The Offseason Thread

[dmiles2186]

Kris Russell was put on regular waivers. No reason given, but I did see where they mentioned that for Leopold to come back, they would have to clear a roster spot. Just speculation but maybe this is the first step in that?

[The Flake]

I might be in the minority here but I would much rather have Kris Russell in the note than Leopold any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[glen a richter]

I'd rather have Rob Scuderi. Cup experience and all that good stuff.

[dmiles2186]

Dallas and Le sacre Bleu are out of the running for Vinny.

[dmiles2186]

Vinny's a Flyer.

[glen a richter]

Source? He can't sign anywhere until Friday.

[Nyghtewynd]

It is becoming more and more likely that the Blues will be a worse team this year and not a better one.

[Toasted Oates]

Per the Twitter machines of LeBrun and Dreger, he signs with the Flyers for 5 years, 4.5 mil per. The demand for more years scared everyone off.

I didn't figure they would make a whimper in free agency, but after they pussy footed around at the draft, it's getting tough to stay patient.

[dmiles2186]

Source? He can't sign anywhere until Friday.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck- ... 15395.html

The Philadelphia Flyers began the day among the top three teams in the Vincent Lecavalier Derby. But the free-agent center’s demands were too rich for the Detroit Red Wings, and the Dallas Stars later confirmed they were out of the running as well.

The last team standing was the Flyers, who put Vincent Lecavalier in orange and black with a 5-year, $22.5 million deal for a $4.5 million cap hit – making him the second-highest paid forward on the team behind Scott Hartnell ($4.75 million.)

As a straight one-for-one upgrade over Danny Briere, it’s a win for the Flyers. But it’s more complicated than that.

There’s going to be a lot of attention paid to the other salaries on the Flyers, because the team began the day with just $4.18 million in cap space, per Cap Geek. That’s without a goalie to complement Steve Mason. That’s with new contracts due to Claude Giroux, Brayden Schenn, Sean Couturier and (if they keep him) Kimmo Timonen next summer.

(Wait … the Flyers might overspend at other positions and try to go goaltending on the cheap? It’s like the 1990s never ended!)

One imagines Braydon Coburn’s $4.5 million cap hit, and three remaining contract years, will be shipped out to compensate. His name was being bandied about at the NHL Draft, with the Edmonton Oilers a specific target.

Here’s Broad Street Hockey’s take on the cons for the Vinny deal:

The deal puts the Flyers right back over the salary cap. They had $4.18 million in space before the deal, and they still need to sign a starting or tandem starting goaltender. This is probably where the Braydon Coburn trade talk from the weekend comes into play, but I'd still rather trade Andrej Meszaros for a bag of pucks to get some cap savings. Once the season starts, Chris Pronger's LTIR relief will help as well. There's also a full no-move clause in the deal, because Lecavalier was going to get that from just about any team at this stage of his career. High-powered free agents get NMCs.

Why the Flyers for Vinny? They came close to the 5 years at $5 million he was looking for and play in the Eastern Conference. (Hey, he can knock off some dough from the price tag, getting $32.667 million over the next 14 years from the Tampa Bay Lightning.) His versatility at forward means he could play up with Claude Giroux or as a second-line center.

Why Vinny for the Flyers? They wanted a second line center with size. They wanted some veteran leadership. And let’s face it: There’s never been a big name that Ed Snider didn’t covet, whether or not it made fiscal or strategic sense.

Does this make sense? Again, they did have a need at forward, although the solution didn’t necessarily have to be a 33-year-old and a 5-year contract. But their needs were so much more glaring on the back end that this signing feels abjectly irresponsible.

Yes, they’re going to sell a metric ton of Lecavalier Flyers gear; perhaps that’ll offset the cost of having Steve Mason, Affordable Other Goaltender and a questionable defense on the backend.

We much preferred last summer’s Philadelphia Flyers Star-[expletiving].

[goon attack]

I'm afraid we're turning into the Ottawa Senators of the WC. Sure, some nice players, but no money players.

Yeah, 27 is a smooth, skilled defenseman. But he's a pansy.
91 gave us all broners, but he's a pansy
etc, etc, etc


PUSSIES. All of 'em except perhaps Backes and Reaves.

[Kreegz2]

I'm afraid we're turning into the Ottawa Senators of the WC. Sure, some nice players, but no money players.

Yeah, 27 is a smooth, skilled defenseman. But he's a pansy.
91 gave us all broners, but he's a pansy
etc, etc, etc


PUSSIES. All of 'em except perhaps Backes and Reaves.

This year's training camp should be run exlusively by Twist, Chase, and the ghosts of Gassoff and Durbano.

[sseagle]

It is becoming more and more likely that the Blues will be a worse team this year and not a better one.

I'm so glad you are here...

[cardsfan04]

It is becoming more and more likely that the Blues will be a worse team this year and not a better one.

Why? Free agency doesn't even start for a week and very few big trades have occurred.

[crazyhorse]

Leopold signed extension, 2 years 4.5 million

[Jaykay]

Can someone please explain me: What is the thing with the buy-outs? If a team buys out a player, does this free-up cap-space? If yes, does the bought-out players not count agains the cap-hit at all, or is there a minimum amount?

edit: ...and is it just me or is there an unusual amout of buy-outs this year?

[dmiles2186]

Can someone please explain me: What is the thing with the buy-outs? If a team buys out a player, does this free-up cap-space? If yes, does the bought-out players not count agains the cap-hit at all, or is there a minimum amount?

edit: ...and is it just me or is there an unusual amout of buy-outs this year?

The NBA has a similar buy out policy and it seems like more teams are going the route of trying to rid themselves of those stupid contracts that were en vogue a few years back. Thankfully the Blues weren't a part of that craze. But yes, basically the team has to pay the contract in full over time. I believe the player has to clear waivers, as well. Once this is done, it frees up all cap space that the contact had previously occupied. After next season, teams will have two buyouts instead of just one.

[Jaykay]

Can someone please explain me: What is the thing with the buy-outs? If a team buys out a player, does this free-up cap-space? If yes, does the bought-out players not count agains the cap-hit at all, or is there a minimum amount?

edit: ...and is it just me or is there an unusual amout of buy-outs this year?

The NBA has a similar buy out policy and it seems like more teams are going the route of trying to rid themselves of those stupid contracts that were en vogue a few years back. Thankfully the Blues weren't a part of that craze. But yes, basically the team has to pay the contract in full over time. I believe the player has to clear waivers, as well. Once this is done, it frees up all cap space that the contact had previously occupied. After next season, teams will have two buyouts instead of just one.

thank you. so my next question is: why is there even a cap? i basically do not care, because sports is just about money - in every sport, btw. somehow i think, teams like the flyers, just ship out the ones who sucked, and ship in the next big contracted apparently, you just need to have the bankroll to do so.

so, if the owners want to ruin by themselves let them have their fun. the players surely also will have their fun, and we will have spectacular stories and headlines there's always a new owner group buying a bankrupted franchise ...but why do you need a cap then?

[cardsfan04]

Can someone please explain me: What is the thing with the buy-outs? If a team buys out a player, does this free-up cap-space? If yes, does the bought-out players not count agains the cap-hit at all, or is there a minimum amount?

edit: ...and is it just me or is there an unusual amout of buy-outs this year?

The NBA has a similar buy out policy and it seems like more teams are going the route of trying to rid themselves of those stupid contracts that were en vogue a few years back. Thankfully the Blues weren't a part of that craze. But yes, basically the team has to pay the contract in full over time. I believe the player has to clear waivers, as well. Once this is done, it frees up all cap space that the contact had previously occupied. After next season, teams will have two buyouts instead of just one.

thank you. so my next question is: why is there even a cap? i basically do not care, because sports is just about money - in every sport, btw. somehow i think, teams like the flyers, just ship out the ones who sucked, and ship in the next big contracted apparently, you just need to have the bankroll to do so.

so, if the owners want to ruin by themselves let them have their fun. the players surely also will have their fun, and we will have spectacular stories and headlines there's always a new owner group buying a bankrupted franchise ...but why do you need a cap then?

The cap still prevents how much a team can spend on its active roster. A team can't just spend unlimited money on the 20 that dress each night even with the buyouts.

[dmiles2186]

Lebrun tweeted that the Blues 'kicked the tires' on Bozak but that Bozak's looking for a 5 year deal. Several other teams in the mix.

I'm not sure I see Bozak here, but fact is, the Blues are doing their research on a lot of guys so it's encouraging that they're trying to add some forwards to the mix.

I also read that Lecavalier told them their presentation was one of the best, even though he chose Philly.

[WaukeeBlues]

Can someone please explain me: What is the thing with the buy-outs? If a team buys out a player, does this free-up cap-space? If yes, does the bought-out players not count agains the cap-hit at all, or is there a minimum amount?

edit: ...and is it just me or is there an unusual amout of buy-outs this year?

My understanding as to why there are more of them this offseason is that with the lockout a team is afforded a certain number of "compliance buyouts" to come to terms with the new salary cap structure put in place by the lockout. In other words, each team has a certain number of guys they can ostensibly "buy out for free" and not have their cap hit still count against the team. Normally when a team buys a guy out they still get a cap hit (albeit a lower one) from the guy for the length of the contract. I think the Isles are still being hit with Yashin's IIRC.

That's why you saw Gomez, et al, getting bought out immediately after the lockout. It was a "free" buy out. This offseason you're just seeing more of the same.