darksabre Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 This does further my belief that Botterill is going to move quickly to reshape the team as he wants it I don't know how much he can do, but shedding so dead weight is a start. I'm sure he's not happy about the cap hit but he probably figures he can get by on some value contracts. I bet Reinhart and Kane are closer to the door... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustache of God Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 This is great. It sends a message and we don't have to worry about Moulson draggin the team down. Sucks to see someone fall off a cliff like that but it needed to be done. Another strike against Murray's ability to assemble a team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabel79 Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 I do feel bad for Matt, sort of. There were rumblings of his showing up to training camp out of shape a couple years ago (damn ice cream fridge), but other than that he's struck me as a good pro who got what turned out to be a bad deal, which nobody saw coming when he signed it. At least to this extent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matter2003 Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) Something like the first $800k-ish cap hit is removed, but the remainder of the cap hit remains with the Sabres (so $4.x Million). The new CBA did this to discourage teams from dumping guys in the AHL to get rid of their cap issue. Ott'wa did this to Redden just before the last lockout. Retirement: anyone know the cap implications if Moulson retires? I know age and contract structure all factor in there. Yeah I felt bad for Redden...he was still an NHL quality player, just not at that cap number. He got screwed...got all that money but had to play in the minor leagues... Edited December 4, 2017 by matter2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 Hallelujah!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 It's been reported that he doesn't like the way he's been handled the last couple of years. Every exit interview he got into it with Murray, about his shape and playing time, etc. Really? Why not Jack? My honest guess: Ownership said "no" to that. Otherwise, I imagine they'd listen to offers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustache of God Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 Why not Jack? Trading Jack would mean the tank was a complete and total failure and everything that went into was a WASTE. There is no way Pegula wants to admit to that. Also, Jack's value is, at this point in his young career, at his lowest. He's due 10 mil/8 years next year and currently is not producing. If he's traded now the value in return would not be worth the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 I would expect that Moulson handles this as the professional that he is known to be. I don't think he's the locker room problem. He makes room for Rodrigues to move up to the team right now. I fully suspect there will be other moves and if you need to have roster flexibility Moulson is the easy first target. The odds of someone claiming him are next to zero. In any event, clearly things are being worked. It might not be at the speed some people want but that speed might not be possible without really screwing the team over. I am sure Kane could be traded within an hour, but the return would not be worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) Trading Jack would mean the tank was a complete and total failure and everything that went into was a WASTE. There is no way Pegula wants to admit to that. Also, Jack's value is, at this point in his young career, at his lowest. He's due 10 mil/8 years next year and currently is not producing. If he's traded now the value in return would not be worth the deal. or it may be that other teams love he is locked up long term and is on a dismal Sabres team and all he needs is a change of scenery ,to a team with teammates who actually have a heart That being said, we'd be utterly mad to trade Jack. Moulson being waived is the right move time to move on from players like Moulson and reward players who are on the cusp of being moved up permanently. Edited December 4, 2017 by ddaryl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 Really? Murray himself said it at least for one of the years in his end of the year presser after he took charge and installed Byslma, maybe more than one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 Maybe he has the rotten attitude Wouldn't you, if you realized you were worthless at your job? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 Wouldn't you, if you realized you were worthless at your job? Have you seen my avatar lately? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabills Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 There was a report by one of the TSN guys on Twitter that they tried to trade him, but no dice. He was willing to expand his list of teams he could be traded to, and the Sabres were willing to eat salary, but they couldn't get a deal done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 There was a report by one of the TSN guys on Twitter that they tried to trade him, but no dice. He was willing to expand his list of teams he could be traded to, and the Sabres were willing to eat salary, but they couldn't get a deal done. We would literally have had to bribe another team with draft picks to take his contract. It's simply incredible how bad he got almost overnight. I think if we were going to re-do the tank and I was the GM, I would only have signed guys to short deals. Journeymen and some guys on the way out. There's like...no point in signing guys to any substantial deals when you're trying to reset. A tank should be as much about re-setting the team's cap as it is the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 There was a report by one of the TSN guys on Twitter that they tried to trade him, but no dice. He was willing to expand his list of teams he could be traded to, and the Sabres were willing to eat salary, but they couldn't get a deal done. Sorry TSN, that report is pretty obvious. Of course the Sabres tried to trade him first! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) I feel bad for Matt Moulson the person. I think he is a good guy and I like him. Matt Moulson the player though, I don't feel bad for. Good teams are typically good because they are ruthless when it comes to shipping out guys that are not performing up to standard. Also this to Jason Botterill Edited December 4, 2017 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 the real question or hope is that he retires. I've tried to find the salary cap implications of this and can't find a thing. Anyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabel79 Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 the real question or hope is that he retires. I've tried to find the salary cap implications of this and can't find a thing. Anyone else? The cap relief is $950k. League Minimum plus $375k. As far as I'm aware there are no implications if he retires, cap recapture only applies to 35+ contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gramps Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 What would happen if Moulson went over to Europe or the KHL and played ? I assume we would be off the hook at that point ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 the real question or hope is that he retires. I've tried to find the salary cap implications of this and can't find a thing. Anyone else? Up thread I asked and it seems like at his age, it's no issue. That seems legit. The cap implications of early retirement were put in place mostly to stop teams from giving guys contracts well past 35 years old with the expectation that they'd retire before the end. That isn't the case here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 the real question or hope is that he retires. I've tried to find the salary cap implications of this and can't find a thing. Anyone else? As others have stated, there are essentially no SC implications from this move. All but $925k of his hit stays on the books. So, if the player they bring up is on an entry level deal they get $0-~$275k of cap relief (depending on where that pkayer falls on min-max deals). So there is no no cap relief, but now a guy they might actually want to play in an emergency or against a particular opponent will be the 13th forward. Rather than a guy the REALLY don't want to ever see in the lineup again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 What would happen if Moulson went over to Europe or the KHL and played ? I assume we would be off the hook at that point ? I think that's right. The Sabres would hold his rights, I think, for 1.5 years if he tried to come back to the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 I think that's right. The Sabres would hold his rights, I think, for 1.5 years if he tried to come back to the NHL. Yup. He'd have to retire from the NHL to go overseas but we'd still have his rights if he tried to come back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 but if he retires doesn't he lose all that money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 but if he retires doesn't he lose all that money? That's why he isn't retiring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.