Many thanks for the discussion.
Quoting: Josh
I guess I'm confused where this 17m is coming from from next off-season and an additional $13m the following off-season.
Based on the projected cap space in 'longterm outlook' - probably looked earlier in making this AGM, now looks more like 19mill and 10mill w/o the cap going up (though think it is projected to by 1mill/year)
Quoting: sabres89
Normally i am in complete agreement with shibbal, but honestly i can see the sabres taking this (depending on their valuation of kravtsov). I would rather higher end young forwards, but i can get there if a right d is the bpa for the other player. No goalies or left d, please and thank you.
It's hard to calculate 'appropriate' value in an Eichel trade w/all the noise/messaging on. Used the formula of 2 1sts, blue chip prospect, interesting B+ prospect, and not taking cap back or retaining. BUF would prefer a blue chip C prospect back and western conference, but if ANA isn't willing to part w/Zegras and other teams (MIN, VGK) would need to give back cap ... options thin.
w/r/t goalies, friends who follow them more closely view Georgiev as a stronger 1b than Koskinen, but don't value him as highly as NYR has until recently (apparently NYR had set his value at a first, which IMHO is inflated). Goalie value is all over the map, often most based on timing/need. It is hard to see EDM being able to make a cap neutral trade for other 1b options such as Khudobin or Korpisalo in season (and from a position of demonstrable need) w/o paying more than a 2nd.
sabres89 liked this.
Reply
CapFriendly
CapFriendly