Was really hoping the new CBA would have addressed that. Teams are just going to keep shooting themselves in the foot with these long term deals..
- LeafsFan1205

They tried. But the PA wanted longer contract length. Bettman tried for a 5 year max and 7 years if signed with his former team. PA rejected that idea

The buyout is the owners way of honouring the deal in place. They buy him out, it is a complete contract. The buyout monies is included in the wording of the deal in the first place, so yes, they are honouring the contract in Full.
- bixll

and kipper is playing games for the flames, so he's honouring his deal. he said he'd retire/not report if he was moved.....it's not against the rules, so he's still honouring his contract, he's allowed to leave the game whenever he wants.

so explain how it's different.

teams can say "play well or i'll buy you out"....so why can't kipper say "keep me in calgary or i'll retire"?

and kipper is playing games for the flames, so he's honouring his deal. he said he'd retire/not report if he was moved.....it's not against the rules, so he's still honouring his contract, he's allowed to leave the game whenever he wants.

so explain how it's different.

teams can say "play well or i'll buy you out"....so why can't kipper say "keep me in calgary or i'll retire"?
- sensarmy_11

Calgary is paying him to play for 5 years. Unless he retires, he will get the 5 years salary he has a contract for. If he retires, he will null and void the remaining time on his contract, it is his right to do so. But, he is walking away from the remainder of his contract, not fufilling it.

This is what happens when you sign guys into their mid to late 30's.

It's funny next year was obviously a year added to help with the cap hit, but now that the reality is the player isn't going to finish out that last year(like expected) and doesn't want to move for a couple months he's the bad guy.

It's also funny that 3 hours north we have a similar aged guy that we'd wish would just retire

Calgary is paying him to play for 5 years. Unless he retires, he will get the 5 years salary he has a contract for. If he retires, he will null and void the remaining time on his contract, it is his right to do so. But, he is walking away from the remainder of his contract, not fufilling it.
- bixll

If Kipper was healthy all year and ended up with the numbers that he currently has, Flames fans would've been begging for him to not fulfill his contract.

Calgary is paying him to play for 5 years. Unless he retires, he will get the 5 years salary he has a contract for. If he retires, he will null and void the remaining time on his contract, it is his right to do so. But, he is walking away from the remainder of his contract, not fufilling it.
- bixll

and if a team signs someone to a 5 year contract, and then buys them out after 2, paying less money then would have othewise been owed.....it's no different.

you're arguing semantics and technicalities.

kipper is within his right to walk away from his contrat ANY TIME HE WANTS.

Calgary is paying him to play for 5 years. Unless he retires, he will get the 5 years salary he has a contract for. If he retires, he will null and void the remaining time on his contract, it is his right to do so. But, he is walking away from the remainder of his contract, not fufilling it.
- bixll

Exactly....

If a team buys out a player, the team must still pay that player, not the full %100, but he is still guaranteed money.. Unlike retiring before your contract is expired....... Not sure why we're still trying to explain this to you...
- LeafsFan1205

i'm not sure how you still can't see the similarities.......if you aren't paying a guy the full amount of his contract, how is that honouring the contract you signed?

so a team can walk away from a contract early, not pay as much to the player, and it's fine.....but if a player walks away early, doesn't take as much money from the team, somehow he gets crucified.

and if a team signs someone to a 5 year contract, and then buys them out after 2, paying less money then would have othewise been owed.....it's no different.

you're arguing semantics and technicalities.

kipper is within his right to walk away from his contrat ANY TIME HE WANTS.
- sensarmy_11

You are correct, however, Clagary can't walk away from HIM.... Big difference.

i'm not sure how you still can't see the similarities.......if you aren't paying a guy the full amount of his contract, how is that honouring the contract you signed?

so a team can walk away from a contract early, not pay as much to the player, and it's fine.....but if a player walks away early, doesn't take as much money from the team, somehow he gets crucified.
- sensarmy_11

The buyout amount is in the contract, so, they are paying the full amount of the agreed upon price.

i'm not sure how you still can't see the similarities.......if you aren't paying a guy the full amount of his contract, how is that honouring the contract you signed?

so a team can walk away from a contract early, not pay as much to the player, and it's fine.....but if a player walks away early, doesn't take as much money from the team, somehow he gets crucified.
- sensarmy_11

Difference there is that there are legal provisions in the contract allowing the team to do that. There aren't any for a player that walks away. So yes. The contract is still being honoured with a buyout.

Kipper is pretty much telling everyone that he wont be back next year, so there is no point in him going anywhere for a month. His choice. The Flames could still take a chance and trade him, but who is going to give up anything for him now?

In a perfect world, yes he should honor his contract. But the assets in hickey are its players, so intangibles like family need to be considered. They aren't trading widgets here.

This is the exact reason why Iginla hasn't been moved years ago. The intangibles.

But legally kipper is in his full right to do what he wants. Everyone knows that at +35 a player can retire and walk from their contract. It was the loophole that was abused on kipper, luongos, Hossa and a few other long term contracts. An unsaid protection for team and player. Kipper had a nmc up to him turning 35 for that very reason (so good job on him and his agent for setting that up).

What's sad is every one is roasting him for having the balls to say "I'm happy here even though we suck and will stick it out". He likes where he plays and signed here for that reason. That's a hell of a lot more honorable then being a baby after being traded and saying "I'm not going". Which means all efforts forming trades and costs for those trades are lost.

Hate kipper because he kept us on the running the last 10yrs and mad the flames look better then they are. Not because one stupid tweet from some idiot who should've probably just kept quiet in the first place. Kippers earned that.

You are correct, however, Clagary can't walk away from HIM.... Big difference.
- bixll

How ever the contract is set up in a way that provided the flames with the most protection possible in a long contract. Low salary at the point where he could be asked to retire.

Overall that's the risk with signing players for that long. If there was a way to make salary scale able and performance based, it could cover those problems. But no union will approve that.

You are correct, however, Clagary can't walk away from HIM.... Big difference.
- bixll

buyout

In a perfect world, yes he should honor his contract. But the assets in hickey are its players, so intangibles like family need to be considered. They aren't trading widgets here.

This is the exact reason why Iginla hasn't been moved years ago. The intangibles.

But legally kipper is in his full right to do what he wants. Everyone knows that at +35 a player can retire and walk from their contract. It was the loophole that was abused on kipper, luongos, Hossa and a few other long term contracts. An unsaid protection for team and player. Kipper had a nmc up to him turning 35 for that very reason (so good job on him and his agent for setting that up).

What's sad is every one is roasting him for having the balls to say "I'm happy here even though we suck and will stick it out". He likes where he plays and signed here for that reason. That's a hell of a lot more honorable then being a baby after being traded and saying "I'm not going". Which means all efforts forming trades and costs for those trades are lost.

Hate kipper because he kept us on the running the last 10yrs and mad the flames look better then they are. Not because one stupid tweet from some idiot who should've probably just kept quiet in the first place. Kippers earned that.
- numbear

Great post! I would have thougt Kipper would have wanted to win a Cup, but if the man likes Calgary & will be happy in a reduced role of backup or 1b for a few years, I would have no problem extending him a few more years. Thats if he still wants to play. Who knows. If he does retire at the end of the year, Flames gain 5.8 mill in cap space so Feaster can go resign Babchuk & extend Sarich so that cap space is safely in the pressbox every game.

buyout
- all mighty oil

Trade him to the Isles.

The least Kipper could have done is not tell anyone he wouldn't report... now he's screwed the Flames instead of a team he should have no loyalty to had he been traded.

Surely other teams would consider that he may not report at his age and situation, wouldn't they? Who's the goalie that wouldn't report to NYI after he got plucked on waivers from KHL?

The least Kipper could have done is not tell anyone he wouldn't report... now he's screwed the Flames instead of a team he should have no loyalty to had he been traded.

Surely other teams would consider that he may not report at his age and situation, wouldn't they? Who's the goalie that wouldn't report to NYI after he got plucked on waivers from KHL?
- BigDre

either way he'd look like a jack ass.

Three years in a row!
- Colin Dambrauskas

He was talking about Crosby...

either way he'd look like a jack ass.
- Lahey

Yeah, but at least he doesn't screw the team that paid him $35 mil over the last decade
EDIT: or half-decade... whatever

Trade him to the Isles.
- Lahey

So, Wave him?

My take:


Meh....whatever....(frank) it