SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

ahdede

ahdede
Member Since
Jun. 7, 2019
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
Forum Posts
11
Posts per Day
0.0
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 3, 2020 at 8:33 p.m.
Thread: Wishful thinking
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Nighthawk</b></div><div>I agree but even a 1st might not be enough for some teams. Problem is not many if any buyers are out there for any big dumps. My guess is JB is holding out &amp; not wanting to eat a 1st. He wants to see if LE can reinvent himself which is unlikely. So other options are let it play out &amp; if prospects can push LE out he will sit in the press box or even get demoted. That situation isn’t cap ideal but savings transferred to an ELC is fine. That would mean the line-up got stronger.</div></div>

Certainly there wouldn't be any cap savings if LE sits in the press box and an ELC is brought up to replace him. If LE is demoted his cap savings are $1.075M. A min ELC replacement of 700k would only net cap savings of 375k.
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 3, 2020 at 1:50 a.m.
Thread: Wishful thinking
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>brocklesnar</b></div><div>Virtanen is a cost controlled RFA, who can play anywhere in the lineup he is finally playing up to his potential. If he gets consistent powerplay time and top 6 minutes he can easily put 25 goals. If he really wants to keep playing for his hometown team he will take a discount. Also it is not even guaranteed they sign Toffoli. Leivo might not even be the same player after his brutal knee injury.</div></div>

Virtanen rarely played in a matchup role, where Green usually used Pearson and Horvat - so he doesn't play anywhere in the lineup. Yes he scored at a 2nd line rate playing primary with Gaudette, and provides speed and size, but his defensive game would need to round out for him to be able to get consistent top 6 minutes on this team. If Toffoli were to resign, it would be hard for him to crack the top 6 5v5 and PP with Toffoli and Boeser on RW. Leivo may not be the same player he was pre injury, but I'd rather take a 1 year bet on him vs paying Virtanen $3M hoping that he finds his 2 way game. Virtanen might take a discount, but he is also eligible for arbitration, where he has a decent case to ask for $3M.
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 3, 2020 at 12:37 a.m.
Thread: Wishful thinking
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>Now let's talk about retention. As intimated by <a href="/users/Nighthawk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Nighthawk</a> , I don't think that you understand how retention works.

Retention means a team pays the player an amount in actual cash equal to that cap hit.</div></div>

This is not how retention works. The salary retained is also determined from the percentage used to determine the cap hit retained.

From Puckpedia <a href="https://puckpedia.com/salary-cap/retained-salary" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://puckpedia.com/salary-cap/retained-salary</a>
When teams trade a player, they can retain, or keep, some of the players' salary and cap hit. The team keeps a % of both the cap hit and salary for the remainder of the contract.

Therefore, if a Player with a Salary of $2.0M and a Cap Hit/AAV of $3.0M is traded with 20% retention, the trading team would continue to pay 20% of the $2.0M Salary and would continue to have a cap hit of 20% of the $3.0M Cap Hit.

All the numbers used in the Armchair Gm calculator are based on cap hits. For Eriksson, 50% retention of $6M cap hit is $3M. The same 50% applies to the salary remaining, which as of yesterday with Eriksson receiving his $3M signing bonus, has $5M total salary remaining - 50% of it is $2.5M.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div> As Nighthawk says, Vancouver would be paying the $3 million bonus plus $6 million in compensation, i.e., $1 million more than Eriksson is owed.</div></div>

If this were really the case - which it is not, then Eriksson's agent would be demanding a trade out of Vancouver as Eriksson would be eligible to receive more than what he is contractually owed.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>Cash is not a consideration at all for Anaheim, one of the most well-run franchises in the League. Just as an example, due to differences between cap hits and contracts (all downward), our actual payroll next year will be at least $10 million less than our cap total. This why we traded for Backes last year and could well trade for Eriksson this year -- just not on those terms. If we we're to do so, I think that it would be in a structure mimicking the Backes deal -- say, Jacob Larsson for Eriksson, Vancouver's 2021 first and Jett Woo.</div></div>

The fact that actual payroll is lower than cap total is precisely why I believe cash could be a consideration. It shows that the team places high value on efficiency, and prefers player contracts where salary owed in a given year is less than the cap hit. Also with revenues drying up because of COVID, teams will be looking at different ways to save cash.
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 1, 2020 at 2:45 a.m.
Thread: Wishful thinking
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>Here's the flaw in your thinking: that by acquiring Eriksson, Anaheim "gains a player who can suit up and contribute." (A) No, he can't, and (B) any contribution would come at the expense of another player's time on ice. We'd much rather have Nic Des Lauriers or one of our left-handed youngsters getting on the fourth line.</div></div>

I admit I don't have knowledge on how Anaheim prefers to configure their bottom six, but from looking at the list of players they have now it seems there would be room for a vet like Eriksson that plays on both wings and PK and still have room for Deslauriers and others. My thought on Eriksson contributing was pointing out how Anaheim could use the cash that was going towards Kesler, and instead spend slightly less of it onto Eriksson who is at least a warm body that can be inserted into games.