Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 54 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 805
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,528
    vCash
    1500
    ^^^^ We could afford Sutter this year, yes. The problem is future years. I've heard that the new cba could enact a sysem that would actually bring the cap down in future years. If that happens, what do we do? We'd be in cap hell again.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,352
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by b1e9a8r5s View Post
    ^^^^ We could afford Sutter this year, yes. The problem is future years. I've heard that the new cba could enact a sysem that would actually bring the cap down in future years. If that happens, what do we do? We'd be in cap hell again.

    Quote Originally Posted by CubbieKid17 View Post
    Been reading a lot of HockeyBuzz articles lately. Apparently, the cap ceiling is likely to go up to around $69 million for the 2012-13 season. It could even go as high as $72 million.

    According to this one site I was checking out about the possibility of a significant salary cap ceiling increase, if we spent big-time money this off-season, it's a possibility that the cap would go down to $62 million for the 2013-14 season under a new CBA and that existing player salaries would be cut back as a result. So, what this means is that we could spend freely this summer, and still be under the cap for the year after due to salaries being cut back for every player.

    Here's the site I checked out if anyone's interested: http://www.kuklaskorner.com/index.ph...t_this_summer/

    If this happens, do we go for Suter and Parise? haha
    We need to find out if this would in fact be the case. Otherwise, I'm all for trading Bolland, Frolik, and possibly Hjalmarrsson while signing Suter and trading for a 2nd line C. If we don't go for a 2nd line C, I'd love to see Bolland stick around and play between Sharp and Kane. Give him a real chance to be our 2nd line C. Then go for a guy like Halpern to be our 3rd line C in case Kruger bombs. If Kruger works out, you move Halpern to 4th line and have some quality depth at C.

    ____-Toews-Hossa?
    Sharp-Bolland-Kane
    Bickell-Kruger-Shaw
    Carcillo-Halpern-____

    or

    ____-Toews-Hossa?
    Sharp-____-Kane
    Bickell-Kruger-Shaw
    Carcillo-____-____

    With the 2nd option, you have more money to go for Suter. I'd love to see us get a big bruiser to play LW on the Toews line. I realize I left Stalberg out. I'm just not sure where exactly to put him or if we'd trade him. Not sure what his trade value is, coming off a 22-goal, 43-points season. Worst case scenario, he's our LW on the Toews line and we put more money into going for Suter and getting a legit 2nd line C.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,528
    vCash
    1500
    I was able to find this from a Pierre LeBrun ESPN chat a few weeks ago...



    Pierre,I have a CBA question. Currently, the players own 57 percent of the pie, and the cap for next year under the current CBA has not been announced, but I've read it will be around $70 million. So if the owners get their way and the players share of the pie decreases to say 50 percent, how much does each percentage decrease of the players share decrease the salary cap floor?

    Pierre LeBrun (12:34 PM)


    Here's the confusing part. yes, the cap will go up to around $68 million to $70 million in late June, but then once new CBA is agreed upon in September or Ocotber or whenever... the cap is expected to go down if owners/league get their way and decrease players' share of the pie just like NBA/NFL did...A lot of people predicting a $55-million cap for next season but really, no one knows until players and owners sit down to negotiate


    http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat...-pierre-lebrun

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,528
    vCash
    1500
    So from what I understand, free agency is going to start, under the assumption of a new higher salary cap. Then the cba is going to expire, and they will have to agree to a new one which could completely change the cap. That sounds like such a dumb way to do it. The NFL and NBA didn't have free agency until the new CBAs were agreed to. Why would they do it this way?

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,352
    vCash
    1500
    I have no idea. It seems really backwards to me too, but at least we get an off-season.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Wrigleyville, IL
    Posts
    3,147
    vCash
    1500
    This seems absolutely backwards to do this... Currently its at about 64mm, then its going to go up, to possibly drop down to 55mm? How can they cut that much from the cap? This will kill alot of teams.
    Mike P. ~~

    Banks - The Boxer sleeps and waits for a championship...

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    13,046
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by synister281 View Post
    This seems absolutely backwards to do this... Currently its at about 64mm, then its going to go up, to possibly drop down to 55mm? How can they cut that much from the cap? This will kill alot of teams.
    I counted 21 teams that were at $55mil or more last year. I don't know how they could do that, something else would have to happen.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,528
    vCash
    1500
    ^^^^ My guess would be that the players salaries would go down proportionately to the decrease in the cap. That would seem to be the only way they could do it. Not sure how the NHL gets the union to agree to that.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    13,046
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by b1e9a8r5s View Post
    ^^^^ My guess would be that the players salaries would go down proportionately to the decrease in the cap. That would seem to be the only way they could do it. Not sure how the NHL gets the union to agree to that.
    Exactly, that is the only way it makes "sense".

    However, if that were the solution, the NHL would be heading towards a lock out.

    I just can't see the cap dropping that much and that fast.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    591
    vCash
    1500
    Each of the past two seasons, I've mentioned trading Kane and Sharp for Parise and Zajac and was called crazy. Anyone still think I'm crazy? Both guys are studs. It would never work now, especially with Parise's contract up, but you can't say it was a bad idea at the time.

    I'm sure I'll get hated on again for it, but the validity of the idea was there.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,352
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by aheili30 View Post
    Each of the past two seasons, I've mentioned trading Kane and Sharp for Parise and Zajac and was called crazy. Anyone still think I'm crazy? Both guys are studs. It would never work now, especially with Parise's contract up, but you can't say it was a bad idea at the time.

    I'm sure I'll get hated on again for it, but the validity of the idea was there.
    I wouldn't do this trade, simply because of how good Sharp has been on the wing. Kane for Parise if their contracts are similar? Sign me up. I'll take Parise over Kane by a decent margin, but I'd take Sharp over Zajac by a pretty big margin. That's without even factoring in Zajac's injury concerns. I realize you were saying that was an idea for the past, but I'd still take Sharp over Zajac, all things considered.

    Edit: I think New Jersey would have to add something to even this out, but it's not a bad idea. I just don't think Kane and Sharp straight up for Parise and Zajac is a good idea. I don't know what New Jersey would add, and if we'd have to add anything else to this trade. Who knows? Won't happen anyways haha.
    Last edited by CubbieKid17; 05-24-2012 at 04:54 AM.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,215
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Boom! View Post
    Exactly, that is the only way it makes "sense".

    However, if that were the solution, the NHL would be heading towards a lock out.

    I just can't see the cap dropping that much and that fast.
    NHL is going to try to do what the NBA did supposedly. Owners want to cut down the player's portion of profits. Also, the prosposed cap cuts have several different levels.

    One thing they're going to do away with is a long term Hossa-type contract, where it's 12 years long and the guy is so old at the end of the contract when the real money, not cap hit, is only $1 mil, making it easy to buy the old-timer out towards the end of the deal. Essentially, it's to spread around the top-tier talent to promote parity around the league. In other words, if you want a top tier player, you're going to pay for him and he's going to take up a big chunk of your payroll. Will make it better to have a evenly talented team rather than 3 stars and some scrubs like the Heat

    Another part of the cap situation is if/when it drops down to say $55 mil again, the salaries of the guys signed prior to 2012 or 2013 will have their cap hits adjusted accordingly and most likely not kept at their current cap hit rate.

    The NHL is more popular now than ever in the U.S and a lockout would be more disastrous than the last lockout. The new CBA could be good/bad, either way it needs to get done and a lockout must be avoided, no questions asked. (Looking at you here Donald Fehr)

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,352
    vCash
    1500
    The new HockeyBuzz article mentions that we covet Max Pacioretty. Perhaps with Bergevin as the new GM of the Canadiens, Pacioretty might not be untouchable. He'd look really good on our top line if he could be had for picks and prospects.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    6,596
    vCash
    1500
    Bolland and a prospect and/or picks to Pittsburgh is a sensible move that I'm hoping Bowman is at least kicking the tires on. The salaries would offset one another. Staal reportedly wants to play for a team that allows him a more offensive role. We need a 2nd line center and we can send Bolland back to fill Staal's shutdown role. McNeill will eventually overtake Bolland's role as a 3rd down checking center, and projects to provide more offense to boot. Until he's ready, that role could be filled with a cheap signing like Jason Arnott.

    Sharp - Toews - Hossa
    Stalberg - Staal - Kane
    Saad - Arnott - Shaw
    Carcillo - Kruger - Mayers
    Bickell

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,352
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack the Ripper View Post
    Bolland and a prospect and/or picks to Pittsburgh is a sensible move that I'm hoping Bowman is at least kicking the tires on. The salaries would offset one another. Staal reportedly wants to play for a team that allows him a more offensive role. We need a 2nd line center and we can send Bolland back to fill Staal's shutdown role. McNeill will eventually overtake Bolland's role as a 3rd down checking center, and projects to provide more offense to boot. Until he's ready, that role could be filled with a cheap signing like Jason Arnott.

    Sharp - Toews - Hossa
    Stalberg - Staal - Kane
    Saad - Arnott - Shaw
    Carcillo - Kruger - Mayers
    Bickell
    If we could get a deal like this to happen, it would solve a few problems.

    1. It would get us out of Bolland's contract.
    2. It would give us a legit 2nd line C.
    3. It would give us some size in our top 6.

    Even if Staal doesn't re-sign after the year, it's a good trade depending on what else you're giving up, simply because it gets us out of Bolland's contract.

    On a side note, I'd love to see Kruger hit the weight room hard this off-season to bulk up and become our 3rd line C. A lot of people don't like him very much, but I would love to see him get up to the 180-185 weight range and see if that helps him out any. He's pretty undersized for the NHL and if he's going to be a checking line C, he's going to need to put on at least another 10 pounds of muscle.

    If Kruger can bulk up to play 3rd line C, I'd love to give Bolland a chance to play 2nd line C on a line with Kane and either Sharp or Stalberg.

Page 5 of 54 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •