[Discussion] Arizona/OEL

[Chris12345]

6 minutes ago, Pete M said:

Pass on this soon to be a bad contract in 3 to 4 years....how you like the LE contract? Last three years of OEL's will be the same but at $8M.

 

No thank-you....we have up and coming dmen in the farm system that will surprise us all in a good way.

We need a vet or two more but not a soon to be wash up. Contract is bad.

 

But for the record I was against the Miller trade so I was actually wrong ONCE

Edited October 2, 2020 by Chris12345

[SilentSam]

I’d rather pick up Petrangelo, than trade for

OEL.

Petrangelo would come under OEL’s cap hit and possibly shorter term than what’s left in OEL’s contract.

Perfect pre-replacement for Edler in a year .

Solid bet presence. Solid Game..

and his “type” never really re-gress in their game.

compare to Chara, Weber, and others they break before they wear out.

use the trade bait for a different position or recapture 1st and 2nd round picks somewhere.

Our upcoming physical D men would be inspired by AP..  Woo, Rafferty, Tryamkin, Chatfeild, Breisbois...

[oldnews]

13 minutes ago, Outsiders said:

 Jake DeBrusk is also playing a factor in why a deal between BOS and ARI might not work. That is the player BOS wants to send the other way. Mostly because he's an RFA and they are having trouble agreeing to a contract. Rumours are Jake DeBrusk wants 5+ million on a long term extension. ARI is trying to shed cap in the short term as well as future so I don't see how trading for Debrusk helps them. 

Is he rumoured to be the principal?

Some of us here propose his rights as a partial return - but haven't sourced that from any rumours, etc.

I agree though - DeBrusk is over-rated - a fair amount of discussion in his availability thread - personally I wouldn't be particularly interested in him - however, if it were a relative matter - of taking his rights and a player like Vaakanainen/or 1st/ or w.h.y, with perhaps a B prospect added (assuming there are two teams showing interest here) - then would that be preferable to Juolevi and an LE dump? 

I guess the question becomes - how hard do they intend to go selling off assets?   will LE's contract actually hold value for them if they go hard enough that they are approaching a cap floor?  that is a huge gap - down to 60ish million - so it's hard to see how a deal proposing dumping LE comes anywhere close to the value of taking DeBrusk's rights - or nothing at all - relative to LE.

It may not matter / be particularly material, if Boston has tipped a tap out hand.  But if they are on any level in the talks - then you have to think DeBrusk + prospect/pick is a baseline, one that's bettter than our proposals.  DeBrusk alone might be considered preferable to Juolevi + LE.... this is where the math gets curious imo.

Edited October 2, 2020 by oldnews

[Provost]

7 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I’d rather pick up Petrangelo, than trade for

OEL.

Petrangelo would come under OEL’s cap hit and possibly shorter term than what’s left in OEL’s contract.

Perfect pre-replacement for Edler in a year .

Solid bet presence. Solid Game..

and his “type” never really re-gress in their game.

compare to Chara, Weber, and others they break before they wear out.

use the trade bait for a different position or recapture 1st and 2nd round picks somewhere.

Our upcoming physical D men would be inspired by AP..  Woo, Rafferty, Tryamkin, Chatfeild, Breisbois...

Except signing Pietrangelo isn’t free.  It would necessitate moving out cap in a separate trade... so not only wouldn’t we be able to regain high picks, we would be moving more out to entice folks to take on Eriksson and another bad contract.

 

There is also the tiny matter of Pietrangelo having a say in the matter, so unlike a video game trade he probably signs elsewhere.

 

We DO currently have a top pairing D who has expressed interest in us specifically, to the exclusion of almost every other team in the league... and could possibly be had at way under market value in trade... so that whole bird in hand saying comes into play.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Provost

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

If I'm interpreting the situation correctly, Arizona may actually see the Eriksson contract as a benefit which is crazy to even think about.  If they can find situations where they are paying less actual money than the cap floor but still reaching it they will save a ton of money.  I have no idea how they actually sell that to their fans and players, but I think it may be a case of riding out the next year of potential losses and then starting over post COVID when fans come back.

the problem as I see it with that scenario - is how truly far they are from the floor.

and taking LE back doesn't get them much closer...so they'd still have to get rid of ? 16ish ? million of cap space?

That's a fair chunk - when the majority of their veteran assets - imo - are not easy cap to move.    a lot of overpriced veteran contracts there - enough to make this team's LE and a few Roussel/Benn types pale by comparison imo.  The only really moveable veteran cap imo might be Goligoski who had an excellent season and only has a year of term remaining.

Kessel, Stepan, Hjalmarrsson for example = 18+ million of cap I would want no part whatsover of....how do they move those players in this climate?  (and two of them have NMCs to further complicate things...)

Edited October 2, 2020 by oldnews

[SilentSam]

1 minute ago, Provost said:

Except signing Pietrangelo isn’t free.  It would necessitate moving out cap in a separate trade... so not only wouldn’t we be able to regain high picks, we would be moving more out to entice folks to take on Eriksson and another bad contract.

 

There is also the tiny matter of Pietrangelo having a say in the matter, so unlike a video game he probslvy signs elsewhere.

 

We do currently have a top pairing D who has expressed interest in us specifically and could possibly be had at way under market value in trade... so that whole bird in hand saying comes into play.

We have cap leaving through attrition.

Tanevs 4.5 helps.. possibly moving Stetchers rights or letting go. 2.8?

if you were to “up” the ante on those 2 players  to re-sign your looking at a combined 8m min.

 

... I get what your saying about interests and playing here,..  

but it’s still hockey, and anything can happen.

 

I will add that I think this city and province has done an incredible job with respect to Covid.

.. and I do think that is highly attractive to players and their families,  this is an issue that will be held in high regard to many, especially to athletes.

[peaches5]

15 minutes ago, Pete M said:

7 years left on a $8M+ contract for a 29 year old dman...36 year old at the end of his contract....I think JB will be heading down the wrong road here...Number 1 dman for how long?

He is 35 at the end of his contract and almost every good dman plays well into their mid 30's. It's once they get over 35 their play starts to fall off.

[GB5]

Note to OEL; please take Vancouver off of our list. your age, recent decline,  dollars owed and remaining term are very scary to me. This is way too reminiscent of Subban and Karlson.

 

ps....if you could substitute Toronto for Vancouver I would be happy to see them stuck with this boat anchor.

[Trebreh]

the pressure is on Arizona to make this deal so if im JB im standing firm with my offer of Eriksson + Sven Bae and Juolevi 

 

kidding aside, we have backup plans if Arizona asks for too much. 

 

we can go after Cernak or Carlo instead. 

[Kobayashi Maru]

2 minutes ago, oldnews said:

the problem as I see it with that scenario - is how truly far they are from the floor.

and taking LE back doesn't get them much closer...so they'd still have to get rid of ? 16ish ? million of cap space?

That's a fair chunk - when the majority of their veteran assets - imo - are not easy cap to move.    a lot of overpriced veteran contracts there - enough to make this team's LE and a few Roussel/Benn types pale by comparison imo.  The only really moveable veteran cap imo might be Goligoski who had an excellent season and only has a year of term remaining.

Kessel, Stepan, Hjalmarrsson for example = 18+ million of cap I would want no part whatsover of....how do they move those players in this climate?  (and two of them have NMCs to further complicate things...)

They definitely have other problems, but I could see them finding ways to move those other guys.  Regardless of that aspect, if you take the players abilities right out of the equation and strictly treat it from a liabilities perspective right now they pay OEL 8.25 for 6 more years.  Eriksson counts against the cap for 6 but paid 3 million in actual cash.  Right there they save 5.25 each of the next two years and then 8.25 for the next 4 after.  Now, you have to factor in the player value so they are going to want low/no cost features in prospects and picks to make up the value but from a strict cost savings it pretty huge.

 

Their next step as you mention is to further shave salary and I think Kessel, Stephan and Hjalmarrson they could move to another team for nothing or a small return.  I don't think they'd have to pay to make them go away as they all still have some value to other teams.  I really think that Arizona because of COVID and no fans may be trying to reduce costs to as low as possible until fans and revenues return and Eriksson actually helps a lot in that case if they move the other guys.  Likely sets them up nicely for a move to a real NHL city, or even Phoenix for that matter.

[oldnews]

10 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

They definitely have other problems, but I could see them finding ways to move those other guys.  Regardless of that aspect, if you take the players abilities right out of the equation and strictly treat it from a liabilities perspective right now they pay OEL 8.25 for 6 more years.  Eriksson counts against the cap for 6 but paid 3 million in actual cash.  Right there they save 5.25 each of the next two years and then 8.25 for the next 4 after.  Now, you have to factor in the player value so they are going to want low/no cost features in prospects and picks to make up the value but from a strict cost savings it pretty huge.

 

Their next step as you mention is to further shave salary and I think Kessel, Stephan and Hjalmarrson they could move to another team for nothing or a small return.  I don't think they'd have to pay to make them go away as they all still have some value to other teams.  I really think that Arizona because of COVID and no fans may be trying to reduce costs to as low as possible until fans and revenues return and Eriksson actually helps a lot in that case if they move the other guys.  Likely sets them up nicely for a move to a real NHL city, or even Phoenix for that matter.

those are good points imo (although I might not agree with the neutral value assessments of a few of those veterans - ie if you wanted me to eat Kessel's contract, be prepared to pay me handsomely to do so)....  if they go that aggressively in cutting all costs they can, our lowball may compete - because in sending OEL here, they get that relative cash savings.

however, if Boston were to offer a DeBrusk alone, or even a Vaakanainen/Ist alone - they move the entirety of the contract and take back nothing = are that much closer to the cap floor than taking LE back would leave them.   They alone, I suppose, know the true extent of their intent to cut - but regardless, I'd either not be in the negotiation, or sticking to a relatively hard line about them taking cap back in the end - remembering that this is a relatively opportune chance to dump LE that outside these negotiations goes back to not so much....so I might compromise a bit there, and in the end, he's a hell of a player that I would spend the offseason anticipating the look of the lineup with him in it.

Edited October 2, 2020 by oldnews

[theo5789]

37 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

It has nothing do with a UFA or a trade.. why would you think a trade makes any difference.. You took a discount cause the GM tells you that is what needs to be done in order to compete for a cup and then he goes out and trades for a guy with a huge salary and larger cap hit and you think this magically changes things? It changes nothing. That logic makes absolutely no sense. 

 

also what cups did they win? They won one in 2011 and these cap friendly contracts were signed well after that and they haven't won since. 

All the more reason they will welcome one of the top defenders in the game, rather than be petty about it. I guess they would be happier if they signed Dillon instead because he fits under their salaries? Logic indeed.

[Vanisleryan]

If we did land OEL sure would go towards enticing our free agents a bit. I really don’t think we can afford Markstrom but Tanev and Toffolli, we’d have possibly the best D in the league 

Edited October 2, 2020 by Vanisleryan

[Kobayashi Maru]

16 minutes ago, Trebreh said:

the pressure is on Arizona to make this deal so if im JB im standing firm with my offer of Eriksson + Sven Bae and Juolevi 

 

kidding aside, we have backup plans if Arizona asks for too much. 

 

we can go after Cernak or Carlo instead. 

Rhymes with Carlo, but it's actually Risto....

[tas]

5 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Rhymes with Carlo, but it's actually Risto....

...you know that's not how rhyming works, right? it's important to me that you know that. 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

Yes, but if that's the principal of the deal, then Arizona might as well fold.

How's that different from basically any point in their history? 

[oldnews]

48 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I’d rather pick up Petrangelo, than trade for

OEL.

Petrangelo would come under OEL’s cap hit and possibly shorter term than what’s left in OEL’s contract.

Perfect pre-replacement for Edler in a year .

Solid bet presence. Solid Game..

and his “type” never really re-gress in their game.

compare to Chara, Weber, and others they break before they wear out.

use the trade bait for a different position or recapture 1st and 2nd round picks somewhere.

Our upcoming physical D men would be inspired by AP..  Woo, Rafferty, Tryamkin, Chatfeild, Breisbois...

so..what you're saying....is....

For example:

Give Zona a prospect or pick to take on LE (or Gaudette to Ottawa to take on LE, or whatever)....but for 'future considerations' instead of OEL.

And then sign Pietrangelo instead?

It's an interesting comparable alternative outcome - but do those dance partners line up with us?

Is that preferable?

I wonder what the actual marketplace will be, even for a UFA like AP.....if Zona hypothetically couldn't even dump an OEL for a prospect/pick to a couple relatively competitive teams, one (Boston) that would appear a pretty good and readily workable fit...then what will AP be able to command on the market?

If a player like Ekman-larsson's market value tanks that dramatically - what is a Nylander worth on the open market?  What are the Leafs' 11 milllion forwards worth in a cap crash?

Edited October 3, 2020 by oldnews

[Kobayashi Maru]

8 minutes ago, oldnews said:

those are good points imo (although I might not agree with the neutral value assessments of a few of those veterans - ie if you wanted me to eat Kessel's contract, be prepared to pay me handsomely to do so)....  if they go that aggressively in cutting all costs they can, our lowball may compete - because in sending OEL here, they get that relative cash savings.

however, if Boston were to offer a DeBrusk alone, or even a Vaakanainen/Ist alone - they move the entirety of the contract and take back nothing = are that much closer to the cap floor than taking LE back would leave them.   They alone, I suppose, know the true extent of their intent to cut - but regardless, I'd either not be in the negotiation, or sticking to a relatively hard line about them taking cap back in the end - remembering that this is a relatively opportune chance to dump LE that outside these negotiations goes back to not so much....so I might compromise a bit there, and in the end, he's a hell of a player that I would spend the offseason anticipating the look of the lineup with him in it.

Yeah it's definitely close.  I think Kessel still has value with his contract, Stepan negative value and Hjalmarson neutral value.  Either way I fully agree that if this actually helps in moving LE then you have to consider that it would likely require a 1st or Jake to move him separately.  I think if the Canucks are the only negotiators they can find a deal that works for both situations.  Could be a game changer for the Nucks.

[Mike Vanderhoek]

45 minutes ago, Pete M said:

7 years left on a $8M+ contract for a 29 year old dman...36 year old at the end of his contract....I think JB will be heading down the wrong road here...Number 1 dman for how long?

 

44 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

We need a vet or two more but not a soon to be wash up. Contract is bad.

 

But for the record I was against the Miller trade so I was actually wrong ONCE

 

28 minutes ago, GarthButcher5 said:

Note to OEL; please take Vancouver off of our list. your age, recent decline,  dollars owed and remaining term are very scary to me. This is way too reminiscent of Subban and Karlson.

 

ps....if you could substitute Toronto for Vancouver I would be happy to see them stuck with this boat anchor.

Why do people continue to look upon his age and contract length as a negative ? you have a caphit that won't increase during the next seven years on a player who will be a reliable and top tier dman very realistically by the time his contract expires. He plays less hard minutes then players like Tanev and Edler, his playing style is that in which he will have more years left or gas in the tank when he reaches Edler's age. Yes the caphit is high, but tell me how often you get a chance to obtain a top tier dman in the NHL ? Could prove a very good addition two fold - Hughes has less opposition pressure on him and OEL maybe in a touch of a lesser role could increase his production not to mention make the PP 1 or 2 very dangerous.

 

You always take a risk on trade, you really try to make it work when a top dman is available and its publicly known he wants to play on your club.

 

When his contract is up he will be 36, he is not old because he is not 23 yrs old in a video game.

[cyacry]

47 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I’d rather pick up Petrangelo, than trade for

OEL.

Petrangelo would come under OEL’s cap hit and possibly shorter term than what’s left in OEL’s contract.

Perfect pre-replacement for Edler in a year .

Solid bet presence. Solid Game..

and his “type” never really re-gress in their game.

compare to Chara, Weber, and others they break before they wear out.

use the trade bait for a different position or recapture 1st and 2nd round picks somewhere.

Our upcoming physical D men would be inspired by AP..  Woo, Rafferty, Tryamkin, Chatfeild, Breisbois...

Petrangelo is UFA though, so there will for sure be more competition in signing him over trading for OEL (since rumour is he will only waive for two teams).