By design the Hawks would want those two to be marketed as Hawks forever and at their age signing for 8/9 years makes sense.
- Al

I thought 8 years was the max they could be sogned for ?

Ok, it's not about whether or not Hossa is tradeable or not. He absolutely is tradeable and his cap hit is actually very attractive for a player as productive as him.

The issue is that his contract was front loaded, making $10M ACTUAL dollars during the first 2 years, then goes to 7.9M ACTUAL dollars for the next 3-4, then 4M for a year, followed by 3 years at 1.0M.

His cap hit is 5.75. That means for every year there was a vast difference between his actual dollars vs his cap hit, if he retires early....the Hawks are on the hook for the difference. Can you imagine 20M in wasted cap space over 5 years?
- eburgio

It was the most tipped contract and the last one allowed to be so front loaded...

If Hossa wakes up one day in the next couple of three years and decides he wants to retire the cap consequences are horrendous.

I thought 8 years was the max they could be sogned for ?
- mrpaulish

I couldn't recall if it was 8 or 9 yrs for a resign.

I thought 8 years was the max they could be sogned for ?
- mrpaulish

Facts schmaks.

It was the most tipped contract and the last one allowed to be so front loaded...

If Hossa wakes up one day in the next couple of three years and decides he wants to retire the cap consequences are horrendous.
- Al

Hopefully they can convince him to sit on IR for the rest of his contract like Pronger is doing.

It was the most tipped contract and the last one allowed to be so front loaded...

If Hossa wakes up one day in the next couple of three years and decides he wants to retire the cap consequences are horrendous.
- Al

I know..... but the Cups were worth it.

It was the most tipped contract and the last one allowed to be so front loaded...

If Hossa wakes up one day in the next couple of three years and decides he wants to retire the cap consequences are horrendous.
- Al

Yes, the Hawks are essentially F'ed either way if Big Hossa said he's had enough. If they trade him, they will be penalized for the years he did play for them. And if he's still playing for them and wants to retire, same deal. Even if he says he wants to go play with his brother Marcel in the Czech league, he would SCREW the hawks.

The Hawks better hope he's productive for 3 more years, and then come up with a concussion/back related issue to put him on LTIR

It was the most tipped contract and the last one allowed to be so front loaded...

If Hossa wakes up one day in the next couple of three years and decides he wants to retire the cap consequences are horrendous.
- Al

And the most horrendous pieces of the consequences were put it during the most recent CBA - long after the contract was signed.

How they could "ex post facto" change the rules is beyond me: contracts signed before the new rules should be exempt from the new rules.

If there ever was a contract that would be almost impossible to trade it is Hossa's...
- Al

We have Hoss for the next 3 yrs. last four years are 1mill each

Why wouldn`t an owner spend 1mill for 5.275 cap? Especially when teams
can`t even make a profit now?

My thinking I save 4.275 per year. I get a great player coach, or LTIR

It may only be logical for a few teams but when? Why not if?

Ok...I did it.

I reordered every player to every team need in the first round and provided commentary:

http://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2014/
- wiz1901

Based on the new waiver rules, from what bowman said, and from what they did last year don't you think they take mainly future college guys/Europeans(sweedes) in the 3rd-7th round? You have a lot of guys being taken from the Canadian leagues which only gives them 4-5 years to develop before they would hit waivers.

We have Hoss for the next 3 yrs. last four years are 1mill each

Why wouldn`t an owner spend 1mill for 5.275 cap? Especially when teams
can`t even make a profit now?

My thinking I save 4.275 per year. I get a great player coach, or LTIR

It may only be logical for a few teams but when? Why not if?
- Joe-snoopy-Cool

If Hossa gets traded to a crappy team, wouldn't he just retire and play in Slovakia? Which would create a big cap penalty for the hawks. It's a very very risky move to trade Hossa cause the hawks will just get hit with the penalty. If they keep him, they can IR him.

By design the Hawks would want those two to be marketed as Hawks forever and at their age signing for 8/9 years makes sense.
- Al

This. Let's hope Bowman has the brains to do that, and that Toews & Kane will take it.

As quiet as things are, it seems that Bowman is trying to get something for (next to) nothing, and will blow the Kesler deal. I can't for the life of me see them turning down Leddy, TT and a first, or Shart, Leddy and a first. He's probably trying to dump Clendening, Versuck, Bickell and/or some other low grades on them. If he dumpster dives just before having to clear up so much cap space, it'll be 2011-12 all over again.

Bowman doesn't strike me as much of a risk taker. He hasn't made a single "big" trade. Why can't you let go of expendables like Sharp, Leddy and/or even TT when the absolute missing piece is obtainable? My God, the man let Buff, Ladd and Frolik go for NOTHING when he had to clear cap space. What's so damned precious about freaking overrated Shart, or even TT, who is clearly going to be at least close to Kane in production, but with better defense? This team with Kesler on board will have a legit run at the next 2 cups. They called the Hawks a dynasty? Guess what? LA IS a dynasty, and if we don't both plug that 2C hole and force Q to stop being an idiot with personnel and lines, LA hasn't won their last cup of this decade ... and the Ducks and Blues are each a player or two away from outclassing us, too.

I couldn't recall if it was 8 or 9 yrs for a resign.
- Al

7 years if a free agent, 8 years if the player is re-signing with his team.

Yes, the Hawks are essentially F'ed either way if Big Hossa said he's had enough. If they trade him, they will be penalized for the years he did play for them. And if he's still playing for them and wants to retire, same deal. Even if he says he wants to go play with his brother Marcel in the Czech league, he would SCREW the hawks.

The Hawks better hope he's productive for 3 more years, and then come up with a concussion/back related issue to put him on LTIR
- eburgio

That`s the only way he retires as a HAWK and us not getting cap reemed

Sounds like.Kesler is being a female dog which is good for us because he Wants to be a Blackhawk

It was the most tipped contract and the last one allowed to be so front loaded...

If Hossa wakes up one day in the next couple of three years and decides he wants to retire the cap consequences are horrendous.
- Al

I really have a problem with the legality of the league punishing a team for a contract the league already approved. Not a lawyer here, but that doesn't seem on solid ground to me, if it were to be challenged that is.

If Hossa gets traded to a crappy team, wouldn't he just retire and play in Slovakia? Which would create a big cap penalty for the hawks. It's a very very risky move to trade Hossa cause the hawks will just get hit with the penalty. If they keep him, they can IR him.
- coldsteelonice

This might be where I missed it. Does the penalty carry on after a trade to
the original signing team? Unless bought out which we have none

Sounds like.Kesler is being a female dog which is good for us because he Wants to be a Blackhawk
- mrpaulish

ONE LAST DIVE BABY

This might be where I missed it. Does the penalty carry on after a trade to
the original signing team? Unless bought out which we have none
- Joe-snoopy-Cool

That's the way I understand it. It's the penalty for signing a circumventing contract essentially. Now if the original team just puts him on IR ala Marc savard and pronger.

I know..... but the Cups were worth it.
- mrpaulish

Risk/Reward and Hossa could very well be like Selanne.

That's the way I understand it. It's the penalty for signing a circumventing contract essentially. Now if the original team just puts him on IR ala Marc savard and pronger.
- coldsteelonice

...except the NHL approved it, but then deemed it bad later. To me, that's the issue. The league lost the legal high ground IMO by approving it in the first place.

That's the way I understand it. It's the penalty for signing a circumventing contract essentially. Now if the original team just puts him on IR ala Marc savard and pronger.
- coldsteelonice

Have to have a valid medical reason that can be substantiated to put a player on LTIR.

Risk/Reward and Hossa could very well be like Selanne.
- Al

Get them some help on the lower lines so Hossa doesn't have to be on the shutdown line all the time in the playoffs and he will be Selanne like

A few rules changes will be made for next year to increase overtime scoring, etc.


http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=724046

Some highlights:

If it becomes official, the new overtime format would require the teams to switch ends for the five-minute extra period, creating the long-change factor that exists in the second period, historically the period that features the most goals. The arena ice crew will also be required to do a dry scrape of the ice before overtime rather than before the shootout.

If the game goes to a shootout, under the approved changes, coaches would not be required to give a list of shooters but instead could go down the bench and pick players as the shootout progresses. Players would still be allowed to shoot only one time.

The League and the NHLPA are discussing the possibility of making the spin-o-rama illegal in shootouts. The Board of Governors also approved the recommendation to give the Situation Room in Toronto more latitude to review goals that may not fit one of the review categories but clearly were not scored in a legal fashion.

And my favorite and it's about damn time:

Also subject to change pending approval by the NHLPA Executive Board are rules governing faceoffs after an icing. One player on the offending team would be eligible to take the faceoff after an icing and a second violation would result in a two-minute penalty.

...except the NHL approved it, but then deemed it bad later. To me, that's the issue. The league lost the legal high ground IMO by approving it in the first place.
- grinder10

We are talking about a league and player's association, not a democracy.
Bettman made sure the big market teams would pay for the break they got with front loading contracts.

No matter if it is Carolina or Columbus every Governor has one vote....And there were more teams looking for front loaded deals to be dealt with in this fashion.