SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Saskleaf

Saskoiler for now
Member Since
Apr. 29, 2020
Favourite Team
Toronto Maple Leafs
2nd Favourite Team
Edmonton Oilers
Forum Posts
13344
Posts per Day
8.9
Forum: Other LeaguesMay 27 at 5:56 p.m.
Thread: The Future of Salary Swish
Not entirely where to post this, so apologies if its frowned upon to post it here. I dont use twitter and thats generally the most active social media for stuff like this. Not sure how much overlap there is between the moderation team here and over at SalarySwish, but I'd just like to put it out there.

Since it's release, I have gotten a surprising amount of use out of SalarySwish. The one thing I really wish it had was social features similar to the ones found here. An Armchair GM on SalarySwish would grow the website substantially, and even just introducing forums to discuss everything would be awesome. One of the most underrated things about this site is the trade / signing discussion forums. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this, just curious as to what the plans are for a website that I genuinely like. Thanks!
Forum: NHL TradesMon. at 9:24 p.m.
Thread: (TBL/NSH) - McDonagh for Myers, Mismash
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>sensonfire</b></div><div>1. Tampa never bought out Philippe Myers.

In this thread, you implied repeatedly that it was going to happen.

It didn't.




2. You also said, "Trade value is irrelevant if a NTC blocks a team from extracting it".



McDonagh had a NTC and specifically asked for a trade back to Tampa.

Much like Tarasenko having a NTC and specifically asking for a trade to Florida.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/nhl/predators/2024/05/21/barry-trotz-ryan-mcdonagh-trade-nashville-predators-tampa-bay-lightning/73788303007/



Knowing that they were asked by Nashville to re-acquire McDonagh, Tampa could have decided not to allow Nashville to extract any trade value.

Given that McDonagh was traded by Tampa to Nashville for next to nothing besides the cap space.

They decided to give Nashville a 2nd round pick instead.

Trade value is relevant.




3. You said, "there is an opportunity cost for them to acquire McDonagh, which is they now tie up 27 million on him that could have been used on a different player".

Why should Tampa have to pay a 2nd round pick for the opportunity cost of acquiring McDonagh while Nashville didn't have to pay anything ?

Doesn't seem fair.

This is like Patrick asking Spongebob for the opportunity cost of borrowing a quarter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeTbIa-OsMQ




4. You said, "If Tampa can make better use of that 27 million than they would by keeping McDonagh, the trade is a win for them."

Apparently, they couldn't.




5. Trades aren't supposed to be win/win situations.

Trades are supposed to be zero sum games.

Everything else is spin.

It's very simple stuff.</div></div>

If your main point here is that Tampa overpaid by giving Nashville a 2nd-round pick to re-acquire McDonagh in 2024, I agree with you on that (assuming McDonagh asked for a trade to Tampa and Nashville felt that keeping him wasn't a good option), but that doesn't make this 2022 trade a mistake. They needed to shed cap hit at the time, and they thought trading McDonagh was the best way to do that (though as I said in my comments at the time, he's not the first person I would have tried to move for that). Since then they've shed some other contracts and the cap has gone up, so now they can afford to take his contract back.

I disagree with your claim that trades aren't supposed to be win/win. Teams go into most trades thinking it's going to make them better at some point, so if both teams get what they think they're going to get out of it, it's a win/win. Sometimes it's more about minimizing a loss, like getting whatever you can for a pending UFA before the deadline, but minimizing a loss can also be thought of as a win.
Forum: NHL TradesMay 31 at 5:42 p.m.
Thread: (TBL/NSH) - McDonagh for Myers, Mismash
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>budgeteam</b></div><div>They are still the same.

Tampa traded McDonagh for an asset (cap space).

They used that asset.

Circumstances changed and they reacquired him.

Both teams realized value from both of the trades. It's very simple stuff. Most of the disconnect comes from people failing to view cap as an asset.

Nothing I originally said in the post you quoted was invalidated by Tampa re-acquiring McDonagh 2 years later.</div></div>

1. Tampa never bought out Philippe Myers.

In this thread, you implied repeatedly that it was going to happen.

It didn't.




2. You also said, "Trade value is irrelevant if a NTC blocks a team from extracting it".



McDonagh had a NTC and specifically asked for a trade back to Tampa.

Much like Tarasenko having a NTC and specifically asking for a trade to Florida.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/nhl/predators/2024/05/21/barry-trotz-ryan-mcdonagh-trade-nashville-predators-tampa-bay-lightning/73788303007/



Knowing that they were asked by Nashville to re-acquire McDonagh, Tampa could have decided not to allow Nashville to extract any trade value.

Given that McDonagh was traded by Tampa to Nashville for next to nothing besides the cap space.

They decided to give Nashville a 2nd round pick instead.

Trade value is relevant.




3. You said, "there is an opportunity cost for them to acquire McDonagh, which is they now tie up 27 million on him that could have been used on a different player".

Why should Tampa have to pay a 2nd round pick for the opportunity cost of acquiring McDonagh while Nashville didn't have to pay anything ?

Doesn't seem fair.

This is like Patrick asking Spongebob for the opportunity cost of borrowing a quarter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeTbIa-OsMQ




4. You said, "If Tampa can make better use of that 27 million than they would by keeping McDonagh, the trade is a win for them."

Apparently, they couldn't.




5. Trades aren't supposed to be win/win situations.

Trades are supposed to be zero sum games.

Everything else is spin.

It's very simple stuff.
Forum: NHLMay 10 at 8:40 a.m.
Thread: New 3v3 league with 30m salary cap
It is reported that teams will carry 14 players, 2 of which are goalies.

At a time the nhl is experiencing talent dilution via expansion, a 30 mil salary cap for 14 players will absolutely lead to scenarios where players can earn more if they leave the nhl, especially the lower/middle tier of player.

As a result, there will be more talent dilution.

Top end players will do even better, as their peers are further watered down.

Most nhl records are now in jeopardy.

Thoughts?

Here’s mine:

1. I think every player in the nhl just got a huge raise. The nhl will have to pay to keep its talent. Unsure if most are aware how labor markets work, yours included: —-increase in pay for one peer is inevitable and eventual increase in pay for all—-. Is why your govt is afraid to raise min wage, messaging makes you believe fast food workers don’t deserve it. It just hurts you to go along with that, even if you’re on the top of the pyramid, as the bottom of the pyramid is your consumer base.

2. I think lock outs become dangerous for the nhl because there is an alternative. I don’t think there will be a lockout in the short/medium term.

3. I’m not interested in the financier, but that is out of my control. Shrug emoji.

4. The nhl has to be furious, it just lost some expansion power. The price of a franchise is high because there is demand. This gobbles up demand.

5. The talent dilution may force the nhl to pause expansion plans while the talent base catches up.

6. The best thing the nhl can do is prevent ideal markets from joining is offering them a guaranteed expansion at an interesting cost, but it’s probably too late, the announcement alone is extreme damage.