• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest blueadams

If Hossa gets bought out..

Rate this topic

52 posts in this topic

It's an ESPN insider article, so I can't read it, but Richards and Hossa are mentioned in the title as potential buy-outs this off-season: http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/blog/_/name/custance_craig/id/9340903/2013-nhl-playoffs-new-cba-makes-interesting-offseason

Assuming that we're able to resign Brunner, Nyquist, Andersson, Kindl and Smith all at about $1M raises... Simply buy-ing out Samuelsson would give us around $5M to pay Hossa.

It's not what I'd do if I was Holland this off-season (or the lines that I'd assemble if I were Babcock), but in terms of things we might actuall
y do, this wouldn't be a bad off-season.

I still like Hossa. Still has that dangerous, dangerous shot. Offensive smarts and skill. Still kills penalties well. Big, strong bod
y. Short enough contract and it could be a great signing for us in a weak FA year.

CAPGEEK.COM USER GENERATED ROSTER
My Custom Lineup
FORWARDS
Marian Hossa ($5.275m) / Pavel Datsyuk ($6.700m) / Justin Abdelkader ($1.800m)
Johan Franzen ($3.955m) / Henrik Zetterberg ($6.083m) / Todd Bertuzzi ($2.075m)
Gustav Nyquist ($1.875m) / Joakim Andersson ($1.875m) / Damien Brunner ($2.350m)
Tomas Tatar ($0.840m) / Darren Helm ($2.125m) / Patrick Eaves ($1.200m)
Cory Emmerton ($0.533m) / Jordin Tootoo ($1.900m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Niklas Kronwall ($4.750m) / Jonathan Ericsson ($3.250m)
Kyle Quincey ($3.775m) / Danny DeKeyser ($1.350m)
Jakub Kindl ($1.883m) / Brendan Smith ($1.875m)
Carlo Colaiacovo ($2.500m) / Brian Lashoff ($0.725m)
GOALTENDERS
Jimmy Howard ($5.292m)
Jonas Gustavsson ($1.500m)
OTHER
Buyout: Mikael Samuelsson ($0.000m)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $65,486,212; BONUSES: $1,010,000
CAP SPACE (24-man roster):- $176,212

Edited by blueadams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just 48 hours after the completion of the Stanley Cup final, the window opens for general managers looking to claw out additional cap space or pull the chute on a risky long-term contract that doesn't look nearly as good now as it did when it was signed.

That's because it will be the start of the normal buyout window that, for the next two summers, will also serve as the opportunity for general managers to utilize their two compliance buyouts -- buyouts that won't count against the salary cap.

There's a solid compliance buyout candidate on nearly every team, and yet as the window gets closer to opening, just how many compliance buyouts we'll see this summer doesn't get any clearer.

One NHL assistant GM was asked to set the over/under on how many compliance buyouts we'll see this year. He put the number at 15. And he expects that number to drop next summer.

But it's truly an educated guess, because teams just aren't tipping each other off at this point.

"We all speculate and say 'This guy, he's automatic buyout.' We don't really know -- I don't know what other teams are thinking," said Tampa Bay Lightning GM Steve Yzerman. "They don't share that information. We don't know their [finances], what they're planning on doing, whether it's a trade or guys in the minors or what they're planning to spend. I really have no idea. I'm really interested to see what happens."

We all are.

"It could be really interesting or it could be really anticlimactic," Yzerman said. "I have no idea."

Yzerman's uncertainty was echoed by several general managers.

"It's a good question," said Columbus Blue Jackets GM Jarmo Kekalainen. "We can always do our calculations and our thoughts but it's still going to be a guess. At the end of the day, we don't sit in the seats other guys are sitting. So many factors go in. From cap issues to budgets to ownership and all kinds of different things. I think it's going to be used. I don't know how much."

Everybody has taken a look at the teams that will struggle to get under the salary cap that drops to $64.3 million and identified players who are expendable. That's the easy part.

The hard part is convincing ownership that it's a great idea to pay a player to play elsewhere, because in some cases these are going to be very useful players. If a guy like Brad Richards is cut loose by the compliance buyout, there will be a lineup of teams interested in the center. Richards isn't the only buyout candidate who will draw interest.

That's not an easy conversation.

"Clearly, there are some teams that have to. Just looking at their cap situations, they have to,"Minnesota Wild GM Chuck Fletcher said. "It's one thing to say you can buy somebody out and they're off your cap but still have to write a check to them. Not every owner has the same world view of that matter. It's still real dollars. Clearly, that's an option some teams will look at strongly. Your preference is to always make hockey moves, if you can."

And that's part of the secrecy. General managers aren't going to tip their hands on buyout candidates just in case they can trade them without paying the money to cut them loose. Another highlight of the new CBA is the ability to conduct retained salary transactions, which allow teams to trade a player while retaining up to 50 percent of that player's salary on their books. Teams can have up to three players on their roster who have their salaries paid by other teams, as long as the aggregate amount of retained salary doesn't exceed $9.645 million this coming season.

So the new CBA leaves other outs besides compliance buyouts, something GMs much prefer.

"If they want to do a buyout, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to do a trade before they'll do the buyout," Kekalainen said. "Now that you can eat the money, that brings money to the picture … the economics of the cap. That's the benefit some teams can afford."

There are benefits in this new CBA, and there are liabilities -- like the cap advantage recapture clause that impacts players who signed deals in excess of six years. In this clause, if a player leaves the league because of retirement or defection to another league, any cap advantage a team received over the course of the contract will be charged against a team's salary cap in equal amounts over the remaining term of the contract. It's the biggest reason a Brad Richards buyout makes so much sense. But it's not just Richards.

It's wild to think about now, considering just how big a role Marian Hossa has played in Chicago's run this season, but one team executive said he thought the Blackhawks absolutely had to look hard at moving Hossa this summer or next. Whether or not the Blackhawks win the Stanley Cup, that would be as hard a move as any Stan Bowman had to make in dismantling the previous championship team in Chicago.

Why is the Hossa deal such a liability?

Thanks to the CapGeek's fantastic recapture calculator, we can calculate exactly what the penalty would be.

Hossa's actual salary drops to $1 million in the 2017-18 season, when Hossa will be 39. Which would make the conclusion of the 2016-17 an ideal time to retire.

If he does, that means the Blackhawks would have earned a cap benefit of $17.1 million over the course of this deal. So from 2017-18 through 2020-21 Chicago would be dinged with a $4.275 million penalty each of those seasons against the salary cap. That's the cost of a top-six forward.

Now, for a player of Hossa's caliber, a trade seems much more reasonable than a compliance buyout. So let's say the Ottawa Senators come calling and want to bring Hossa back to end his career where it began. If the Senators trade for Hossa this summer and he retires after that 2016-17 season, the penalties are much more reasonable.

The Blackhawks would have received a $10.5 million benefit and would be hit with an annual cap penalty of $2.625 million and the Senators would be hit with an annual penalty of $1.65 million from 2017-18 through 2020-21, a much more manageable number when it's shared.

And it's not just Hossa. Ilya Kovalchuk's salary drops to $1 million in 2020-21 for three seasons before increasing to $3 million in 2023-24 and then $4 million in 2024-25.

Let's say he decides to finish up his career in the KHL when that salary kicks down to $1 million. That would have given the Devils a benefit of $17.7 million, which means an annual salary-cap penalty of $4.42 million from the 2021-22 season through the 2024-25 season.

On Twitter, one reader (Sam Hitchcock, @HITCHCSS), proposed to me a trade that would send Florida's No. 2 overall pick to the Devils in exchange for Kovalchuk. If Kovalchuk retires before the 2020-21 season, the Devils would only be hit with an annual penalty of $600,000. The team trading for him, in this case the Panthers, would be the one punished the most, with an annual cap penalty of about $4 million. That's just not worth it. Considering the Devils aren't traditionally a cap team, it makes more sense for them to just accept the risk of a future penalty.

Yzerman inherited his own tough decision to make in Tampa, with Vincent Lecavalier. If Lecavalier retires before his salary drops down to $1.5 million in 2018-19, the Lightning would be hit with a hefty annual salary-cap penalty of $6.477 million in the final two years of Lecavalier's deal through 2020. That's a big hit.

So there's no easy answer when Yzerman was asked if he could say right now with certainty whether or not Lecavalier would be part of his team in August.

"I can say anything I want," Yzerman joked. "We've been busy with the draft combine, our minor league plan. I was at the World Championships. We haven't had our pro scouts together to sit down and plan our summer. We'll make any decisions later on getting closer to the draft."

He's not alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an ESPN insider article, so I can't read it, but Richards and Hossa are mentioned in the title as potential buy-outs this off-season: http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/blog/_/name/custance_craig/id/9340903/2013-nhl-playoffs-new-cba-makes-interesting-offseason

Assuming that we're able to resign Brunner, Nyquist, Andersson, Kindl and Smith all at about $1M raises... Simply buy-ing out Samuelsson would give us around $5M to pay Hossa.

It's not what I'd do if I was Holland this off-season (or the lines that I'd assemble if I were Babcock), but in terms of things we might actually do, this wouldn't be a bad off-season.

I still like Hossa. Still has that dangerous, dangerous shot. Offensive smarts and skill. Still kills penalties well. Big, strong body. Short enough contract and it could be a great signing for us in a weak FA year.

CAPGEEK.COM USER GENERATED ROSTER

My Custom Lineup

FORWARDS

Marian Hossa ($5.275m) / Pavel Datsyuk ($6.700m) / Justin Abdelkader ($1.800m)

Johan Franzen ($3.955m) / Henrik Zetterberg ($6.083m) / Todd Bertuzzi ($2.075m)

Gustav Nyquist ($1.875m) / Joakim Andersson ($1.875m) / Damien Brunner ($2.350m)

Tomas Tatar ($0.840m) / Darren Helm ($2.125m) / Patrick Eaves ($1.200m)

Cory Emmerton ($0.533m) / Jordin Tootoo ($1.900m) /

DEFENSEMEN

Niklas Kronwall ($4.750m) / Jonathan Ericsson ($3.250m)

Kyle Quincey ($3.775m) / Danny DeKeyser ($1.350m)

Jakub Kindl ($1.883m) / Brendan Smith ($1.875m)

Carlo Colaiacovo ($2.500m) / Brian Lashoff ($0.725m)

GOALTENDERS

Jimmy Howard ($5.292m)

Jonas Gustavsson ($1.500m)

OTHER

Buyout: Mikael Samuelsson ($0.000m)

------

CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)

(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)

SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $65,486,212; BONUSES: $1,010,000

CAP SPACE (24-man roster):- $176,212

for the life of me, I cannot figure why people think Nyquist, Kindl and Andersson are getting that much of a raise.....

I, of course, would bring Hossa back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see Hossa getting bought out. If anything, he'd get moved to a franchise that can handle the contract. I just can't see Chicago buying him out, and losing him for absolutely nothing. If he gets bought out, he has to go through waivers which also means there's a slim to none chance we'll get to him. Teams would be foaming at their mouths at a chance to claim Hossa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see Hossa getting bought out. If anything, he'd get moved to a franchise that can handle the contract. I just can't see Chicago buying him out, and losing him for absolutely nothing. If he gets bought out, he has to go through waivers which also means there's a slim to none chance we'll get to him. Teams would be foaming at their mouths at a chance to claim Hossa.

I do believe that if a player gets bought out, that player becomes a UFA...

hillbillywingsfan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe that if a player gets bought out, that player becomes a UFA...

I've been hearing that they have to go through waivers before becoming a UFA. I'm trying to find an article to showcase it but honestly can't. I could be absolutely wrong though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just 48 hours after the completion of the Stanley Cup final, the window opens for general managers looking to claw out additional cap space or pull the chute on a risky long-term contract that doesn't look nearly as good now as it did when it was signed.

That's because it will be the start of the normal buyout window that, for the next two summers, will also serve as the opportunity for general managers to utilize their two compliance buyouts -- buyouts that won't count against the salary cap.

There's a solid compliance buyout candidate on nearly every team, and yet as the window gets closer to opening, just how many compliance buyouts we'll see this summer doesn't get any clearer.

One NHL assistant GM was asked to set the over/under on how many compliance buyouts we'll see this year. He put the number at 15. And he expects that number to drop next summer.

But it's truly an educated guess, because teams just aren't tipping each other off at this point.

"We all speculate and say 'This guy, he's automatic buyout.' We don't really know -- I don't know what other teams are thinking," said Tampa Bay Lightning GM Steve Yzerman. "They don't share that information. We don't know their [finances], what they're planning on doing, whether it's a trade or guys in the minors or what they're planning to spend. I really have no idea. I'm really interested to see what happens."

We all are.

"It could be really interesting or it could be really anticlimactic," Yzerman said. "I have no idea."

Yzerman's uncertainty was echoed by several general managers.

"It's a good question," said Columbus Blue Jackets GM Jarmo Kekalainen. "We can always do our calculations and our thoughts but it's still going to be a guess. At the end of the day, we don't sit in the seats other guys are sitting. So many factors go in. From cap issues to budgets to ownership and all kinds of different things. I think it's going to be used. I don't know how much."

Everybody has taken a look at the teams that will struggle to get under the salary cap that drops to $64.3 million and identified players who are expendable. That's the easy part.

The hard part is convincing ownership that it's a great idea to pay a player to play elsewhere, because in some cases these are going to be very useful players. If a guy like Brad Richards is cut loose by the compliance buyout, there will be a lineup of teams interested in the center. Richards isn't the only buyout candidate who will draw interest.

That's not an easy conversation.

"Clearly, there are some teams that have to. Just looking at their cap situations, they have to,"Minnesota Wild GM Chuck Fletcher said. "It's one thing to say you can buy somebody out and they're off your cap but still have to write a check to them. Not every owner has the same world view of that matter. It's still real dollars. Clearly, that's an option some teams will look at strongly. Your preference is to always make hockey moves, if you can."

And that's part of the secrecy. General managers aren't going to tip their hands on buyout candidates just in case they can trade them without paying the money to cut them loose. Another highlight of the new CBA is the ability to conduct retained salary transactions, which allow teams to trade a player while retaining up to 50 percent of that player's salary on their books. Teams can have up to three players on their roster who have their salaries paid by other teams, as long as the aggregate amount of retained salary doesn't exceed $9.645 million this coming season.

So the new CBA leaves other outs besides compliance buyouts, something GMs much prefer.

"If they want to do a buyout, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to do a trade before they'll do the buyout," Kekalainen said. "Now that you can eat the money, that brings money to the picture … the economics of the cap. That's the benefit some teams can afford."

There are benefits in this new CBA, and there are liabilities -- like the cap advantage recapture clause that impacts players who signed deals in excess of six years. In this clause, if a player leaves the league because of retirement or defection to another league, any cap advantage a team received over the course of the contract will be charged against a team's salary cap in equal amounts over the remaining term of the contract. It's the biggest reason a Brad Richards buyout makes so much sense. But it's not just Richards.

It's wild to think about now, considering just how big a role Marian Hossa has played in Chicago's run this season, but one team executive said he thought the Blackhawks absolutely had to look hard at moving Hossa this summer or next. Whether or not the Blackhawks win the Stanley Cup, that would be as hard a move as any Stan Bowman had to make in dismantling the previous championship team in Chicago.

Why is the Hossa deal such a liability?

Thanks to the CapGeek's fantastic recapture calculator, we can calculate exactly what the penalty would be.

Hossa's actual salary drops to $1 million in the 2017-18 season, when Hossa will be 39. Which would make the conclusion of the 2016-17 an ideal time to retire.

If he does, that means the Blackhawks would have earned a cap benefit of $17.1 million over the course of this deal. So from 2017-18 through 2020-21 Chicago would be dinged with a $4.275 million penalty each of those seasons against the salary cap. That's the cost of a top-six forward.

Now, for a player of Hossa's caliber, a trade seems much more reasonable than a compliance buyout. So let's say the Ottawa Senators come calling and want to bring Hossa back to end his career where it began. If the Senators trade for Hossa this summer and he retires after that 2016-17 season, the penalties are much more reasonable.

The Blackhawks would have received a $10.5 million benefit and would be hit with an annual cap penalty of $2.625 million and the Senators would be hit with an annual penalty of $1.65 million from 2017-18 through 2020-21, a much more manageable number when it's shared.

And it's not just Hossa. Ilya Kovalchuk's salary drops to $1 million in 2020-21 for three seasons before increasing to $3 million in 2023-24 and then $4 million in 2024-25.

Let's say he decides to finish up his career in the KHL when that salary kicks down to $1 million. That would have given the Devils a benefit of $17.7 million, which means an annual salary-cap penalty of $4.42 million from the 2021-22 season through the 2024-25 season.

On Twitter, one reader (Sam Hitchcock, @HITCHCSS), proposed to me a trade that would send Florida's No. 2 overall pick to the Devils in exchange for Kovalchuk. If Kovalchuk retires before the 2020-21 season, the Devils would only be hit with an annual penalty of $600,000. The team trading for him, in this case the Panthers, would be the one punished the most, with an annual cap penalty of about $4 million. That's just not worth it. Considering the Devils aren't traditionally a cap team, it makes more sense for them to just accept the risk of a future penalty.

Yzerman inherited his own tough decision to make in Tampa, with Vincent Lecavalier. If Lecavalier retires before his salary drops down to $1.5 million in 2018-19, the Lightning would be hit with a hefty annual salary-cap penalty of $6.477 million in the final two years of Lecavalier's deal through 2020. That's a big hit.

So there's no easy answer when Yzerman was asked if he could say right now with certainty whether or not Lecavalier would be part of his team in August.

"I can say anything I want," Yzerman joked. "We've been busy with the draft combine, our minor league plan. I was at the World Championships. We haven't had our pro scouts together to sit down and plan our summer. We'll make any decisions later on getting closer to the draft."

He's not alone.

Why would the Senator's have a smaller than Hawks' hit against the cap if they traded for Hossa?

Edited by Johnz96

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been hearing that they have to go through waivers before becoming a UFA. I'm trying to find an article to showcase it but honestly can't. I could be absolutely wrong though

No, I believe that was a one-off thing before the start of this season. Summers 2013 and 2014 any compliance buyouts go straight to UFA.

And for the record, Marian Hossa's highest goal total in the last 7 seasons was 40 goals in 2008-09.....when he played with Pavel Datsyuk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, YES. I want this to happen for one primary reason - I actually have a Hossa Winter Classic jersey and it would be nice to be able to wear it again in public without being openly mocked like I'm some sort of traitor. I could go on for days about how unreasonable fans are about Hossa - it isn't any fundamentally different than people who still wear Shanahan jerseys (he did play for New York after us, or do people forget that?).

I really don't see Hossa getting bought out. If anything, he'd get moved to a franchise that can handle the contract. I just can't see Chicago buying him out, and losing him for absolutely nothing.

Well, it isn't for nothing. We all know that Chicago sold their sole to sign him on a backdiver contract. It got them a Cup, but it did take them 2 years to replenish the role players that were basically gutted as cap casualties. After the 2013 CBA, the arena has changed once again. They can buy him out and save the cap hit problems they'll have later, but there are huge financial disincentives if he retires early either way.

for the life of me, I cannot figure why people think Nyquist, Kindl and Andersson are getting that much of a raise.....

I guess what I can't figure out is why people would have a hard time figuring that out. No, they won't get "Filppula" money, but those guys were on rookie contracts. All three of them figure to be regular NHL'ers for us, so they can't keep making "Jake Taylor" money (yay Major League reference).

We actually are in kind of a tough position, which is that all these guys are RFA's (Brunner is also a UFA) at the same time, and they're all due for a "bridge contract", probably in the neighborhood of $1.5 to $3 million per. Kindl's resume really isn't much different than Jonathan Ericsson's was at the time he got 3 years, $9.75 million. Kindl's 26 years old and this is the first year he's made more than $1 million in salary. Kindl also hasn't had the luxury of being hidden next to Lidstrom or Kronwall - he's primarily been on the 3rd defensive unit with a slow or terrible partner, yet really took big steps forward this year.

I'm a huge fan of Nyquist - he should probably sign some type of 2-year deal and with regular playing time, he could be a $3 - $5 million per year player by the time he's a UFA.

You don't HAVE to pay these guys more, but somebody will make a qualifying offer if you mess around with them too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see Hossa getting bought out. If anything, he'd get moved to a franchise that can handle the contract. I just can't see Chicago buying him out, and losing him for absolutely nothing. If he gets bought out, he has to go through waivers which also means there's a slim to none chance we'll get to him. Teams would be foaming at their mouths at a chance to claim Hossa.

It isn't for nothing, its so they don't have to take on a star player's cap hit when that star player isn't even playing.

I can't tell if its going to happen, but if it does I totally see Holland going after him. If I recall, Hossa really enjoyed his time here and I'm sure he would be glad to be back. We all know how much Holland likes ex-wings too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would the Senator's have a smaller than Hawks' hit against the cap if they traded for Hossa?

Because the Blackhawks would eat the cap benefit for the four seasons they've already had Hossa, leaving the Senators to pick up the remainder.

dirtydangles likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would the Senator's have a smaller than Hawks' hit against the cap if they traded for Hossa?

Only if he retires early. Because the cap hits are averaged over the term of the contract, the Blackhawks would have had a benefit that they were paying him more actual dollars than were counting against the cap. I don't know exactly how this part is calculated, but the key parts are bolded. It's the cap benefit to the team they have to keep in their books as a 'penalty' for an early retirement.

Hossa's actual salary drops to $1 million in the 2017-18 season, when Hossa will be 39. Which would make the conclusion of the 2016-17 an ideal time to retire.

If he does, that means the Blackhawks would have earned a cap benefit of $17.1 million over the course of this deal. So from 2017-18 through 2020-21 Chicago would be dinged with a $4.275 million penalty each of those seasons against the salary cap. That's the cost of a top-six forward.

Now, for a player of Hossa's caliber, a trade seems much more reasonable than a compliance buyout. So let's say the Ottawa Senators come calling and want to bring Hossa back to end his career where it began. If the Senators trade for Hossa this summer and he retires after that 2016-17 season, the penalties are much more reasonable.

The Blackhawks would have received a $10.5 million benefit and would be hit with an annual cap penalty of $2.625 million and the Senators would be hit with an annual penalty of $1.65 million from 2017-18 through 2020-21, a much more manageable number when it's shared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL @ thinking that the hawks will buy out hossa.

come on.

If they were smart they would, but maybe you're right. There are some pretty stupid people running that organization

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt they'll buy him out this season. Probably after next though, to avoid how killer the last few years of his contract are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it illegal to buyout a player and re-sign them? If a player and team could come to a common understanding that a contract hurts a team due to unexpected CBA changes they could perhaps work it out with a new contract with a shorter term for slightly higher cap hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it illegal to buyout a player and re-sign them? If a player and team could come to a common understanding that a contract hurts a team due to unexpected CBA changes they could perhaps work it out with a new contract with a shorter term for slightly higher cap hit.

This isn't allowed. Any player who is bought out by his team during the summer cannot play for that team in the following season.

Edited by Crymson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt they'll buy him out this season. Probably after next though, to avoid how killer the last few years of his contract are.

This is a really good point as they have a handful of guys in contract years next year that will get raises (Crawford, Shaw, Bolland, Hjalmarsson) and guys who will get raises in two years (Kane, Toews). They may take one more run with Hossa next year and then buy him out.

I think, for this year, it will come down to Bickell vs. Hossa. I don't think they can have both. They have to resign Leddy and Krueger and I'm sure Stalberg will be walking. They have $2 million available right now. That will probably go up to ~$5 million if (when?) they buy out Montador at $2.75 million.

Edited by unsaddleddonald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL @ thinking that the hawks will buy out hossa.

come on.

The Hawks are $4M over the cap for next year, and that's if they let go Handzus, Leddy, Rosival, Emery, Kruger, Stallberg, Meyers and Bickell and replace them with kids on ELCs. And that's with only 21 players signed including no backup goalie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0