp used to do
I now (hopefully) have 14M in cap space to sign 9 or 10 players
- sign Niemi for 4M or less per year on a 4 year deal (4M)
- bring Hannu Toivenen up to the NHL as backup (550K) or sign a cheap backup for Niemi (Raycroft perhaps, 700K)
- resign Bickell, 600K
- hope like hell that dman Vishnevskiy is ready to play in the NHL (800K)
- hope like hell that dman Jassen Cullimore is ready to play in the NHL (600K)
- sign or trade for a dependable top-6 dman that can be had for 1.2-ish
- do some other stuff
Thats about as far as I can go really - they've dug themselves such a deep hole that it is beyond my vision to see the whole way out.
I still think the odds are going up that they'll have to move one of Hossa/Toews/Kane. And we know which one of those 3 will be the first to go (Hossa)
You cannot bury a player of Brian Campbell's Calibre in the minors,, no way jose geeze hes a no 1 d man on a lot of teams,, if this management is willing to do this to a player like Campbell noone and i mean noone will ever sign in chi town again,, why would i sign a big contract in a hockey town if this is how they'd treat me when i have played well throughout... this isn't jeff finger we re talking about
Pasty |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 13:45:17
|
btw Corey Crawford has payed his dues in the AHL he will be the backup next year i would think
Pasty |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 14:15:40
|
At this point, I'd be seeking offers for Marian Hossa.
I know, I know. He is a part of their core. But honestly, the true core up front consists of Patrick Kane & Jonathon Toews. Marian Hossa, to me, is expendable.
But, would a team take on his big contract? Fairly unlikely. Perhaps if, what they had to give up was minimal for a player of his talents and production. A team like, the NYI may seek a winger to play with that of Jon Tavares. I mean, it would certainly help Mr. Tavares production and his development, having a talent to play along side of him. And, the NYI have those dollars to do so. Not to mention, a few young talents and picks to get the job done.
The return would be substantial, but, it may come down to having to move Mr. Hossa for CHI. If, plans don't work out as they hope. So, taking on picks and more prospects may help the team in the long run, while securing the team now financially, and letting the doors open up for Seabrook next year. Who to me, is more important down the road than that of keeping Hossa, with Toews and Kane up front already.
If I could move out Hossa and bury/move the contract of Mr. Huet. Things would be looking good from there. I could re-sign Niemi and add a few more depth guys to help round out the team.
I could then try to move Bolland, clearing up enough space for a solid roster once again.
One that is only short of Hossa, who albeit good offensively, is lower on the depth chart there due to guys like Kane & Toewes as is. I also lose my backup goalie, no big deal. And, a depth guy in Bolland.
Not huge losses, in my opinion. Hossa hurts the most of course, but at the end of the day, his return and financial freedom, seem well worth it.
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 15:33:50
|
quote:
You cannot bury a player of Brian Campbell's Calibre in the minors,, no way jose geeze hes a no 1 d man on a lot of teams,, if this management is willing to do this to a player like Campbell noone and i mean noone will ever sign in chi town again,, why would i sign a big contract in a hockey town if this is how they'd treat me when i have played well throughout... this isn't jeff finger we re talking about
Patsy, generally agreed. This move would be preceded by a waiver offer , and presumably some team will pick him up for nothing. However, if no team is willing to take him for nothing on waivers, then what do you do? The Hawks are so close to the cap, they cannot afford 3.75M for a dman that doesn't even play with the team, if someone were to pick him up on re-entry. The buyout would be slightly less painful, but still pretty painful, 2.5M per year for 12 years or something like that?
The Hawks are more forked than any other team I have seen in a long time - not since the NJD the first year after the CBA was signed, where they had to put Malahkov on long-term injury just to get back under the cap in time for the season. They have some very hard choices to make very soon.
quote:
But, would a team take on his big contract?
Irvine, I think Hossa is highly movable right now, he is nearly ppg at a cap hit of 5.25M. A lot of teams would love to get someone like him, and there are several teams that can afford the actual $ amounts he is making (as opposed to the cap hit).
I wonder if other GM's have come to the same thought - for a team like NYI, who can do a favour for CHI with Campbell, perhaps they are asking for Hossa as part of the deal to return the favour. Something like:
to NYI:
- Campbell
- Hossa
to CHI:
- Okposo
- 2011 1st and second round picks, or more
I don't know, I'm just throwing it out as an example of what might be going through a GM's mind. CHI is now so desperate to get rid of Campbell that anything is possible. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 15:35:28
|
quote:
If I could move out Hossa and bury/move the contract of Mr. Huet. Things would be looking good from there. I could re-sign Niemi and add a few more depth guys to help round out the team.
Unfortunately Irvine, thats still not enough. If they were to do that, CHI would have 11.1M to sign 10 players - including Niemi. |
|
|
|
Tiller33
PickupHockey Pro
389 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 16:24:35
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by nuxfan[/i]
Irvine, I think Hossa is highly movable right now, he is nearly ppg at a cap hit of 5.25M. A lot of teams would love to get someone like him, and there are several teams that can afford the actual $ amounts he is making (as opposed to the cap hit).
I wonder if other GM's have come to the same thought - for a team like NYI, who can do a favour for CHI with Campbell, perhaps they are asking for Hossa as part of the deal to return the favour. Something like:
to NYI:
- Campbell
- Hossa
to CHI:
- Okposo
- 2011 1st and second round picks, or more
I don't know, I'm just throwing it out as an example of what might be going through a GM's mind. CHI is now so desperate to get rid of Campbell that anything is possible.
Could definately see a scenario such as this comng together. I propesed Campbell to the Ilses in another thread and was scoffed at, but I they have one of the most unpredictable owners in the league and a ton of Salary cap room. Tavares needs a better linemate than Matt Moulson (don't get me wrong I like Moulson) and Hossa could fit that bill. And unlike Campbell Hossa doesn't have a NTC.
Wouldn't count out a blockbuster like this at all! |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 17:04:44
|
quote:
I propesed Campbell to the Ilses in another thread and was scoffed at
And I still scoff at it  . I don't think NYI will take just Campbell in exchange for other bits - honestly thats just too much of a one-way favour. Teams know that CHI desperatly wants to be rid of Campbell, so they'll extract what they can, if they can get more. |
|
|
|
Tiller33
PickupHockey Pro
389 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 17:20:56
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by nuxfan[/i]
[br]quote:
I propesed Campbell to the Ilses in another thread and was scoffed at
And I still scoff at it . I don't think NYI will take just Campbell in exchange for other bits - honestly thats just too much of a one-way favour. Teams know that CHI desperatly wants to be rid of Campbell, so they'll extract what they can, if they can get more.
If it happened it would definately be more than Just Okposo and a First rounder. Lol but I hope you're right if it means there is a chance the buds can nab Sharp. I'm sure other teams would have more to offer Chicago for him though. |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 18:51:05
|
@ nuxfan:
I realize that removing Hossa & Huet would still not provide enough cap relief.
But, this is why I also suggested (as I progressed), moving Sharp out after that.
With that, (and without looking), you are then roughly $14.5M above the cap to sign those players.
You could also entertain the thought of buying out Campbell, or moving him out and taking less return for him than you would have hoped. Or, something along those lines.
Yes, this seems like a ton of players to be moving out. But honestly, it's beginning to look like something Chicago may have to consider.
A) Removing Huet from the books, the best way they can.
B) Trading Patrick Sharp
C) Trading Marian Hossa
D) Ridding of Brian Campbell from the books (Possible trade)
With all of this, they free up:
$5.275 (Hossa)
$3.900 (Sharp)
$7.142 (Campbell)
$5.625 (Huet)
Total: $21.942
They will be able to receive some salary back in return (IE, a roster player or two) of lesser dollar amounts than the ones going out. Making it more feasible to move a guy like Marian Hossa or Brian Campbell.
This is of course wishful thinking. Do I see all of this happening? No. It's just highly unlikely in a salary cap world.
But, it would certain put Chicago in position to ice a full roster, and still be competitive. They lose a quality defencemen, a talented offensive forward, and a leader.
But, they also can gain more youth in return, while keeping their top 2 D and top 2 offensive stars.
And really, in a salary cap world, you can't ask for much more than that -- especially, in the position that Chicago is in.
They move some big name guys, they really do. But, honestly, I don't find it so devisatating to the whole line up as others may see it.
I see the only big problem being, finding buyers for all these big contracts. At this point, if I were CHI GM, I'd be willing to take slightly less of a return on all these guys to get my team financially where I need to.
I could then focus on adding depth guys via what is left in Free Agency, or even seeking EU/RU leagues to find some depth.
Such as the NYR signing Mats Zucarello-Aasen. I love this guy. Highly skilled, just very small. But, he has heart and offensive skill, coupled with great speed. Watch for this kid.
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 20:29:23
|
quote:
btw Corey Crawford has payed his dues in the AHL he will be the backup next year i would think
I thought of that too Patsy, but Crawford comes with a cap hit of 800K, while Toivanen is only 550K. Not much difference, but every bit counts. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 20:42:25
|
Irvine-
CHI cannot buy out Campbell, or at least it doesn't solve their entire problem. If they buy out, they will take a cap hit of approximately 2.5M for the next 12 or 15 years, or something like that (does anyone know the buyout rules? I think its 1/3 of salary spread over 3x the remaining contract, but I'm probably wrong).
Anyway, they pretty much have to give Campbell away for nearly free. Waivers is a good way to do it, or trade for nothing but a draft pick or two (virtually give him away).
Your math for the rest is good, if they remove those players they gain 21M in capspace. Which they use to sign:
- Niemi (4M)
- 3 or 4 dmen (although lower depth)
- 2 top-6 forwards
- 1 depth forward
- reserve enough to extend Seabrook @ 5M/year
Wow.
If that all happens, CHI will have eliminated the following from their Stanley Cup team:
- Byfuglien
- Ladd
- Versteeg
- Sharp
- Huet
- Campbell
- Hossa
- Madden (UFA, unlikely to sign back)
- Eager
- Burish
- Sopel
- Fraser
That is a significant house cleaning. I cannot recall such a significant house cleaning for an NHL team ever. |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 22:49:14
|
My only question is, who is willing to pick up $7mil for Brian Campbell?
Only a few teams can pick it up.
But how many teams want to, especially since his contract runs through to the 2015/2016 season?
How about high value contracts with little difference trades to lose cap space?
i.e. Campbell for Souray (I use it as an example only, Oilers are not taking on high individual salaries, but trying to lose them)
Maybe Ribeiro for Campbell with some picks on both sides, with a savings of 2mil?
|
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2010 : 23:12:44
|
It's crazy to think about Chicago moving all of these players. But mathematically speaking at this point, it almost seems like what they have to do.
A couple of big contracts must go, and some more smaller ones too. In order to ice a full roster, and to ice one with atleast some actual depth. Not a roster full of entry level contracts.
They have a lot of work to do. A lot more than meets the eye at a glance.
Irvine/prez. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 05:36:35
|
Wow, they really are up chit creek without a paddle. Makes me anxious about the possibility of Toronto getting a Sharp, or even a Hossa . . . yes, Hossa. But that's for later - what would I do as Chicago GM?
1) Party with the Stanley Cup and hundreds of hot, scantily clad strangers in bikinis, sitting in my hot tub time machine sipping $5,000 cognac.
2) Take said time machine back to when I was about sign Campbell for 8 mil and stop myself.
Sorry, let me start again.
I agree with Irvine - move Hossa for a bunch of very cheap, good prospects. Trade Campbell away for almost nothing, unfortunately, but get a cheap 3rd rate d-man back. And lastly, try to keep Sharp, but if still not under the cap, trade him for two prospects of decent value, one of which can be inserted in the line-up right away.
Argh, I forgot about Huet . . . trade him to the GM who is married and who I have compromising photos of with the scantily clad ladies in aforementioned hottub!
Scratch it all . . . seriously, I just drink the $5,000 cognac and wait for what "fine" or discipline the NHL will give me for being over the cap.
I am half serious here . . . what are the penalties?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Tiller33
PickupHockey Pro
389 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 07:30:34
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by slozo[/i]
they really are up chit creek without a paddle. Makes me anxious about the possibility of Toronto getting a Sharp, or even a Hossa . . . yes, Hossa...
move Hossa for a bunch of very cheap, good prospects.
I'll agree on one thing that The Blackhawks are "up chit creek". I give a Hossa to Toronto move 0% chance of happening (can you have negative percent?). Without arguing his skills or merits as a player, Burke absolutely will not add a player with a contract term of 11 years, the majority of which he is making $2.5 million above his cap hit. Brian Burke has been one of the most outspoken GM's against these ludacris contracts, so I see no chance of him bringing one to his team. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 09:41:50
|
Slozo, research turns up very little, but what I can find as possible penatlies are pretty severe (from a posting on HFBoards):
Until the team gets under the cap:
- suspension of team employees
- forfeiture of games
- also, the league can "help" the team get under the cap by voiding contracts starting with last one signed, until the team is under the cap. Players with voided contracts would become UFA
Added penalties:
- forfeiture of draft picks
- Fine from 1M to 5M for the team
Apparently outlined in Article 26 of the CBA, and can be applied at the discretion of the commissioner.
I recall a couple of years ago the Flames had to play the last 10 games or so of the year short some players (only 9 forwards, or something like that) due to cap issues - had they played a full team they would have been over the cap. They lost nearly every game and it cost them a berth in the playoffs. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 09:43:24
|
You know Tiller, that is a good point about Burke being outspoken on those contracts . . . crap. That kills THAT dream.
You have to think though that of either Sharp or Bolland, one of these guys will find themselves in Toronto - there isn't a more desperate or determined team looking for top 6 (potential top 6 IMHO for Bolland) guys than the Leafs.
I really do wonder how desperate the Chicago situation will get, and if waiting long enough, for how little they might receive back. Which is why if I was Chicago GM, I'd be very active right now, and take whatever I could get before having to give away players for absolutely nothing . . . which may happen if the current GM holds on for too long.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 10:40:03
|
This is why I was so shocked to see the Hawks match Hjarmalsson. I mean, good player and all but that contract really forces the hand.
You have to think that Stan Bowman(and his daddy) would not make a move like this without something in the works. The only logically thinking I can come up with is that Campbell is on his way out of town and they did not want to lose a very capable and legitimate #3 guy in Hjarmalsson.
Still, even moving Campbell out, Bolland or Sharp have to go as well as Huet for them to have a fighting chances and icing any kind of team within the framework of the CBA.
Did anyone else wonder if there might be some 'medical' claim against Huet. If he can not play because he is 'hurt' long term, the number comes off the cap.
There has to be something deeper that we are missing because the people leading this team are far too successful to make this kind of mess of this situation. |
Edited by - Beans15 on 07/14/2010 10:56:25 |
|
|
|
Tiller33
PickupHockey Pro
389 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 11:47:54
|
This is definately the worst case of cap mismanagement since the current CBA was put into place.
Slozo I wish I could share your optimism about Sharp or Bolland. As a Leaf fan I would love to see Sharp in Blue and white, but I have to think if he is one of the next Blackhawks to leave there are other teams that will be able to offer a more competitive package for him.
I would think Chicago would be looking for an NHL ready forward on an entry level contract along with another prospect or high pick. For the Leafs that would leave Tyler Bozak, Nazim Kadri, Luca Caputi, and Brayden Irwin. You can argue that neither Kadri or Irwin are NHL ready that decision can't be made until training camp, so you're left with Caputi and Bozak. I would be reluctant to trade Bozak because I believe he has the most promise of any Leaf prospect, perhaps even more so than Kadri.
If Chicago would be interested in a trade such as:
Caputi
Gunnarsson (I like Gunnarsson and hope he isnt moved)
3rd round 2011
for
Sharp
5th 2011
Then maybe, but like I said I believe there are other teams capable of tabling a more competitive offer. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 12:38:35
|
quote:
This is why I was so shocked to see the Hawks match Hjarmalsson. I mean, good player and all but that contract really forces the hand.
Yup, agreed. I too think something must be in the works for other large players, but nothing as of yet...
I think CHI would rather have Huet go play in Europe to get his salary off the books. Long-term injury is difficult to show, and it also forces the player to not be able to play anywhere (even Europe). Its in both of their interests to have Huet play - if he regains form in Europe then perhaps he becomes tradable for something later in the year or this time next year. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 12:45:25
|
Turning focus from those that will be leaving CHI, how about Niemi?
His arbitration date is July 29. His agent is trying to work out a long term deal, and according to the Tribune he does not want to go to arbitration - he's worried the arbitrator will undervalue Niemi and not give as long a deal either.
One can only think that the bar for Niemi was set with the Halak signing, but I can't think of an arbitration award ever that has been more than 2 years... |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 13:41:33
|
Don't quote me on it, but I don't believe that the arbitration sets the length of the contract but only the annual salary.
Also, I am thinking that the Halak comparison will not be as big a factor in the signing of Neimi as one might assume. Remember, Neimi was a rookie last year and has all of 42 regular season games and a total of 64 regular and playoff games. No legal, 3rd party arbitrator is going to give an elite level contract to a guy who has played less than one season of hockey. I don't care if he won the Cup, it's not going to be a Halak sized deal.
I would suggest that some comparable contracts the arbitrator will use would be similar to Michael Leighton, Jonas Gustovsson, John Quick, and Tuuka Rask. All of which have been signed recently, all have playoff experence(except for one guy) and all seem pretty similar in regards to performance and production.
They might go a bit higher than the average of these guys but not by much. If he does not sign prior to the arbitration, I will be absolutely gobsmacked if the deal is higher than $2.25M per season. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 16:00:22
|
arbitration awards will stipulate contract length and total amount. The only deals I can recall that were more than one year in recent memory are:
- In 2007, Cammarelli was awarded a 2yr/6.7M deal
- In 2009, Hudler was awarded a 2yr/5.75M deal
Also according to arbitration rules, the arbitrator cannot take into account salaries signed as UFA's in that same year - so Halak's deal will not weigh into things. So Beans, your comparable list might be accurate - although I would remove Leighton, he's been in and out of the NHL for about 8 years now. Quick/Rask/Gustavsson would be comparables.
With that in mind, the arbitrator might go lower than Niemi values himself - 2.5-ish? |
|
|
|
Tiller33
PickupHockey Pro
389 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 16:18:06
|
anyone know how it is decided if a player has arbitration rights?
I know that for some RFA's if they are qualified they and unsigned before a certain date they become a UFA because they don't have arbitration rights. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 17:22:00
|
In order to have arbitration rights, a player must:
* Between 18 and 20 with at least four years of professional experience
* 21 years old and have played at least three years of professional hockey
* Ages 22 and 23 with at least two years experience in the pro ranks
* 24 or older with at least one year of professional experience
If an RFA is qualified, that simply means that the team has preserved their rights to that player. In the case of a player with arbitration rights, the team extends its rights to the time of the arbitration hearing. In the case of an RFA without arbitration rights, it is indefinate.
If an RFA is not qualified, the player becomes a UFA on July 1.
There is an exception that rule, but I'm not sure what it is. I mentioned in another thread that Bill Sweatt (prospect picked up by TOR as part of the Versteeg package) falls into this category. He is an RFA, but will become UFA in August if TOR cannot sign him. I'm not sure why. |
|
|
|
Tiller33
PickupHockey Pro
389 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 17:57:17
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by nuxfan[/i]
[br]In order to have arbitration rights, a player must:
* Between 18 and 20 with at least four years of professional experience
* 21 years old and have played at least three years of professional hockey
* Ages 22 and 23 with at least two years experience in the pro ranks
* 24 or older with at least one year of professional experience
If an RFA is qualified, that simply means that the team has preserved their rights to that player. In the case of a player with arbitration rights, the team extends its rights to the time of the arbitration hearing. In the case of an RFA without arbitration rights, it is indefinate.
If an RFA is not qualified, the player becomes a UFA on July 1.
There is an exception that rule, but I'm not sure what it is. I mentioned in another thread that Bill Sweatt (prospect picked up by TOR as part of the Versteeg package) falls into this category. He is an RFA, but will become UFA in August if TOR cannot sign him. I'm not sure why.
Thanks for the breakdown nuxfan.
Ya the Sweatt situation is what I was having trouble understanding, also I thought Christian Hanson did not have arbitration rights but I guess he does. One thing I don't understand is how would it be possible for someone 18-20 to have 4 years professional experience? Do they count European Elite Leagues as professional experience under NHL Collective Bargaining?
(Sorry that this is off topic) |
Edited by - Tiller33 on 07/14/2010 17:59:28 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 21:21:20
|
I really don't see Hossa being part of any deal. Wasn't Bowman involved in the deal to bring him there last season?? Why sign a guy to a 12 year deal one year only to move him out a year later?? That does not make any sense.
Here's the deal with Hossa. He does nothing but produce. He plays anywhere, any line, any time, with any team mates and still produces. He has been a PPG player for virtually the past decade playing with 4 different teams.
You can't find players like that every day, they are rare, rare, super rare.
Take nothing away from Sharp and Bolland, but if it's my choice I am keeping Hossa over both of those guys.
And to anyone who will talk about age, don't. The three years difference between Sharp and Hossa is insignificant. Furthermore, Sharp will be a UFA in 2 years and will be looking for Hossa like money anyway. He doesn't and has never produced like Hossa has.
Ultimately, Sharps value is higher, which might be difficult to apprecaite as I just went on about how much I prefer Hossa. However, a less than $4 million cap hit for a potential #1 line players and definately one of the league's best 2nd line players is a complete steal for the next 2 years.
I see Hossa as important to that Hawks team as Keith, Kane, and Toews. Because of those three, Sharp becomes expendable. Very similar to Calgary moving Phaneuf. It's not that he is a poor player or the team does not want to keep him. But the asset with the highest value will move when you have a plie of assets.
The only question is which team will produce enough picks and prospects to get Sharp. The issue with TO being involved is their shortage of a 1st round pick next season.
I see FLA and Tallon getting his hands back on Sharp. |
|
|
|
leafsfan_101
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1530 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 21:36:53
|
Based on the math, Chicago needs to sign at least 5 more players to meet the minimum requirement of 2 goalies and 18 players. IF they sign them all at the league minimum (which is impossible) they will need to clear up roughly 3 mil AT LEAST.
Factor in that they need to sign a goalie, 3 forwards and a defenseman, I would figure that they would need to clear at least 10 mil to remain competative with relative depth. They also need to get rid of large contracts (ie Campbell, Huet, Hossa, Kane, Toews, Sharp) to make the necessary moves.
I think that the players will need to force Chicago's hand here, and people will be dealt. Huet will be gone and Crawford will be called up, Niemi will be resigned, and the rest will need to be signed from the FA pool at small contracts.
I would not be suprised to see a blockbuster to not only keep them cap complient for next season, but to set themselves up for years down the road. Could Seabrook be moved with his RFA status after next season? |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2010 : 21:53:51
|
Beans, I'm pretty sure the Hawks don't want to move Hossa either - you're right, he's an elite player with a very cap-friendly contract, a top-line forward on any team in the league. They don't come around often.
I threw Hossa into the mix as a tangent on what other teams might try to extract out of CHI in order to take on Campbell (or Huet I suppose). What if NYI came along and said they would take Campbell, but only if Hossa was part of the deal - in return for young prospects/draft picks. I think I threw out Okposo and 1st/2nd round picks next year, but maybe its more than that, whatever. Maybe its not Hossa (he has a NTC), maybe its Seabrook. Or Kane.
That solves a lot of problems for CHI fast...albeit at a deep cost. As a silver lining, that probably allows them to keep Sharp and Bolland, who they need for depth, and fill in the rest of the team with 12M in cap space.
As leafsfan says, the closer they take this to training camp the more drastic the move(s) will have to be. Its pretty awe striking how deep CHI has dug this hole for themselves. I think its getting more likely that one of those big forwards is going to get moved. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 07:50:35
|
I think you may have convinced me Beans - maybe Hossa won't move, in fact, it's not very likely at all. But a good argument can be made for Sharp not being moved for the reasons you also mention - he's a viable top line player on the second line, he's relatively cheap right now, and he's younger. Yeah, he doesn't have quite the production that Hossa has, but he's half the price - and as expensive players go, Hossa would definitely get you the best return for all the reasons you mention.
But you're right, more likely that Sharp goes, and Hossa stays. But I bet Chicago listens to any offers out there . . .
The real problem is who might be willing to bite on Campbell's big contract, especially in this tight market. He could go for very, very little.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 08:13:29
|
Here is a look at teams with the most salary cap room remaining.
Does anyone see any takers for Campbell??
NYI - $27.8 million
ATL - $27.2 million
COL - $26.2 million
STL - $ 24.5 million
TB - $ 19.4 million
LAK - $ 17.5 million
ANA - $ 16.9 million
NASH - $ 16.9 million
DAL - $15.6 million
PHO - $ 15.4 million
I never realized that Atlanta has that much cash left. They could comfortably take Campbell and have a legitimate #1 defender that they may never have had. Plus, ATL has a track record of doing nothing with draft picks anyway.
|
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 09:38:09
|
NYI and ATL are the logical destinations for Campbell, due to the cap hit. They both have enough cap space to sign Campbell and still sign other players that they need to this year and next. However a closer look at your teams (because my morning is slow today):
COL (yes) - they also have to sign Peter Mueller and Christ Stewart (both RFA this year), as well as keep enough money in the bank for TJ Galiardi and Craig Anderson next year. They have also indicated that they will not spend to the cap this year (at least) due to declining revenues at home. I'm not sure how much they want to get that #1 dman as well (at that price anyway), I think they want to see if Liles can get back in form.
STL (yes) - they still have to sign Johnson, Perron, Hensick this year. Next year they need to re-sign David Backes, TJ Oshie, Patrick Berglund, Crombeen. Except for Backes, all of them are going to get significant raises off of entry level deals, and no doubt they'll want to hang onto them all. They do however have a need for a puck moving dman.
TB (no) - they only have 16 players under contract so far, so they still need to sign 7 more just to field a team. So we'll be generous, say it takes 7M to do that, we're down to 12M in cap space (one of those is Downie, but the rest could be fillins). Apart from Stamkos they don't have any large looming free agents coming up, but Stamkos is going to get a significant raise. As long as they kept enough in the kitty to sign him, they could then add Campbell. I'm not sure how much they need that #1 though - they have Kubina, Ohlund, and Hedman as their future (yes, I know none of them are #1's)
LAK (no) - still 7 players to sign this year, and if one of them is Kovy their cap space will fill up fast. Also looming next year - Doughty, Johnson, and Simmonds, 3 guys that are going to eat up the rest of the cap space they have and then some (thankfully Handzuz and Williams are UFA after this season). I'm also pretty sure they have their #1 dman situation figured out - how could they pay Doughty less than Campbell next year?
ANA (yes) - Anaheim would be a good destination as well, they have 16M to sign 3 guys, have most of their big pieces locked up for the forseeable future. The biggest deciding factor on the direction of ANA is what they do with Ryan, and what they do with Selanne. If they resign both, say bye to 7M in cap space. They would just be able to fit Campbell under the cap in that case. Then they would have to do some dealing, because they would only have 5 dmen and a boatload of forwards
NSH (no) - I don't see it. They will resign Weber next year, he is their #1, they'll fill in other bits. NSH is another team that has vowed not to spend to the cap.
DAL (yes) - I could see this happening too - again, most of the big bits are locked up now, they have to sign 3 players and have 16M. And they could use a Campbell-style player on their roster. Also not willing to spend to the cap, so they'd probably look to moving one of their forwards to make some money room (not necessarily to CHI).
PHO (maybe) - less likely, unless they looked at Campbell as a replacement for Jovo (he is UFA after this season). They have a lot of bits to sign next year as well, including Bryzgalov, Yandle, Fiddler, Upshall, Vrbata. Notoriously cheap too, they won't spend to the cap.
Beans, did you leave EDM off your list on purpose? They have 13M in space and only need to sign one player. If they drop Souray, they would have even more room to accomodate Campbell, and one might argue they would have a need - unless you think Gilbert/Whitney is enough. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 09:40:14
|
| Also to consider - Campbell has a NTC, so that will limit where he goes for the next 5 years. While I can't see him handcuffing the team in this situation, I also can't see him OK'ing a deal to NYI or ATL. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 09:55:34
|
Is it a no trade clause or a no movement clause. Big difference.
If it's a no movement clause, I believe it means they can not put him on Waivers either. He would have to agree to it.
Scary.
I think Campbell will play anywhere he has a chance to win. |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 11:09:07
|
it is a no trade clause. Campbell can provide a list of up to 8 teams that he could be moved to, and the team has a 45-day window to accomodate a trade to one team on the list. He can be waived as well. He could be bought out with either a NTC or NMC
Also, the buyout option, I found clarity. For Campbell, he could be bought out at 60% of remaining deal over double the remaining term. He has 42M and 6 years remaining on his contract. So buyout would be 25.7M, spread over 12 years, would be 2.14M per year.
Not as bad as I thought, but still not good. 2.14M for the next 12 years...sheesh. Is that worse than Yashin's buyout? |
|
|
|
nuxfan
PickupHockey All-Star
3670 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 11:10:06
|
quote:
I think Campbell will play anywhere he has a chance to win.
I do too. Which eliminates many of the teams on your list  |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 07/15/2010 : 11:12:43
|
Of course Beans left EDM off the list. There reason Souray is still an Oiler is because management didn't want to take significant salary in return. This was shown in them putting Souray on waivers.
No way EDM would take Campbell, his contract is way too big and too long for EDM to take. Souray is off the books within two years, Campbell has a contract until 2015/2016.
Besides, why should EDM upgrade their defense through expensive salaries, instead of drafting? Remember, the EDM rebuild is through the draft, not through trades, like Burke's in TO. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Chicago's Next Move? 
