Sign in to follow this  
Matt_T83

The value of cap space in rebuilding (and a Canucks mistake)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Just to add an example of a good team/player to target: I would be targeting the Pittsburgh Penguins and Marc-Andre Fleury towards the trade deadline, if I were a rebuilding team with cap space.

 

Matt Murray just backstopped them to a Stanley Cup, so he's clearly clutch. He's got a decent .922 Sv% this year, and has played 29 games. In contrast, Fleury has only started 28 games, likely being given every chance to prove himself, but has only mustered a .906 Sv% and an ugly 3.15GAA. Fleury is signed until 2018-2019 at an AAV of 5.75M. The penguins would almost certainly like to clear that cap space, and it's not likely they will get much value for an over the hill, overpaid goaltender.

 

A trading partner that could eat Fleury's contract and offer them a value player (like Jannik Hansen) could definitely get some picks/prospects out of the Penguins. This is a team that definitely has another cup run in them, maybe 2-3 more. They want to win now, and would be willing to pay for it if the price is fair. Unfortunately the Canucks are not in a position to take advantage of such a situation.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Teravainen for a 2nd, a 3rd, and a cap dump, eh.   Wow.  Pretty good for a young forward with 28 pts.

 

One point more than Baertschi....who cost a 2nd, no 3rd, and no cap dump....

 

I'm not saying you can't make good moves without accepting bad cap hits. And also, the two trades are not comparable. Baertschi was struggling and could have been considered a 'project'. I would argue the risk in the Baertschi trade was considerably higher. Mind you, if Teravainen busts, feel free to quote/flame me on this. 

 

I would argue that 3-4 years from now Teravainen is clearly the better player.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I've been thinking about for a while. Admittedly, I wanted the Canucks to sign a free agent or two during the season last year (but not Eriksson), but I changed my mind once I looked more closely at the teams cap situation.

 

Right now, we have 3 contracts that were not handled very well:

 

Eriksson - 6 years, 6 million per (5 seasons remaining after this one)

Dorsett - 4 years, 2.65 million per (2 seasons remaining after this one)

Sbisa  - 3 years, 3.6 million per (1 season left after this one)

 

*Burrows is currently being overpaid but that is a different situation. He had just taken a pay cut for the benefit of the team and earned his contract with his play. He was also a Gillis signing not a Benning signing.

 

Eriksson does not need much explanation. He is a free agent I did not want. I thought we had enough on our roster already to warrant not signing him or any big fish forward UFA.

 

Dorsett is a player that we definitely should have signed, but his cap hit should have been lower. I think he should have been in the same ballpark as guys like Clifford, Reeves, Hednricks, Maroon, etc. at around 1.5-2 million per. If he wouldn't sign for that then we don't need him as he becomes more of a liability than an asset, simple as that.

 

Sbisa was not in a very strong position to negotiate when he signed his contract and was coming off a bad year. The term was good, but again the cap hit is higher than it probably should have been. His cap hit should have been at around 2.5 million per which would have been a slight raise from his 2.175 million per.

 

If we had been focused on the cap at the time of those decisions, we could have about 12 million in cap space. We could have easily been in on landing a skilled forward in Teravainen or a recent 1st round pick in Crouse. Combine that cap space with the amount of relief we have when Burrows' and Miller's contracts expire and that over 20 million in cap space this upcoming off season. We could easily resign Horvat, Gudbranson and Tryamkin as well as anyone else who earned a contract.

 

Having cap space is ultimately a very good thing and it opens up a lot of different options that we could use. It's never a bad thing to play it safe and leave yourself some room. You can always spend to the cap to make the "finishing touches" to your team that would make it a contender.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Matt_T83 said:

 

I'm not saying you can't make good moves without accepting bad cap hits. And also, the two trades are not comparable. Baertschi was struggling and could have been considered a 'project'. I would argue the risk in the Baertschi trade was considerably higher. Mind you, if Teravainen busts, feel free to quote/flame me on this. 

 

I would argue that 3-4 years from now Teravainen is clearly the better player.

I don't care much for predictions 3 years into the future.

 

You've cited a fairly best-case scenario for a cap dump return.

Unfortunately it's a bit of a cherry pick.

 

If you want the counterpoint, the market value for a cap dump was 'corrected' or undermined when Phoenix took Datsyuk's 7.5 million cap hit and added the 20th and 53rd overall to move up a mere four spots in the draft to 16th overall.   Arguably got nothing for eating that.

The Teravainen deal was a good one for Ron Francis, but I'm not sure anyone should try to make a template of it as if you're going to replicate it and rebuild your team on the back of eating cap dumps.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't exactly Bennings fault.  Once the twins and Burrows are off the books we will have plenty of space. The bulk of the cap space is being eaten up by inherited aging vets.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the GM can build a competitive team without spending to the cap, then great. I agree. He should do so and capitalize on all such opportunities. But I don't think the GM should choose to build a lesser team just so that he can capitalize on the chances that may or may not arise.

 

I don't think such opportunities justify leaving the cap space.  For example, maybe JB thought Eriksson would help us be competitive by scoring 30 goals and bringing the Sedins back to near PPG level. He was wrong but I don't fault him for it; he had his reasons for signing Eriksson. 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 year age difference between TT and Baercheese. TT is only 22 and has higher ceiling imo. 

 

OP your point makes a lot of sense. Most on CDC remember how MG go Ehrhoff from SJS. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't care much for predictions 3 years into the future.

 

You've cited a fairly best-case scenario for a cap dump return.

Unfortunately it's a bit of a cherry pick.

 

If you want the counterpoint, the market value for a cap dump was 'corrected' or undermined when Phoenix took Datsyuk's 7.5 million cap hit and added the 20th and 53rd overall to move up a mere four spots in the draft to 16th overall.   Arguably got nothing for eating that.

The Teravainen deal was a good one for Ron Francis, but I'm not sure anyone should try to make a template of it as if you're going to replicate it and rebuild your team on the back of eating cap dumps.

They deserved nothing for it. The Datsyuk contract does nothing to hamper the Coyotes. It literally has no impact on their hockey operations. They aren't paying Datsyuk a single cent of that money. On the other hand a team like Carolina was eating the entire Bickell contract as well as the 4M or so left on his deal. For a small market team losing money like the Canes eating that salary earned them Teravainen.

 

I am going to guess there were many other teams in a similar position to the Coyotes (think Sens, Jackets, Canes, Jets, etc) who were also willing to take on Datsyuk for a modest return. If you want to see the precedent for the Datsyuk trade look no further than the Tim Thomas trade. The Islanders got nothing for taking that on that contract except the pleasure of circumventing the cap and reaching the cap floor. These small market teams don't give a fig about cap space.

 

As far as recent precedents for trades involving cap dumps...

 

Bolland and Crouse for a 3rd

Laich + 2nd + Carrick for Daniel Winnik

 

Would much rather have spent the 6M on Eriksson contract this way. A guy like Crouse would have fit this team perfectly.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Toews said:

They deserved nothing for it. The Datsyuk contract does nothing to hamper the Coyotes. It literally has no impact on their hockey operations. They aren't paying Datsyuk a single cent of that money. On the other hand a team like Carolina was eating the entire Bickell contract as well as the 4M or so left on his deal. For a small market team losing money like the Canes eating that salary earned them Teravainen.

 

I am going to guess there were many other teams in a similar position to the Coyotes (think Sens, Jackets, Canes, Jets, etc) who were also willing to take on Datsyuk for a modest return. If you want to see the precedent for the Datsyuk trade look no further than the Tim Thomas trade. The Islanders got nothing for taking that on that contract except the pleasure of circumventing the cap and reaching the cap floor. These small market teams don't give a fig about cap space.

 

As far as recent precedents for trades involving cap dumps...

 

Bolland and Crouse for a 3rd

Laich + 2nd + Carrick for Daniel Winnik

 

Would much rather have spent the 6M on Eriksson contract this way. A guy like Crouse would have fit this team perfectly.

There are two sides to the cap reality though, and you're fudging the context.

No, Columbus and Winnipeg wouldn't have been willing to eat 7.5 million for nothing - neither had the cap space and neither considered themselves a bottomfeeder without competitive intentions.

So the market to dump those kinds of cap hits is actually pretty small -  Detroit was in a hard place, and Chayka flat out gifted them a ridiculous deal that failed to leverage their position of strength in that situation.    It's true that sending salary on top of cap costs more in assets, but I don't have a problem with signing an actual NHL top 6 as opposed to eating garbage and gaining a prospect in the process.

Edited by oldnews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Matt_T83 said:

Just to add an example of a good team/player to target: I would be targeting the Pittsburgh Penguins and Marc-Andre Fleury towards the trade deadline, if I were a rebuilding team with cap space.

 

Matt Murray just backstopped them to a Stanley Cup, so he's clearly clutch. He's got a decent .922 Sv% this year, and has played 29 games. In contrast, Fleury has only started 28 games, likely being given every chance to prove himself, but has only mustered a .906 Sv% and an ugly 3.15GAA. Fleury is signed until 2018-2019 at an AAV of 5.75M. The penguins would almost certainly like to clear that cap space, and it's not likely they will get much value for an over the hill, overpaid goaltender.

 

A trading partner that could eat Fleury's contract and offer them a value player (like Jannik Hansen) could definitely get some picks/prospects out of the Penguins. This is a team that definitely has another cup run in them, maybe 2-3 more. They want to win now, and would be willing to pay for it if the price is fair. Unfortunately the Canucks are not in a position to take advantage of such a situation.

I was thinking of bringing Juice back. He has a NMC and his performance has declined significantly. He is no longer worth the 4.5M or so he is being paid. Anaheim is quite likely planning on buying him out. He agrees to waive his NMC for the expansion draft and the Canucks get back some assets like a 2nd and Brandon Montour. KB could be the #7 or he just joins the team in a coaching/mentorship role. Seems like an ideal situation.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Toews said:

I was thinking of bringing Juice back. He has a NMC and his performance has declined significantly. He is no longer worth the 4.5M or so he is being paid. Anaheim is quite likely planning on buying him out. He agrees to waive his NMC for the expansion draft and the Canucks get back some assets like a 2nd and Brandon Montour. KB could be the #7 or he just joins the team in a coaching/mentorship role. Seems like an ideal situation.

Bieksa is 3rd on the Ducks in 5 on 5 ice time, playing 20 minutes a night.

I think you're premature in suggesting a buyout and perhaps dreaming if you think we're getting Montour for taking him back.

It's true that the Ducks are in a hard place in expansion, but regardless of whether they moved Bieksa or not (and it's up to him, why would he leave a contender to come to Vancouver?) - it remains that they have Fowler, Vaatanen, Lindholm, Manson, Despres - no matter how you slice it they're going to have to expose a very good young defenseman, so there isn't much point of shuffling deck chairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldnews said:

There are two sides to the cap reality though, and you're fudging the context.

No, Columbus and Winnipeg wouldn't have been willing to eat 7.5 million for nothing - neither had the cap space and neither considered themselves a bottomfeeder without competitive intentions.

So the market to dump those kinds of cap hits is actually pretty small -  Detroit was in a hard place, and Chayka flat out gifted them and ridiculous deal that failed to leverage their position of strength in that situation.    It's true that sending salary on top of cap costs more in assets, but I don't have a problem with signing an actual NHL top 6 as opposed to eating garbage and gaining a prospect in the process.

I haven't checked the numbers but I am sure there are a few teams whose budget allowed them to take upon that contract. Maybe the Jackets and the Jets may not but I am guessing the Devils or the Canes or one of these budget teams had the cap space. Its important to note that the Datsyuk contract does not hamper any of these teams as they did not plan on spending higher than that 7.5M either way. Considering these circumstances taking on Datsyuk's contract cannot even be considered a burden so I am willing to bet Detroit was able to the whittle down the price to something reasonable especially if there were multiple teams involved.

 

There is a precedent for taking on contracts with zero salary paid out, and that is the Tim Thomas trade. The Islanders got back nothing for doing that trade. In fact I believe the condition on that trade was that Boston would get a pick if Thomas played for the Isles that year, a condition that he would obviously never fulfill. There will be another trade like this soon enough and I guarantee you that the return will be next to nil again.

 

Excellent trade by Chayka, he got his man (Chychrun) and it was better value than the 4th or 5th round pick he would have otherwise received for taking Datsyuk's contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Toews said:

I haven't checked the numbers but I am sure there are a few teams whose budget allowed them to take upon that contract. Maybe the Jackets and the Jets may not but I am guessing the Devils or the Canes or one of these budget teams had the cap space. Its important to note that the Datsyuk contract does not hamper any of these teams as they did not plan on spending higher than that 7.5M either way. Considering these circumstances taking on Datsyuk's contract cannot even be considered a burden so I am willing to bet Detroit was able to the whittle down the price to something reasonable especially if there were multiple teams involved.

 

There is a precedent for taking on contracts with zero salary paid out, and that is the Tim Thomas trade. The Islanders got back nothing for doing that trade. In fact I believe the condition on that trade was that Boston would get a pick if Thomas played for the Isles that year, a condition that he would obviously never fulfill. There will be another trade like this soon enough and I guarantee you that the return will be next to nil again.

 

Excellent trade by Chayka, he got his man (Chychrun) and it was better value than the 4th or 5th round pick he would have otherwise received for taking Datsyuk's contract.

Actually there were few options at the time, and Chayka got bent over by Holland, not leveraging what a hard place Detroit was in, and how few options they had.

No teams needed that Datsyuk cap hit to get to the floor - again, you're twisting reality and ignoring the real context.

They gave up a 2nd and the 20th to move to 16.   They got nothing for doing Detroit a massive favour.  I'm sure Holland will pay it forward lol.

Rookie mistake that benefitted Phoenix literally nothing - when holding out and making Detroit wait would have only increased the pressure on Holland to actually ante up.

Chayka was owned on the draft floor.

Edited by oldnews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, oldnews said:

Bieksa is 3rd on the Ducks in 5 on 5 ice time, playing 20 minutes a night.

I think you're premature in suggesting a buyout and perhaps dreaming if you think we're getting Montour for taking him back.

It's true that the Ducks are in a hard place in expansion, but regardless of whether they moved Bieksa or not (and it's up to him, why would he leave a contender to come to Vancouver?) - it remains that they have Fowler, Vaatanen, Lindholm, Manson, Despres - no matter how you slice it they're going to have to expose a very good young defenseman, so there isn't much point of shuffling deck chairs.

You are probably right here. Wishful thinking on my part but the Canucks need to engage in any and all out of the box thinking in order to bolster the lack of depth in the prospect pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, oldnews said:

Actually there were few options at the time, and Chayka got bent over by Holland, not realizing what a hard place Detroit was in, and how few options they had.

No teams needed that Datsyuk cap hit to get to the floor - again, you're twisting reality and ignoring the real context.

They gave up a 2nd and the 20th to move to 16.   They got nothing for doing Detroit a massive favour.  I'm sure Holland will pay it forward lol.

Rookie mistake that benefitted Phoenix literally nothing - when holding out and making Detroit wait would have only increased the pressure on Holland to actually ante up.

Chayka was owned on the draft floor.

There is no twisting, there is one precedent for the Datsyuk situation and in that trade the team receiving the cap dump got nothing. Describing it as a "massive favor" is such an overstatement especially when it does nothing to affect the Coyotes cap situation or budget.

 

Chayka killed it. He got his man (Chychrun) for a pick and a contract that does sweet &^@# all to his team. He is obviously a really intelligent kid for getting a GM job in just his 20s. He knew by precedent from the Thomas trade that taking contracts like that would never return much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what it will cost to dump Eriksson at this point. I'm thinking Granlund Brock Eriksson for a 2nd ouch! I hope he can turn it around cuz he's gonna be expensive to move. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Toews said:

There is no twisting, there is one precedent for the Datsyuk situation and in that trade the team receiving the cap dump got nothing. Describing it as a "massive favor" is such an overstatement especially when it does nothing to affect the Coyotes cap situation or budget.

 

Chayka killed it. He got his man (Chychrun) for a pick and a contract that does sweet &^@# all to his team. He is obviously a really intelligent kid for getting a GM job in just his 20s. He knew by precedent from the Thomas trade that taking contracts like that would never return much.

You're whiffing on half of the equation - the value of that cap space to Detroit.  That it does sweet f'all to Phoenix misses the point entirely - a logic that fails to realize the value of 7.5 million of cap space to any team hoping to compete.

There were very few teams in a position to eat that cap, and none of them needed it to get to the floor.

The irony here is you guys talking about the value of cap space and the advantage we should take of that - as you fail to realize what a massive favour Chayka did Detroit, with literally no return.  The 20th, 53rd and 7.5 million cap space to move up 4 spots - and you believe that is genius.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.