According to the very reliable people of Twitter, the NHLPA, in their battle to limit escrows that force players to give up percentages of their salary if the NHL overestimates its revenue when it sets the cap, may have agreed with the NHL to freeze the salary cap at $81.5m for a couple of years. Obviously, the Leafs are badly hurt by this, but so is every team against the cap. Here, I'll underpay everyone on the Lightning and still be barely under the cap to prove that this is not okay for us.
I moved Killorn to the Avalanche because they seem like one of the few teams who aren't so awful that Killorn would never want to go there (unless he's trying to weaponize his no-trade list to prevent any trade at all), but can maybe afford him. They have $15m in cap and do have to re-sign Rantanen, but otherwise I think they can make it work. I don't pay that much attention to the Avalanche, so if a fan wants to come here and tell me why I'm stupid and wrong, go ahead. If a trade doesn't work, waivers are always an option and I feel like a team like the Kings, Ducks, or Senators should have the cap space and want some depth scoring and veteran experience on what will be a young, prospect-filled team, so while Killorn would have them on his no-trade list, with waivers, he has no choice. I chose the Blackhawks for Paquette because I think they could be looking to contend shortly and some bottom-six center depth is always nice. If not them, I'm sure someone would take him as he's well worth that contract. I chose the Red Wings for Coburn mainly because of the Yzerman connection and some short-term cheap defensive options wouldn't hurt them, but he's another player who I'm sure someone else would take too.
This leaves us with a 22 man roster, but without making an NTC disappear, I don't see a way around that. It's doable anyway, just not encouraged, and anyway, this is already so ridiculous that it's really the least of the concerns. Every single player rejects these deals and we're *still* not fitting 23 men under the cap. If Point takes a reasonable AAV rather than one of our crazy low bridge offers, we probably have to lose two if not three of Cernak, Cirelli, Sergachev, and Joseph. I don't think we have the prospects to replace them.
tl;dr: If Twitter turns out to be correct, we're absolutely screwed.
While nothing has yet been agreed upon between those parties, sources with knowledge of the talks believe the salary cap could end up being frozen at its current $81.5-million ceiling for two more years — or raised only minimally — as a way to lower players’ escrow payments.
It sounds suspicious, but Sportsnet is usually very reliable. I'm a little worried.
Don't know why you say the Leaf would be in that much cap problem. They have expiring contracts and only Dermot as bigger name RFA to sign next year. If cap is so important, even Killorn might be a guy no one wants at 4.4m. If there is no or minimal cap increases, no team wants a long term iffy cap hit player.
Players whine about escrow but they agreed to it in the revenue sharing in the CBA determine the cap. They don't have no legitimate argument. If the rules change about the cap, (lower), bet the owners get a compliance buyout. That will give all teams some cap relief.
Don't know why you say the Leaf would be in that much cap problem. They have expiring contracts and only Dermot as bigger name RFA to sign next year. If cap is so important, even Killorn might be a guy no one wants at 4.4m. If there is no or minimal cap increases, no team wants a long term iffy cap hit player.
Players whine about escrow but they agreed to it in the revenue sharing in the CBA determine the cap. They don't have no legitimate argument. If the rules change about the cap, (lower), bet the owners get a compliance buyout. That will give all teams some cap relief.
I mentioned the Leafs because that's the team that most of the media is obsessing over with this rumor. I know every defenseman other than Reilly is up for contract next season, but I don't know which defensemen you're going to keep and how hard it will be to re-sign everyone under cap. If this went on for slightly longer than 1-2 years, Andersen and Reilly would become problems. I definitely don't think you have it as bad as Tampa.
With a compliance buyout, we probably buyout Palat, assuming he doesn't rebound. That allows us to keep Killorn and get a 23 man roster, or, better yet (if possible), trade Killorn and actually sign every RFA to some reasonable deals. So I guess this is a worst case scenario rather than a likely thing.
I mentioned the Leafs because that's the team that most of the media is obsessing over with this rumor. I know every defenseman other than Reilly is up for contract next season, but I don't know which defensemen you're going to keep and how hard it will be to re-sign everyone under cap. If this went on for slightly longer than 1-2 years, Andersen and Reilly would become problems. I definitely don't think you have it as bad as Tampa.
With a compliance buyout, we probably buyout Palat, assuming he doesn't rebound. That allows us to keep Killorn and get a 23 man roster, or, better yet (if possible), trade Killorn and actually sign every RFA to some reasonable deals. So I guess this is a worst case scenario rather than a likely thing.
Folks should get over this illusion that they have the need and the right to their UFAs....no they are free. Leafs aren't getting in a bidding war for those three UFA Dmen who they may or not want.
By my calculations the Leaf will have 7 or 8m in cap next year (83.5m cap) to sign three Dmen. And that is after Reilly, Dermot, Sandin and Liljegren are on the team. Actually the Leaf cap situation may be easier next year. Now "easier" assumes that the two former # 1 picks Sandin and Liljegren are NHL good next season. Consensus is they will be.
I understand your reasoning for trading Coburn to Detroit but I don't see it happening. First Detroit is finally getting younger on their back end with 3 D over 30 retiring or just won't be resigned so taking on a 34yr old dman wouldn't be smart. Second take a look at Detroit's Capfriendly page they have 14 RFAs and 7 UFAs with contracts expiring at the end of the season. So even a $1.7M might be too much to take on. Plus for a team rebuilding like the Wings that 3rd is more valuable than Coburn at this point of his career.
Obviously JBB has factored next year cap situation into negotiating with Point. If 5.7 for 3 years is accurate it is very low. JBB holds the cards but if he plays hardball I see someone giving Point an offer sheet. And the kicker is the longer this draws out it gives Cirelli time to shine and add value to his next contract.
Obviously JBB has factored next year cap situation into negotiating with Point. If 5.7 for 3 years is accurate it is very low. JBB holds the cards but if he plays hardball I see someone giving Point an offer sheet. And the kicker is the longer this draws out it gives Cirelli time to shine and add value to his next contract.
I think he accounted for next year with reasonable cap increases, but I don’t see how he could have planned for no cap increases, per the current rumor, unless we get a compliance buyout or something. The pieces just don’t fit.
GenXHockey a aimé ceci.
Répondre
CapFriendly
CapFriendly