Sign in to follow this  
janisahockeynut

What would you do? (Discussion)

Recommended Posts

Well, to get under the cap, we have had to drop to a 22 man roster, and we are just slightly under the cap. Now when Motte and Roussel come back, we will be at a 24 man roster, and 

approx. $4,000,000 over cap.

 

Now, we do not have to make the decision today, but I would like to start the discussion today, and see how it changes, as we get closer to having to make those decisions.

 

There is also one wild card, which is Tryamkin, who I believe will be over after his season ends. Personally, I sign him for next season and don't worry about the end of this one, but there is an argument that says other wise. IMO, Tryamkin sign for around 2.8 Million US, which would be around approx. 3X what he makes in Russia. So that is another viable in this season will present.

 

To me, that is just under 7 Million over, for next year, we have to shed

 

Now, this is the GM forum, and this involves long term planning, so from what you see now, after camp and 3 games, there will be some hard decisions to make in the up and coming months.

 

Please note, I do not see us making a decision, tomorrow, but sooner or later (by Christmas), some tough decision will be made.

 

So, the first order of business will be to shed the 4 Million needed to bring back Motte and Roussel...……...what would your plans be to day...……(It is ok, to change your mind)

 

This is a long term planning exercise…..and Winter is coming!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe neither Motte nor Roussel have been placed on LTIR and, therefore, their salaries are already included. Obviously, when Motte and Roussel come back another player will have to be demoted to Utica or traded and this can only reduce our cap hit from where we are today. Not sure why you are seeing this as a problem.

 

If, and it is a big if, Tryamkin comes over at the end of the year we will only be hit with a very small pro-rated cap hit that should be quite manageable as well.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my thoughts on the subject...…….

 

Personally, I think the 3 players I am looking at are Eriksson, Sutter, Tanev.

 

Eriksson, is definitely the number 1 choice, and it would definitely be our number one choice to move.

Unfortunately, his cap hit will not make it easy, and unfortunately if it is him, it will cost either or both, a asset and/or cap retention. The only chance we, have to get out of this, is if Benning and Green keep him on the roster and/or put him down to Utica immediately, and hope for him to retire. (Possible?). There is one other way, Eriksson leaves, and that is a loan to a European club, with his consent.  (If we can rid ourselves of Eriksson, all our troubles disappear)

 

Sutter and Tanev are different, in that they are both positive contributors, when healthy. Not only that, but Sutter has shown to be a very versatile player, and one that can fill in more than adequately if a top 6 or top 9 gets injured. But, his 4.3 million dollar contract, and his value make him a potential player, that has to be moved, especially if Tanev or Eriksson can not be moved. It is very problematic. He has looked good. Does he stay healthy? Should we move him sooner than later?

 

Tanev is another enigma, as he is building chemistry with Quinn Hughes, and in the big picture, is a very useful player when heathy. IMO, because he is playing with Quinn, he will have to retrieve the puck much less, and will be handling it much less. This has to be good on his health. Looking at Tanev long term, causes some concern to me, because his contract is up at the end of this year, and with so many contracts coming up over the next couple of years, I am not sure he is viable long term. Does he stay healthy? It that a good time to move him? Much depends on whether we have a replacement.

 

Tryamkin is the replacement for Tanev......maybe! If he comes, and if he is good enough. One way or another, Tryamkin is part of this puzzle, and sits there as a possible reason, why Benning signs him this year, instead of next year. If Tryamkin can jump in, we reduce salary, and get younger...….those are wins. All big "IF's"

 

There is also one other possibility, which could be explored, but I am not to sure of, is if Benn can move over and give Quinn the proper support that Tanev gives. 

 

These are unanswered question, so early in the season, and it for sure is a wait and see, type of scenario. But with injuries starting to show up, and big BUFF, putting a stick into the spokes of Winnipeg, the questions are starting to rise their heads.

 

Yes, it is a wait and see, but those are the main 3, I have come up with, as possible moves that solve our problems.

Share this post


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

Roussell and motte aren't on LTI jus IR so we don't need to shed anything since the cap calculation already includes their salary. In other words we do nothing at all

Well, I guess, my wheels fell of early...…….

 

But It still, becomes some type of problem, which will need to be addressed

 

Obviously, that takes the Cap concern out of the question, but still long term, what are Benning's moves?

 

Take a guess now, and check back.....do we trade anyone? 

 

Damn! I truly thought Roussel was on LTIR...………...sorry guys!

 

(Mud on my face!)

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

...……...what would your plans be to day...……(It is ok, to change your mind)

 

My plan today is the same as it is any other day, and no I won't be changing my mind - I'd let Jim Benning handle it::D.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a Jake fan since he started but, watching him the past 2 seasons, I feel he doesn't have the motivation required to be a dedicated NHL team player.  Ergo, I'd try to package him and Eriksson for the best possible draft pick available, or a decent prospect.  That would shed $7.25MM from the cap. I really hate to do this but Jake is not showing signs of the consistency required to keep his place on the team.  I'd love him to prove me wrong but........

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

I've been a Jake fan since he started but, watching him the past 2 seasons, I feel he doesn't have the motivation required to be a dedicated NHL team player.  Ergo, I'd try to package him and Eriksson for the best possible draft pick available, or a decent prospect.  That would shed $7.25MM from the cap. I really hate to do this but Jake is not showing signs of the consistency required to keep his place on the team.  I'd love him to prove me wrong but........

 

How's he going to prove you wrong if we trade him lol

 

Also, there is no cap issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BrockBoester said:

How's he going to prove you wrong if we trade him lol

 

Also, there is no cap issue

I was merely responding to the original post, which asked for suggestions to shed $7MM  -  that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No choice but to bury more contracts unless they give away more of this team's future to make up for more management mistakes and poor judgment.

 

Markstrom, Tanev, Pearson, could be dealt and get the team close.

 

Such really bad management here though.

 

There is another problem too. I know most posters don't look to the future BUT this team is committed to 10+ million in bonuses, buyout and cap recapture this year which will impact the team in a huge way next season even more so than this season.

The cap problem is so bad that players will need to be given away to meet the limit, maybe starting now.

 

Edited by ItTakesAnArmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

No choice but to bury more contracts unless they give away more of this team's future to make up for more management mistakes and poor judgment.

 

Markstrom, Tanev, Pearson, could be dealt and get the team close.

 

Such really bad management here though.

 

There is another problem too. I know most posters don't look to the future BUT this team is committed to 10+ million in bonuses, buyout and cap recapture this year which will impact the team in a huge way next season even more so than this season.

The cap problem is so bad that players will need to be given away to meet the limit, maybe starting now.

 

Hmm...really?  Who’s off the books at the end of the season?  So bad indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, IBatch said:

Hmm...really?  Who’s off the books at the end of the season?  So bad indeed.

Hmmmm, how many will need new contracts? Hmmm, only 8 players needing a raise? 1/3 of the team with 10+ mil less than this year.

Then again the team could decide to not re-sign Virtanen, Gaudette, Motte, Leivo, Schaller, Stecher, Fantenburg, Markstrom or Tanev. If they let Tanev, Markstrom and Schaller go then they are close to the 10+ mil commitment other than them the rest would do it.

You can see that this and next year's cap is a mess making it reasonable if not maybe necessary to trade away another 1rst round pick to jettison Eriksson's contract. Or some other good prospect like Tryamkin that is not in the headlights all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Hmmmm, how many will need new contracts? Hmmm, only 8 players needing a raise? 1/3 of the team with 10+ mil less than this year.

Then again the team could decide to not re-sign Virtanen, Gaudette, Motte, Leivo, Schaller, Stecher, Fantenburg, Markstrom or Tanev. If they let Tanev, Markstrom and Schaller go then they are close to the 10+ mil commitment other than them the rest would do it.

You can see that this and next year's cap is a mess making it reasonable if not maybe necessary to trade away another 1rst round pick to jettison Eriksson's contract. Or some other good prospect like Tryamkin that is not in the headlights all the time.

Loui and his six million will come off the cap when he retires, which will come soon.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Loui and his six million will come off the cap when he retires, which will come soon.  

No, then cap recapture happens, cap hit of 5.67 mil and 3.67 mil followed by a couple of years of 667K That is with a buyout.

Only two players with active contracts have retired Kovalchuk and Luongo as far as I know and teams have been hit hard. So a buyout is more likely unless they package his cap hit up with a prospect or draft pick. They will need all the space possible.

 

Even if they got all the 6 mill off the cap they are still in cap hell.

Edited by ItTakesAnArmy

Share this post


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

No, then cap recapture happens, cap hit of 5.67 mil and 3.67 mil followed by a couple of years of 667K That is with a buyout.

Only two players with active contracts have retired Kovalchuk and Luongo as far as I know and teams have been hit hard. So a buyout is more likely unless they package his cap hit up with a prospect or draft pick. They will need all the space possible.

 

Even if they got all the 6 mill off the cap they are still in cap hell.

I don’t think Errikson’s contract is a cap recapture one.  It’s more like that Swedish guy’s that retired from Buffalo last season.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2019 at 10:48 PM, singing chef said:

I've been a Jake fan since he started but, watching him the past 2 seasons, I feel he doesn't have the motivation required to be a dedicated NHL team player.  Ergo, I'd try to package him and Eriksson for the best possible draft pick available, or a decent prospect.  That would shed $7.25MM from the cap. I really hate to do this but Jake is not showing signs of the consistency required to keep his place on the team.  I'd love him to prove me wrong but........

 

Looks better than ever this year, is doing everything thats being asked of him, well..and has a low low cap hit - thats good value there especially when you take his future potential into account. no way we trade him.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I don’t think Errikson’s contract is a cap recapture one.  It’s more like that Swedish guy’s that retired from Buffalo last season.  

I don't know if Eriksson will refuse to report to camp, Bergland's contract was voided because he refused t show up.

Something similar to what Byfuglien is doing now

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would do nothing and wait for Tanev, Edler, and Sutter to get hurt all on the same shift.

 

I joke but the reality is very rarely is every Canuck healthy at the same time.

 

If everyone is healthy, thank the hockey gaud and either send him down or Erikkson. 

 

Could also waive Levio. Lots of plugs left even though this place disagrees (see Baer discussion).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2019 at 11:31 AM, janisahockeynut said:

Well, to get under the cap, we have had to drop to a 22 man roster, and we are just slightly under the cap. Now when Motte and Roussel come back, we will be at a 24 man roster, and 

approx. $4,000,000 over cap.

 

Now, we do not have to make the decision today, but I would like to start the discussion today, and see how it changes, as we get closer to having to make those decisions.

 

There is also one wild card, which is Tryamkin, who I believe will be over after his season ends. Personally, I sign him for next season and don't worry about the end of this one, but there is an argument that says other wise. IMO, Tryamkin sign for around 2.8 Million US, which would be around approx. 3X what he makes in Russia. So that is another viable in this season will present.

 

To me, that is just under 7 Million over, for next year, we have to shed

 

Now, this is the GM forum, and this involves long term planning, so from what you see now, after camp and 3 games, there will be some hard decisions to make in the up and coming months.

 

Please note, I do not see us making a decision, tomorrow, but sooner or later (by Christmas), some tough decision will be made.

 

So, the first order of business will be to shed the 4 Million needed to bring back Motte and Roussel...……...what would your plans be to day...……(It is ok, to change your mind)

 

This is a long term planning exercise…..and Winter is coming!

Give Tonya Harding a brown paper bag full of cash to take out Loui's knee while he sits in the press box eating popcorn during a game.

 

::D

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 12:38 PM, ItTakesAnArmy said:

No choice but to bury more contracts unless they give away more of this team's future to make up for more management mistakes and poor judgment.

 

Markstrom, Tanev, Pearson, could be dealt and get the team close.

 

Such really bad management here though.

 

There is another problem too. I know most posters don't look to the future BUT this team is committed to 10+ million in bonuses, buyout and cap recapture this year which will impact the team in a huge way next season even more so than this season.

The cap problem is so bad that players will need to be given away to meet the limit, maybe starting now.

 

I am not sure why you are concerned with performance bonuses. These won’t have any major impact on the cap for this year, and it certainly isn’t worse next year as you suggest.

 

Firstly, the perf bonuses are well below the 7.5% cushion (about $6m) allowable over the $81.5m cap, so these do not affect the cap this year or next year.

Secondly, the recapture penalty is no worse next year than it is this year either.

 

We are nowhere near cap hell!

 

I agree we could stand to lose some large contracts such as Eriksson and Baer, which for their cost are not able to contribute much to the team from the press box and from Utica. I believe Baer might be traded near the TDL to a contender for depth. LE is virtually untradeable. I would support moving him to Utica to try and see if he might void his contract by not reporting. However, even if we can’t move any of these contracts before next season, we are not in cap trouble.

 

Let me show you how the team could structured for next season without losing Baer or Eriksson and still be cap compliant...

 

Miller Pettersson Boeser

Pearson Horvat Ferland

Roussel Gaudette Virtanen

Motte Beagle Sutter

(Leivo)

 

Edler Myers 

Hughes Tryamkin

Benn Stecher

(Juolevi)

 

Markstrom

Demko 

 

EST. TOTAL CAP = $79.5m

Including all recapture penalties and buried contracts

 

This assumes:

Baer and Eriksson buried in Utica

Schaller walks

 

This assumes resigning:

Markstrom $5m

Tryamkin $2.75m

Stecher $2.75m

Gaudette $1.5m

Leivo $1.5m

Virtanen $1.5m

Motte $1.1m

 

I have also assumed that Tanev will walk or be traded at the TDL, but if he has a good season then they may offer him a 2 year x $4m contract. Resigning Tanev would be contingent on either missing out on Tryamkin, or on getting Tryamkin and trading a contract such as Baer’s which is currently taking up $2.29m in cap space.

 

A bunch of other contracts end in 2021, so we will have space to resign Pettersson and bring in high end prospects such as Podz. This team is not mismanaged. It is actually very nicely constructed from a salary cap perspective.

  • Upvote 1

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.