Quote:
Originally Posted by bax
Yeah, but there is always a cost in the form of draft picks or buy outs or trading a valuable player for less than they are worth.
It cost Toronto a 1st round pick to move 1 season of Marleau just last off season.
The Turris buyout is going to cost Nashville 2 million of cap space for the next 8 season.
We have heard rumors that Vegas will look at moving Schmidt, Marhessault, and Stastny if they can't find a taker for Fleury. They offered up a 2nd round pick for taking on his contract and even then no team bit.
|
Come to think of it. How much money is tied up league-wide on previous buyouts? So many teams that have had to do it, so is it possible that there is no major disadvantage because of it? If all teams do it, then it becomes a form of cost of doing business.
Does it help the Flames that the Oilers had to buy out Sekera when the Flames had to do the same with Brouwer? Fast forward a few years and we will have the same question with the only difference being the names of players.
Ideally you want no dead cap space. But that's hard to do in this league bacause some GMs are a lot more aggressive about winning. So if fear of overpaying is stopping you from trading for or signing players you want (need), then are you actually further ahead?
It's nice to win every trade, RFA negotiation or sign players to bargain deals. But bargain shopping doesn't translate to success on the ice. Sure, it gives us something to boast about. Tre the wizard and all.
But in the end it is about winning hockey games and that's hard to do without top end talent.
Heard yesterday that Vegas is looking to add Shattenkirk. How is that possible? Cap hell, buyouts and all? Rich get richer while we hope to sign Turris, Ryan or Duclair to bargains
