Soucy might cost a little more (I know, but a similar type player), and it doesn't matter if it's jones or Robertson, whoever wins the 3 LD spot gets that spot

Soucy won't be more than that. Cheaper if anything.

Soucy won't be more than that. Cheaper if anything.

Teams would line up for trouba at 6m so retaining 2m is better than the buyout

The problem is his no-trade clause, not sure where he'd go and what a realistic return would be. Plus the rangers have a great track record of keeping their captains longterm, a la callahan, jagr, mcD, etc.

Maybe some of this could happen if the were able to trade Trouba. With a little retained salary he becomes an attractive add to many teams. Of course there is the NMC issue. But buying out Trouba and Goodrow? not happening.

Buyouts are a very bitter pill. If done to extend players off ELCs or to acquire either a young player (signed with term) or an RFA- then the buyout might make some sense. But to use the gained CAP to invest in UFA's? That's just extremely poor asset and CAP management.

Trouba has a NTC, so what teams would be the most likely to trade for him? The Islanders, Devils, Sabres, Penguins, Flyers, and maybe the Bruins? Even if he agrees to waive for those teams, the only somewhat logical teams the rangers would trade with are the sabres or Bruins because they are out of the division. Still not necessarily possible that trouba would be willing to waive to go there, that's why I came to the conclusion of a buyout.

For a few reasons, talk of trading Trouba at the moment is probably a moot point...so yeah- if they were to move him a buyout would probably be the means. But to invest the resulting Cap in Tarasenko and Soucy I think would be a pretty bad decision.

One other thing...I for one look forward to Trouba's play under LaV- he seems to stress defensive structure, yet also wants his Dmen to contribute to the offense. Also, physical play is a trait of Lav's teams. Trouba might have a lot to gain under the new coach.

Why Othmann as top 6 RW. I get he played some RW in juniors but wouldn't it benefit him to gain experience at RW in the AHL where there will be less pressure and a HC that has been pretty solid with the young talent there. Rather have Cuylie on 4th line at LW, put Kaako 2nd line RW and Engvall 3rd line RW

If you are performing a buyout on a player who is in the same age range as a UFA you are going to sign with that money that is going to either fill a bigger need on the team or provide the opportunity to sign multiple players with each one of them having the ability to duplicate the 1 player's production why would it be poor asset and CAP management. Wouldn't 2 players making a combined 3.64 million and putting up a combined point total b/t 50 & 60 pts be better than 1 player making the same amount of money and only putting up 31 pts.

Your example of replacing Goodrow with Engvall and Acciardi is by all means acceptable. I wouldn't pick those 2 players...but the premise is fine. The issue I have is what's done here with Trouba. I don't know enough about Soucy to offer a real good opinion whether he'd be a good replacement for Trouba....but I don't dislike the premise- as long as the resulting CAP savings is invested in a player much younger than Tarasenko. To get out from under Cap committed to Trouba- only to commit that to a player who will be 37 when his contract is done is just foolish.

I wouldn't commit to Tarasenko long-term - not with the multiple shoulder injuries over the past few years. Plus, there is definitely going to be team that would sign him for more than 5 mil a year.
Soucy is a huge left shot D who plays alot on his off-side. Not a player who is going to generate a lot of offense. I would rather take that 4 mil and use it on an actual RD like Mayfield - Mayfield is 2 years older than Soucy.

Your points about Tarasenko- exactly why I wouldn't buy out Trouba to get into that mess.

As far as replacing Trouba right now with cheaper options- I'm sure there are several acceptable options which could become available...but I'd just leave Trouba in place for now. I want to see what he can be in Lav's defense. And really Plan A for moving on from him probably coincides with Schneider being able to move to 2RD AND the loosening of Trouba's movement clause. And don't forget- any dead money on hand might really be an issue when they look to extend Shest in 2yrs.

What about Killorn or Zucker, instead of Tarasenko?

I wouldn't want to commit long-term to Killorn or Zucker. Killorn had a career year at his age going into FA. Zucker is injured too much.
I agree with Jimbo1119 - Trouba buyout is not really worth it. A goodrow buyout with the reinvestment of that money into 2 forwards that will each produce near his level with a combined salary of Goodrow - kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

Here is a version I out together based on a Goodrow buyout: https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/4252486

Killorn will be 34 in Sept; Zucker 32 in January. Unless getting either of these guys on a Corry Perry like deal I would stay away. How bad would it be to still be on the hook with Touba dead Cap and have to buy out one of these guys because he no longer can contribute in the NHL- let alone provide contribution commensurate with his contract? Like an Andrew Ladd situation...no thanks!

Only situations I'd entertain a Trouba buyout at the moment would be 1) If the Cap were used to extend LaF or Miller long term. Currently, though, a bridge deal would be more appropriate for both. Maybe Miller gets a longer deal- but that can be done by just getting Goodrow off the books. or 2) To acquire an RFA or a young player signed with term.