Sign in to follow this  
Provost

[Signing] William Karlsson re-signs (8 years, 5.9M AAV)

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Provost said:

Well they do get the Clarkson cap relief, but still will have to make some moves for sure as they still need a couple more roster players too.

 

Colin Miller and Reaves should be basically free for cap relief.

They have to be under the cap at season's beginning before they're allowed to put Clarkson on LTIR

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Pizza said:

99 point player Nathan Mackinnon makes $6.3M so I don't expect Boeser's contract to be more than $7M.

 

I'd be super pump if Boeser gets 6Mx8 or 6Mx6.

McKinnon signed that deal in 2016 did he not?  He was a 52 pt player at the time.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, goblix said:

 

You can't use MacKinnon as any kind of comparable lol. Everyone knows he's a bargain and that contract is nutso value. It's like saying well Erickson makes 6m so don't expect Boeser to sign for any less than 15m ;)

  

Yes I can totally use MacKinnon to make a prediction on Boeser's next contract. Nathan just had 52 and 38 points the 2 seasons prior to signing his deal. Very similar numbers to Boeser now. The cap was also 7 million less at the time so taking that into account, it can't be more than 9-10% of the cap.

Edited by Pizza
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:

They have to be under the cap at season's beginning before they're allowed to put Clarkson on LTIR

And they don't have any waiver exempt players that they can paper down. Makes it all that much more important that they try to move Clarkson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:

They have to be under the cap at season's beginning before they're allowed to put Clarkson on LTIR

I think there is some other mechanism that can be used do deal with that.  It happened with another team last year and the signings were counted as the injury replacements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:

They have to be under the cap at season's beginning before they're allowed to put Clarkson on LTIR

No they don't.  They can go over and operate at a cap increased by up to his cap hit.  Under that approach it is assumed that the injured player has already been replaced on the roster. 

 

The CBA has an illustration - art.50.10 (d):

 

Illustration #4: The Upper Limit in a League Year is $70.0 million. A Player who has an SPC with an Averaged Amount of $2.0 million becomes unfit to play on the last day of Training Camp, and on the same day, his Club exercises the Bona-Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception on such Player. On Opening Day, the Club has an Averaged Club Salary of $71.5 million (excluding Earnable Performance Bonuses up to the full amount of the Performance Bonus Cushion). The Club is deemed to have already fully replaced the unfit-to-play Player with any Player or Players on the Opening Day Roster. If these replacements are maintained through the conclusion of the season, the Club's Averaged Club Salary is $71.5 million, as the Club is permitted to exceed the Upper Limit by $1.5 million because of the Bona-Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Rick Blight said:

And they don't have any waiver exempt players that they can paper down. Makes it all that much more important that they try to move Clarkson.

Pretty sure Vegas got a 1st and 2nd for eating Clarkson.

 

Might be time for them to give back to get rid of a lesser contract (Haula and Reaves 2.75 shouldn't cost them near what they received to eat Clarkson)....

 

They may not have to move Clarkson - although if they did, the Canucks 17 million (minus Boeser and depth players) might come in handy.

 

I'd be far more inclined to make them pay to get rid of Clarkson  than give up assets to buy MIller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I keep hearing Millers name brought up. 

 

Wasnt there a guy on the knights that got stuck in the substance abuse program? For some reason i thought it was a name like “Miller”. 

 

Cant remember who though. Anyone remember who it was for sure?

 

*Nate Schmidt, suspended 20 games for PEDs. My bad

 

https://www.nhl.com/news/vegas-golden-knights-nate-schmidt-suspended-for-performance-enhancing-substances/c-299924770

Edited by MystifyNCrucify
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Pizza said:

Yes I can totally use MacKinnon to make a prediction on Boeser's next contract. Nathan just had 52 and 38 points the 2 seasons prior to signing his deal. Very similar numbers to Boeser now. The cap was also 7 million less at the time so taking that into account, it can't be more than 9-10% of the cap.

Fair fair, he did have 63 point season in his first year so had a 3 year sample size to go off of. Either way I like your points it is very similar to the Boeser camp and I do agree either way 7mx6 seems about right to me 

 

I am curious though in how much things have changes throughout the years. McDavid / Matthews / Eichel / Draisaitl all got paid in out of their ELC it looks like  Marner / Aho / Laine / Tkachuk / Connor all looking at some big paydays. Times have definitely changed from even 3-4 years where bridges are less of a thing and players are getting paid for what they are projected to do in addition to what they have done.

 

I know Boeser doesn't compare to a lot of those players (especially the first 3) but it's just a trend seems to be happening. I wouldn't be overly surprised if Boeser pushes for around 8m and for that reason

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

You can't use MacKinnon as any kind of comparable lol. Everyone knows he's a bargain and that contract is nutso value. It's like saying well Erickson makes 6m so don't expect Boeser to sign for any less than 15m ;)

 

Mckinnon came off his ELC with 52 pts, signed for 8.6 percent of the cap. Same percentage today would put Boeser at 7 mill which would probably be the base on a long term deal.

 

Obviously, Eriksson is not a comparable. UFA.

Share this post


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

Pretty sure Vegas got a 1st and 2nd for eating Clarkson.

 

Might be time for them to give back to get rid of a lesser contract (Haula and Reaves 2.75 shouldn't cost them near what they received to eat Clarkson)....

 

They may not have to move Clarkson - although if they did, the Canucks 17 million (minus Boeser and depth players) might come in handy.

 

I'd be far more inclined to make them pay to get rid of Clarkson  than give up assets to buy MIller.

Completely agree.......

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These state tax free States are bull$&!# in a salary cap era. Its not a level playing field. 

  • Hydration 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Completely agree.......

And particularly after making the move they did for Tampa's Miller.

JT Miller is a great addition - the type of player this lineup really needed.

Colin Miller - might be a good offensive defenseman, reasonably aggressive for his size - but not really the type of defenseman this team needs.

So - recover assets to take on Clarkson as opposed to spending them on the wrong type of defenseman.

If they were to do so, it might preclude them from signing a Myers - in which case they could go to a whole host of other less expensive placeholding options (that I've named elsewhere) - but in doing so it would also mean that they retain more cap flexibility moving forward....

I'd be open to either of those options - but not so much in spending assets for Miller - and then still having considerable work to do to make that blueline fit / balanced.

Share this post


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

So Vegas now at 89 mil salary with an 81.5 cap limit. 

We’ll take Ryan Reaves off your hands there, McPhee. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Well maybe I haven't had enough coffee to wake myself up this morning.

 

But they can remain 10% over the cap until opening night at which point they get the cap relief from Clarkson (5.25 million).


It limits what they can do from now until then, but they consider themselves contenders - I think they'd spend an asset if necessary to rid themselves of a Haula  or Reaves as opposed to 'giving a Miller away for free'.

 

The thing about the Clarkson cap - it prevents them from doing much from now until they set their roster for the season, so they are effectively somewhat bypassed by the UFA market - in which case I think they will retain their essential assets as opposed to dumping a 20 minute D - they've already lost Engelland in all likelihood - I'd be surprised if they sacrificed Miller when they have depth forwards they can dump, probably at a lesser cost than the loss of Miller would represent.  If they dump MIller, they need to replace Miller.  Replacing a depth forward is far easier, particularly when they're being bypassed by the market because of Clarkson.

That's my take.  I think if anyone wanted Miller, it would cost assets, probably market value range assets.   Simply because Vegas is in  a tight cap situation does not make their valued assets cap dumps. 

 

And again - if this team were to acquire Miller, it creates a need / leaves a need for another D to fit - a heavier, harder minutes guy than Miller - there'd still have to be another important addition regardless, imo.    Spending assets on Miller doesn't make primary sense imo.

Exactly.

 

And I’m pretty sure all GM’s and their management groups have things under control. I doubt any GM in the league are now in a situation they weren’t aware of beforehand. This scenario, and ours, are not news to them. They work at this every day all year. It might be tricky and take time, but they know what they are doing. It’s not a small business they take care off.

 

I work with way more moving parts and $ wise with a bit smaller numbers, and I know whats going on and where we are moving going forward.

 

I doubt anyone in the NHL does this by just winging it and find themselves lost in the summer. And the contracts, durations and amounts are known to them so no surprises there either. Individual performance and team performance might be more of an educated assumption but the rest is pretty easily manageable when you have a cap floor and a ceiling that is semi easy to predict.

 

Not an easy task, but no-one is there by surprise when it comes to numbers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

We’ll take Ryan Reaves off your hands there, McPhee. 

Why do people want a 32 year old 10-20 point guy that makes 2.25m for 1 year ?

 

I understand he's a bully and a bruiser and perhaps we need more sandpaper... but really if I'm going to try to fleece a player from VGK Reaves is last on my list.

Edited by goblix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

We’ll take Ryan Reaves off your hands there, McPhee. 

Let's spitball some fool's game!

 

To Vegas

Schaller

 

To Vancouver

Reaves

Clarkson

Vegas 1st 20

 

This might mean no Myers type signing (unless LE vacates) - but they could still get a mid range placeholder - or possibly deal a guy like Baertschi or dump Spooner to clear more cap....

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, mll said:

No they don't.  They can go over and operate at a cap increased by up to his cap hit.  Under that approach it is assumed that the injured player has already been replaced on the roster. 

 

The CBA has an illustration - art.50.10 (d):

 

Illustration #4: The Upper Limit in a League Year is $70.0 million. A Player who has an SPC with an Averaged Amount of $2.0 million becomes unfit to play on the last day of Training Camp, and on the same day, his Club exercises the Bona-Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception on such Player. On Opening Day, the Club has an Averaged Club Salary of $71.5 million (excluding Earnable Performance Bonuses up to the full amount of the Performance Bonus Cushion). The Club is deemed to have already fully replaced the unfit-to-play Player with any Player or Players on the Opening Day Roster. If these replacements are maintained through the conclusion of the season, the Club's Averaged Club Salary is $71.5 million, as the Club is permitted to exceed the Upper Limit by $1.5 million because of the Bona-Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception.

 

I've found so much anecdotal evidence to the contrary on reddit/HF boards/twitter/CanucksArmy and equivalents, and I've thought for years that a team had to be cap compliant on the first day of the regular season without any LTIR, but apparently you're right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

So Vegas now at 89 mil salary with an 81.5 cap limit. 

It's okay they will likely gamble a bunch of that away.  I was just there and would have no problem getting down to that number.

Share this post


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

Let's spitball some fool's game!

 

To Vegas

Schaller

 

To Vancouver

Reaves

Clarkson

Vegas 1st 20

 

This might mean no Myers type signing (unless LE vacates) - but they could still get a mid range placeholder - or possibly deal a guy like Baertschi or dump Spooner to clear more cap....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heck yes! A policeman AND a replacement first round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.