Edmonton is No Good VI: Chia•den•freu•de

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Robbob

The current CBA is expires after the 2021–22 season. Lucic's contract goes to 2022-2023 season. They usually have buyout compliance period to help get teams in compliance due to changes in the CBA. If there isn't any major changes then I don't even know if there will be a buyout compliance period.

At any rate, at least 4 more season (including this one) left before the possibility of that to occur.

Both the owners and the players have an opportunity to opt out of the CBA next fall.

I would be shocked if the players don't exercise that option.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Robbob

The current CBA is expires after the 2021–22 season. Lucic's contract goes to 2022-2023 season. They usually have buyout compliance period to help get teams in compliance due to changes in the CBA. If there isn't any major changes then I don't even know if there will be a buyout compliance period.

At any rate, at least 4 more season (including this one) left before the possibility of that to occur.

I am also on board with the career ending injury/illness theory. The precedent has been set to get away with it, why wouldn't you if you are Lucic and the Oilers?

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Both the owners and the players have an opportunity to opt out of the CBA next fall.

I would be shocked if the players don't exercise that option.

I guess, they could opt out to expire after the 2019-2020 season. If they do opt out, it will not be anything major. I don't see them changing things enough to offer teams a compliance buyout.

So best case scenario for Oiler fans is 2 more years of Lucic if, and only if there is a compliance buyout.

[Incogneto]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I guess, they could opt out to expire after the 2019-2020 season. If they do opt out, it will not be anything major. I don't see them changing things enough to offer teams a compliance buyout.

Biggest deal for the Players is Escrow and the Olympics.

Is that enough to opt out and lose pay for?

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Incogneto

Biggest deal for the Players is Escrow and the Olympics.

Is that enough to opt out and lose pay for?

I highly doubt it. On top of that 2020 is probably when Seattle comes in so both the PA and League will want that to be the focus.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Fire

Didn't that happen just the one time?

And it was a result of the fact that there had been significant changes to contract limits.

Even if there is a strike/lockout, I am not sure how far the needle would move this time. So a buyout window is much less likely IMO.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Robbob

The current CBA is expires after the 2021–22 season. Lucic's contract goes to 2022-2023 season. They usually have buyout compliance period to help get teams in compliance due to changes in the CBA. If there isn't any major changes then I don't even know if there will be a buyout compliance period.

At any rate, at least 4 more season (including this one) left before the possibility of that to occur.

Unless the owners want to reduce the revenue split there shouldn’t be compliance buyouts this time around

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I highly doubt it. On top of that 2020 is probably when Seattle comes in so both the PA and League will want that to be the focus.

Especially when escrow is pretty much needed. Tweaks can be made of course, but you need some sort of a true up for a system that shares revenue 50/50.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Fire

Didn't that happen just the one time?

No, there were compliance buyouts available after both post-cap lockouts.

After the 2005 lockout, compliance buyouts were needed because some teams couldn't have iced cap-compliant rosters without them. That's how the Flames got McCarty.

The 2013 lockout didn't need compliance buyouts as much as 2005, but I guess they were justified because the players' share of HRR was reduced from 57% to 50%.



I don't know if there are likely to be any changes in the next CBA that will justify offering compliance buyouts. The players are unlikely to want them again because although the money doesn't count against the cap, it still counts as part of the players' share of revenue.

[dirk diggler]

Agreed, but the fact they gave Coffey this job last year is just so awesome. Maybe they should bring in Kurri or Tikanen to wake up Puljarvi.

[Lord Carnage]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Unless the owners want to reduce the revenue split there shouldn’t be compliance buyouts this time around

I see that and Escrow being tied together...

Everyone knows the players want Escrow gone... and the owners ideally want to move the needle to more than 50/50.

I think if the players decide they want Escrow gone enough to opt out, then I think the owners response is, "Fine, but we're now doing a 57/43 split (or whatever the numbers are). And no more artificial escalator..."

On the other hand, if the players don't opt out, I can't see the owners opting out just to get a bigger share of the pie. Just makes them look too greedy.

Of course, I could be wrong...

Either way, unless there's a larger change in the system, I also don't know if we're going to see compliance buyouts this time.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Lucic isn't "doesn't belong in the NHL" bad. But that contract is horrific, I don't even mean this season. I mean the four seasons after this one.

Really? I disagree. I mean, the thing about Lucic is that he possesses a narrow band of skills, he doesnt have the speed to be on a top line, nor does he have the speed to be on a bottom line.

Hes not overly physical anymore, and even when he is, he grinds players into the boards but still doesnt win the puck so what good is that?

He still has a shot and decent passing, but he takes so long with both that by the time he executes anything the play is either already dead or well anticipated.

So he doesnt have the abilities to play on the top 2 lines, he doesnt have the tools to play effectively on the 4th line so really, you're stuck throwing him on the 3rd line in terms of 'damage limitation.'

Hes not going to be great and he is least likely to hurt you, but hes also a boat anchor that isnt going to help you.

Brilliant signing. One of Edmonton's best.

But yes, the Oilers are going to pulling hard for a compliance buyout.

Another astute move for Chia to put a feather in his cap!

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by getbak

No, there were compliance buyouts available after both post-cap lockouts.

After the 2005 lockout, compliance buyouts were needed because some teams couldn't have iced cap-compliant rosters without them. That's how the Flames got McCarty.

The 2013 lockout didn't need compliance buyouts as much as 2005, but I guess they were justified because the players' share of HRR was reduced from 57% to 50%.



I don't know if there are likely to be any changes in the next CBA that will justify offering compliance buyouts. The players are unlikely to want them again because although the money doesn't count against the cap, it still counts as part of the players' share of revenue.

The rich teams love them, so they'll probably be there.

But all of this lockout discussion is because of one of Oil Stain's more effective deflections recently. The main thing to concentrate on is that Lucic sucks, has one of the worst contracts in the league, and the oilers are stuck with him for either a few more years, or a lot more years. Haha. E=NG.

[MolsonInBothHands]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Especially when escrow is pretty much needed. Tweaks can be made of course, but you need some sort of a true up for a system that shares revenue 50/50.

How much income have the players actually lost due to the corrections made by escrow?

I was of the understanding that once final revenue numbers were determined, the players could receive a payment from escrow.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

How much income have the players actually lost due to the corrections made by escrow?

I was of the understanding that once final revenue numbers were determined, the players could receive a payment from escrow.

I would guess they lost some as they used their escalator clause to raise the cap as revenue did not support it. I also guess it was a bigger issue as the scaled back the revenue split

I think at this point the players are finally seeing good inflation in salaries over the last 2 to 3 years

By my count I have potential of 42 players signing for 6 mil or more next summer. Of those 42 I have 9 that already had a cap hit of 6

The league has 23 current deals at 8 or more cap hit. I see 14 more this summer. Marner, Matthews, bobrovsky, rantanen, panarin, e karlsson, Stone, Wheeler, seguin, doughty, kucherov, laine, ekman-Larson, couture. 0 of the 23 expire this summer so 38 at 8 or more. Some of these guys could be getting 11 plus. Starting to make toews Kane and kopitar contracts look good and definitely making mackinnon barkov monahan scheifle tarasenko look like huge steals

Imo some of the issues players may have had a couple years ago may not be as big a deal now that they are seeing contracts increase each summer

[GioforPM]

Imagine having to pray for a compliance buyout in two years so you can escape a contract that can't be bought out any other way, or moved in any other way.

That's essentially hoping for the cap to go down, so you can complain that you are no longer able to be compliant because you signed lots of crappy players to too much money. Lots of teams have one bad contract. The Oilers have a bunch.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

*ahem* A betamax IS a VCR. Stands for video cassette recorder. I think you mean VHS.

Continue.

Bingo!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Well he does handle the Oilers propaganda so he was probably instructed to give the fans a heads up here.

You are mistaking Staples for one of Bob Stauffer or Mark Spector. I'm fairly convinced that Staples doesn't even get to speak to anyone in the Oilers organization. Hell, the entire substance of all his written content is reduced to reporting on the work of other hockey writers and commentators. The saddest thing about David Staples is that he propagandizes voluntarily.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You are mistaking Staples for one of Bob Stauffer or Mark Spector. I'm fairly convinced that Staples doesn't even get to speak to anyone in the Oilers organization. Hell, the entire substance of all his written content is reduced to reporting on the work of other hockey writers and commentators. The saddest thing about David Staples is that he propagandizes voluntarily.

He reminds me of Tobias Funke (not in the Chia doppelgangar sense) trying to be part of the Bluth family. He *so* wants to be the propaganda guy, trying so hard.

[Ashasx]

Ryan Strome has 0 points in 14 games this season. Strome once scored 50 points as a sophomore.