Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 214
  1. #11
    1st Scoring Line
    gokor84's Avatar
    Karma: 20124000
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,370
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    366 Post(s)

    Default

    If there is a deal to made to trade Quick without getting an albatross contract back in return you do it. Kings can easily eat 1.8mill for the next 4 years and get something decent in return not spectacular but shedding 4 mill in cap space is worth it in my opinion.

  2. #12
    Nyssa's Minion
    jammer06's Avatar
    Karma: 2147483647
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,670
    Mentioned
    105 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    3458 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gokor84 View Post
    If there is a deal to made to trade Quick without getting an albatross contract back in return you do it. Kings can easily eat 1.8mill for the next 4 years and get something decent in return not spectacular but shedding 4 mill in cap space is worth it in my opinion.
    They keep eating and pretty soon you're sitting on 10-15% of dead cap in retirement retention deals...for 4 more years. I'm just saying I'd rather have access to the body to do something with it than be definitively handicapped.

  3. #13
    2 Late to Change My Name
    HeadInjury's Avatar
    Karma: 1889862
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,101
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    404 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MiketheKing View Post
    If it's true, "the I'll retire" threat is a bitch move that should be circumvented via high priced NHL lawyers. If you wanna retire and you're able bodied, the player should take the hit financially, not the club. Although, there is always a chance of collusion to have players "reach an agreement" and retire with payments behind closed doors I suppose.
    The CBA allows players to retire without financial consequences (other than not get what is remaining on their deal). Everyone agreed to that so there is nothing to complain about.

    I am unaware of any source claiming that Carter actually threatening to retire. $7 million is a lot to walk away from. His final two years are for $2 million in salary. I find it hard to believe at his age that he would walk away from that.

    Kings should try to put him in a good situation nonetheless.

  4. #14
    Team LGK
    JWR's Avatar
    Karma: 9882230
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    396 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jammer06 View Post
    Say Quick says Eff you guys I'm going home, now you get 4 years of 1.8 million recapture penalties, or 3 years at 2.4 if he decides he want that 7 million dollars coming next year but after that he doesn't care to be an LTIR bitch. So you offer to trade him with something like 2 million retained as an incentive to move him. At best he's pulling what, a second round pick and maybe a b level prospect? You want 4 years of 2 million in cap for a 2nd and a maybe?
    I would think his situation is much different that Carter who has already received the lions share of his contract. Quick would be "walking away" from $23.2 mil and would be able to sign elsewhere unlike if he was bought out.
    "Like the wind crying endlessly through the universe, Time carries away the names and the deeds of conquerors and commoners alike. And all that we are, all that remains, is in the memories of those who cared we came this way for a brief moment." Harlan Ellison

  5. #15
    2 Late to Change My Name
    HeadInjury's Avatar
    Karma: 1889862
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,101
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    404 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gokor84 View Post
    If there is a deal to made to trade Quick without getting an albatross contract back in return you do it. Kings can easily eat 1.8mill for the next 4 years and get something decent in return not spectacular but shedding 4 mill in cap space is worth it in my opinion.
    Looking at what other goalies make, I've never understood why people think Quick's cap hit is high. If he was a UFA after this season, he'd be able to get a 4-year deal at $5.8 million on the open market. Plus his current deal has him earning $7,000,000, $3,500,000, $3,000,000 and $2,500,000 over the next 4 seasons, which some teams would undoubtedly see as a positive.

  6. #16
    Nyssa's Minion
    jammer06's Avatar
    Karma: 2147483647
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,670
    Mentioned
    105 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    3458 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JWR View Post
    I would think his situation is much different that Carter who has already received the lions share of his contract. Quick would be "walking away" from $23.2 mil and would be able to sign elsewhere unlike if he was bought out.
    His situation is intrinsically different from 2 aspects
    1: he's competing in a goalie market where returns are notoriously low
    2: he's a definite LTIR asset/Risk which is not nearly as problematic when its a winger vs a goalie.

    My point is that if you're viewing this as a cap saving move, the "cost" to do this business is a minimal return to alleviate yourself of maybe 3 million per year and not 6 million.

  7. #17
    Concussed Villain
    Mondo Blando's Avatar
    Karma: 7006204
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    11,542
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    4887 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jammer06 View Post
    Moving Quick would simply be the equivalent of a Gaborik for Phaneuf move. Not only would we lose out on the LTIR protection, but we'd be subject to potential recapture penalties. On an assets for future outlook I don't see what return is out there in a goalie market to make that work. Maybe if the cost of the salary retention is equal to the recapture you could mitigate your risk but again who's coughing up a price worth that? Remember Jimmy Howard is sitting out there as a rental and the last true number 1 goalie move was Blues overpayment for Ryan Miller.
    I could see Quick being moved over the summer, especially if Bobrovsky leaves Columbus. It wouldn't be a pretty deal, but the Kings cannot afford to lose either Campbell or Petersen just to keep Quick.

    He would be a terrific asset to any team with goaltending issues at the deadline, but the remaining term significantly reduces his value. I wouldn't expect more than a 2nd round pick, maybe a b prospect too

  8. #18
    All Star
    Ice24's Avatar
    Karma: 1143000
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    8,734
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2163 Post(s)

    Default

    None of the players mentioned will be around when the Kings make it back into the playoffs. So if there is a taker have at it.

  9. #19
    All Star
    Ice24's Avatar
    Karma: 1143000
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    8,734
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2163 Post(s)

    Default

    I would put Doughty out there to see if there are any takers. A huge contract but a team with space on the verge of a run, they might just do it?

  10. #20
    Nyssa's Minion
    jammer06's Avatar
    Karma: 2147483647
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,670
    Mentioned
    105 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    3458 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mondo Blando View Post
    I could see Quick being moved over the summer, especially if Bobrovsky leaves Columbus. It wouldn't be a pretty deal, but the Kings cannot afford to lose either Campbell or Petersen just to keep Quick.

    He would be a terrific asset to any team with goaltending issues at the deadline, but the remaining term significantly reduces his value. I wouldn't expect more than a 2nd round pick, maybe a b prospect too
    Quick would absolutely make sense for any organization/coach that has a tendency to point the finger at the net to spare the team. To that end I can see Lumbus, Philly, Calgary, edmonton and maybe Carolina as potential fits. In all cases that avenue likely is not one where the organization is going to primarily see value in his actual salary vs cap hit discount, nor will they be hoping his shaky injury history gets him to LTIR.

    I'm just not seeing a partner out there for Blake to participate in a salary dump deal, which if that is the main motivation its hard to find a market.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •