SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Is there a way to make Gallagher work

Created by: NHLfan10506
Team: 2022-23 New Jersey Devils
Initial Creation Date: Jan. 11, 2022
Published: Jan. 11, 2022
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
I love Gallagher, but the contract concerns me.

This isn't a fully developed trade idea yet. Would love people's input on how to lessen the long-term impact of Gallagher's deal....especially for years 2023-25.

I had two routes:

(1) retain on both sides. Habs and Devils swap a couple players, but Devils retain more in $$ in first year or two, while Habs retain some down the line (I know its a fixed number throughout contract, but am focused on the net number). (Trade below is this route).

(2) Devils take on a cap dump in short-term. So it would look like Gallagher for whatever return Habs want, plus Devils take a shorter, unwanted contract in exchange for some retention on Gallagher's contract.

Please chime in if you have any ideas.
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
6$6,300,000
3$3,700,000
3$2,500,000
2$800,000
2$800,000
2$800,000
2$800,000
2$800,000
2$800,000
2$800,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
2$3,250,000
1$1,250,000
1$950,000
Trades
1.
NJD
  1. Gallagher, Brendan ($2,000,000 retained)
Additional Details:
Original idea was Gallagher for Boqvist and picks (here: https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/2990947)
MTL
  1. Kuokkanen, Janne ($912,500 retained)
  2. Tatar, Tomas ($2,250,000 retained)
Additional Details:
Saves MTL more money in short term, and lessens the long-term hit on NJD.

I would love Gallagher on NJD but am trying to find a creative way to lower his cap on the back of the deal, when Devils are likely to to be cap-conscious since they have Bratt, Zacha due for deals in 2022; and Severson, Smith, Graves, Blackwood, McLeod and Sharangovich up in 2023; then Mercer, Holtz, Muk in 2024.

Someone have a better solution to move more salary to NJD in near-term in order to bring down Gallagher's long-term hit???
2.
NJD
  1. Laferriere, Alex [Reserve List]
LAK
  1. Boqvist, Jesper
Additional Details:
For a prospect someplace he could get regular minutes. Guy needs a restart somewhere.
Buyouts
Retained Salary Transactions
Recapture Fees
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2022
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the EDM
Logo of the NYI
Logo of the CBJ
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
2023
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
2024
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
23$81,500,000$74,998,333$0$1,732,500$6,501,667
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$6,300,000$6,300,000
RW, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$8,000,000$8,000,000
C
UFA - 8
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$2,000,000$2,000,000
C, LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$894,167$894,167 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
RW, LW
RFA - 3
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$894,167$894,167 (Performance Bonus$400,000$400K)
RW, C
RFA - 2
Logo of the Montreal Canadiens
$4,500,000$4,500,000
RW, LW
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 5
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$3,700,000$3,700,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$7,250,000$7,250,000
C
UFA - 5
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$3,400,000$3,400,000
LW, RW
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$975,000$975,000
C
RFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$825,000$825,000
RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$2,500,000$2,500,000
LW
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$3,166,667$3,166,667
LD
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$9,000,000$9,000,000
RD
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$2,800,000$2,800,000
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$863,333$863,333 (Performance Bonus$400,000$400K)
LD/RD
RFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$4,166,666$4,166,666
RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$850,833$850,833 (Performance Bonus$82,500$82K)
G
RFA - 2
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$1,125,000$1,125,000
LD
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$925,000$925,000
RD
RFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
$1,250,000$1,250,000
C, RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$4,125,000$4,125,000
G
UFA - 1
$950,000$950,000
LW, RW
UFA - 4
$3,250,000$3,250,000
RD
UFA - 2
Taxi Squad
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$800,000$800,000 ($0$0$0$0)
RD
UFA
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$800,000$800,000 ($0$0$0$0)
RW
RFA - 2
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$863,333$863,333 ($0$0$0$0)
LW
RFA - 2
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$795,000$795,000 ($0$0$0$0) (Performance Bonus$82,500$82K)
LD
RFA - 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
Jan. 11, 2022 at 2:07 p.m.
#1
Speak of the Devil
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2017
Posts: 23,925
Likes: 26,426
Devils have the better Alex Laferriere
Jan. 11, 2022 at 2:09 p.m.
#2
v5 CBJ GM
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 15,844
Likes: 8,548
kuokkanen does interest me from a fan perspective, but not too sure about tatar considering he's probably gone from his second round in MTL after his contract's up
Jan. 11, 2022 at 2:13 p.m.
#3
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2021
Posts: 998
Likes: 466
it would probably have to be a different player over Tatar (unless Ducharme gets canned) based on how his tenure with us ended
Jan. 11, 2022 at 2:15 p.m.
#4
Meme Account
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2021
Posts: 856
Likes: 288
Why would MTL want Tatar back...

A player I'd look at is Johnsson and Boqvist or a Pick, but I'm not sure what he's worth to NJ. I know he's having a good year but it seems like it could end at any point since he only had 11 last year
Jan. 11, 2022 at 2:15 p.m.
#5
me wan da poonani
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,857
Likes: 4,243
Maybe not the feedback you were looking for but I don't see the upside in acquiring Gallagher.
Nor do I see any benefit in moving Tatar (who is a better player imo) and Kuokkanen (who has some runway left to develop, not to mention a good contract) for Gallagher who's qualities are declining rather rapidly and a suboptimal contract to boot.
Honestly I see little point in trading for any non-high end / elite winger for the foreseeable future as we are gonna have too many middle six wingers anyway in the near future.
If you are looking to bind up future cap space just do that in free agency, or better yet, remain flexible towards the cap as all of our prospects ELCs' are gonna run out sooner or later.

I guess I should ask though, what do you see in Gallagher anyway?
Jan. 11, 2022 at 2:23 p.m.
#6
Hop on the Slaftrain
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 16,131
Likes: 20,442
The Canadiens have no reason to move Gallagher and even fewer reasons to retain on him over 5 seasons. Is the contract ideal? Certainly not, but he's not the big waste some pretend him to be. He scored 31 in 2017-18, 33 in 2018-19, was on pace for 30 in 2019-20 and 32 in 2020-21. This season is an outlier until proven otherwise, as the team is decimated by injuries/covid/coaching and he lost his two linemates of the last three years in the same offseason.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 2:39 p.m.
#7
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,667
Likes: 4,091
You have the right idea for what you are trying to accomplish.

Player A has a $4M contract for 4 years.
Player B has a $2M contract for 2 years.

Both teams retain 50%.
Both teams have a $3M equivalent cap hit for 2 years and $2M for 2 years.

If however, team A retains 25% and team B retains none.
Team A has a $3M cap hit for 2 years and a $1M cap hit for 2 years.
Team B has a $3M cap hit throughout.

So the double retention does what you want and is more beneficial to Team B, provided they are retaining on a contract with shorter term.

I believe we don't see it happen normally, because team A doesn't want or need retention on a contract they are receiving.
Teams also don't want to lock up their own retention spots and are susceptible to the other team's whims if they do.
You can send a contract back with retention expecting to be free and clear in 2 years, only to have the other team use a buyout which will put you on the hook for 4 years. Suddenly your expected retention, which you presumably gave up assets for, is reduced.

GMs prefer to do straight retention. They want as much benefit as they can get immediately. When you are asking for retention, it's usually because you need it or want to maximize your cap space now. Retaining in that position is counter-intuitive.
F50marco liked this.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 3:08 p.m.
#8
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 39,597
Likes: 18,153
Quoting: Zuki9797
kuokkanen does interest me from a fan perspective, but not too sure about tatar considering he's probably gone from his second round in MTL after his contract's up


Quoting: GoHabsGo99
it would probably have to be a different player over Tatar (unless Ducharme gets canned) based on how his tenure with us ended


Quoting: HabsRSus
Why would MTL want Tatar back...

A player I'd look at is Johnsson and Boqvist or a Pick, but I'm not sure what he's worth to NJ. I know he's having a good year but it seems like it could end at any point since he only had 11 last year


I totally forgot Tatar's history with Habs. I was really just looking at a contract to retain. Just brain-farted his last season and the playoffs.

Consider him a place-holder for now...
zk97 liked this.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 3:11 p.m.
#9
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 19,537
Likes: 6,692
Quoting: ricochetii
You have the right idea for what you are trying to accomplish.

Player A has a $4M contract for 4 years.
Player B has a $2M contract for 2 years.

Both teams retain 50%.
Both teams have a $3M equivalent cap hit for 2 years and $2M for 2 years.

If however, team A retains 25% and team B retains none.
Team A has a $3M cap hit for 2 years and a $1M cap hit for 2 years.
Team B has a $3M cap hit throughout.

So the double retention does what you want and is more beneficial to Team B, provided they are retaining on a contract with shorter term.

I believe we don't see it happen normally, because team A doesn't want or need retention on a contract they are receiving.
Teams also don't want to lock up their own retention spots and are susceptible to the other team's whims if they do.
You can send a contract back with retention expecting to be free and clear in 2 years, only to have the other team use a buyout which will put you on the hook for 4 years. Suddenly your expected retention, which you presumably gave up assets for, is reduced.

GMs prefer to do straight retention. They want as much benefit as they can get immediately. When you are asking for retention, it's usually because you need it or want to maximize your cap space now. Retaining in that position is counter-intuitive.


This happy

The problem is I don't see NJ with any players that fit the bill so it would be really hard to make a Gally to NJ deal work IMO.

If MTL is going to move Gallagher, its going to be for a pretty big bad contract coming back and then some picks and prospects to make it worth their while. The Gally contract is simply too long to retain on so taking back a negative asset would provide that other team the cap relief in that form.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 3:20 p.m.
#10
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 39,597
Likes: 18,153
Quoting: PaulieWalnuts
Maybe not the feedback you were looking for but I don't see the upside in acquiring Gallagher.
Nor do I see any benefit in moving Tatar (who is a better player imo) and Kuokkanen (who has some runway left to develop, not to mention a good contract) for Gallagher who's qualities are declining rather rapidly and a suboptimal contract to boot.
Honestly I see little point in trading for any non-high end / elite winger for the foreseeable future as we are gonna have too many middle six wingers anyway in the near future.
If you are looking to bind up future cap space just do that in free agency, or better yet, remain flexible towards the cap as all of our prospects ELCs' are gonna run out sooner or later.

I guess I should ask though, what do you see in Gallagher anyway?


I think Gallagher would check a lot of boxes for us.

(1) he is a finisher. Maybe not going to win Rocket Richard trophies, but when he is healthy and playing his game, he should put up 2015-20 Kyle Palmieri-esque numbers.
(2) he is a right shot winger, who can play with pace.
(3) he does well in a possession style game, is a positive CF% player his whole career.
(4) he is close with Ty Smith and I think he could tie into the clubhouse quickly.
(5) he plays with heart, is a leader-by-example type player (would be in some ways, like another Miles Wood in that respect).

...and he has always been one of my favorite non-Devils.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 3:43 p.m.
#11
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 39,597
Likes: 18,153
Quoting: ricochetii
You have the right idea for what you are trying to accomplish.

Player A has a $4M contract for 4 years.
Player B has a $2M contract for 2 years.

Both teams retain 50%.
Both teams have a $3M equivalent cap hit for 2 years and $2M for 2 years.

If however, team A retains 25% and team B retains none.
Team A has a $3M cap hit for 2 years and a $1M cap hit for 2 years.
Team B has a $3M cap hit throughout.

So the double retention does what you want and is more beneficial to Team B, provided they are retaining on a contract with shorter term.

I believe we don't see it happen normally, because team A doesn't want or need retention on a contract they are receiving.
Teams also don't want to lock up their own retention spots and are susceptible to the other team's whims if they do.
You can send a contract back with retention expecting to be free and clear in 2 years, only to have the other team use a buyout which will put you on the hook for 4 years. Suddenly your expected retention, which you presumably gave up assets for, is reduced.

GMs prefer to do straight retention. They want as much benefit as they can get immediately. When you are asking for retention, it's usually because you need it or want to maximize your cap space now. Retaining in that position is counter-intuitive.


This right on. An example could be when Habs traded Pacioretty for Tatar a few years ago.

Patches had 1-year, $4.5 million remaining
Tuna had 3-years, $5.3 million remaining

Habs retained $450,000, Knights retained $500,000. It was a wash for first year, but saved Habs on years 2 & 3 of Tatar contract.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 3:51 p.m.
#12
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 39,597
Likes: 18,153
Quoting: F50marco
This happy

The problem is I don't see NJ with any players that fit the bill so it would be really hard to make a Gally to NJ deal work IMO.

If MTL is going to move Gallagher, its going to be for a pretty big bad contract coming back and then some picks and prospects to make it worth their while. The Gally contract is simply too long to retain on so taking back a negative asset would provide that other team the cap relief in that form.


Not sure I follow. If Habs need cap space to speed along their rebuild/retool, this would provide that.

They could take the slow road, trade a Tofolli or Chiarot, gain some picks, wait until they develop and Petry, Hoffman, etc deals expire.
But that would be 4+ year rebuild.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 4:03 p.m.
#13
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 19,537
Likes: 6,692
Quoting: NHLfan10506
Not sure I follow. If Habs need cap space to speed along their rebuild/retool, this would provide that.

They could take the slow road, trade a Tofolli or Chiarot, gain some picks, wait until they develop and Petry, Hoffman, etc deals expire.
But that would be 4+ year rebuild.


No I think you misunderstood me. Im saying NJ should need to send back more bad cap back for this to work for them. From a Habs perspective, they don't need cap space. They're probably rebuilding and players will be traded naturally to give them tons of flexibility for future years. They need picks and prospects.

So its in Habs best interest to A) avoid retention for 6 years which is just way too long to retain on, B) take back bad contracts equivalent to what the retention would have been and C) take back enough cap so that the other team offers better picks and prospects as the sweetener.

Thats why I don't think NJ makes sense for the Habs to trade to and why NJ probably wouldn't want to offer more of what the Habs need to make it worth their while.
Jan. 11, 2022 at 4:34 p.m.
#14
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 39,597
Likes: 18,153
Quoting: F50marco
No I think you misunderstood me. Im saying NJ should need to send back more bad cap back for this to work for them. From a Habs perspective, they don't need cap space. They're probably rebuilding and players will be traded naturally to give them tons of flexibility for future years. They need picks and prospects.

So its in Habs best interest to A) avoid retention for 6 years which is just way too long to retain on, B) take back bad contracts equivalent to what the retention would have been and C) take back enough cap so that the other team offers better picks and prospects as the sweetener.

Thats why I don't think NJ makes sense for the Habs to trade to and why NJ probably wouldn't want to offer more of what the Habs need to make it worth their while.


Oh, gotcha, that makes total sense and is pretty aligned with my thinking.

I just wanted to see of there was a there, there
F50marco liked this.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll