SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

ANA-NJ, ANA-TOR

Created by: TML_GM
Team: 2016-17 Anaheim Ducks
Initial Creation Date: Sep. 20, 2016
Published: Sep. 20, 2016
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
Yes, prospects are "super valuable", especially to a budget team like Anaheim. However, lets remember that ANA also has a lot of $ invested in the current group and the window is closing for truly elite-level Getzlaf/Perry/Kesler). To get ROI on the back-end of those deals they need to win a cup short term.

Solution: Divest in futures and invest in the now.

NJ have lots of cap space and open spots on the blue line and the NMC on Bieska wouldn't kill them at the expansion draft. This makes them an ideal dumping ground for his contract (assuming he is willing to waive). They can also take the full cap hit (lower dollars) of Bernier for a year to allow Anaheim the flexibility they need to re-sign RFAs/acquire a top-line LW.

The cost to dump Bieksa is significant due to the 2 years at 4M dollars at age 35 and the NMC (given the rules of the expansion draft). A second and a third + Manson will likely seem low to NJ fans and high to ANA fans. This likely means the price is right. I'm ball-parking... the real find here is the appropriate destination for those contracts. Kinkaid is the return to replace Bernier. Cheap, effective backup G. ANA will worry about injury to Gibson, however if that happens during the season a quick call to Dallas will get you a replacement for minimal return.

That trade allows the signing of Lindholm and Rakell with enough room left to go and get a top-line LW for Perry and Getzlaf. Why not pickup the phone and call TOR, since you seem to have them on speed dial anyway. Toronto can send JVR at half price (of an already cheap contract) along with Kapanen (a highly skilled prospect in a tier just below their big 3 who could play in their lineup this year or get more seasoning in the A), as well as a cheap, vet D man for stability in Hunwick along with a 2nd round pick (to replace the one they lost in the NJ deal).

In exchange the Leafs receive Montour (the RHD prospect the Leafs need) as well as Ritchie (the power forward they are missing from their group of skilled winger prospects) as well as Stoner's contract. Yes, ANA gives up two prospects with high potential. The Leafs also give up one as well as a proven top line player who is currently one of the few bright spots for team USA at the WCH.

The result is Anaheim maintaining (and arguably improving due to subtraction) their awesome D group. They lose two D prospects, but still have Larsson waiting in the wings to fill the Fowler spot, should ANA decide to trade him and recoup the loss of prospects closer to the end of his deal. The rest of their top 5 D is under contract/control for 4 or more years. They lose Ritchie but gain JVR at a discounted price to make a push. JVR will almost certainly contribute far more than Ritchie over the next two years.

ANA OUT
Bieksa (dump)
Bernier (dump)
Stoner (dump)
Ritchie
Montour
Manson
2nd 2017
3rd 2019

ANA IN
JVR (50%)
Kapanen
Kinkaid
Hunwick
2nd 2017
+Cap to resign Rakell/Lindholm
+Still 6M below the cap






Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
6$5,000,000
2$3,000,000
Trades
1.
NJD
  1. Bernier, Jonathan
  2. Bieksa, Kevin
  3. Manson, Josh
  4. 2017 2nd round pick (ANA)
  5. 2019 3rd round pick (ANA)
2.
Buyouts
Retained Salary Transactions
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2017
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the OTT
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
2018
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
2019
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the ANA
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
23$73,000,000$64,555,833$0$0$8,444,167

Roster

Left WingCentreRight Wing
$2,125,000$2,125,000
LW, RW
M-NTC
UFA - 2
$8,250,000$8,250,000
C
NMC
UFA - 5
$8,625,000$8,625,000
RW
NMC
UFA - 5
$3,000,000$3,000,000
LW
M-NTC
UFA - 2
$6,875,000$6,875,000
C, RW
NMC
UFA - 6
$3,750,000$3,750,000
RW, LW
UFA - 3
$675,000$675,000
LW
UFA - 1
$3,000,000$3,000,000
RW, LW
UFA - 6
$863,333$863,333
RW
UFA - 3
$1,750,000$1,750,000
C, LW
NMC
UFA - 2
$1,600,000$1,600,000
C
UFA - 1
$900,000$900,000
LW
UFA - 1
$900,000$900,000
RW
UFA - 2
$600,000$600,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
$5,000,000$5,000,000
LD
UFA - 6
$2,437,500$2,437,500
LD/RD
UFA - 4
$2,300,000$2,300,000
G
UFA - 3
$4,000,000$4,000,000
LD/RD
UFA - 2
$3,700,000$3,700,000
RD
UFA - 5
$863,333$863,333
LD/RD
UFA - 2
$1,200,000$1,200,000
LD
UFA - 1
$725,000$725,000
G
UFA - 1
$700,000$700,000
RD
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
Sep. 20, 2016 at 11:47 a.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2015
Posts: 1,565
Likes: 89
I don't think this gives good value back to the Leafs
Sep. 20, 2016 at 11:57 a.m.
#2
Thread Starter
Armchair GM Addict
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2016
Posts: 214
Likes: 28
Quoting: LeafsFan
I don't think this gives good value back to the Leafs


JVR (and 2.1M dollars) + Kapanen (Leafs have many prospects of a similar skill set) + a 2nd round pick (that can likely be recouped at the TDL) for two high-end prospects that fill needs and that are further along in their development (NHL ready) than a fresh draft pick, as well as a cap dump. Seems decent enough to me, though I usually try to overcompensate for value since the complaints are usually that "Leaf players/prospects are overvalued". Perhaps you could expand on your thoughts about value.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 12:04 p.m.
#3
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 33,053
Likes: 8,999
Not enough for Lindholm, I would be totally shocked if he takes any thing short of $6 million to $6.5 million per long term. $5 million per wont cut it.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 12:04 p.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2015
Posts: 1,565
Likes: 89
Quoting: TML_GM
Quoting: LeafsFan
I don't think this gives good value back to the Leafs


JVR (and 2.1M dollars) + Kapanen (Leafs have many prospects of a similar skill set) + a 2nd round pick (that can likely be recouped at the TDL) for two high-end prospects that fill needs and that are further along in their development (NHL ready) than a fresh draft pick, as well as a cap dump. Seems decent enough to me, though I usually try to overcompensate for value since the complaints are usually that "Leaf players/prospects are overvalued". Perhaps you could expand on your thoughts about value.


No your right that's a pretty good return, I just think that the Leafs might want some right now players to help lift their current young stars, I really like Ritchie, Montour seems pretty good too, I think though I would feel more comfortable if you didn't retain JVR but I understand Ducks side.

I think unless were acquiring a current impact player for JVR its going to be difficult to compete this year.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 12:17 p.m.
#5
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2016
Posts: 679
Likes: 12
You have made their Dcore worse. Much worse. You also didn't add any forward depth. I don't get any of these moves. As a duck fan hard hard no on all of it.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 12:17 p.m.
#6
Thread Starter
Armchair GM Addict
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2016
Posts: 214
Likes: 28
Quoting: RedWingFan56
Not enough for Lindholm, I would be totally shocked if he takes any thing short of $6 million to $6.5 million per long term. $5 million per wont cut it.


These are just placeholder estimates, not specifics. Obviously they will vary based on term, etc. Purely examples. It does show that both would be able to fit under their cap easily with room to spare.
LeafsFan liked this.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 12:21 p.m.
#7
Thread Starter
Armchair GM Addict
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2016
Posts: 214
Likes: 28
Quoting: JuniorGM
You have made their Dcore worse. Much worse. You also didn't add any forward depth. I don't get any of these moves. As a duck fan hard hard no on all of it.


While I disagree, I appreciate some perspective from the Ducks side. Forward depth doesn't seem to be the Ducks problem from an outsider's perspective. Top-end LW for the top 6 and $ are the biggest needs that I see.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 2:41 p.m.
#8
leafs1967again
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2016
Posts: 1,626
Likes: 21
ANA makes the 1st deal and passes on deal with us. Saves them the $ they need saved and keep their young talented prospects.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 3:05 p.m.
#9
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2016
Posts: 679
Likes: 12
Quoting: JuniorGM
You have made their Dcore worse. Much worse. You also didn't add any forward depth. I don't get any of these moves. As a duck fan hard hard no on all of it.


Ducks have one forward prospect that has top 6 upside. They need some young scoring on ELCs. That should be the focus. High scorinf young AHL players last year. Also Manson played like a top pair dmen last year and hes still really cheap. Bieksa is still serviceable its the Kesler contract that will bury the ducks. Oh and stoner is better than Hunswick he just costs way more.
Sep. 20, 2016 at 8:08 p.m.
#10
VeryLeafy
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2016
Posts: 678
Likes: 28
I think these trades are fair. I believe JVR trade makes sense for both sides. I agree the ducks need to win now. Ritchie looks like he is skilled but not exactly fast. He may not be a top player although it's to early to tell.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll