Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 7 votes

Franzen Buyout?


  • Please log in to reply
204 replies to this topic

Poll: Franzen Buyout?

Would you use an amnesty buyout on Franzen this summer?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 marcaractac

marcaractac

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Location:St. John's, newfoundland

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:13 AM

damn just saw if brad richards retires with 1 year left on his deal at 1 million salary the rangers will get screwed 17 mill in the cap recapture , hawks 18 million same scenario with hossa ... franzen and zetterberg probably around the same amount of $$

 

cant take the chance with both , hank i can see him play but not mule

 

No concern for this happening with Franzen as he makes a lot less money than Richards or Hossa. Zetterberg makes more yes, but he is signed until he is 40, not 42 like Hossa. 

 

I don't think Franzen should be bought out at all. He can be traded. His cap hit isn't high at all, making the term less of an issue. He would be a prime candidate for a team that barely spends above the cap year in and year out. 



#42 nyqvististhefuture

nyqvististhefuture

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:28 AM

franzen makes 1 million at 39 yrs old and same at 40 .... same as zetterberg .. were in the same boat as the richards/hossa deals



#43 marcaractac

marcaractac

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Location:St. John's, newfoundland

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:32 AM

franzen makes 1 million at 39 yrs old and same at 40 .... same as zetterberg .. were in the same boat as the richards/hossa deals

 

No. Because Hossa and Richards are a lot more likely to retire before their deals are up, and make a lot more money. So their respective teams will be on the hook for a lot more in terms of a cap hit than the Wings would be. Even if Franzen and Hank retire when they would start on their 1 million dollar years, the cap hit the Wings would have to endure would be nowhere near what Chicago and NYR would have to deal with.



#44 nyqvististhefuture

nyqvististhefuture

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:33 AM

just checked ... if he retires at 39 we get a penalty of 8.318 million ... still f*cken high

 



 

 



#45 marcaractac

marcaractac

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Location:St. John's, newfoundland

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:45 AM

just checked ... if he retires at 39 we get a penalty of 8.318 million ... still f*cken high

 



 

 

 

Whatever the cap hit is is relative to how many years are left, based on what he is paid vs what his cap hit was over those years. the difference then is split up over the remaining years left once retired. considering franzens cap hit, if he retired with 2 years left (most likely scenario) you take the money he was paid, subtract the total cap hit of the years played, divde that number by 2 and that would be the cap hit for two years. and it would be SOOOOOO much less than this 8.318 million you're coming up with.

 

By my math, and what I've read on this rule, if Franzen retired with 2 years left, Detroit would have a cap hit of about 2.95 million a year for two years. Not the end of the world.

 

If Hank retired with 2 years left, he'd leave us with a cap hit of arounf 5 mil a year for 2 years.

 

As of right now, the Wings saved just over 5 million because of Franzen's cap hit. So if he was traded this summer, then retired with 2 years left. When those two retired years get here, the wings would be responsible for the current cap savings of the first 4 years of his deal, where as the team he is traded to would be on the hook for the cap savings on the last two years.


Edited by marcaractac, 30 May 2013 - 11:57 AM.


#46 Drake_Marcus

Drake_Marcus

    Pariah

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,336 posts
  • Location:Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:00 PM

For those that think illitch wouldn't buy him out frankly don't know anything. Illitch has always been willing to throw money at his teams. They're also businesses and sometimes you have to cut your losses. The question isnt if illitch would be OK with it.


Its a question of if Holland would do so and basically admit it was a bad contract. Which I don't see happening. This team needs to free agents to play on the second line. Not paying fil or FTA Zen gives us the money to do so.

 

By "don't know anything" do you mean "clearly understand the cap value of scoring wingers in today's NHL"?  He has a sub 4 million dollar cap hit and has averaged 0.37 goals per game since signing the contract (0.37, 0.37, 0.38 and 0.34 goals/game in the seasons from 09-10 to 12-13).  That is a pro-rated 30 goals per season over 82 games.  Simply said- you can't get 6'3 30 goal scorers for that cheap anymore unless they're on an entry level or short-term RFA contract.  Calling Franzen's contract a 'bad contract' displays true ignorance of the reality of contracts in today's NHL.


Dedicated to lulz once lost:
Posted Image
Thanks TeeMan!

"We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas
of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage" --H.P. Lovecraft

#47 marcaractac

marcaractac

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Location:St. John's, newfoundland

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:11 PM

 

By "don't know anything" do you mean "clearly understand the cap value of scoring wingers in today's NHL"?  He has a sub 4 million dollar cap hit and has averaged 0.37 goals per game since signing the contract (0.37, 0.37, 0.38 and 0.34 goals/game in the seasons from 09-10 to 12-13).  That is a pro-rated 30 goals per season over 82 games.  Simply said- you can't get 6'3 30 goal scorers for that cheap anymore unless they're on an entry level or short-term RFA contract.  Calling Franzen's contract a 'bad contract' displays true ignorance of the reality of contracts in today's NHL.

 

I don't think it is a bad contract at all, which is why I think Franzen would make good trade bait. I think buying him out would be idiotic. But getting something for him would be a smart move IMO. Come playoff time, it would be better to have a 15-20 goal scorer who works his ass off each and every night. Franzen had a few years now to try and show that 2008 wasn;t a one time thing. I think he has had enough chances. 

 

I don't hate the guy, and wouldn't be upset to see him with the team next season. I just don't think he has the heart or hunger to be a winner any more, and that his best use to the team would be as a tradable asset. 



#48 nyqvististhefuture

nyqvististhefuture

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:12 PM

if franzen retires on his 2nd last season we gotta pay 4.1 mill on the cap for 2 seasons if he retires on his last year its 8.318

 

http://www.capgeek.c...raded_year=2013



#49 GoWings!

GoWings!

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 231 posts
  • Location:NJ

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:21 PM

Some guys lack the hunger and drive after they've already won the championship and got the long term contract. I think he fits this description. I loved 08 Franzen and we wouldn't have won it without him but he seems disinterested and disappears quite often now. He has his moments but a hustling, grinding 25 goal scorer would suffice.

Edited by GoWings!, 30 May 2013 - 01:36 PM.


#50 marcaractac

marcaractac

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Location:St. John's, newfoundland

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:38 PM

if franzen retires on his 2nd last season we gotta pay 4.1 mill on the cap for 2 seasons if he retires on his last year its 8.318

 

http://www.capgeek.c...raded_year=2013

 

No. If he retired with one year left, they would be on the hook for a one year cap hit of 2.95 million. 

 

That link you post shows what his penalty would be if he retired with 2 years left. 


Edited by marcaractac, 30 May 2013 - 12:40 PM.


#51 St. Michael (the Red Wing)

St. Michael (the Red Wing)

    Heavenly With the Puck

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,822 posts
  • Location:Mankato, MN

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:00 PM

So can you buyout 3 players then?

 

Sammy, Bert and Franzen?

 

Am I missing anyone else that people want to buyout?



#52 marcaractac

marcaractac

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Location:St. John's, newfoundland

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:09 PM

So can you buyout 3 players then?

 

Sammy, Bert and Franzen?

 

Am I missing anyone else that people want to buyout?

 

I think Sammy should be the only one. Bert is prob a good extra to have around. He can fill in on any line, and other than his weird injury this season he has been healthy and good for some secondary scoring.

 

Franzen has a decent cap hit, and IMO can be traded without much issue to a bottom feeder. 

 

I think Coli proved valuable, and got better and better each game. he can be a good dman to have around if he stays healthy. 



#53 Zetts

Zetts

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 965 posts
  • Location:Edmonton

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:53 PM

There is no way we can afford (talent-wise) to buy him out.  I mean, we clearly need more scoring.  If we bought him out, we'd struggle to find pieces that could allow us just to break even with this year offensively.  And don't pretend like Tatar would come close.

 

Trading him, as others have mentioned, might be feasible if we get back decent offense in return.  I'd still be against it, but it's an option.  But buying him out?  It's embarrassing that there are so many people that actually voted for that.

 

Many people around here will never acknowledge this, but I'll just throw it out there:

Losing Jiri Hudler hurt.  Obviously he didn't have a lot of the intangibles (and wanted too much money).  But we lost a 50 point scorer.  It does hurt, regardless of his other shortcomings.  Notice how we needed more scoring this year?

And now some people want to lose a 30 goal scorer as well by buying him out?  I get being pissed off with some things, but sometimes you have to acknowledge that you can't get a perfect player and that 30 goal players are valuable.


Edited by Zetts, 30 May 2013 - 02:03 PM.


#54 FlashyG

FlashyG

    1st Line All-Star

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,145 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:38 PM

if franzen retires on his 2nd last season we gotta pay 4.1 mill on the cap for 2 seasons if he retires on his last year its 8.318

 

http://www.capgeek.c...raded_year=2013

 

Why would he retire? he can just go on LTIR get his full salary for a year or 2 and help the team by not having his cap hit count against their payroll.

 

its what Philly is doing with Pronger.



#55 nyqvististhefuture

nyqvististhefuture

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:45 PM

 

No. If he retired with one year left, they would be on the hook for a one year cap hit of 2.95 million. 

 

That link you post shows what his penalty would be if he retired with 2 years left. 

 

 

 

 

DUDE check yourself the penalty if he retires on his last year  is 8+ million ... jesus ... no idea where you get this 2.95 from



 

Why would he retire? he can just go on LTIR get his full salary for a year or 2 and help the team by not having his cap hit count against their payroll.

 

its what Philly is doing with Pronger.

 

 

pronger is injured different story everyone knows hes basically done ... as for mule theres a good chance he wont play on one of those years if not both for 1 million a season ... zetterberg is in the same boat but i can see him playing like alfredsson did for 1 mill


Edited by nyqvististhefuture, 30 May 2013 - 02:44 PM.


#56 StormJH1

StormJH1

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 701 posts
  • Location:Twin Cities, MN

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:53 PM

People keep saying that it's a "cap friendly" contract, which it is...now.  But that doesn't necessarily make it a good contract for the full life of the contract, in light of the new CBA.  As people have pointed out above, there are significant penalties in the millions of dollars if he retires early.

 

And he's going to retire "early".  Does anyone look at Franzen and think "There's a guy who can stay motivated to stay in NHL shape until he's 40"?  I don't.  I see a large a guy with a history of knee problems, who doesn't have the cerebral game of a Larionov or Datsyuk that would allow those players to help a team probably until their early-to-mid 40's.  People will be looking at him in a year or two wondering where his legs went, just as they did with Holmstrom a few years ago.  Even a guy like Brian Rafalski, who nobody accused of being "done", hung it up when he was 37.  Franzen is also Swedish, so the allure of being in the U.S. for 82-game seasons where he's no longer a Top 6 forward might not appeal to him like they might to a North American player "just hanging on".

 

I'd have to have a better understanding of the CBA implications to say for sure what I would do, but I think this is a closer question than a lot of people think.



#57 Drake_Marcus

Drake_Marcus

    Pariah

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,336 posts
  • Location:Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 30 May 2013 - 03:06 PM

As time goes by the NHL will likely have to address situations like that of Pronger. Philly is guilty of a pretty blatant circumvention of the intention of the cap (note that circumventing the intention of the contract rather than the letter of the contract is a much different thing, and likely not something you can penalize).  As it stands it's pretty clear Pronger isn't actively moving toward anything but retirement and the only reason he hasn't retired is to keep his contract off the books.  Now because he couldn't likely pass a physical (not that most active NHL players his age likely can pass a standard physical) the NHLPA could easily protest any action taken against him the NHL's hands appeared tied.  What I'd like to see is this: if a player misses an entire season due to injury without retiring their contract slides forward another year (the team would still have to pay them for the injured year but that's something they insure contracts against anyway so owner complaints would fall on deaf ears).  This should definitely be appealable based on circumstance.  In Pronger's case I could imagine a legitimate appeal based on the fact that his contract is so obnoxiously long sliding it forward another year would be a significant penalty in terms of having to pay a player farther into their declining years.  On the other hand it's hard to feel bad for Philly when the sign a player that old to such a long term contract that is so clearly designed to circumvent the cap.

 

The Pronger and Luongo contracts really stretched the premise of Holland's Franzen/Zetterberg contracts thin.  With the Z/Franzen contracts they were signing a relatively young, pending UFA they drafted to contract the player would likely play out (expiring as a 40 year old).  With Pronger and Luongo it was pretty clear neither player would be playing until they were 43 years old.  That extra 3 years is a huge difference.  Hell, in Pronger's case he signed the contract as a 35+ meaning the team would be on the hook no matter what.  And by "no matter what" I mean "unless they pretend he's just working through an injury for five and a half straight years".  Pronger played 13 games last season and zero this season.  It's pretty absurd at this point to keep pretending he's going to make a magic come back as a 39 year old player next season who hasn't played in almost 2 years.



So can you buyout 3 players then?

 

Sammy, Bert and Franzen?

 

Am I missing anyone else that people want to buyout?

 

Each team gets 2 amnesty style buy outs of contracts signed before the current CBA.


Dedicated to lulz once lost:
Posted Image
Thanks TeeMan!

"We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas
of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage" --H.P. Lovecraft

#58 marcaractac

marcaractac

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Location:St. John's, newfoundland

Posted 30 May 2013 - 03:39 PM

 
 
 

DUDE check yourself the penalty if he retires on his last year  is 8+ million ... jesus ... no idea where you get this 2.95 from


 
 
pronger is injured different story everyone knows hes basically done ... as for mule theres a good chance he wont play on one of those years if not both for 1 million a season ... zetterberg is in the same boat but i can see him playing like alfredsson did for 1 mill

Do. The. Math.

Its the difference in salary paid out and cap savings of years played on the deal, divided by remaining years left when retired. stop coming up with incorrect numbers on the internet. The math is pretty easy.

Edited by marcaractac, 30 May 2013 - 03:43 PM.


#59 RedLightGoesOn

RedLightGoesOn

    Playoff Ice...if you know what I mean

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 815 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 03:50 PM

Franzen is going down hill and is useless the majority of the time. He skates lazily, makes mistakes, doesn't put much effort in, etc. I don't think someone who has proven to be largely ineffective and unmotivated worth any cap hit. What is worse is he doesn't seem to care and is way to comfortable making a fair chunk of change while playing like crap and being outpeformed by Cleary in the CHI series. This guy is a nonfactor for us.

 

If we aren't prepared to motivate him by benching him or scratching him, I say we look to unload him in the near future via trade and get some value out of him before it is too late.


40 for life.

#60 Richdg

Richdg

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 04:47 PM

Guys, use capgeek and read. If franzen was to retire in the Summer of 2017, 4 seasons from now we would have a cap it of 2,772,727 for 3 more seasons. If he was to retire in the summer of 2016, our cap hit would be just under 2.1 million for 4 seasons. I he retires in the summer of 2018 the cap hit is 4.16 million for 2 seasons. If he retires in the summer of 2019 the hit is 8.32 million for 1 season.

In any of these events he costs us money on our cap, when he is not even playing. The hit is worse as he gets closer to the end of his contract. Now if we buy him out, he gives us a $0 cap hit. he is going to get paid his 22.5 million no matter what we/he does.







Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users