Proposal Salary Cap Moves - Van - NJ , Van - Mtl

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, Provost said:

I didn't say he WOULD retire, just that we should have forced the issue and made him decide before having to waste assets to ditch his contract.

you might still get your wish. If Benning goes out and gets Simmonds that may push Loui to Utica. 

[mll]

1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

you might still get your wish. If Benning goes out and gets Simmonds that may push Loui to Utica. 

There are no roster limits past the TDL.  Canucks need to clear 5M to add Simmonds - although NJD could retain up to 2.5M.  Loui in Utica would only be 1.075M cleared.  

 

For now there's no room to do anything unless they can offload a contract or some of the injuries are season ending where LTIR cap space can continue to be used.  Probably why LeBrun says Simmonds would only be an option if Ferland can't go - his LTIR cap space would then remain available.  Wouldn't help the bonus overage situation though.  

 

[qwijibo]

13 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Posters don’t actually know what’s going on with the team, they speculate and guess. That’s what all of us do.

 

The idea that he would retire this coming summer, was originally floated by @Alflives, and it has a lot of merit. After his 3 million bonus is paid this summer, he’s only owed another 7 million. 

 

I think Eriksson likes it here  in Vancouver, its entirely possible and conceivable, that he retire and join the team in some capacity.

 

I don’t think Eriksson is a bad guy, clearly this should have been a much different contract than it was, I think the fact that NO ONE would trade for him last summer, even with his own agent trying to make deals behind the scenes, was an eye opener for him. Some players decline faster than others, just like some mature faster than others. Pretty sure Eriksson knows that his chance of making this team next season are pretty remote.

 

I think he will retire, I think there’s enough out there to form that hypothesis, but again, it is only a hypothesis, ythe same as everything else on this forum. It’s just ne that makes a lot of sense.

My point is you can’t make a plan based on what you hope will happen.  The bottom line is Ericksson is under contract for 2 more seasons after this year and has a contract that isn’t easy to buy out or offload.  You can’t just hope he’ll pull the plug after getting his bonus next year.  You can hope for the best but you plan for the worst 

Edited February 8, 2020 by qwijibo

[VegasCanuck]

15 minutes ago, Provost said:

I covered this in a couple of other threads before... but $40 million only sounds good if you don't remember that you need to sign 15 or so players with that money including two goalies; 3-4 top 4 D; 3 top 6 forwards; and a bunch of other players.  It also ignores that fact we won't really have $40 million, because we will push about $4 million in ELC bonuses into that year if we don't move out enough salary next season to accommodate it.

$36 million - $10 million for Petterson - $8 million for Hughes - $5 million for Tanev or equivalent - $5 million for Markstrom = $8 million left.

With that $8 million you need to sign Virtanen and 10 more roster players.  That is mathematically impossible.  The alternative is to no re-sign any of our useful players except for Petterson and Hughes and just be terrible for two seasons with no depth.  It is math, not opinion.

 

There will be other roster moves. including replacing some veterans with guys on ELCs.

 

If Benning says he’s comfortable with our cap space, I trust his opinion.

[JM_]

6 minutes ago, mll said:

There are no roster limits past the TDL.  Canucks need to clear 5M to add Simmonds - although NJD could retain up to 2.5M.  Loui in Utica would only be 1.075M cleared.  

 

For now there's no room to do anything unless they can offload a contract or some of the injuries are season ending where LTIR cap space can continue to be used.  Probably why LeBrun says Simmonds would only be an option if Ferland can't go - his LTIR cap space would then remain available.  Wouldn't help the bonus overage situation though.  

 

I would imagine NJ is retaining on that deal, and getting a roster player back as well. Sounds like Ferland is feeling good so this probably isn't a thing anyway. 

 

It would certainly help if Loui did retire after his next bonus but i'm not holding my breath. I guess anything's possible, maybe leaving 4 mil on the table is something he'd do to avoid Utica for 2 years, particularly if he gets a front office job like Luongo to make up some of the difference. 

Edited February 8, 2020 by Jimmy McGill

[VegasCanuck]

2 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

My point is you can’t make a plan based on what you hope will happen.  The bottom line is Ericksson is under contract for 2 more seasons after this year and has a contract that isn’t easy to buy out or offload.  You can’t just hope he’ll pull the plug after getting his bonus next year.  You can hope for the best but you plan for the worst 

As posted earlier by @Jimmy McGill, we could absolutely buy Eriksson out if needed, this summer. It would still provide us with enough space. Remember that we will also lose someone in summer 2021 to Seattle as well.

[Lazurus]

2 hours ago, kenhodgejr said:

TRADE 1

Why Vancouver does the trade with NJ- Vancouver will have 6 million dollars taken off our cap at the end of the season as a result of this trade.  Simmonds is a rental player for the playoffs if we make it and his salary will be gone after this season. Simmonds can play up and down the line up. He can play on Petterssons line and keep him safe.  In the past 5 years Benning has developed a good group of prospects who are close to making the team. We can afford to give up a 1st round pick to improve our salary situation and save us from getting into bad situations like other NHL teams are in.

This almost has to be like trolling.

 

Giving up more of the future to correct mistakes? Simmonds may have been okay but he is pretty much done now, so you suggest both Eriksson AND Simmonds and for that the team gets to get rid of another 1rst round pick that maybe a lottery pick? Do that dieal and it is a guaranteeed lottery pick in any of the next 4 years.

 

Don't spend good money after bad, this sounds like a gambler saying he is going to win it all back, just lend him another grand.

59 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

According to Benning, we are okay on cap space moving forward, I trust his knowledge of the cap over anyone in this board.

 

I think that Eriksson will likely retire from the NHL after this season. Although we will likely face some type of recapture penalty, this will be less than a direct buyout. Why would Eriksson do this? He will likely be sent to Utica next season if he’s still with the team, which means he loses control of where he is in relation to his family.

 

Remember, the summer that we have to sign Pettersson and Hughes, is the same summer that the NHL will be signing the new broadcast deal, which means a more significant jump in the cap.

 

In conclusion, let’s just keep our draft picks and focus on developing internally, we aren’t as tight against the cap as everyone seems to think. 

The cap is public information for anyone to look at, the only speculation from Benning is how he will spend it and it is out there for all to see that this team is not good enough to deal away draft picks to correct the mistakes and overpaid contracts. Sure the Eriksson thing is dabbled around, capfriendly makes it easy to look at but there would still be a multi million dollar cap hit for years yet, there will not be any "mutual termination" like might happen with Byfyglien, that is a separate thing and might still have cap ramifications for the Peg. If he retires he cannot play anywhere for two years or the duration of the current contract of the Nucks get hammered, NJ had to give up a pick.

Relegating him to Utica to correct the team's mistake(s) could send out the wrong type of message to other FAs 

Even buying him out carries additional cap hits.

 

No matter how good Pettersson is he should not get paid like McDavid, give him a bridge deal similar to Boeser or Horvat and the third contract be the big one. maybe a McKinnon up to UFA status with a very large last season so the any qualifying offer is a substantial raise al by itself.

There will be no offer sheets to worry about, the "unwritten rule" forbids poaching stars, even the Aho offer sheet benefited the Hurricanes because they ended up signing him for less than market value in the end.

 

Not only keep the draft picks but add to them, in the cap world young cheap talent is the only way to succeed and cup winning teams come through the draft and cap compliance or very shrewd managing and trades. Instead of letting assets walk away lets add draft picks and hope for the future.

 

Every 1rst round pick represents a year of growth, building or rebuilding. Once at the mountain peak then 1rst become necessary to maintain that level for a decade or so and then the enviable downfall because even keeping those firsts, because they are so late, doesn't replace the star core players, they seem to be mostly 1 to 9 picks on every team.

Edited February 8, 2020 by Lazurus

[Provost]

7 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

There will be other roster moves. including replacing some veterans with guys on ELCs.

 

If Benning says he’s comfortable with our cap space, I trust his opinion.

So you are saying we don't have to make moves to move out veterans because we can believe what Benning that that we are OK... but also don't worry because we ARE ACTUALLY going to make some moves to move out veterans?

We only have a few veteran contracts expiring in the coming two seasons, and many of those are guys we actually would like to re-sign because we don't have replacements ready.  We are much worse if we have to remove most of Markstrom, Tanev, Stecher, Virtanen, and Edler  and replace them with ELC contracts.  We are possibly worse if you add in Pearson to that list because we have no idea if Hoglander or Podkolzinv will be ready for top 6 minutes in two seasons to replace his production.  If you think our defence will be any good over the next two years with Rafferty, Juolevi, and Tryamkin in place of Edler, Tanev, and Stecher... you are just in a different reality.  Maybe we can work them into the lineup, but that is a longer term project than the next two seasons.

We have contracts in place that mean we have no cap space to re-sign guys we would want to.  That is math, and is a straight up fact.  We don't have enough contracts coming off the books next season and in 2021-22 to make up for the raises we need to give the young guys we want to re-sign.  That is math and that is a straight up fact.

Hinging our entire future for the next several years on wishful thinking like: "Maybe Eriksson will volunteer to retire early" and "Maybe the economics aren't really what the league is saying and we will have a big cap jump" and "Maybe Seattle will take a big money bad contract off our hands"... and needing ALL of those things to come to pass to be able to ice a decent team... that is just horrible planning.

If any of those things doesn't come to pass, it will cost way more than a 1st round pick to ditch cap, because every single other team is going to be desperate to ditch cap as well, with very few teams that can take on any.  The upside of doing it now when we need to helps us exponentially by removing pushed ELC bonuses, as well as having the ability to make moves that actually let us take some cap back in order to make us better.

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, Pears said:

Throw away a first round pick just to get rid of a contract? Come on...

 

[Pears]

3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Good thing Benning isn’t Dubas  

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, kenhodgejr said:

You need to think how will EP/Huggy play if we can't afford to pay them because the team is overpaying guys on the bottom 6. At some point Benning will need to make a bold move to fix this situation. In the larger picture a 1st and a 2nd is a small price to improve the financial health of a team. We still have Podkolzin, Hoglander, Madden, Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty, MacEwan, and Lind all primed to make the team in the next year or two

These contracts you want to trade draft picks for will ALL be gone in 2 years time.  You understand this right?  Petey and Hughes won't even be in their prime in 2 years and Eriksson, Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, Baertschi, Benn, Pearson, Luongo's cap hit, Edler, will all be off the books.  By the end of 2022 when Petey is 23 and Hughes is 22 all those contracts will be gone.  Our young prospects will take over.  Next year and the year after are the only 2 years that Benning needs to worry about.  After 2022 we are home free.  

[6string]

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

So you are saying we don't have to make moves to move out veterans because we can believe what Benning that that we are OK... but also don't worry because we ARE ACTUALLY going to make some moves to move out veterans?

We only have a few veteran contracts expiring in the coming two seasons, and many of those are guys we actually would like to re-sign because we don't have replacements ready.  We are much worse if we have to remove most of Markstrom, Tanev, Stecher, Virtanen, and Edler  and replace them with ELC contracts.  We are possibly worse if you add in Pearson to that list because we have no idea if Hoglander or Podkolzinv will be ready for top 6 minutes in two seasons to replace his production.  If you think our defence will be any good over the next two years with Rafferty, Juolevi, and Tryamkin in place of Edler, Tanev, and Stecher... you are just in a different reality.  Maybe we can work them into the lineup, but that is a longer term project than the next two seasons.

We have contracts in place that mean we have no cap space to re-sign guys we would want to.  That is math, and is a straight up fact.  We don't have enough contracts coming off the books next season and in 2021-22 to make up for the raises we need to give the young guys we want to re-sign.  That is math and that is a straight up fact.

Hinging our entire future for the next several years on wishful thinking like: "Maybe Eriksson will volunteer to retire early" and "Maybe the economics aren't really what the league is saying and we will have a big cap jump" and "Maybe Seattle will take a big money bad contract off our hands"... and needing ALL of those things to come to pass to be able to ice a decent team... that is just horrible planning.

If any of those things doesn't come to pass, it will cost way more than a 1st round pick to ditch cap, because every single other team is going to be desperate to ditch cap as well, with very few teams that can take on any.  The upside of doing it now when we need to helps us exponentially by removing pushed ELC bonuses, as well as having the ability to make moves that actually let us take some cap back in order to make us better.

I don't think I was really being clear. Benning has said all along though, that he will find ways to move veterans out as youth prove that they are ready to take their place.

[coastal.view]

you know

that without all these proposed moves

the nucks are already in a solid position to resign

both ep40 and hughes

 

not sure why so many have this need to move assets to free up still more cap space

nucks spend to almost the cap every season historically

not sure why this reality creates anxiety for so many

the team management has the salary cap situation well in hand

 

some just doubt everything this team does

and think somehow they know better then those running the team

this is not a team with a salary cap problem

just accept that

 

cap space this off season $18 million plus cap bump of $3 million

cap space next off season $40 million plus cap bump of $3 plus $3 million = $46 million

 

how much do you think ep40 and hughes will be paid

and whatever they are paid, we have the room

 

so those proposing to create yet more space are not doing it for these players

but for lower tier players

who would pay a 1st round pick to move a bad contract

so we have space to resign edler or tanev or some other mid tier player

because that is actually what is being proposed

Edited February 9, 2020 by coastal.view

[Provost]

1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

you know

that without all these proposed moves

the nucks are already in a solid position to resign

both ep40 and hughes

 

not sure why so many have this need to move assets to free up still more cap space

nucks spend to almost the cap every season historically

not sure why this reality creates anxiety for so many

the team management has the salary cap situation well in hand

 

some just doubt everything this team does

and think somehow they know better then those running the team

this is not a team with a salary cap problem

just accept that

 

cap space this off season $18 million plus cap bump of $3 million

cap space next off season $40 million plus cap bump of $3 plus $3 million = $46 million

 

how much do you think ep40 and hughes will be paid

and whatever they are paid, we have the room

 

so those proposing to create yet more space are not doing it for these players

but for lower tier players

who would pay a 1st round pick to move a bad contract

so we have space to resign edler or tanev or some other mid tier player

because that is actually what is being proposed

Well, thank goodness we have the models of Toronto and Edmonton who have shown that you can contend for the Cup just by having a couple of high end talents and then an bunch of scrubs filling out the rest of their roster....

[coastal.view]

11 minutes ago, Provost said:

Well, thank goodness we have the models of Toronto and Edmonton who have shown that you can contend for the Cup just by having a couple of high end talents and then an bunch of scrubs filling out the rest of their roster....

thanks for your emotive response

not sure how that really applies to my post

 

not sure how one goes from the nucks needing to sign 2 key elite players

with 45 or so million dollars available

to the conclusion that the nucks are following the laffs model

 

but we all have different perceptions on what is actually going on i guess

 

i'm gonna stick with focus on the actual details and facts we are dealing with

and assume our rebuild / retool

is not mimicking the shanaplan

 

Edited February 9, 2020 by coastal.view

[J.I.A.H.N]

As I have shown in other threads

 

Pettersson peers are signing for about 7 to 7.5 for a point per game player long term

Hughe's peers are getting around 6 to 6.5 for players around his skill level

 

Also, after Eriksson's July 1st bonus is paid, he will be owed 5 million for the next 2 seasons....his cap will be 6 million per year = 12 million

 

The Canucks will have a few option to rid Eriksson's contract...………..Benning does not seemed worried about it, so I am not

 

Sutter still has value and can be moved in all types of scenario's

 

Schaller is gone...………...Fantenburg could be gone...……….Baertschi is a year away from gone, at worst

 

We cold loose something, but not much, IMO

[Provost]

2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

As I have shown in other threads

 

Pettersson peers are signing for about 7 to 7.5 for a point per game player long term

Hughe's peers are getting around 6 to 6.5 for players around his skill level

 

Also, after Eriksson's July 1st bonus is paid, he will be owed 5 million for the next 2 seasons....his cap will be 6 million per year = 12 million

 

The Canucks will have a few option to rid Eriksson's contract...………..Benning does not seemed worried about it, so I am not

 

Sutter still has value and can be moved in all types of scenario's

 

Schaller is gone...………...Fantenburg could be gone...……….Baertschi is a year away from gone, at worst

 

We cold loose something, but not much, IMO

Pin this because if those elite players sign for anywhere in that neighbourhood, JB is a hero.  That is short term bridge deal kind of money for that level of player.  To lock them up long term, add $2 million plus to each of those.

[mll]

8 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

As posted earlier by @Jimmy McGill, we could absolutely buy Eriksson out if needed, this summer. It would still provide us with enough space. Remember that we will also lose someone in summer 2021 to Seattle as well.

Eriksson's buyout cap hit is 5.7M next season followed by 3.7M and 2 other years at 700K.  

 

[Provost]

31 minutes ago, mll said:

Eriksson's buyout cap hit is 5.7M next season followed by 3.7M and 2 other years at 700K.  

 

...and Buying him out the next year it is $4 million and then $1 million.

 

Add in the roster player to replace that position and you don’t save much, if anything at all.  Certainly nothing in the neighbourhood of how much we need to trim. Folks aren’t joking when they say it is buyout proof.

 

The folks that are saying it is all just fine aren’t laying out any actual map for how it is fine... just pointing out a couple of things like the expiring contracts and then a bunch of hopes, or saying that we have $40 million in cap space without adding up the cost of signing the players we need.

 

The math is clear and simple.  We either don’t re-sign many/most of our expiring good value players, or we work to vacate some dead money.

 

Basically  every expiring contract is a good value player who is producing more than their current contract (Markstrom, Virtanen, Tanev, Stecher, Leivo, Gaudette, Petterson, Hughes, Pearson, Edler).

The only bad money contract coming off the books after this year is Schaller.  The year after that it is Baertschi, Benn, and Sutter.  The raises for just keeping some of the good players is more than the expiring bad money.

 

I have yet to see a laid out plan that doesn’t involve losing a ton of our depth, or making unlikely assumptions like big cap increases.  All of them also ignore pushed ELC bonuses that aren’t counted towards the cap on Capfriendly but that we still have to account for under the cap ceiling.