Boyle decision likely on July 4

George Bazos, agent for Lightning defenseman Dan Boyle, said Thursday night that his client likely will wait for Friday before making a decision on whether to waive his no-trade clause. Tampa Bay had asked the puck-moving defenseman to waive the clause in order to facilitate a move that would help the Lightning clear some salary cap space.

"We've been in communication," Bazos said of Boyle's camp and the Lightning. "Everybody understands everybody's position. Dan is going to think about things tonight. We will have further discussions (Friday) to find what is the best option for Dan."

Said Lightning owner Len Barrie: "We're working closely with Dan on trying to make this work on both sides. Dan has been a great player for the organization, but sometimes we have to make tough decisions. The good news for Dan is he has an opportunity to get into some great situations."

It appears three teams remain in the serious running: The Sharks apparently are the front-runners while the Canucks and Thrashers are still mounting charges. Apparently Senators GM Bryan Murray wasn't kidding when he told the Ottawa Citizen he did not think he could muster enough in trade to make it worth the Lightning's while.

 

   

Comments

[Another Joe]

Im glad im not the only one who had a thought about Boyle's contract. I felt bad posting it because I like Boyle and think he is a good player. If he is traded its just a good business move,nothing else more to read into it.

I like all the other signings. I like a Smith/Kolzig tandem with Ramo getting a solid year of work in the AHL and can be called up if needed.

The only move I question is Craig getting a 2 year contract. Not sure he's shown enough to earn that especially after he took the team to arbitration last year, but hopefully he will prove me wrong.

Go Bolts!

[Geografer]

If he refuse to report he would be suspended without pay and would remain so for he duration of his contract or the team would most likely try to trade him to someome he would also have to waive his no-trade clause for. I don't think Danny would ever do this.
Oh and j - I have to add bravo to Cleo - I too am sick of seeing the same posts about restructuring his contract. This has been addressed at least 7,000 times. The fact is had he known this was an option I can't believe Danny would have signed that contract. The fact is he already took a hometown discount. Look at the deals that just went down in free agency he could have had even more money from another team. I think that is what makes this even worse - he took a cut and if it is true they knew all along they were going to trade him - that is just wrong.

[ron]

don't go!

[Tom M]

I can see the trade given the stupid contract that Krispy Kreme negotiated in the first place...but getting back inferior D-men with questionable draft picks won't make me a happy camper on the 4th of July!

And Boyle played his guts out for the Lightning...a real character guy...so accept this as one of those business decisions that just plain sucks!

[j]

woah buddy! calm down killer. Guess I wasen't here for your 6,999 previous nhl contract seminars.

Ok, so how about this one...what happens if he doens't waive his no-trade and then he gets put on waivers and he refuses to report to the team that claims him? Does his contract become void if he refuses to play? How long would the team that claimed him own his rights?

[Goalman]

Why would Dan want to go to Atlanta? This is a team that doesn't have a prayer. A bad Organization that is located in the former murder capital of the country.
O.K. Lets see. Vancouver? A Beautiful city with no cup chance(they lost their captain today. (Nasland).
Those are the positives. Add those to the facts that Dan is building a house in Tampa;his wife is from Tampa.;they're expecting their first child;we are going to have a great team and he is loved by the majority of fans.
Sure I can see plenty of reasons to waive a no trade clause.NOT!!! DAN, AS NANCY REAGAN PUT IT; JUST SAY NO!!!

[léo]

WHO is the defenseman (or men) who are COMING BACK in the trade?
No matter the quantity, if the quality of defenseman (or men) is not as fine as Boyle's?
You will have gotten scr*wd.
And that's it.
Yo.

[Tony]

Just don't trade him to Atlanta...

[Cleo]

For the 7,000th time. NHL contracts are guaranteed, they cannot be restructured, and allow for bonuses in only very limited situations, ie: rookie contracts, players over 35, and certain pre-set amounts for winning league awards (Conn Smythe, Rocket Richard, etc), all of which bonuses count against the cap. Cripes, it seems this comes up at least once a week.

Additionally, when a player is traded, his entire contract is traded with him, there's no cash involved, and the old club can't continue to pay any of the contract.

I think(and it pains me to say this)Boyl's only real option is to waive the NTC and talk to a team that he wants, if he doesn't the lighting will more then likely put him on waivers and he looses. So, for his benefit he probably should, what does every body else think?

[Ted]

Trade Boyle

[Don in St. Pete]

Another Joe, Your post is probably the most sensible and realistic one I've seen today, and as a former defenseman it never occurred to me but you are exactly right. Look at these defensemen that are playing into there late 30's and early 40's and they are all huge, Chelios, Blake, Lidstrom and Schneider. look at the smaller guys and how long they last like Bobby Orr and Brad Park. That being said Danny is worth every penny this year if as proposed he is fully recovered and ready to rock. We have a lot of depth and potential on the blueline in the system and these guys may be attempting to protect that value now by bringing in a younger guy and saving so cap space for further maneuvering. If we can get a top 2 guy back for Boyle it should be considered but I'm thinking Chris Phillips and not Metzaros.

[j]

Mike-yeah I wasn't sure about that either...after some searching the only recent contract restructuring I can find is Roman Turek in 2004....

"In 2004 Turek restructured his contract to substantially drop his salary from $5M plus bonuses for the 04-05 and 05-06 seasons. The restructuring brought his salary to between $1M and $2M, with potential earnings relying heavily on performance bonuses. The restructuring saved the Calgary Flames organization between $3M and $4M in 2004"

Thats a shame if they can no longer restructure contracts....doesn't leave many options if they need to cut salary.

[Tallahassee Mike]

j--As far as I know, the new CBA does not allow for contract restructuring. Also, all bonuses count towards the salary cap, so this doesn't seem like an option.

[Tallahassee Mike]

I agree. I love Boyle and I think if he ends up leaving Tampa it will be emotional for all parties. Having said that, I think we gave him too many years for too much money at the trade deadline. He's worth 6.6 million now, yeah, but in three years? Especially with his wrist: despite how great he may feel, severing your tendons never completely heals.

I also think the importance of a puck-moving D-man has been reduced by our recent signings. Boyle was so important the last two years because our offense was dead without Marty and Vinny. Now we have Prospal back and combined with Malone and Vbrata that's three potential 30 goal scorers. Plus you can count on Stamkos, Oulette and Jokinen, given that they make the team, to score around 20 goals (Oulette had like 18 and Jokinen had like 16). On top of all of this we no longer play Tortorella's puck pursuit system. Our strategy will be very different under Melrose and perhaps Boyle won't figure into that as much as he did in the past.

So in light of all of this, I will be very sad to see Boyle go. Consider this though: Mike Green got about 4 million a year and he's a top notch defenseman. If we can get a good, solid blueliner AND save 2.5 million, and pick up some draft picks, then it'll be worth it.

I just hope the package up Kuba. I think he's one of the worst on the team and at 3 million a year, totally overpaid. I love Picard and Lundin though, I think Ranger's solid. Let's see how new guy, O'Brien, Smaby, and Boyle or Boyle's replacement play into camp--we could be looking at a pretty decent D-corp.

[j]

I wonder if they've discussed restructuring Boyle's contract to make it more cap friendly. If they added bonus incentives to it so if he meets certain goals, he'll get back up to the money he was going to get....i'm sure he'd take it since he wants to stay here so badly. It would work out for everyone.

[Boltflasher]

....and, yes, this IS the result of another bad Feaster contract...he did not learn from his Brad mistake...and, that's me above, also...

[Voice of the Turtle]

It appears obvious that the spending binge was predicated on the intention of dropping Boyle from the outset. The new owners never did see Danny as a persona grata with the Lightning, and one harkens back to their resistance to his re-signing earlier in the year.

Despite the forward-looking and aggressive recruiting by Koules and Barrie, the plan to dispatch Danny Boyle is an outright blunder.

Without Boyle, the Lightning defense (along with its inability to produce turnovers, move the puck, and provide meaningful help with the power play) becomes the Achilles Heel of this team.

Joe, you are absolutely correct...I have been blogging for awhile now, especially in response to those who kept saying "trade Vinny", that no, it was Boyle that should be moved now, while we can something for him...and, yes, 2 years from now, he will be way overpaid....I think OK agreed to his contract because he thought he could probably move him if needed to, but it needs to be done now, not in 2 years when his value goes down...good post Joe...

[Not the Marlboro Man]

I can't see getting anyone to replace Dan at this jecture and I still Blame that moron Feaster for all of this, because he couldn't negotiate worth a crap. Boyle would have stayed in Tampa for allot less. Now if he doesn't decide to accept the trade situation they will probably place him on waivers and then there is no telling where Boyle would end up. One way or another its a lose lose situation for Boyle. I also have to make an appology to the Canadien press for breaking this. I truly didn't believe this and thought it was just another conspiratorial rumor aimed at Tampa Bay to create discord among the players in the press. Well, I was wrong...TSN was right all along.
Sports reporters from Tampa Bay should have investigated where the Boyle trade sorce originated from alittle better. It looks like the Canadien boys did their homework.

[Another Joe]

I like Boyle and I want him here this year also but Ive been thinking about this all day and here is a thought.

Dan Boyle is 32 years old and is signed for 6 years at 6.6 million a year. Is he worth 6.6 million this year. Yes I can somewhat buy that. Will he be worth 6.6 million after two more nhl years with four more years left on his contract. Im not so sure I can buy that.

I think that the contract Boyle was given was to much money for to many years. If they dont trade him now and get a good return the bolts are on the hook at 6.6 million till the guy is 38 years old. If Boyle was signed for 3 years at 5 million per year I dont think the new ownership would even think about trading him.

Anyone with similiar or you guys think im way off base???