SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

rja

Member Since
Jul. 28, 2017
Favourite Team
New York Rangers
Forum Posts
1017
Posts per Day
0.4
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 6, 2020 at 2:57 p.m.
Thread: Next Season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BSpadaro83</b></div><div>LOL you literally are too obtuse to get the point that i am making. I ll try one last time as to why it has nothing to do with a min salary UFA signing. Smith has a $4.35m cap hit, but on 7-2-20 any team that acquires him only has to pay him $2.35m in actual cash salary. BUT HIS WHOLE $4.35m CAP HIT COUNTS TOWARDS HITTING THE CAP FLOOR. So if you are team (OTTAWA) who has to add almost $30M in Cap hits to hit the cap floor next season to be compliant, but will never spend an additional 30M in ACTUAL CASH, these contracts are exactly what you are looking for. And in looking at the others around the league, Smith has one of the better ones percentage wise on Cap hit to floor to actual dollars saved.</div></div>

A) Relax no need to get hostile.
B) Name me every team that you think will need help getting to the cap floor, and I can easily find a better deal than trading away assets just to help getting to the cap floor. I can start working on Ottawa now if you'd like. Also, I can send out some feels to Ottawa fans right now and see how they feel about trading assets for Brendan Smith. I have already seen what some Red Wings fans think of him too. Here's a link <a href="https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1662104">https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/1662104</a>.

I was not disagreeing with anything you were saying in the slightest. I think you made good points and I followed and understood everything you said; I am only saying I think it's unlikely that a team will trade for Smith, even if they are having problems reaching the cap floor. I simply believe GMs will think there are alternatives out there that are better off for them.

Two other points particularly about Smith and NYR:
1) He has a 10 team no trade list, and Canada has higher income taxes, so when you throw out a team like Ottawa, it may be unlikely to be approved by Smith, who wants to maximize his salary in his final year.
2) It's very possible that the cap only increases to $84 million, as many players would prefer not to pay back salary in escrow over the course of the next few years. I assume the NHLPA would be happy with that $2.5 million bump. If that is the case, NYR still have plenty of contracts to sign (Strome, Deangelo, Lemieux, just to name a few). It's possible NYR do not have a ton of cap space to work with to begin with. Therefore, all the leverage one would believe NYR would have with a team like Ottawa may diminish, simply because NYR are trying to get under the cap ceiling.

There are a lot of moving parts here, which makes me doubt NYR's ability to move Smith. Sorry if I seemed "obtuse" to you with my responses; I sometimes do not elaborate. And sorry if this is too long to read hahah.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 6, 2020 at 1:46 p.m.
Thread: Next Season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BSpadaro83</b></div><div>I know this is tough to understand but you are missing the point almost completely. No one is gonna sign a UFA to a back loaded deal (since Smiths deal was frontl-oaded and now pays less cash on the back end), to game the salary cap now for a player of any real value. Smith brings value because he is a player that can still play on most teams 3rd pair AND his contract is salary cap scammy for any floor concern teams, and its an expiring deal. None of those benefits exist from a UFA signing.</div></div>

Lol I know what a front loaded and back loaded contracr is. There are plenty of players on the market that will sign for less than whatever you’d have to pay smith in real salary, and would take up less cap space, that will bring equal production to the team’s third pair. That’s all I am saying. The other teams’ best alternatives are more attractive than trading for smith, unless NYR give up another asset that is attractive with smith. Hence why I suggested georgiev. You’re trying to reason why a team should take on smith. I am only saying that the alternatives that exist out there are more attractive options. That’s it.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 6, 2020 at 10:37 a.m.
Thread: Next Season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Mike_Gartner</b></div><div>i think you are on the right path. bridge Strome for 2 years, somewhere between $4-5M.
create his value as a solid 2C and trade him from a place of strength in year 2.
they need to do the same thing with Smith - pair him with Trouba, create a solid shutdown pair and then move him at the deadline for whatever they can get.
it would be nice to move Staal somewhere, even 50% retained to open more opportunity for the younger guys.

this team is still 2 years away from being considered as a contender - this year and next are going to be confusing years for the fan base, especially after what they accomplished the past 2 months.</div></div>

No reaason for Strome to agree to a 2 year deal. He's 26 and could walk to free agency in a year. He should demand a long term deal or a one year deal.

Smith and Staal are not going anywhere because nobody will want to take their deals unless you NYR gave up assets NYR likely does not want to give up. Just let them play out next year and then use the large amount of a cap space in the following offseason.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 4, 2020 at 11:02 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 2, 2020 at 6:10 p.m.
Thread: Red Wing Fans Would This Interest You
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>aedoran</b></div><div>One that has stayed constant since Yzerman has taken over he is building through the draft he most likely trading picks. All of this doesn't matter if NYR doesn't trade Georgiev!!! I think since NYR has 3 goalies Hank is the one who is out retire, buyout and even if Shesterkin plays every game left trading Georgiev would be foolish.</div></div>

A) I do not think Hank is retiring, and likely does not want to move his NTC unless he goes to contenders close to NY. Will be tough to move him, and a buyout should not be considered an option. Worst case, they feel like they have to move Georgiev, and NYR can find backups until someone on their long list of goalie prospects are ready (Lindblom, Wall, Huska, etc.).
B) I was not even suggesting NYR should make the trade, but I thought this would make sense.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 2, 2020 at 12:59 p.m.
Thread: Red Wing Fans Would This Interest You
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DiehardRedWingsFan58</b></div><div>Could possibly see Markstrom if he reaches free agency, Perhaps Greiss on a short term deal. Or maybe Yzerman makes a move to get Georgiev at the draft. Honestly not really sure wouldn't mind Lehner either for the right price.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>zadinaveleno</b></div><div>Yzerman will sign someone. He will overpay for a serviceable goalie like Markstrom.</div></div>

I guess we disagree on that point. I think other teams can match what Yzerman would be willing to pay for a goalie, and the free agents will opt to go elsewhere. Plus, I figured Detroit would prefer a cost controlled goalie with a solid level of production to go with their oncoming young core. One year of Smith in another year where DET will not compete does not make a big deal, and even so, they should have plenty of money to go get at least a couple of free agents with Smith on the books.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 25, 2020 at 12:32 p.m.
Thread: i dont get what florida is trying to do
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BCAPP</b></div><div>What I am saying is would you be upset if you got Pageau and Wallmark and the two prospects? Because I'm arguing that's what you got.</div></div>

And I am saying that they would have been better off getting better futures for Trocheck and paying pennies on the dollar for depth. I think it was just a lousy return for a 2C who's AAV is below market rate for 2 years. I think we're simply talking past each other. I am not disagreeing with you that the Panthers can still compete and added forward depth they needed; I am looking at the Trocheck trade in a vacuum and saying it's a lousy return. I think they would have been better off asking for only a first and Wallmark (which looking at the Canes depth at center I think they would have folded and accepted that deal) and found other ways to add cheap depth players. I think these two prospects do not really push the needle. But maybe I am wrong and these kids will play well for the Panthers.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 25, 2020 at 9:14 a.m.
Thread: i dont get what florida is trying to do
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BCAPP</b></div><div>By the way because you referenced him Pageau is 0.24/0.46

He may be better than Haula defensively but Haula is the better offensive player. He isn't just some throw in he would have been an excellent rental by himself.

Florida wanted to use their very good 2c to acquire a good 2c and good 3c because their centre depth stank. They did that and added two prospects.

IMHO they made their team better today (Haula/Wallmark is better than Trochek/Toninato) and acquired two long term assets for it.</div></div>

Even if we assume that is true, which could be debated, it's still a lousy return once Haula walks in the summer. I think they could have easily received a similar package for Trocheck as Pageau. Maybe Walmark, the Toronto first, and a lesser prospect? Remember Trocheck still has another two years left on his contract. Then the Panthers could have spent less valued assets for one or two rentals to help with their depth (Thornton, Simmonds, Ennis, etc.). It just seemed mishandled. Just because they are better today (which I agree with you but others may not) does not mean this was a good deal for them looking at the big picture.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 24, 2020 at 11:50 p.m.
Thread: i dont get what florida is trying to do
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BCAPP</b></div><div>I think the Trochek trade was great by Florida.

They turned their 2c into a slight downgrade at 2c AND added a 3c (Wallmark).

Then for giving up control (I believe 2.5 years on Trochek for 0.5 years on Haula) they added 2 solid prospects. Smart.</div></div>

I have to respectfully disagree. I think Haula is a third liner, and a good one at that (maybe a second liner on a team with little depth at best), but they have no intentions of keeping him long term. The prospects are okay, but neither look like they'll be impact players. Wallmark to me is more of a 4th liner, at best a 3C. However, given what OTT received for Pageau as a rental, the Panthers got a terrible return for Trochek, who still has 2 more years left at a cost controlled rate. Trading a cost controlled 2C with term and yielding two prospects with limited upside, and two third liners is just not a great return based on precedent, let alone what occurred today.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 24, 2020 at 12:21 p.m.