Toggle sidebar

Who would you compliance buyout?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates

Compliance Buyout

  • Total voters
    67
Fitzy

Fitzy

Very Stable Genius
Jan 29, 2009
36,368
24,174
Let's assume the hypothetical scenario in which due to cap shrinkage reasons, each NHL team gets one free buyout this offseason.

The Rangers have a number of viable options of various cap hits and utility to consider. Which would you choose?
Click to read more...
 
As sad of an ending to his Rangers career as it would be, the correct choice is Lundqvist. His is the most albatross contract and he has no place on the team anymore.
 
IIRC these would be just buyouts, not compliance buyouts...
IIRC Compliance Buyouts were a one-time option related to the changes in CBA -
Richards by NYR was a compliance buy-out
(OK i see you are creating a one-time buy-out option with lower Cap, and calling those Compliance Buyouts, ok)

but i wouldn't buy out anyone,
i don't want any of those Cap Hits extending beyond next season

NYR should just 'take their medicine', 'feel the pain'
and let the 4 big Cap Hits (these guys plus Shatty's buy-out big lump sum hitting next season) go away in a year, as scheduled
 
cwede said:
IIRC these would be just buyouts, not compliance buyouts...
IIRC Compliance Buyouts were a one-time option related to the changes in CBA -
Richards by NYR was a compliance buy-out

but i wouldn't buy out anyone,
i don't want any of those Cap Hits extending beyond next season

NYR should just 'take their medicine', 'feel the pain'
and let the 4 big Cap Hits (these guys plus Shatty's buy-out big lump sum hitting next season) go away in a year, as scheduled
Click to expand...

I believe OP is suggesting that team's will be given compliance buyouts due to the coronavirus-related stoppage
 
UnSandvich said:
I believe OP is suggesting that team's will be given compliance buyouts due to the coronavirus-related stoppage
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the hypothetical.

Were we to consider real buyouts we'd have a much different debate.
 
I think ultimately, the smartest business decision would be Hank. But buyout would not be my first choice there. It'd go more like:

1. Good trade (get something resembling an asset for him)
2. Retirement
3. Meh trade (get meh for him)
4. Compliance buyout
5. Buyout/Bad trade (take back a bad "asset" for him or have to give up a good one)
 
Voted Staal

Hank can either retire or get scratched next season unless another team wants him. Of course, his NTC is in place.
 
I’d prefer Staal as I just don’t think he’s doing anything positive at all and won’t be movable even as a 50% UFA next deadline. That said, Hank clearly makes the most sense with his cap number. If it’s a free buyout than buying out Hank without consequence is the obvious “correct” move. That said, I think Hank actually has the ability to have value as an expiring contract next deadline, if he were to accept a move. I still think that from a pure business perspective you simply can’t argue against buying out Hank if we’re given a freebie, but considering his legacy and possibly being able to move him at the deadline versus how much of an anchor Staal has become... it’s a toss up. If we didn’t have Georgiev in the equation I would be perfectly comfortable, even confident, with having Hank as Shesty’s back up for the final year of that contract. I don’t feel that he can’t play and I certainly don’t think that his game is below an average back up goalie. He just makes a ton of money and we happen to have two very good goalies beside him. Staal, on the other hand, makes a lot of money as well but considerably less, and is a complete anchor. At the end of the day, I guess the answer is, I don’t care. Smith, to me, is actually serviceable and just badly overpaid. At about $2M he’s a fine bottom six/bottom pair utility guy who can play two roles and seems liked in this group.
 
I gotta be honest if a trade doesn't amount and this season has been an indication of the future, all factors considered with what we have on the roster and the system and that massive contract I'd hedge my bets and buyout Trouba. The amount of lapses he has on both ends, it's not a big deal at ~6 million. When your getting paid as a top 5 Dman and your not even close to that level it's a problem. I'm far more comfortable trying to find guys that bring aspects of what Trouba does to compliment Fox and ADA than pay Trouba 8 million a year for the next 6 years.

And let's not get it twisted Trouba logs a ton of minutes and brings things in his game that the others can't but that number bothers me
 
  • Like
Reactions: hi and KirkAlbuquerque
USA_TROUBA_JACOB.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZiGOODejad, Rangers743 and KirkAlbuquerque
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal
Staal

Henrik has earned the right to go out in his own way.

Plus, whether playing or not, he doesn't give the puck away, allow the opposition to go around him or stay unattended in the slot. He doesn't hurt the team as a health scratch. Staal is a horrible drag on the team.

I would love for Henrik to retire and have the Rangers pay him his full salary to be Rod Gilbert for a year, if not forever.
 
B17 Apricots said:
I gotta be honest if a trade doesn't amount and this season has been an indication of the future, all factors considered with what we have on the roster and the system and that massive contract I'd hedge my bets and buyout Trouba. The amount of lapses he has on both ends, it's not a big deal at ~6 million. When your getting paid as a top 5 Dman and your not even close to that level it's a problem. I'm far more comfortable trying to find guys that bring aspects of what Trouba does to compliment Fox and ADA than pay Trouba 8 million a year for the next 6 years.

And let's not get it twisted Trouba logs a ton of minutes and brings things in his game that the others can't but that number bothers me
Click to expand...

If it really came to that point, Trouba would be traded. His NTC doesn't technically kick in for another few months. Whether the Rangers would actually do him dirty like that is another story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnSandvich
Voted Staal, I believe he actively is making the Rangers worse with his play, whereas Lundqvist is average in the few starts he gets.

If we by some miracle made it to the cup finals next season I'd rather have 8.5mil as backup than have Staal anywhere near the ice
 
  • Like
Reactions: haveandare
Rangerfan4life90 said:
If it really came to that point, Trouba would be traded. His NTC doesn't technically kick in for another few months. Whether the Rangers would actually do him dirty like that is another story.
Click to expand...

They can also ask him to waive it if needed. Buying him out, compliance or otherwise, is absolutely the wrong call
 
Rangerfan4life90 said:
If it really came to that point, Trouba would be traded. His NTC doesn't technically kick in for another few months. Whether the Rangers would actually do him dirty like that is another story.
Click to expand...
I'd hope so, but I think it'd come at a cost like the Subban and initial Kessel trade where your probably gonna be retaining to get something done. And if that's the case will the return be worth retaining a million for 6 years
 
Staal. He's creating a log jam on the left. Putting literally anyone else there would be a big upgrade to the team. Everyone that plays with him is worse for it.

Lundqvist is the biggest number, but he can at least still serve capably as a backup. And while I don't want to trade Georgiev, that seems like a forgone conclusion. He's not going to be okay being the backup forever.

We could use Georgiev to return an asset. Staal would return nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Apocalypse Dude
How do compliance buyouts typically work? Do you have to pay the entire value of the contract? Looking at cap space alone, the best choice long term is clearly Trouba. Staal and Lundqvist are gone next year. Fox and DeAngelo both play the right. Not sure if Dolan would be ok paying ~50m for one year of play Trouba though.
 
3rd Guy High said:
How do compliance buyouts typically work? Do you have to pay the entire value of the contract? Looking at cap space alone, the best choice long term is clearly Trouba. Staal and Lundqvist are gone next year. Fox and DeAngelo both play the right. Not sure if Dolan would be ok paying ~50m for one year of play Trouba though.
Click to expand...
The same buyout rules apply as normal, only the team does not have the cap hits each season. He would receive 2/3 of the remaining base salary, divided over 12 years. Signing bonuses are paid in full and on schedule.

So in the case for Trouba, here's what his payout would look like (post-buyout earnings column):
d0P6pHb.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom