SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Major risk with MASSIVE reward

Created by: Random2152
Team: 2020-21 Edmonton Oilers
Initial Creation Date: Mar. 27, 2020
Published: Mar. 27, 2020
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
I have ZERO idea what other pieces are moving where. It could be that FLA pays due to EDM taking on the longer, bigger contract but Bob could rebound and has only had one down season so they may be able to convince Holland they shouldn't pay.

Just an interesting idea I had.

The retained salary would go down to under 750k against the cap if Neal were to be bought out going by the Phaneuf buyout (with the Sens retaining) So remeber you have ~1M more cap space than the AGM estimates.

I know it is tight to the cap (and assumes the cap is unaffected) but I do not know Oilers contract projection or their prospect pool well enough to properly fill out the roster so take that with a grain of salt. The point of the AGM is the Bob trade as an idea. What are your thought Oilers fans?
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
2$3,000,000
2$3,675,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
2$1,600,000
1$700,000
CREATEDYEARSCAP HIT
Cannon, Fodder
1$700,000
Trades
1.
FLA
  1. Neal, James ($1,750,000 retained)
Additional Details:
FLA buys out Neal, Cap hit against the Oilers goes down to ~725k
2.
EDM
OTT
  1. Chiasson, Alex
  2. 2020 3rd round pick (EDM)
  3. 2022 2nd round pick (EDM)
Buyouts
Retained Salary Transactions
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2020
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
2021
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the PIT
Logo of the EDM
2022
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the EDM
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
21$84,500,000$85,111,032$341,534$230,000-$611,032
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$1,600,000$1,600,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$12,500,000$12,500,000
C
UFA - 6
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$3,200,000$3,200,000
RW
UFA - 4
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$6,000,000$6,000,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$8,500,000$8,500,000
C, LW
UFA - 5
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$894,166$894,166 (Performance Bonus$230,000$230K)
RW
RFA - 1
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$808,333$808,333
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$3,675,000$3,675,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$1,500,000$1,500,000
RW, LW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$875,000$875,000
LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$1,200,000$1,200,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
$700,000$700,000
RW, C
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$5,600,000$5,600,000
LD
UFA - 2
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$3,000,000$3,000,000
RD
UFA - 2
Logo of the Florida Panthers
$10,000,000$10,000,000
G
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$4,167,000$4,167,000
LD
UFA - 3
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$4,166,666$4,166,666
RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$4,500,000$4,500,000
G
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$850,000$850,000
LD/RD
UFA - 2
Logo of the Edmonton Oilers
$4,000,000$4,000,000
LD/RD
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Cannon, Fodder
$700,000$700,000

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
Mar. 27, 2020 at 2:36 a.m.
#1
Hakuna Matata
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2020
Posts: 34,560
Likes: 21,131
I would not trade for Bob that contract was a huge mistake. He should have stayed with Columbus and signed for less
Mar. 27, 2020 at 2:38 a.m.
#2
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 10,387
Likes: 4,004
Decent idea. I would structure it differently though.

Bob with retention and (lesser prospect than Noel) for Koskinen and Neal with retention. FLA will still need a goalie, and EDM won't want two guys in the overpay boat. Koskinen's value is more 0 than negative, but Bob's retention (about 500k) would cost the prospect downgrade. Ownership might be against retention, but that's probably the only way that contract gets moved.

For the sake of this thread, I ignored all movement and trade clauses.

Why the Chiasson payment? He remains a viable bottom 6 option for most teams, and anyone not in a cap lock might be interested in what he offers. You shouldn't have to pay to move him.
Random2152 liked this.
Mar. 27, 2020 at 2:59 a.m.
#3
Thread Starter
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,354
Likes: 5,679
Quoting: Wqrrior
Decent idea. I would structure it differently though.

Bob with retention and (lesser prospect than Noel) for Koskinen and Neal with retention. FLA will still need a goalie, and EDM won't want two guys in the overpay boat. Koskinen's value is more 0 than negative, but Bob's retention (about 500k) would cost the prospect downgrade. Ownership might be against retention, but that's probably the only way that contract gets moved.

For the sake of this thread, I ignored all movement and trade clauses.

Why the Chiasson payment? He remains a viable bottom 6 option for most teams, and anyone not in a cap lock might be interested in what he offers. You shouldn't have to pay to move him.


Disagree on Chiasson but that's small fries.

FLA is rumoured to want to cut down 10mil in payroll, so I don't think adding Mikko is within their budget. Noel had a poor d+1 season so they may see him as expendable and being able to lose that much salary might make a ton of sense for Fla, especially if Bob doesn't bounce back. If he does, EDM make out like bandits.

So while I am fully aware other pieces might be moving in this trade, I don't think it is the ones you suggest with ret on Florida's part
Mar. 27, 2020 at 3:29 a.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 10,387
Likes: 4,004
Quoting: Random2152
Disagree on Chiasson but that's small fries.

FLA is rumoured to want to cut down 10mil in payroll, so I don't think adding Mikko is within their budget. Noel had a poor d+1 season so they may see him as expendable and being able to lose that much salary might make a ton of sense for Fla, especially if Bob doesn't bounce back. If he does, EDM make out like bandits.

So while I am fully aware other pieces might be moving in this trade, I don't think it is the ones you suggest with ret on Florida's part


I'm aware of the paycuts, but the buyout spreads that salary, especially if Neal's short term retention exceeds Bob's. There would be a decent difference - consider further that it's likely that one/both of Hoffman and Dadanov won't return. However, in this case it would be EDM, not FLA that remains not willing. I can't see them considering Bob unless Koskinen is involved in some way.
Mar. 27, 2020 at 4:02 a.m.
#5
Thread Starter
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 9,354
Likes: 5,679
Quoting: Wqrrior
I'm aware of the paycuts, but the buyout spreads that salary, especially if Neal's short term retention exceeds Bob's. There would be a decent difference - consider further that it's likely that one/both of Hoffman and Dadanov won't return. However, in this case it would be EDM, not FLA that remains not willing. I can't see them considering Bob unless Koskinen is involved in some way.


I don't know. The potential upside is insane for EDM here. A resurgent Bob, even for a handful of seasons plus Noel for a cap dump is insane value. Looking at Florida's AGM they need as much money as possible open so they can ice a competitive roster within their budget so I'd imagine that if this were not enough then non salary pieces would be moved.

Maybe something conditional. Like if Bob doesn't rebound EDM gets a pick or two but if he does Fla gets a pick
Mar. 27, 2020 at 8:24 a.m.
#6
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 24,133
Likes: 7,782
Quoting: Wqrrior
Decent idea. I would structure it differently though.

Bob with retention and (lesser prospect than Noel) for Koskinen and Neal with retention. FLA will still need a goalie, and EDM won't want two guys in the overpay boat. Koskinen's value is more 0 than negative, but Bob's retention (about 500k) would cost the prospect downgrade. Ownership might be against retention, but that's probably the only way that contract gets moved.

For the sake of this thread, I ignored all movement and trade clauses.

Why the Chiasson payment? He remains a viable bottom 6 option for most teams, and anyone not in a cap lock might be interested in what he offers. You shouldn't have to pay to move him.


I don't think you've been paying attention. Of the 30 goalies that played in at least 35 games this year, Koskinen's Sv% ranks 6th. All of the 5 goalies ahead of him will make substantially more than his $4.5M next season. Thats a value contract, no way would Holland downgrade his goaltending AND take on that huge cap-killing contract for the dubious benefit of paying Neal $750k for the next 6 year to not play for the Oilers.
justaBoss liked this.
Mar. 27, 2020 at 8:28 a.m.
#7
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 24,133
Likes: 7,782
Quoting: Random2152
I don't know. The potential upside is insane for EDM here. A resurgent Bob, even for a handful of seasons plus Noel for a cap dump is insane value. Looking at Florida's AGM they need as much money as possible open so they can ice a competitive roster within their budget so I'd imagine that if this were not enough then non salary pieces would be moved.

Maybe something conditional. Like if Bob doesn't rebound EDM gets a pick or two but if he does Fla gets a pick


It a HUGE risk with a tiny reward. Over the past 2 seasons Bob has posted a .907 Sv% while Koskinen has posted a .911 Sv%. I don't see any upside here.

Bob will be 32 at the next training camp and has 6 more years with a $10M cap hit. Nobody has any interest in taking that on.
F50marco liked this.
Mar. 27, 2020 at 9:40 a.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 19,614
Likes: 6,752
Quoting: CD282
It a HUGE risk with a tiny reward. Over the past 2 seasons Bob has posted a .907 Sv% while Koskinen has posted a .911 Sv%. I don't see any upside here.

Bob will be 32 at the next training camp and has 6 more years with a $10M cap hit. Nobody has any interest in taking that on.


Agreed. He may revert back to Bob of old which would be amazing but if we were all betting men, what would those odds be? IMO not very good. Even if he did miraculously put up vezina numbers his first year, how long do you think he would sustain it for? Once again, not very long IMO.

I simply would not risk this. Not worth the potential reward as the risk heavily outweighs the reward here.
CD282 liked this.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll