In The Cap World With A Cap Problem.

[captainhorvat]

6 hours ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Right now the Canucks have over 12 mil off the books with injured players. Edler, Sutter, Motte and Graovac, with the additional 6+mil cap hit for Luongo, Spooner and Baerstchi

Even at the start of the season they were millions over but had Roussel off the books and the way the cap works the longer off the more they can adjust the dollars.

 

Who goes when Edler and Sutter come back? Even if they sent Eriksson down they still get a 5 mil cap hit.

 

This team's cap situation may be the worst in the league right now. They are so capped out and have too many contracts.

 

Benning cannot trade for players, there is no room.

ONE of the only ways he can make space is to trade Eriksson but other teams will want a top draft pick added, Eriksson is now that bad contract traded from team to team with draft picks added.

How ele wil he conjure up cap space? Already the team has compromised a prospect, Gaudette. He will not pass through waivers now.

 

Benning will have to trade away roster players for picks or AHL players.

 

Maybe if he trades Markstorm maybe he can get a pick to add to an Eriksson trade and take 10 mil off the cap, that still would not free up enough for trades but then he would not have to lose players for free.

 

 

 

[Junkyard Dog]

3 minutes ago, IBatch said:

This is all true - but at the end of next year we also need to sign EP and then Hughes ... that's going to eat up some serious coin, even if they both get bridged which is possible - but probably not wise.  Don't see a plan in there for that - and it also happens to be why I think we should be seriously thinking about letting Markstrom walk (if we are in the playoffs at the TDL) and looking for a serviceable cheap vet to work with Demko. 

Hughes won't be as much as people think imo. Young D don't usually sign big money deals right away and he won't have any arbitration rights since he burned a year early like Boeser.

 

Year after we get 16 Million once Roussel, Beagle, Loui and Lou are off the books.

 

I don't think cap will be an issue we would be at a point where we would have signed our young guys and have a bunch of other contracts expire.

[Nuxfanabroad]

No lyrics today(on holidays!)..but I swear James Brown could do something with this title.

[Nucksfollower1983]

2 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

In a post prohibition world we have a problem. It's Monday and I am drinking Old Mill.

 

 

that's a problem on any day of the week, not just a monday

[VIC_CITY]

6 hours ago, erkayloomeh said:

If a player (like Lou Eriksson for ex.) Gets injured in a fight in practice, can he go on LTIR saving us cap? 

If so , QH I have a job for you . 

If Quinn can't get it done, I hear Tanya Harding is looking for work.

[VIC_CITY]

1 hour ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Hughes won't be as much as people think imo. Young D don't usually sign big money deals right away and he won't have any arbitration rights since he burned a year early like Boeser.

 

Year after we get 16 Million once Roussel, Beagle, Loui and Lou are off the books.

 

I don't think cap will be an issue we would be at a point where we would have signed our young guys and have a bunch of other contracts expire.

The new TV deal will be signed by then as well, so you have to think the cap will go up by $5M, maybe more in the next few years.

[erkayloomeh]

9 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

If Quinn can't get it done, I hear Tanya Harding is looking for work.

Lou would never lace them up again. 

Toast 

[rychicken]

4 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

Does this post end the thread... Math usually has only one correct answer, and you are correct sir.  

 

This is unless the CDC decides two plus two equals potatoes or whatever today.  

there are a lot here that would make great Ministers of Finance....

[canuckpuckluck1]

1 hour ago, VIC_CITY said:

The new TV deal will be signed by then as well, so you have to think the cap will go up by $5M, maybe more in the next few years.

With the Leafs so far in the hole with their cap issues, and being the media darlings of the league...maybe there is a significant increase in the cap...like $10M....hmmm

[VIC_CITY]

Just now, canuckpuckluck15 said:

With the Leafs so far in the hole with their cap issues, and being the media darlings of the league...maybe there is a significant increase in the cap...like $10M....hmmm

I see what you did there but an escalating cap is good for everyone, owners included.

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

This is all true - but at the end of next year we also need to sign EP and then Hughes ... that's going to eat up some serious coin, even if they both get bridged which is possible - but probably not wise.  Don't see a plan in there for that - and it also happens to be why I think we should be seriously thinking about letting Markstrom walk (if we are in the playoffs at the TDL) and looking for a serviceable cheap vet to work with Demko. 

It's certainly an option. There are many ways it can play out, but our cap isn't as bad as the OP is making it seem and it's due to the depth of the team. We do have some dead weight, but it will get sorted out.

[Drakrami]

8 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Hughes won't be as much as people think imo. Young D don't usually sign big money deals right away and he won't have any arbitration rights since he burned a year early like Boeser.

 

Year after we get 16 Million once Roussel, Beagle, Loui and Lou are off the books.

 

I don't think cap will be an issue we would be at a point where we would have signed our young guys and have a bunch of other contracts expire.

So what do you think a 70 point defensemen will get? If Hughes keeps up his production, we are looking at 5.5mil per year minimum. Pettersson, 9million minimum. We will also have to give Gaudette/Virtanen a raise to around 2.5mil each. We will have to re-sign Demko to a bridge that's another 3.5mil. Not to mention our defense lineup likes bare 2 years from now with Edler and Tanev getting old. That 16 million you are talking about doesn't look enough, does it? And I am just talking about minimums here. If any player holds out and requests more, then we are in for some fun. 

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, Drakrami said:

So what do you think a 70 point defensemen will get? If Hughes keeps up his production, we are looking at 5.5mil per year minimum. Pettersson, 9million minimum. We will also have to give Gaudette/Virtanen a raise to around 2.5mil each. We will have to re-sign Demko to a bridge that's another 3.5mil. Not to mention our defense lineup likes bare 2 years from now with Edler and Tanev getting old. That 16 million you are talking about doesn't look enough, does it? And I am just talking about minimums here. If any player holds out and requests more, then we are in for some fun. 

5.5  on the low side - part of it will also have to do with what Dahlin, Makar and Heiskanen get and where QH fits in that scheme - good post. 

 

9 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Hughes won't be as much as people think imo. Young D don't usually sign big money deals right away and he won't have any arbitration rights since he burned a year early like Boeser.

 

Year after we get 16 Million once Roussel, Beagle, Loui and Lou are off the books.

 

I don't think cap will be an issue we would be at a point where we would have signed our young guys and have a bunch of other contracts expire.

He's not getting Werenksi - McAvoy type money; even on a bridge unless his play drops down to their level.   He's playing like a superstar defenseman and those get paid, even if it's less than EP it won't be much less if keeps it up.  More then BB for sure if he keeps it up.  The two could easily eat up all the 16 million you referred to in another post leaving virtually nothing for the remaining guys.   Markstrom would help, as would LE sent packing but even one year of his salary will cost a first (see Marlaeu) and will come at a cost.  If JM is at his highest and we could recover a first as a rental then do it, if it's a Lack like return still do it.  Unless other guys can get traded to clear space and the cap goes way up, this team can't re-sign everyone.   The OP is might be a tad over anxious about it - but he's actually right to be concerned. 

[Ajax-]

18 hours ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Right now the Canucks have over 12 mil off the books with injured players. Edler, Sutter, Motte and Graovac, with the additional 6+mil cap hit for Luongo, Spooner and Baerstchi

Even at the start of the season they were millions over but had Roussel off the books and the way the cap works the longer off the more they can adjust the dollars.

 

Who goes when Edler and Sutter come back? Even if they sent Eriksson down they still get a 5 mil cap hit.

 

This team's cap situation may be the worst in the league right now. They are so capped out and have too many contracts.

 

Benning cannot trade for players, there is no room.

ONE of the only ways he can make space is to trade Eriksson but other teams will want a top draft pick added, Eriksson is now that bad contract traded from team to team with draft picks added.

How ele wil he conjure up cap space? Already the team has compromised a prospect, Gaudette. He will not pass through waivers now.

 

Benning will have to trade away roster players for picks or AHL players.

 

Maybe if he trades Markstorm maybe he can get a pick to add to an Eriksson trade and take 10 mil off the cap, that still would not free up enough for trades but then he would not have to lose players for free.

 

 

 

I'm sorry but what exactly are you saying? questioning? seeking opinions? 

[theo5789]

6 hours ago, Drakrami said:

So what do you think a 70 point defensemen will get? If Hughes keeps up his production, we are looking at 5.5mil per year minimum. Pettersson, 9million minimum. We will also have to give Gaudette/Virtanen a raise to around 2.5mil each. We will have to re-sign Demko to a bridge that's another 3.5mil. Not to mention our defense lineup likes bare 2 years from now with Edler and Tanev getting old. That 16 million you are talking about doesn't look enough, does it? And I am just talking about minimums here. If any player holds out and requests more, then we are in for some fun. 

If any player holds out, then it's a good thing we have been drafting decently to replace them and they can enjoy throwing their NHL career away. I think Pettersson might not sign for as much as many fear. I will reassess after next season, but I bet he signs for around 7.5 million at this point. Many though Boeser was going to get 7 or 8 million, but he didn't. Hughes might get more than that if we sign him long term, but I would agree that's about the amount if he bridged. At least we have an owner willing to spend to the cap. Once all the dead weight comes off and with the cap rising, we should be able to manage.

 

We are talking like we have 3 players signed over 10 million dollars...

[Phat Fingers]

21 hours ago, erkayloomeh said:

If a player (like Lou Eriksson for ex.) Gets injured in a fight in practice, can he go on LTIR saving us cap? 

If so , QH I have a job for you . 

Hove that job to a either Goldy or Baer.  Want to stop riding the bus...  I have a favour though.  

[ItTakesAnArmy]

21 hours ago, The_Rocket said:

Only way this team runs into cap problems is if they want to make a serious add in free agency in the next two years (ie Barrie at 8 million or something). Even if that happens, there are still ways of staying under. Don’t worry about the cap, it’s fine

Lets say the team is close at the TDL, how does the team make a trade? Who could they trade, they HAVE to move cap space to make a trade?

 

Hughes can be cheap for his next two deals under this CBA, RFA's don't have much leverage, of course if a team gives him an offer sheet

20 hours ago, gurn said:

Yep, saw that earlier; I was just saying imo the guy is an NHL player and no longer a prospect thus he is not "compromised" as a poster was alleging.

Compromised, Gaudette, meaning no longer waiver exempt so he cannot be sent down without being exposed AND possibly needing protection at the expansion draft.

 

 

21 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Why do we need to trade for players exactly? Why would we be taking on more cap in a trade too? Unless you're thinking we should trade prospects and picks for players, which I'm sure you'd also complain about if Benning did. As of right now, we don't need to do anything else, which is why we don't need to worry about it. There isn't going to be a deal out there where we wish we could've done had we had more cap space.

 

You're forgetting that the cap can and most likely will increase. This is an unknown as to how much, but generally will go up.

 

We have a projected 14 million in cap space next season without the unknown cap increase. 14/21 players signed. We have to make some decisions on who to keep and let walk away, but it should be workable with the depth we have that can slot in. I imagine we work on moving Sutter even at a low return and may have to retain (say 50% retention would still net us about 1.5 million as we would have to add a cheap depth player as well). Sign Marky for 6, Jake for 2.5, Gaudette bridged at 2.5, Motte at 1.5, possibly Tryamkin at 2.5 plus cheap depth at about 2.7 million total. That brings us up to 17.7 million added for next season which doesn't seem out of reach with the cap going up. Would need to worry about bonus carry-over, but at that point, we look at the trade market to unload a year of Baertschi or move on from Pearson at higher value and possibly give someone like Hoglander or Lind a good look at making the roster.

 

After next season, things open up even more with Baertschi and Sutter off the books (if we haven't moved on from them already or bought out Sven to open up even more space). We could be adding a Podkolzin at this point on an ELC that could potentially boost our top 6 and provide more cap savings. There the expansion draft that could take off some more cap space here as well.

 

Then the following season LE will be off the books (again if not removed already at this point) and that's 6 million + cap increases to help pay for some extensions.

 

We are just fine cap-wise and Benning and crew seem to have it all figured out. Benning was the one that suggested we didn't have as much cap space as it seemed when we had like 20+ million in cap space. They are cognizant of the situation and have planned accordingly. The Luongo recapture was planned for as well in that if it hadn't occurred, then we either would've added another player or signed a higher end player instead of Ferland at the time.

A possibility, but the NHLPA could decide that.

How much money do you think the owners will allow to be buried, if Eriksson goes down which is only a million off the cap anyway, then he has over 8 mil in Utica. If people thought they were interfering owners before they should reconsider that under this leadership all the losses they have allowed, money spent, capped out every year and devaluation of the team with lowered market sales and tickets.

I think there is a line.

It is not the owners fault for bad contracts or evaluations but IMO they have been exceptionally tolerant of spending money for the results but 8+ mil in the minors might be too much even for them.

Sven and Brandon off the books for the 2021/2022 season will help, not for the Seattle draft at this point though.

What about Tanev? Re-sign, trade or let walk? Surely he will want similar money to Myers or Edler is he stays.

Markstrom should be dealt while the market is hot and his value is high AND while still under contract, Re-sign and it is a raise to ? 4.5 mil with term and clause?

Is Stecher trade bait, moving his 2+ mil helps but there is that depth thing even if Tryamkin comes back, what if JB makes it a Stecher vs Tryamkin thing, he has trade one to help the team?

 

The bonuses next year are if the kiddies make their marks, if the team gets close to the playoffs they probably will and most posters hope so. Another 4.5+ mil hit

19 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

On 12/9/2019 at 8:21 PM, MattJVD said:

Edler, Motte, and Graovac are not off the books, just off the roster. Their cap hit is still applied. 

 

With all our injured players back, (meaning 16 forwards, 8 D, 2 golies). We'd be at an 82,798,206 cap hit, over the cap by $1,298,206. (Including our buyout, recapture penalty, and burried players). We would be 3 players over the roster limit with all of those players back, so 3 would have to be sent down. Sending down the cheapest 3 players would net us $2,315,000 in cap space, making us cap and roster compliant with over 1 mil in cap space.

Does this post end the thread... Math usually has only one correct answer, and you are correct sir.  

 

This is unless the CDC decides two plus two equals potatoes or whatever today.

You forgot the bonuses 4.5+ mil

[ItTakesAnArmy]

23 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Sherlock, you might wanna apply that magnifying glass to the cap list of our incoming opponent. There's more unnecessary drama in that post than a daytime soap!

The only thing about the other team is whether it is a winner or a loser and how they got to where they are. I could care less about TO's cap unless they are winning, which they have been doing a lot more than the Canucks, looking at the cap is not just seasonal so for TO being capped out they have won and played in the playoffs a lot more than the Canucks, which is not a stretch considering how bad this team has spent it's money and the result, club history of the worst 4 year period ever.

Nobody wins the cup because they spend less only more wisely and with intelligence, future planning and imagination, all of which has not been evident over the last 5 years.

 

 

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

cap unless they are winning, which they have been doing a lot more than the Canucks,

Not this year.

[spur1]

1 hour ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

The only thing about the other team is whether it is a winner or a loser and how they got to where they are. I could care less about TO's cap unless they are winning, which they have been doing a lot more than the Canucks, looking at the cap is not just seasonal so for TO being capped out they have won and played in the playoffs a lot more than the Canucks, which is not a stretch considering how bad this team has spent it's money and the result, club history of the worst 4 year period ever.

Nobody wins the cup because they spend less only more wisely and with intelligence, future planning and imagination, all of which has not been evident over the last 5 years.

 

 

Thanks for clearing things up...it all makes sense now. You are a Laffs fan.