Quoting: wojohawk
At least try to keep is somewhat real. Funny how you want to talk about injury prone, age, yada yada yada....but fail to mention Petry is plenty injury prone himself and 2.5 years older. Fun fact....last 2 seasons, EK has played more games than Petry.
Trying to keep this on the rails and not getting to snippy with you....but the Hawks are not touching Petry with that retention for those picks....just not happening. Hawks don't need retention as they have plenty of cap space so offering retention to lessen the sweetener is completely counterproductive to trying to move cap from a cap strapped team to one with plenty. Pay the price to move the full contract, find someone else to take it, or have fun with Petry for a couple years.
There is a difference between taking back cap for a useful player (the Pettersson part of this proposal) and retaining verses taking back a cap dump like Granlund and eating 16 million. Asking the Sharks to eat 27 million between taking Granlund and the retention is dreaming bigly....I will give you that.
I can tell you just didn't read my description at all for this post, basically notes this is mostly hypothetical.
EK played 132 games the last two season, Petry played 129... huge 3 game difference. Since Karlsson got to the Sharks for the 18-19 season he's played 293 of a possible 372 games (78%). Petry in the same span played 337 of a possible 373 games (90%). So... yeah fun fact EK is more injury prone and 2.5 years younger...
"Not get to snippy" that's so kind of you. The penguins retaining does actually make sense. The Hawks aren't going to be a contender for the remainder of Petry's contract. As I noted, sending him to Chicago would be an example and would I would assume Chicago would do in this situation would be to probably retain on Petry and send him to a contender that needs depth or has an injury at the deadline. If they did that, retaining on his contract at $4M rather than $6.25M makes it much more attractive for the team trading to Chicago thus getting the hawks more return. So in the end they have more assets (which can be used in the draft or in packages to make their own trades) and spent nothing to get Petry. If i didn't have retention I would still not be using a 1st and 2nd to move petry... he's still playing well. Look at teams that have spent a 1st to move cap that's completely dead, Sean Monahan is the most recent example and it's because he had a hip injury and declined heavily. Petry has neither of those factors.
Bigly... what a stupid word but can't say I'm shocked. You're using the whole number of 27 million to make things sound vastly worse, and I don't understand why people do that on here. Gives off the quick assumption that it is 27M/year (also it'd be $26.1M not $27M). If they move Karlsson, they will have to retain and have to take cap back, just not gonna work any other way.