How does your team look, cap wise?

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:23 pm

Is your team in trouble or in good shape? The Leafs appear to be in bad shape. They have nine players under contract eating up $26 million. I would have no problem if the Leafs bought out Nolan, Belfour, McCabe, and possibly Tucker to free up some money for the cap. There is so much free agent talent out there that the Leafs need to free up some room to sign some.

The person they would miss the most is Eddie.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:48 pm

The Sabres are in great shape. They've been build around a lower cost bottom line ever since Adelphia went belly up and Golisano bought the team. They will do well in this new age NHL.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:32 pm

The scariest team (as far as how good they will be) is Calagry. They have something like 11 guys signed taking up only around $13 million. The only two players they have to sign that may eat up a lot of salary are Iggy and Kipper. They will still have a lot of money left over.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:13 pm

Blues might see the cellar of the Norris with Albatross' like Weight and Tkachuk.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:32 pm

Don't forget to add Pronger!

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 4:40 pm

Kings are looking pretty good cap wise, with few high paid players and lots of youth.

Biggest need for the Kings would be a scoring right winger and a physical d-man who doesn't mind dropping the gloves.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 4:52 pm

Nice article on ESPN right now about where teams stand with guys under contract and how much money is tied up right now...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/s ... 6450&num=0

The Wings are a mess right now...the closest to the cap and they'll have a few guys they'll need to buy out. Talk radio out of Detroit is all over the idea of who should be bought out. Lots of wild scenarios being thrown around. The Wings are paying for their old ways and teams like them will have to realize that developing their own young players will become a more important part of the game than just signing blank checks to free agents.

Joseph has a club option for over $6 million...I'm betting that he's let go and Legace, who's only going to make about $1 or $1.5 million will become the starter in net. The backup likely becomes Joey MacDonald from Grand Rapids and probably by next year, Jim Howard out of Maine will join the team as the goalie of the future. On defense, Lidstrom has a huge salary but I don't think you buy him out. Hatcher is probably a candidate to go and Schneider and Chelios are already going to be a free agents. The Wings defense will center around Lidstrom, Fischer and AHL's top defenseman of last year, Niklas Kronwall. They still have Dandenault and Rivers as well. Not sure how the blueline will look.

The forward situation is a mess. Lang and Whitney have large salaries and I've got to believe that one of them will be bought out. I'm hoping it's Whitney. Shanahan and Yzerman are either in their last year or are UFA. Datsyuk and Zetterberg are unsigned. The role players are in place...Draper, Holmstrom, Maltby and McCarty under contract but I'd bet on McCarty as being a buyout candidate. They've got a few guys with the Griffins who'll probably join the lineup...Jiri Hudler and Mark Mowers comes to mind. They'll have a bunch of open roster spots after they're done buying out players. They might sign a free agent or two but most of the team will have to be guys within the organization. There's a possibility of Igor Grigorenko or Johan Franzen coming over from Europe and playing right away.

I honestly can say I have no clue how they're going to look this fall...

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 5:12 pm

ESPN is NUTS if they think the Kings would ever consider getting Allison back. He is a cancer and is fucking injury prone.

JD · Post by JD » Thu Jul 14, 2005 5:13 pm

Hapday wrote:The scariest team (as far as how good they will be) is Calagry. They have something like 11 guys signed taking up only around $13 million. The only two players they have to sign that may eat up a lot of salary are Iggy and Kipper. They will still have a lot of money left over.

Yup. The Flames are in fantastic shape. The biggest concern over the past year with the new CBA was the possibility that Iginla could be a UFA with the new rules in place, but that didn't happen.

Basically, Daryl Sutter gets to keep the core that went to the Finals two years ago and add pieces to fill the holes. I suspect the holes would include some more scoring punch, but I might argue that Sutter has already addressed that with the addition of Daymond Langkow and the return of Steven Reinprecht from his shoulder injury. Not to mention, Chuck Kobasew is two years older and fresh off leading the AHL in goals this past year, and Matthew Lombardi should be OK to return from his noggin injury, thanks Derian Hatcher :x .

Add to that young phenom defenseman Dion Phaneuf and recent college grad Eric Nystrom. My homer mind can't help but think the Flames will be one of the best young teams in the NHL.

Hard to know for sure, though. We don't have a clue what any of the other teams will look like!

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 5:21 pm

JD wrote:My homer mind can't help but think the Flames will be one of the best young teams in the NHL.

Right now, Calgary and Tampa Bay are the two best young teams in the NHL. No doubt about that. With a salary cap now in place, no worries in Calgary about Iggy leaving for more money.

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 5:24 pm

Rangers are pretty much screwed. Losing Holik and Kasparaitis is a necessity. I would love for Leetch to come back into the fold.

The Lightning could have major issues with so many FA's since contract years counted during the lockout.

Should be an interesting summer.

Captain Haddock · Post by **Captain Haddock** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:02 pm

Scary ready - Ottawa, Calgary

In complete shambles - Toronto, Vancouver

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:05 pm

Captain Haddock wrote:Scary ready - Ottawa

Disagree with you completely here. Ottawa is in a little cap trouble already. They have 10 players signed for about $23 million. I can see them buying out deVries and Smolinski, but still leaves them with 8 players making $17 million. The Senators have to sign Hossa, Spezza, Havlat, and Volchenkov. It wouldn't be unrealistic to say those four alone could possibly eat up $12-15 million. So if these players are signed you have 12 players making anywhere from $29-32 million.

Captain Haddock · Post by **Captain Haddock** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:02 pm

No way. This isn't Toronto.

Hossa 2.5 mil, Spezza 2.5 mil, Havlat 1 mil, Volchenkov disposable.

Captain Haddock · Post by **Captain Haddock** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:05 pm

Vancouver is a disaster.

Naslund says he probably won't return, Cloutier is still the main man lol...and Bertuzzi is the albatross around their neck. Even if he's allowed to play, he's Naslund's butt-buddy.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:59 pm

Captain Haddock wrote:No way. This isn't Toronto.

Hossa 2.5 mil, Spezza 2.5 mil, Havlat 1 mil, Volchenkov disposable.

:roll: :roll:

What'ch you been smokin?

Hossa getting 2.5?? He should fire his agent then. Goldilocks is getting 4.7 mil, so there is no way Hossa is going to sign for 2.5. Havlat will get at least 2.5m Spezza the same, and I'll take Volchenkov on the Leafs if the Senators don't want him.

al? · Post by **al?** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:42 pm

everything Shoalzie said, and....

Red Wings are in trouble if Zetterberg and/or Datsyuk get greedy. I hate to say it, but I don't think Stevie should come back. The team needs the cap room and there's nothing left to prove, but at least the my last memory of seeing him play won't be my last memory of seeing play.

Defence will be a different animal, but there's a lot of good talent in the minors, and if Lidstrom sticks around and Fischer stays healthy, they're solid. I will thank God when Lurch is finally finished disgracing that jersey.

It will be a different, but still competitive squad. Grind Line takes the torch, Datsyuk and Zettterberg are the new dynamic duo.....and it's finally Manny's turn. The Wings will be fine.

See You Next Wednesday · Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:31 pm

Cross Traffic wrote:ESPN is NUTS if they think the Kings would ever consider getting Allison back. He is a cancer and is fucking injury prone.

He's not a cancer, but he is injury prone.

Captain Haddock · Post by **Captain Haddock** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:43 pm

There's no way that Hossa will make over 4 mil. It's looking like Havlat & Spezza will sign for under 2 mill a piece. Your 12-15 mil to sign the four of them has me wondering what you're smoking?

Hey, look at this. From the Globe & Mail, a Leafs flagship paper.

In their massive article about how the Canadian teams are looking...

"The Ottawa Senatora are in the best shape of the six Canadian clubs..." lol

They don't leave out the Leafs...at least they throw them a token bone. A small one...but a bone none-the-less.

"On the surface, it looks like the Leafs are in dire straits. But this is an opportunity for Fergie to show whether he was the right hire."

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:45 pm

Doesnt matter, with Dave Taylor managing and Andy Murray coaching, the Kings are still fucked. If these Denver based owners were serious about winning there would have been a move made

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:31 am

Captain Haddock wrote:
"The Ottawa Senatora are in the best shape of the six Canadian clubs..." lol

That just proves that the Globe and Mail has no fucking clue what they're talking about. Calgary is, hands down, the Canadian club that is in the best shape. I would even place Montreal above Ottawa in that respect. Remember that these two teams have actually won a round or two in the playoffs the last couple of years.

You are out to lunch completely on Hossa. He was in the running for the scoring title, I think he'll at least want Alfredson-type money. At the very least Spezza and Havlat sign for $2 mil each, although Havlat will probably get $2.5.

Captain Haddock · Post by **Captain Haddock** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 8:35 pm

Calgary hasn't signed Iginla. They have no goalie.

Therefore, at this moment..they are not in the best shape.

I have to laugh at you, Hap. After a 24% rollback in salary, all the concessions that the NHLPA has given into...and you're rolling out a 30% raise for Hossa. Typical Leaf-fan. You can't help but spend money.

Yes, Hap, all the sports reporters have it wrong and you have it all correct. Way to go. lmao

JD · Post by JD » Sat Jul 16, 2005 12:25 am

Captain Haddock wrote:Calgary hasn't signed Iginla.

Do you have any reason to think that they won't?

They have no goalie.

Uh, ever heard of that Miikka Kiprusoff guy? Oh, but the Senators have someone to tend goal, of course... I hear Hasek actually got a year younger this past season... :roll:

I envy the Senators' talent-base, but I'm not sure I'd take their situation over the one we're about to enjoy in Calgary.

fix · Post by **fix** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 11:51 am

Hapday wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
"The Ottawa Senatora are in the best shape of the six Canadian clubs..." lol

That just proves that the Globe and Mail has no fucking clue what they're talking about. Calgary is, hands down, the Canadian club that is in the best shape. I would even place Montreal above Ottawa in that respect. Remember that these two teams have actually won a round or two in the playoffs the last couple of years.

You are out to lunch completely on Hossa. He was in the running for the scoring title, I think he'll at least want Alfredson-type money. At the very least Spezza and Havlat sign for $2 mil each, although Havlat will probably get $2.5.

Really?

Both Calgary and Ottawa are potentially fucked now with this new CBA.

Small markets face big trouble
Free agent frenzy looming next year NHL lockout will

count as a season

KEN CAMPBELL
SPORTS REPORTER

Upon further review, the new collective bargaining agreement is looking better for the likes of Tomas Kaberle, Jarome Iginla, Joe Thornton and Vincent Lecavalier and potentially disastrous for the small-market teams it was supposed to help.

A source close to the negotiations confirmed a published report yesterday stating that not only does the free agency age drop to 29 next summer, but players under that age who have eight years of NHL experience, will also qualify for unrestricted status. In the summer of 2007, players who are 28 or have seven seasons will qualify. In 2008 — and for the remainder of the agreement — players who are 27 or have seven seasons of experience will qualify.

Also, for purposes of player tenure, last year's aborted season will count as a season played for all NHL players.

All of which means next summer is shaping up to have the strongest free agent crop in the history of the game. Along with Iginla, Thornton, Lecavalier and Kaberle, other potential unrestricted free agents include Martin St-Louis, Marian Hossa, Zdeno Chara, Wade Redden, Jose Theodore and Ed Jovonovski.

Under the previous CBA, the Leafs wouldn't have had to deal with Kaberle as an unrestricted free agent until after the 2008-09 season. Because he will have been an NHLer for eight years once his contract expires next summer, Kaberle will now be unrestricted.

Liberalized free agency was one of the concessions the owners made in exchange for a salary cap, but critics suggest that this will do nothing to protect the small-market teams. What it does mean is that the effects of arbitration, one of the league's biggest concerns going into negotiations for a new CBA, will not drive salaries for players in their mid 20's because those dollars will now be driven by unrestricted free agency.

But instead of holding a player's rights until age 31, teams will now face the proposition of losing star players because they either won't have enough room under the salary cap or it will force them to spend closer to the cap limit of $39 million (all figures U.S.). In 2003-04, 15 of the league's 30 teams spent under what the cap will be next season.

"Wait until fans of small-market teams like the Ottawa Senators find out about this," said one player agent. "I sure hope they win the Stanley Cup next season because what are they going to do when teams offer Chara and Hossa the cap (of $7.8 million) and Redden $6 million?"

The Calgary Flames will be particularly hard-hit by the CBA for several reasons. If not for the eight-year rule, Iginla would have had to wait one more year to become an unrestricted free agent, but unless the Flames sign him to a long-term deal, he'll be free next summer.

To make matters worse, the revenue-sharing aspect of the deal will also hurt Calgary.

"If you go by 2003-04, they were in the top 10 in revenues so they'll have to share revenues," said an NHL executive. "So now they lose the Canadian assistance plan and they have to share revenues. How exactly does that help them?"

It was always thought that the deal would put a larger importance on drafting and developing players, an area in which the Leafs have been lacking, but this makes player personnel decisions even more crucial.

"Edmonton always complained that they couldn't keep their stars and that they lost Doug Weight and Bill Guerin when they were 30," the agent said. "But now they might lose Eric Brewer when he's 26."

Link

But this new CBA was done to help out the small market teams right?

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 1:23 pm

At the same time, the salary cap could actually help the big markets. If the Wings can win and be a money-making team with only a $39 million payroll instead of $60-70 million...mo money! Of course, they'd have to contribute to the revenue sharing though. I really don't see too many flaws in this new system...hopefully the players ratify it and we can look forward to what should be one of the wildest offseasons the NHL has ever had.

JD · Post by JD » Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:07 pm

BWAAHHHAAAAAHAAA!!!!!!

I LOVE the fact that you've posted that article, Otis. I happened past it earlier this morning and got a good chuckle. And now you're going to use it to prove your point?

1) If the Flames are making top ten revenues, they'll be fine. When they had problems years ago, the problem arose out of the fact that they weren't making enough revenue. Besides, this CBA TIES SALARY EXPENSES TO REVENUES, in case you haven't gotten that yet. The Flames will be more than happy to share their revenue if they're making that much.

2) Jarome Iginla is a free agent next year if, and only if, his new contract expires next year. Darryl Sutter is completely free and able to sign Jarome to a long-term deal this summer. Why start panicking about something that still may or may not happen?

3) Small markets are not the only teams that will have players become UFA's. If someone wants to sign Iginla, fine. We'll use the cap room to go and get another top-flight player.

4) THERE IS A SALARY CAP. It's not like Toronto can go and throw all kinds of dough at Iginla next summer, because in all likelihood, Calgary will have the cap room to match their offer!!

The reasons Ken Campbell, Sports Reporter points out the CBA will be a negative for small markets are pretty one-sided and deliberate, and can be perceived as negatives for the big markets too.

Point not made.

Adelpiero · Post by **Adelpiero** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:14 pm

pronger is still a RFA

Bode blues, they deal gap tooth and could bring in youth and picks.

blues are working on buying out weight(i am a huge weight fan, but he has struggled in blues system, and with no wingers, he is useless here)

Captain Haddock · Post by **Captain Haddock** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:57 pm

Didn't Iginla turn down a contract just before the lockout started? I'm pretty sure he declined a nice 5 year deal.

I think he might be looking elsewhere.

fix · Post by **fix** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:50 pm

JD wrote:BWAAHHHAAAAAHAAA!!!!!!

I LOVE the fact that you've posted that article, Otis. I happened past it earlier this morning and got a good chuckle. And now you're going to use it to prove your point?

1) If the Flames are making top ten revenues, they'll be fine. When they had problems years ago, the problem arose out of the fact that they weren't making enough revenue. Besides, this CBA TIES SALARY EXPENSES TO REVENUES, in case you haven't gotten that yet. The Flames will be more than happy to share their revenue if they're making that much.

2) Jarome Iginla is a free agent next year if, and only if, his new contract expires next year. Darryl Sutter is completely free and able to sign Jarome to a long-term deal this summer. Why start panicking about something that still may or may not happen?

3) Small markets are not the only teams that will have players become UFA's. If someone wants to sign Iginla, fine. We'll use the cap room to go and get another top-flight player.

4) THERE IS A SALARY CAP. It's not like Toronto can go and throw all kinds of dough at Iginla next summer, because in all likelihood, Calgary will have the cap room to match their offer!!

The reasons Ken Campbell, Sports Reporter points out the CBA will be a negative for small markets are pretty one-sided and deliberate, and can be perceived as negatives for the big markets too.

Point not made.

1) If the Flames are making top ten revenues, they'll be fine. When they had problems years ago, the problem arose out of the fact that they weren't making enough revenue. Besides, this CBA TIES SALARY EXPENSES TO REVENUES, in case you haven't gotten that yet. The Flames will be more than happy to share their revenue if they're making that much.

Too key words there JD, if and if
I thought that this CBA was supposed to remove all doubt that the small markets would be profitable under the new agreement. Now you're saying that they won't? Which is it... this is the deal you claim they wanted no?
Sure the Flames did well last year but how much of that can be attributed to their playoff run?
What happens when they don't make the playoffs for a season or two?

2) Jarome Iginla is a free agent next year if, and only if, his new contract expires next year. Darryl Sutter is completely free and able to sign Jarome to a long-term deal this summer. Why start panicking about something that still may or may not happen?

If I were a Flame fan, I'd be panicking that Iginla might decide not to resign with the Flames. Afterall, he is the franchise right now.

3) Small markets are not the only teams that will have players become UFA's. If someone wants to sign Iginla, fine. We'll use the cap room to go and get another top-flight player.

You say that as if top-flight players will want to sign and play in small markets. Look at the NBA JD, how many top-flight players there want to play in a small market. How many of them want to play in a location where they will have marketing opportunities and a better lifestyle outside of the game.
I'm not saying that Calgary won't be able to attract the better players, hell most Canadian cities and true hockey markets will be able to do that.
But the Nashvilles and Pittsburghs... good luck.

4) THERE IS A SALARY CAP. It's not like Toronto can go and throw all kinds of dough at Iginla next summer, because in all likelihood, Calgary will have the cap room to match their offer!!

Which means that if he is an UFA, he will be free to choose which market will suit his needs best. A mega multi-media city like Toronto, New York, LA with an unlimited number of opportunities to add to his playing salary or small town Calgary, with a loyal fan base.
If all things being equal... say goodbye to Iglina

The reasons Ken Campbell, Sports Reporter points out the CBA will be a negative for small markets are pretty one-sided and deliberate, and can be perceived as negatives for the big markets too.

Point not made.

Oh so let me get this straight here... is it just one sports reporter that you're saying is biased or are you going with a blanket statement?

JD · Post by JD » Sat Jul 16, 2005 10:59 pm

Otis wrote:1) If the Flames are making top ten revenues, they'll be fine. When they had problems years ago, the problem arose out of the fact that they weren't making enough revenue. Besides, this CBA TIES SALARY EXPENSES TO REVENUES, in case you haven't gotten that yet. The Flames will be more than happy to share their revenue if they're making that much.

Too key words there JD, if and if
I thought that this CBA was supposed to remove all doubt that the small markets would be profitable under the new agreement. Now you're saying that they won't? Which is it... this is the deal you claim they wanted no?

Uh, you do know the difference between revenue and profit, don't you? Sharing revenue might cut into their profit, but that's kind of a secondary issue when you're making money. The Flames certainly don't want to be losing gobs of money, even though the owners have shown in the past they're willing to live through some temporary red ink.

If I were a Flame fan, I'd be panicking that Iginla might decide not to resign with the Flames. Afterall, he is the franchise right now.

Panicking because he might not want to? Yikes, if I lived my life like that, I'd be a freaking nutcase by now. At any rate, Iginla's recent quotes have shown me nothing but a strong desire to stay here and take care of that unfinished business from last June.

You say that as if top-flight players will want to sign and play in small markets. Look at the NBA JD, how many top-flight players there want to play in a small market. How many of them want to play in a location where they will have marketing opportunities and a better lifestyle outside of the game.
I'm not saying that Calgary won't be able to attract the better players, hell most Canadian cities and true hockey markets will be able to do that.
But the Nashvilles and Pittsburghs... good luck.

That may be a point, but if you've noticed lately, Iginla seems to be doing pretty well with endorsements and marketing opportunities (Nike, CIBC, Hockey Hall of Fame, etc.), all while playing in small-market Calgary.

Which means that if he is an UFA, he will be free to choose which market will suit his needs best. A mega multi-media city like Toronto, New York, LA with an unlimited number of opportunities to add to his playing salary or small town Calgary, with a loyal fan base.
If all things being equal... say goodbye to Iglina

If Iginla's needs are a "mega multi-media city" then he's the wrong guy for the job and Darryl Sutter will be willing to send him packing. In Calgary, for the last two years or so, our mantra has been "In Sutter we trust". And we do. Mr. Sutter mentioned at our season ticket holder meeting a month ago that Jarome Iginla will not remain a Calgary Flame unless he wants to be here. And for good reason. But for the time being, he's not gone, and I haven't heard a thing that indicates he will be gone.

Oh so let me get this straight here... is it just one sports reporter that you're saying is biased or are you going with a blanket statement?

They're all biased, quite clearly. But this article struck me as over the top.

I don't know, Otis, you and I both seem to be pretty happy with this deal, even if we disagree on why and how... let's see how it plays out.

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:06 am

This link might be helpful:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature.asp?fid=7006

Kings have this as their current signees (w/rollback):

Mattias Norstrom
$2.66 million
Aaron Miller
$2.66 million
Craig Conroy
$2.394 million
Lubomir Visnovsky
$1.52 million
Mathieu Garon
(Team Option) $1.216 million
Dustin Brown
$942,000
Nathan Dempsey
$874,000
Trent Klatt
$912,000
Derek Armstrong
$760,000
Tim Gleason
$646,000
Sean Avery
$532,000
Jeff Cowan
$532,000

Restricted Free Agents: Eric Belanger, Joe Corvo, Esa Pirnes, Jason Holland, Mike Cammalleri, Alexander Frolov.

Unrestricted Free Agents: Roman Cechmanek, Stephane Quintal, Luc Robitaille, Martin Straka, Jason Allison, Anson Carter, Adam Deadmarsh, Zigmund Palffy, Brad Chartand, John Tripp, Josef Stumpel.

Belanger, Corvo, Cammalleri, and Frolov should be signed from the restricted list. Palffy and Luc should be signed from the unrestricted list.

With Garon as their #1, DT will be looking for a veteran backup that makes less than a mil per season.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:59 am

they need to get rid of Miller that guy misses almost as many games as Allison and Deadhead

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:44 pm

Cross Traffic wrote:This link might be helpful:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature.asp?fid=7006

Thanks for the link...

The only team that's closest to having a full roster that is under the cap is Phoenix. They've got to still re-sign Boucher and three key defensemen, Mara, Morris and Ference but they're almost ready to go.

Everyone else has either most of their roster still to re-sign or there are some of the high payroll teams that will need to cut a few guys loose in order to field a full 23-man roster. I'd hate to be a GM this summer...

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:15 pm

Flyers just bought out Leclair and Amonte and cleared about $10 mil in salary cap space.

Reportedly they've had their front office people learning how a salary cap works and how to 'exploit it' for the past year or so through the tutelage of the Philadelphia Eagles cap guru, Joe Banner.

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:27 pm

Do those 2 have anything left to offer? Both are 35+ and Leclair has become brittle.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:46 pm

Cross Traffic wrote:Do those 2 have anything left to offer? Both are 35+ and Leclair has become brittle.

If they lower their salary demands, I'm sure someone will pick them up. They are 40 goal scorers anymore but they wouldn't be bad second line/power play guys...for the right price though. Between the two, I'd probably take Amonte because he's still got some speed and doesn't have the back problems like LeClair.

There's going to be a lot of big names on the scrap heap this summer simply because teams don't want to overpay for them with the cap in effect. Teams will be a lot smarter with giving guys their true market value. In the old NHL, it would cost a team $5-8 million for a goal-scorer but now, they might be had for only $2-4 million. Players will have lower their demands because teams just won't be able to give them what they want.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:48 pm

From what I understand, Frolov is notcoming back to the Kings, I heard on a Kings site that he was going to stay in Eurpoe and play

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:20 pm

Shoalzie wrote:
There's going to be a lot of big names on the scrap heap this summer simply because teams don't want to overpay for them with the cap in effect.

The best part of the cap is that older, broken-down players like Leclair will get paid like an older, broken-down player should and they won't be paid based on things that he's done the past. GM's will now have a 'what can you do for me now?' attitude.

Thank God too, otherwise the Leafs would be signing Leclair for $10 million a season. Oh, wait. Pat Quinn isn't the GM anymore. :D

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:53 pm

Cross Traffic wrote:Do those 2 have anything left to offer? Both are 35+ and Leclair has become brittle.

Not really. Even Amonte has lost his scoring touch. But they did have heft contracts that the Flyers were able to get rid of as they attempt to go after Pronger or Neidemyer.

Mainiac · Post by **Mainiac** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:16 pm

The Bruins are in great shape salary-wise with only 3 players under contract for a total of about $1.5 mil. Of course signing Thornton, Samsonov, Gonchar, and some others at decent rates will help. At least thay have the room to do things right.

Oh yeah, hi everyone.