[proposal]Virtanen as a sweetener to move Brandon Sutter (retention required?)

[the grinder]

1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:

Well, they're in a rebuild right now. Eventually they'll be very good with Zadina, Rasmussen, Svechnikov, Veleno and Seider developing. A good young goalie gives them a better chance to win now and down the road. Otherwise DET will be like the Oilers, a lot of scoring talent, but can't keep the puck out of their net. DET would still have guys like Abdelkader, Mantha, Nielsen, Larkin - and Virtanen. Maybe they add a few more veterans (like Sutter) to carry the load until the youngens arrive. 

why would Detroit want to trade Bertuzzi for ?  they could simply sign a free agent goalie ie lehner . marky  etc   and keep Bertuzzi  . plus big Zack is our "bertuzzi" and he is going to do some damage this play in/ playoffs  

[luckylager]

[Coconuts]

Moving Virtanen to move Sutter seems silly tbh. Sutter's got one year left at roughly 4.4m, if we're really serious about saving cap we'd be better off retaining 50% of his remaining year and trading him. 

 

Sutter at 4.4 is a bit much, but 2.2? He's definitely serviceable at 2.2m. If we're able to do that without bringing salary back that's roughly 2.2m cap space freed up. 

[canuktravella]

  as bad as some of bennings contracts are  eriksson sutter and rousell can be either sent to minors like baertchi  that frees up 4 mill in cap  but might be a record for bad contracts in minors 4.5 plus 6 plus 3 plus 3.66   17.16 mill in minors  or  half cap can be retained on sutter and eriksson  perhaps teams would want sutter at 2.23 or eriksson at 3. but no giving youth away 

 

[Ballisticsports.]

Throw Jake in to get rid of a foundational player in Sutter, who only has 1 year left?

No, I would not do that deal

 

Apparently Gear had a plan, let him fix this problem of too many high priced guys sitting on the bench,, Ahl or not earning their keep

He even got a promotion for it

Stick with the plan (whatever it is) no more getting rid of picks and prospects anymore , to dump or pick up vets (As that doesn't make it look like there was a plan then) and definitely, not a good one

[Gawdzukes]

12 hours ago, Pears said:

Can we honestly stop making proposals that include us attaching one of our good young players/prospects just to get out of a contract a year or two early?

 

12 hours ago, Fanuck said:

^This! 

JV has shown legit potential to be a 20g+ scorer who's physically involved in the game and who, while he's still learning the ropes on/off the ice of being a pro athlete, is young enough that he could be considered a 'core' asset for a long time.  

 

Can't adequately relate how frustrating it is to see all these threads about trading Jake/Brock/Demko/Gawd/ect..

 

Maybe some ppl haven't been around long enough to remember what it was like when we had NO prospects/young kids whatsoever of this caliber?  

 

Yeah, I get the issues of the cap and contract clauses but giving away all of our depth doesn't sound like a way to build a contender. 

 

Internet + dumb + 12 yrs old =  EA Sports

 

solve for answer

[VforVasili]

The OP can consider himself excommunicated. 

[Provost]

You should be able to do better offloading salary if you are ditching a young relatively low cost player that was drafted high and still has some upside.

Think about the asking price for guys like Puljujarvi and Andersson (from the Rangers)... is Jake worth significantly less than those guys?  He is more accomplished than them by far, but at the same time has shown more that he might not have the same potential.

You should be able to offload longer term money or also get something back by offloading a younger player like that.  I am not disagreeing that he could be used as a trade chip to get rid of money.

Either both Sutter and Baertschi or Jake + something for Eriksson.

[mll]

25 minutes ago, Provost said:

You should be able to do better offloading salary if you are ditching a young relatively low cost player that was drafted high and still has some upside.

Think about the asking price for guys like Puljujarvi and Andersson (from the Rangers)... is Jake worth significantly less than those guys?  He is more accomplished than them by far, but at the same time has shown more that he might not have the same potential.

You should be able to offload longer term money or also get something back by offloading a younger player like that.  I am not disagreeing that he could be used as a trade chip to get rid of money.

Either both Sutter and Baertschi or Jake + something for Eriksson.

Sutter 4.4 + Baertschi 3.4 + Virtanen - don't see any team wanting that combo at close to 10M.    

[BPA]

I would not be opposed to trading JV + LE for a prospect RH D (if possible).  We have serviceable wingers to replace JV and potential prospects (Hogs / Podz / Lind) coming up.

 

I would let Leivo + Stecher walk.  I think we can survive without them.

 

Unless Markstrom and Toffoli and Tanev sign for $5M on 3yr contracts, I'd seriously think of letting them walk as well.  Yes it would be a step back but better than being in cap hell.

Edited July 21, 2020 by BPA

[Gawdzukes]

3 minutes ago, BPA said:

I would not be opposed to trading JV + LE for a prospect RH D (if possible).  We have serviceable wingers to replace JV and potential prospects (Hogs / Podz / Lind) coming up.

 

I would let Leivo + Stecher walk.  I think we can survive without them.

 

Unless Markstrom and Toffoli and Tanev sign for $5M on 3yr contracts, I'd seriously think of letting them walk as well.  Yes it would be a step back but better than being in cap hell.

Cap Hell is only as bad as you make it out to be in your own mind. I would rather have great players and have to do some math and thinking than be under the cap. The goal is to win hockey games. Not solve a math puzzle.

[BPA]

1 minute ago, Gawdzukes said:

Cap Hell is only as bad as you make it out to be in your own mind. I would rather have great players and have to do some math and thinking than be under the cap. The goal is to win hockey games. Not solve a math puzzle.

Sure.  Let's keep everyone then. But that's not how it's going to work. 

 

We already know it's probably not possible to resign all 3 of Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev.  So some moves need to be made.

[Ballisticsports.]

33 minutes ago, mll said:

Sutter 4.4 + Baertschi 3.4 + Virtanen - don't see any team wanting that combo at close to 10M.    

A downer to think of all the sour contracts that no other team would be interested in and that we have to throw in sweeteners now to unload them

Maybe the man paying for this, will put a stop to this, before aging vets cost us even more young players

[Ballisticsports.]

2 minutes ago, BPA said:

Sure.  Let's keep everyone then. But that's not how it's going to work. 

 

We already know it's probably not possible to resign all 3 of Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev.  So some moves need to be made.

Yes it is no longer 2004

Teams need to be sure of who they commit cap money on now and not just throw it around and worry on how to deal with it later.

They have to have a plan to be successful

We are told there is one for us, i just hope it is going along as planned and it all works out for the best

[theo5789]

20 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

[proposal]Virtanen as a sweetener to move Brandon Sutter (retention required?)
 

Few questions:

 

1) Would Virtanen being used as a sweetener be enough to move Sutter?

 

2) With Virtanen as a sweetener, would retention still likely be required to move Sutter?  If so, how much?

 

Assuming that we were able to make the above move without retention, we would clear $5,625,000 of cap.  
 

Miller-Pettersson-Toffoli

Pearson-Horvat-Boeser

Roussel-Gaudette-MacEwen

Motte-Beagle-Eriksson 

 

If Ferland is healthy, Motte switches to the right side and Eriksson comes out of the line-up.

 

FWIW - I would also let Leivo walk (1.5 million off the books) and also unqualify Stecher (2.325 million) to clear up another 3.825 million, which would give us about 9.45 million in extra cap.  
 

In an independent deal, Demko + draft pick should be a good enough sweetener to move Eriksson which would give us a little more than an extra 7 million in cap.  
 

That should be more than enough money to re-sign Toffoli, Markstrom, and Tanev.

Most of the talk has been covered, but I just want to point out that we aren't "saving" cap by letting Leivo and Stecher go. They are not in the cap equation for next season as of right now anyway. Capfriendly has us at just over 17 million in cap space next season to sign whoever we want to sign or not. Technically we wouldn't be saving cap on Virtanen either, but it is likely that we are signing him with a raise too.

 

So in your original proposal, all we would "save" is Sutter's cap for next season. If we can move out Eriksson using Demko, then we have to replace Demko. Even if we can get a cheap backup, all we would "save" there is the 6 million. So is it worth moving Jake and Demko (+whatever else needed) to save about 10 million in cap space? Potentially, but I think that "whatever else" we need to add will be significant.

[mll]

6 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Most of the talk has been covered, but I just want to point out that we aren't "saving" cap by letting Leivo and Stecher go. They are not in the cap equation for next season as of right now anyway. Capfriendly has us at just over 17 million in cap space next season to sign whoever we want to sign or not. Technically we wouldn't be saving cap on Virtanen either, but it is likely that we are signing him with a raise too.

 

So in your original proposal, all we would "save" is Sutter's cap for next season. If we can move out Eriksson using Demko, then we have to replace Demko. Even if we can get a cheap backup, all we would "save" there is the 6 million. So is it worth moving Jake and Demko (+whatever else needed) to save about 10 million in cap space? Potentially, but I think that "whatever else" we need to add will be significant.

The bonus overage of this season hasn't been accounted for yet - it's at least 1.7M that will come in deduction of the available cap space.  Both Pettersson and Hughes have hit their schedule A of 850K each. 

[Pears]

46 minutes ago, BPA said:

Sure.  Let's keep everyone then. But that's not how it's going to work. 

 

We already know it's probably not possible to resign all 3 of Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev.  So some moves need to be made.

CapFriendly currently has us at $17,075,128. So let’s say we give Markstrom and Toffoli five or six years at $6M per each. That leaves about $5M to sign Tanev so really, we just gotta move one or two contracts to be able to sign Virtanen, Gaudette, Motte, MacEwen etc. 

[mll]

9 minutes ago, Pears said:

CapFriendly currently has us at $17,075,128. So let’s say we give Markstrom and Toffoli five or six years at $6M per each. That leaves about $5M to sign Tanev so really, we just gotta move one or two contracts to be able to sign Virtanen, Gaudette, Motte, MacEwen etc. 

There's a bonus overage - you have to deduct at least 1.7M from that amount.  CapFriendly hasn't done the numbers yet.  

[theo5789]

9 minutes ago, mll said:

There's a bonus overage - you have to deduct at least 1.7M from that amount.  CapFriendly hasn't done the numbers yet.  

Ah yes I thought about that, but I forgot to write it down.

[theo5789]

22 minutes ago, Pears said:

CapFriendly currently has us at $17,075,128. So let’s say we give Markstrom and Toffoli five or six years at $6M per each. That leaves about $5M to sign Tanev so really, we just gotta move one or two contracts to be able to sign Virtanen, Gaudette, Motte, MacEwen etc. 

Say Marky and Tanev come in at around 11 million. Minus the bonus overage leaves about 4.5 million left. I imagine we buyout Baertschi. Even then, we may have to make a small move to sign the rest of those guys and fill in whatever spots left in the lineup. IMO, Toffoli is only signed if we can move out some of the big contracts (which I think is unlikely). An alternative is we trade Boeser for a top 4 RD at roughly the same cost of less, but in the end it's at wing where it's going to take the hit and we have the youth there to hopefully up the odds of replacement one or the other.

 

Optimistically, I hope we get Marky signed to 5.5 million for 6 years (likely with no movement clause), Tanev at 4.5 for 4 years (less term would be better, but would also bump up the dollar amount then) and thus only 10 million committed to the two, so an extra million to work with. If we do sign Toffoli, I'm hoping it's closer to 5 million rather than 6, which would simply be unaffordable for us IMO. Even at 5 million, we would have to move out Baertschi, Sutter and Roussel (Eriksson will be tough to move) to get it done I would think. In other words, it's not going to be easy. I would try to move Sutter and Roussel with some retention (hopefully not 50%) as that likely doesn't cost us any major assets.

 

I could see a situation where Sutter and Ferland potentially on the IR, which may open up some room, but it makes things more complicated.