your prob right... I bet there would be a line of teams willing to trade for Kadri...
- hehateme

One has to get recognize the big target he has earned on his back by DoPS...that the ne t suspension will be Tom Wilson level.

Kim would need to sit down with him and make sure he understands no more boo boos are acceptable. That should get it done.

They would give you zaitsev for free. And laugh. Or is that lowering the price of acquiring Kadri
- jcragcrumple

I know, but he is better then 2/3 of what we have right now....

One has to get recognize the big target he has earned on his back by DoPS...that the ne t suspension will be Tom Wilson level.

Kim would need to sit down with him and make sure he understands no more boo boos are acceptable. That should get it done.
- IonSabres

ugh

I'm on record as saying that I have warmed up to the idea.
Yes, but at a wholesale discounted price.
Cap Space is the biggest asset they get back.
The player exchanged is a virtual throw in.
Scandella at 50% retained.
- IonSabres

I can't see how he isn't in high demand. Teams would be lining up for pick + prospect deals.

I know, but he is better then 2/3 of what we have right now....
- hehateme

5 more years though

That's a long time

5 more years though

That's a long time
- jcragcrumple

If he gives me 20-30 points a year and is a plus player, ill take him for 5 years at 4.5 mil....

5 more years though

That's a long time
- jcragcrumple

kadri?...he's got three more

I can't see how he isn't in high demand. Teams would be lining up for pick + prospect deals.
- Lunaion

I'm sure there will be more than one, yes.
Many? Questionable.
The reason is the risk of him
A) getting a 20 gamer for the next stupid reaction
B) possibility of him ruining you playoffs like he did the last 2 years.
His suspension caused them to lose a serviceable playoff type player, and shuffle their roster to be less than optimized. In tightly contested games, it was a significant factor.

That sentiment is reflected in a couple of thexquotes from NHL executives.

Kind of an odd hypothetical:

What if the Sabres and Oilers swapped Okposo and Lucic at 50% retained each?

It would allow both teams to then move their newly acquired asset more easily.

Per: wiki:

Including cash in trades is still prohibited, but teams may retain part of a traded player's salary to ease the cap burden on the acquiring team. Provisions on such retention are as follows:

(provision 1) - The acquiring team must assume at least 50 percent of the remaining salary and cap charge of the SPC.

(Provision 2) Such a contract can only be traded twice using provision 1 during the lifetime of the SPC.


So if I'm reading this correctly, the sabres could then retain an additional amount, say $1m, and trade Lucic somewhere to play for $2m a year.


I bet a lot of teams would take that for free. So we retain $4m total and give up nothing of value. We're in effect just laundering the cash.

kadri?...he's got three more
- Michael Pachla

Zaitsev

Kind of an odd hypothetical:

What if the Sabres and Oilers swapped Okposo and Lucic at 50% retained each?

It would allow both teams to then move their newly acquired asset more easily.

Per: wiki:

Including cash in trades is still prohibited, but teams may retain part of a traded player's salary to ease the cap burden on the acquiring team. Provisions on such retention are as follows:

(provision 1) - The acquiring team must assume at least 50 percent of the remaining salary and cap charge of the SPC.

(Provision 2) Such a contract can only be traded twice using provision 1 during the lifetime of the SPC.


So if I'm reading this correctly, the sabres could then retain an additional amount, say $1m, and trade Lucic somewhere to play for $2m a year.


I bet a lot of teams would take that for free. So we retain $4m total and give up nothing of value. We're in effect just laundering the cash.
- jcragcrumple

I'm liking what I'm hearing here.
W hat other non-hockey ideas do you have?

Zaitsev
- jcragcrumple

they can keep him

Kind of an odd hypothetical:

What if the Sabres and Oilers swapped Okposo and Lucic at 50% retained each?

It would allow both teams to then move their newly acquired asset more easily.

Per: wiki:

Including cash in trades is still prohibited, but teams may retain part of a traded player's salary to ease the cap burden on the acquiring team. Provisions on such retention are as follows:

(provision 1) - The acquiring team must assume at least 50 percent of the remaining salary and cap charge of the SPC.

(Provision 2) Such a contract can only be traded twice using provision 1 during the lifetime of the SPC.


So if I'm reading this correctly, the sabres could then retain an additional amount, say $1m, and trade Lucic somewhere to play for $2m a year.


I bet a lot of teams would take that for free. So we retain $4m total and give up nothing of value. We're in effect just laundering the cash.
- jcragcrumple

brilliant!!!!

(if it works that way)

brilliant!!!!

(if it works that way)
- Michael Pachla

As far as i can tell, the only other stipulation is this:

3. Retained salary by the trading team cannot be more than 15 percent of the upper salary cap limit.

4.A maximum of 3 such contracts with salary retained in a trade can be on a team's books at any one time.


It would fit within both of those



Here's the entire text:

Prior to the reintroduction of the cap, it was fairly common (especially for wealthier teams) to include cash as part of a trade and/or retain some or most of a player's salary when trading him to another team. This was usually done when the club needed roster space for (an)other player(s) and could afford the extra costs. Under the terms of the 2005 collective bargaining agreement, when a team traded for another player, it assumed the full cap hit and remaining salary obligations of the acquired player. Including cash in a trade was also forbidden. That was partially changed for the 2013 collective bargaining agreement. Including cash in trades is still prohibited, but teams may retain part of a traded player's salary to ease the cap burden on the acquiring team. Provisions on such retention are as follows:

1 The acquiring team must assume at least 50 percent of the remaining salary and cap charge of the SPC.
2 Such a contract can only be traded twice using provision 1 during the lifetime of the SPC.
3 Retained salary by the trading team cannot be more than 15 percent of the upper salary cap limit.
4 A maximum of 3 such contracts with salary retained in a trade can be on a team's books at any one time.

This provision is included in Article 11 of Summary of Terms the 2013 Collective Bargaining Agreement Memorandum of Understanding.[13]

I am not a racist person so I support bringing him to Buffalo
- homiedclown

This made me laugh

I'm sure there will be more than one, yes.
Many? Questionable.
The reason is the risk of him
A) getting a 20 gamer for the next stupid reaction
B) possibility of him ruining you playoffs like he did the last 2 years.
His suspension caused them to lose a serviceable playoff type player, and shuffle their roster to be less than optimized. In tightly contested games, it was a significant factor.

That sentiment is reflected in a couple of the quotes from NHL executives.
- IonSabres

This is 100% correct...
Same as Bogo getting injured and missing a season. it's just a matter of time.

TOR's cap issue makes him moved because they would rather sign the RFA (Marner & Kapanen). The only way Kadri stays is if they move Nylander. I would not take him and his cap hit, much harder to move.

Kind of an odd hypothetical:

What if the Sabres and Oilers swapped Okposo and Lucic at 50% retained each?

It would allow both teams to then move their newly acquired asset more easily.

Per: wiki:

Including cash in trades is still prohibited, but teams may retain part of a traded player's salary to ease the cap burden on the acquiring team. Provisions on such retention are as follows:

(provision 1) - The acquiring team must assume at least 50 percent of the remaining salary and cap charge of the SPC.

(Provision 2) Such a contract can only be traded twice using provision 1 during the lifetime of the SPC.


So if I'm reading this correctly, the sabres could then retain an additional amount, say $1m, and trade Lucic somewhere to play for $2m a year.


I bet a lot of teams would take that for free. So we retain $4m total and give up nothing of value. We're in effect just laundering the cash.
- jcragcrumple

Sure, we could do that
But we’d be incurring a 4mil Cap hit from those moves every year, for 4 more years

.........

Sure, we could do that
But we’d be incurring a 4mil Cap hit from those moves every year, for 4 more years
- jdfitz77

If we bought him out this year, for the next 8 years, we pay:

$4
$4
$5
$3
$1
$1
$1
$1

Under my plan, we pay $4, $4, $4, $4 and we're done.

I'm sure there will be more than one, yes.
Many? Questionable.
The reason is the risk of him
A) getting a 20 gamer for the next stupid reaction
B) possibility of him ruining you playoffs like he did the last 2 years.
His suspension caused them to lose a serviceable playoff type player, and shuffle their roster to be less than optimized. In tightly contested games, it was a significant factor.

That sentiment is reflected in a couple of thexquotes from NHL executives.
- IonSabres

Never take things at face value. If he's available, those same GM's will forget everything they said and go after him.

He's a good player on a good contract.

Kind of an odd hypothetical:

What if the Sabres and Oilers swapped Okposo and Lucic at 50% retained each?

It would allow both teams to then move their newly acquired asset more easily.

Per: wiki:

Including cash in trades is still prohibited, but teams may retain part of a traded player's salary to ease the cap burden on the acquiring team. Provisions on such retention are as follows:

(provision 1) - The acquiring team must assume at least 50 percent of the remaining salary and cap charge of the SPC.

(Provision 2) Such a contract can only be traded twice using provision 1 during the lifetime of the SPC.


So if I'm reading this correctly, the sabres could then retain an additional amount, say $1m, and trade Lucic somewhere to play for $2m a year.

.
I bet a lot of teams would take that for free. So we retain $4m total and give up nothing of value. We're in effect just laundering the cash.
- jcragcrumple

Bro this is awesome.. i don't know if it is true but man you may have stumbled on to something here...

This made me laugh
- Der Kaiser

good, there is a black man in my wedding photo, he is standing to the right of me as my best man

just because I despise 1 woman who happens to be Korean descent, does not make me a racist

Bro this is awesome.. i don't know if it is true but man you may have stumbled on to something here...
- hehateme

If someone told me "You can get rid of Okposo, give up nothing, and clear 2 million in cap space over the life of the contract," i'd definitely do it

If we bought him out this year, for the next 8 years, we pay:

$4
$4
$5
$3
$1
$1
$1
$1

Under my plan, we pay $4, $4, $4, $4 and we're done.
- jcragcrumple

I guess vs a buyout it’s a better option
But i doubt Botts would like taking a 4mil Cap hit for 4 seasons

Alternatively...
we keep Okposo for ONE more year
But then after next year is the lockout
If it’s like the last lockout...
we’ll have the option to use a compliance buyout that won’t affect our cap at all

Obviously it’s not a sure thing that it’ll happen
But the cost of waiting to find out is only 1 more year with a guy that can score 15-ish goals

I’m totally ok with that

good, there is a black man in my wedding photo, he is standing to the right of me as my best man

just because I despise 1 woman who happens to be Korean descent, does not make me a racist
- homiedclown

maybe a little chauvinistic.. but I agree not a Racist....