Looks like they have about $5M in space after this season and most of their team signed.

Kane @ $7.5M

Tuch is $4.75 and Glass is entry. Tuch had an off year this year, but looks like his playoffs are looking better than the regular season. Had 52 points previous full season.
- hawkitect

Tuch is at $4.75 million for the next 6 years, Vegas isn’t trading him.

The Athletic suggests that the Hawks are high on Sam Colangelo. The implications are that he may not be available at #46 so the Hawks could taken him at #17.

Wiz has Colangelo going at #55, The Hockey News has him at #41 while the ISS pegs him at #61.

Colangelo seems like a stretch at #17, but anything is possible.

The Athletic suggests that the Hawks are high on Sam Colangelo. The implications are that he may not be available at #46 so the Hawks could taken him at #17.

Wiz has Colangelo going at #55, The Hockey News has him at #41 while the ISS pegs him at #61.

Colangelo seems like a stretch at #17, but anything is possible.
- DarthKane

They could always trade down. I would prefer that they stay at 17, and maybe put a package together around their 2nd rounder to move up 6 spots.

From TSN:

Chicago Blackhawks: A 20 per cent reduction for salaries above $200,000, 15 per cent reduction for $100,000 to $200,000, with the elimination of bonuses.

Typical of most other teams.

I still say - don’t count on many (if any) buyouts throughout the league - including using Wirtz money.

Buyouts do cost money.

From TSN:

Chicago Blackhawks: A 20 per cent reduction for salaries above $200,000, 15 per cent reduction for $100,000 to $200,000, with the elimination of bonuses.

Typical of most other teams.

I still say - don’t count on many (if any) buyouts throughout the league - including using Wirtz money.

Buyouts do cost money.
- StLBravesFan

Sure they do but so does losing

Sure they do but so does losing
- BetweenTheDots

Buyouts don't guarantee winning. And someone said they cost money and I think they're right.

Sure they do but so does losing
- BetweenTheDots

Not if - for the next season, at least - there are very few (if any) marginal revenues to be generated.

Buyouts don't guarantee winning. And someone said they cost money and I think they're right.
- 6628

You're right. Buying out Smith saves $2M this season, but when you factor in the cost of a replacement, even a player on an ELC, it would be just over 1M. If they can Make it work, they should just ride it out with Smith. They could also look at trading Smith and retaining salary. The problem with that is that we will most likely have to include a sweetener.

Looks like they have about $5M in space after this season and most of their team signed.

Kane @ $7.5M

Tuch is $4.75 and Glass is entry. Tuch had an off year this year, but looks like his playoffs are looking better than the regular season. Had 52 points previous full season.
- hawkitect

Kane’s cap hit is $10.5, and even if it was $7.5....




...no.

Sure they do but so does losing
- BetweenTheDots

Buffalo reduced the salary of their assistant coaches over the summer, and asked them to take another haircut for the upcoming season for which they said no. There are not going to be any buyouts this year. There also are going to be some very unhappy UFA's and RFA's as far as contract proposals are cincerned.

Not if - for the next season, at least - there are very few (if any) marginal revenues to be generated.
- StLBravesFan

Sure but how does the owner lose money buying out the player? If i recall there is a hard cap and Smiths be paid the next 2 years 1 mil per counts against the cap, i think that's right

or they could bury him in Rockford but his $2 mil will count against the cap this year

I think the owner actually saves a million dollars doing the buy out?

Sure but how does the owner lose money buying out the player? If i recall there is a hard cap and Smiths be paid the next 2 years 1 mil per counts against the cap, i think that's right
- BetweenTheDots

I did the math a couple of weeks ago and posted it here - you can go to Capfriendly and do some math too.

The hockey reason to buy him out is to replace his cap hit. Between the cash cost of buying him out and the replacement player cost (less the amount of the buyout charge to the cap over three years), there was a net cost to the Hawks of several hundreds of thousands of dollars per year over three years -- I don’t remember exactly how much.

A cost of doing business, perhaps, in normal times - not when you’re telling coaches and staff to take pay reductions and furloughs.

I think the owner actually saves a million dollars doing the buy out?
- BetweenTheDots

Replacement player.

Replacement player.

Replacement player.

Buffalo reduced the salary of their assistant coaches over the summer, and asked them to take another haircut for the upcoming season for which they said no. There are not going to be any buyouts this year. There also are going to be some very unhappy UFA's and RFA's as far as contract proposals are cincerned.
- LAHawk

You really believe that, the workers always get screwed, i guarantee you all these teams will be pressed against the cap, players will still get paid

Replacement player.

Replacement player.

Replacement player.
- StLBravesFan

We'll see

The Athletic suggests that the Hawks are high on Sam Colangelo. The implications are that he may not be available at #46 so the Hawks could taken him at #17.

Wiz has Colangelo going at #55, The Hockey News has him at #41 while the ISS pegs him at #61.

Colangelo seems like a stretch at #17, but anything is possible.
- DarthKane

Um, they may be high on him as a #2 pick but that doesn't mean they think he's a #1...

From TSN:

Chicago Blackhawks: A 20 per cent reduction for salaries above $200,000, 15 per cent reduction for $100,000 to $200,000, with the elimination of bonuses.

Typical of most other teams.

I still say - don’t count on many (if any) buyouts throughout the league - including using Wirtz money.

Buyouts do cost money.
- StLBravesFan

Wirtz didn't become a billionaire by wasting money and it's not really Rocky's call it's the board of the main company. Family owned they still have a board.

You're right. Buying out Smith saves $2M this season, but when you factor in the cost of a replacement, even a player on an ELC, it would be just over 1M. If they can Make it work, they should just ride it out with Smith. They could also look at trading Smith and retaining salary. The problem with that is that we will most likely have to include a sweetener.
- tvetter

I would hope Smith is better than an ELC player so much for buyouts fixing losing.

You really believe that, the workers always get screwed, i guarantee you all these teams will be pressed against the cap, players will still get paid
- BetweenTheDots

Pressed against a "shrinking" cap at 50/50 split. Yeah. They most definitely will get screwed nowhere close to their contracts face value.

I did the math a couple of weeks ago and posted it here - you can go to Capfriendly and do some math too.

The hockey reason to buy him out is to replace his cap hit. Between the cash cost of buying him out and the replacement player cost (less the amount of the buyout charge to the cap over three years), there was a net cost to the Hawks of several hundreds of thousands of dollars per year over three years -- I don’t remember exactly how much.

A cost of doing business, perhaps, in normal times - not when you’re telling coaches and staff to take pay reductions and furloughs.
- StLBravesFan

I think you got to recheck your math because if you buy out Smith it will cost a total of $2166000 plug Suter in at $925,000 grand total of $3,091,000? Smith current contract $3,250,000? Am i missing something and that $2,166,000 would be divided by 2, 2 year cap hit of $1,083,000, i think

Pressed against a "shrinking" cap at 50/50 split. Yeah. They most definitely will get screwed nowhere close to their contracts face value.
- rpeters01

Don't the players carry a heavy burden of a 50/50 split

i may be wrong but i believe a buyout is the one of the only ways a players isn't guaranteed his entire contract?

Buffalo reduced the salary of their assistant coaches over the summer, and asked them to take another haircut for the upcoming season for which they said no. There are not going to be any buyouts this year. There also are going to be some very unhappy UFA's and RFA's as far as contract proposals are cincerned.
- LAHawk

100% totally agree when I read posts about "this UFA or that UFA/RFA won't play for those $'s" I laugh and smile. It's going to be eye opening the real cap probably won't get back to where it was for 5 years people are not going to pack stadiums anytime soon. If Chicago offered Saad a $4m extension he should jump at it. I think you will see a lot of two year followed by two year contracts in the future. Either way negotiations with GM's are going to be short and one sided.