SalarySwishSalarySwish

Helping Anaheim

Created by: JT_Miller
Team: 2016-17 New Jersey Devils
Initial Creation Date: Feb. 11, 2017
Published: Feb. 11, 2017
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Legend
Left Handed
Original Team
Waivers Exempt
Right Handed
Position
Trade Clause
Max Perf. Bonus
Expiry Status
Term Remaining
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
Waivers ExemptMcDavid, Connor
$12,500,000 (Performance Bonus$250,000)
C
NMC
UFA - 5
Description
Even If the Ducks convince Bieksa to waive his NMC and they want to protect Manson along with Fowler, Vatanen, and Lindholm, either Silfverberg or Rakell are going to be left unprotected. And comparing their season I'd say they chose to protect Rakell so the Devils come in and offer an exempt young player and a pick for Silfverberg so they do not lose him for nothing.
Trades
ANA
  1. 2017 2nd round pick (NJD)
Additional Details:
Alex Kerfoot
Kerfoot projects as a middle 6 forward. Currently plays for Harvard, 22 years old.
Recapture Fees
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2017
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the COL
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NSH
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
2018
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the FLA
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
2019
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
24$73,000,000$49,358,334$0$1,082,500$23,641,666
Left WingCentreRight Wing
$3,000,000$3,000,000
LW
UFA - 4
$2,875,000$2,875,000
C
NTC
UFA - 5
$2,325,000$2,325,000
RW, LW
UFA - 5
$5,000,000$5,000,000
LW, C
NTC
UFA - 3
$4,000,000$4,000,000
LW, C
UFA - 3
$3,750,000$3,750,000
RW, LW
UFA - 3
$925,000$925,000
LW
UFA - 2
$894,167$894,167 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
C, LW
UFA - 3
$1,250,000$1,250,000
RW
UFA - 1
$1,300,000$1,300,000
RW, LW
UFA - 2
$1,100,000$1,100,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
$800,000$800,000
RW
UFA - 1
$725,000$725,000
RW, LW
UFA - 1
$600,000$600,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
$5,000,000$5,000,000
LD/RD
NTC
UFA - 4
$605,833$605,833 (Performance Bonus$232,500$232K)
RD
UFA - 1
$6,000,000$6,000,000
G
NTC
UFA - 6
$1,666,667$1,666,667
LD
UFA - 2
$925,000$925,000
RD
UFA - 2
$725,000$725,000
G
UFA - 1
$2,666,667$2,666,667
RD
UFA - 3
$587,500$587,500
LD
UFA - 1
$1,250,000$1,250,000
RD
UFA - 1
$1,137,500$1,137,500
LD
UFA - 2
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
$4,850,000$4,850,000
LW, RW
NMC
UFA - 2
$4,021,428$4,021,428
C
UFA - 1

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight

Top Comments

Feb. 11, 2017 at 12:30 p.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 263
Likes: 6
Ducks need to get rid of D not forwards.
Feb. 11, 2017 at 1:12 p.m.
#2
NYR v3 GM
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2016
Posts: 1,400
Likes: 189
Quoting: dirtface
Ducks need to get rid of D not forwards.
If they chose to protect their top 4 defenseman, they are going to lose a quality forward to expansion. So, no they do not need to get rid of forwards however I'm trying to get value back for one of them instead of losing one for nothing to expansion.
Feb. 11, 2017 at 2:01 p.m.
#3
Lenny7
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2017
Posts: 13,291
Likes: 11,051
Quoting: JT_Miller
Quoting: dirtface
Ducks need to get rid of D not forwards.
If they chose to protect their top 4 defenseman, they are going to lose a quality forward to expansion. So, no they do not need to get rid of forwards however I'm trying to get value back for one of them instead of losing one for nothing to expansion.


Ducks are going to lose a good player regardless. I'm not 100% sure what the point of losing a good player in a trade for less than ideal value and STILL losing a good player for nothing. Might as well lose one and keep the other, unless the value in a trade is actually there. No point selling low.
Feb. 11, 2017 at 2:33 p.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2016
Posts: 95
Likes: 14
Quoting: Lenny7
Quoting: JT_Miller
If they chose to protect their top 4 defenseman, they are going to lose a quality forward to expansion. So, no they do not need to get rid of forwards however I'm trying to get value back for one of them instead of losing one for nothing to expansion.


Ducks are going to lose a good player regardless. I'm not 100% sure what the point of losing a good player in a trade for less than ideal value and STILL losing a good player for nothing. Might as well lose one and keep the other, unless the value in a trade is actually there. No point selling low.


I think what they may want to do is trade Vatanen and keep everyone else. Montour fits the same mold as Vatanen and doesn't need protecting.
Feb. 11, 2017 at 3:16 p.m.
#5
NYR v3 GM
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2016
Posts: 1,400
Likes: 189
Quoting: Lenny7
Quoting: JT_Miller
If they chose to protect their top 4 defenseman, they are going to lose a quality forward to expansion. So, no they do not need to get rid of forwards however I'm trying to get value back for one of them instead of losing one for nothing to expansion.


Ducks are going to lose a good player regardless. I'm not 100% sure what the point of losing a good player in a trade for less than ideal value and STILL losing a good player for nothing. Might as well lose one and keep the other, unless the value in a trade is actually there. No point selling low.


By trading Silfverberg and having Bieksa waive his NMC, the Ducks can protect Perry, Getzlaf, Kesler, Rakell, Fowler, Lindholm, Vatanen, and Manson. What player of value are they at risk of losing for nothing? Cogliano?
See All