SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Fine well take Turris

Créé par: sedin33
Équipe: 2020-21 Canucks de Vancouver
Date de création initiale: 31 mars 2021
Publié: 31 mars 2021
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Transactions
VAN
  1. McLeod, Ryan
  2. Turris, Kyle (750 000 $ retained)
  3. Choix de 4e ronde en 2021 (EDM)
Détails additionnels:
Trade is Sutter @ 50% for 4th
EDM
  1. Sutter, Brandon (2 187 500 $ retained)
Détails additionnels:
Trade is Turris (750K retained) + McLeod -- salary dump
Rachats de contrats
Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
Frais appliqués
Enfoui
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2021
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de EDM
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
2022
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
2023
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
Logo de VAN
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2481 500 000 $79 615 212 $1 700 000 $1 132 500 $1 884 788 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
5 250 000 $5 250 000 $
C, AG, AD
UFA - 3
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
4 125 000 $4 125 000 $
C
UFA - 3
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
5 875 000 $5 875 000 $
AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
AG
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
950 000 $950 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
1 225 000 $1 225 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
825 000 $825 000 $
AD, C
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
2 550 000 $2 550 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
900 000 $900 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
700 000 $700 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
891 667 $891 667 $ (Bonis de performance200 000 $$200K)
AG, AD
RFA - 3
Logo de Oilers d'Edmonton
900 000 $900 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
800 000 $800 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Oilers d'Edmonton
834 167 $834 167 $ (Bonis de performance82 500 $$82K)
C
RFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
700 000 $700 000 $
AG, C
UFA - 1
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
DG
NMC
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
DD
NTC
UFA - 4
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
4 300 000 $4 300 000 $
G
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
5 950 000 $5 950 000 $
DG/DD
M-NTC
UFA - 5
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
1 250 000 $1 250 000 $
DD
NMC
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
1 050 000 $1 050 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
DG/DD
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
700 000 $700 000 $
DD
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
916 667 $916 667 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
DG
UFA - 1
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
3 750 000 $3 750 000 $
AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
3 500 000 $3 500 000 $
AG, AD
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
C
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance2 850 000 $$3M)
C, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
750 000 $750 000 $
AD
UFA - 1
Équipe de réserve
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $ (4 925 000 $$5M4 925 000 $$5M)
AG, AD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
863 333 $863 333 $ (0 $$00 $$0) (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
DG
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
811 667 $811 667 $ (0 $$00 $$0) (Bonis de performance82 500 $$82K)
G
RFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
700 000 $700 000 $ (0 $$00 $$0)
DG
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
700 000 $700 000 $ (0 $$00 $$0)
DD
UFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
700 000 $700 000 $ (0 $$00 $$0)
C
UFA - 1

Code d'intégration

  • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
  • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

Texte intégré

Cliquer pour surligner
31 mars 2021 à 11 h 28
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2021
Messages: 139
Mentions "j'aime": 26
no way edmonton give up mcleod for that. He is a beats in the ahl right now and they would rather keep turris i thnik
Rooney, sedin33 et CD282 a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 11 h 29
#2
Go Jets Go
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2018
Messages: 5,403
Mentions "j'aime": 4,141
Can't see EDM making this trade especially with the way McLeod has been playing in the AHL. Is Sutter really THAT big of an upgrade on Turris? I'd rather just keep Turris as depth for next year and hang onto the pick and McLeod.
sedin33, Oilyboy et Bringer_Of_Snow a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 11 h 35
#3
Roster Architect
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2021
Messages: 2,643
Mentions "j'aime": 909
This entire deal makes no sense.

You say moving Sutter at 50% retained is equal to a 4th round pick (basically a cap dump), but then the price to move Turris who's deal is less at $1.65M but just has an extra year of control costs a good prospect? Both contracts have roughly the same amount of real money left on them so there's no economically value to either side either. You could make a good argument that Sutter retained at 50% straight up for Turris is equal value as it is. Sutter being the slightly better player, but Turris having more team control. But the difference is far from a prospect like McLeod.
CD282 a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 11 h 41
#4
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2018
Messages: 3,920
Mentions "j'aime": 2,064
Quoting: Hockey_Nerd
This entire deal makes no sense.

You say moving Sutter at 50% retained is equal to a 4th round pick (basically a cap dump), but then the price to move Turris who's deal is less at $1.65M but just has an extra year of control costs a good prospect? Both contracts have roughly the same amount of real money left on them so there's no economically value to either side either. You could make a good argument that Sutter retained at 50% straight up for Turris is equal value as it is. Sutter being the slightly better player, but Turris having more team control. But the difference is far from a prospect like McLeod.


I can't believe how wrong this post is. First, Sutter is on an expiring deal with one month remaining in the season. He isn't a cap dump. Edmonton is rumored to be very interested in him. The rumored deal is Sutter at 50% for a 4th.

Second, Vancouver is a cap team and doesn't have any room this year and not projected to have any room next year and DOESN'T WANT OR NEED TURRIS. To help Edmonton, we could take Turris at 900K for a B prospect. Maybe insert a different prospect, but the point is the same.

Vancouver would be happy to trade Sutter @ 50% for the 4th.
31 mars 2021 à 11 h 49
#5
Roster Architect
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2021
Messages: 2,643
Mentions "j'aime": 909
Quoting: sedin33
I can't believe how wrong this post is. First, Sutter is on an expiring deal with one month remaining in the season. He isn't a cap dump. Edmonton is rumored to be very interested in him. The rumored deal is Sutter at 50% for a 4th.

Second, Vancouver is a cap team and doesn't have any room this year and not projected to have any room next year and DOESN'T WANT OR NEED TURRIS. To help Edmonton, we could take Turris at 900K for a B prospect. Maybe insert a different prospect, but the point is the same.

Vancouver would be happy to trade Sutter @ 50% for the 4th.


Is Sutter worth his $4.375M AAV contract? No. Are you trading him with retention on his deal? Yes. Are you acquiring any salary or good prospects back in the deal? No. --- that my friend, is the exact definition of a cap dump.

I'm not saying that Edmonton isn't interested in Sutter, all I was saying is that your trade logic is terrible. Turris isn't a cap dump when they can bury 65% of his contract in the minors or taxi squad (they can send him down and only anything over $1.075M counts against the cap - making his cap hit $575K which is less than a league minimum contract). & that is not worth a B prospect who has shown a ton of progression in his game. Regardless if Vancouver wants Turris or not. If they don't want him, don't acquire him. Edmonton could maneuver around the cap without moving Turris. Which goes back to my original point that your trade logic is terrible.
Bringer_Of_Snow et arab05 a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 11 h 49
#6
The Spawn is back
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2016
Messages: 2,277
Mentions "j'aime": 1,068
Turris isn't covering the bet of his 2 year deal, but he is pretty cheap, not a big problem (on taxi/buried he costs about 500k). Definitely not a big enough problem to require trading McLeod, who is looking great and could easily end up in Edmonton's bottom 6 next season, at a cheap cost.

Sutter add would be fine, but there are cheaper other options out there that require less cap wrangling.
sedin33, oilersguy, Bringer_Of_Snow and 2 others a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 11 h 50
#7
Ouch
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 1,442
Mentions "j'aime": 540
Quoting: sedin33
I can't believe how wrong this post is. First, Sutter is on an expiring deal with one month remaining in the season. He isn't a cap dump. Edmonton is rumored to be very interested in him. The rumored deal is Sutter at 50% for a 4th.

Second, Vancouver is a cap team and doesn't have any room this year and not projected to have any room next year and DOESN'T WANT OR NEED TURRIS. To help Edmonton, we could take Turris at 900K for a B prospect. Maybe insert a different prospect, but the point is the same.

Vancouver would be happy to trade Sutter @ 50% for the 4th.


Even if none of Turris' salary was retained its so low a B prospect to move him is to much. Plus McLeod is an above average prospect right now, whom is projected to take the 3rd line center position as soon as need season. Sutter at 50% IF the Oilers can find room works but if not it's not worth losing a good prospect over. If a deal can't be made the Oilers have 3 other players they are pursuing
sedin33 a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 12 h 9
#8
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2018
Messages: 3,920
Mentions "j'aime": 2,064
Quoting: Hockey_Nerd
Is Sutter worth his $4.375M AAV contract? No. Are you trading him with retention on his deal? Yes. Are you acquiring any salary or good prospects back in the deal? No. --- that my friend, is the exact definition of a cap dump.

I'm not saying that Edmonton isn't interested in Sutter, all I was saying is that your trade logic is terrible. Turris isn't a cap dump when they can bury 65% of his contract in the minors or taxi squad (they can send him down and only anything over $1.075M counts against the cap - making his cap hit $575K which is less than a league minimum contract). & that is not worth a B prospect who has shown a ton of progression in his game. Regardless if Vancouver wants Turris or not. If they don't want him, don't acquire him. Edmonton could maneuver around the cap without moving Turris. Which goes back to my original point that your trade logic is terrible.


Quoting: JmoneyTalk
Even if none of Turris' salary was retained its so low a B prospect to move him is to much. Plus McLeod is an above average prospect right now, whom is projected to take the 3rd line center position as soon as need season. Sutter at 50% IF the Oilers can find room works but if not it's not worth losing a good prospect over. If a deal can't be made the Oilers have 3 other players they are pursuing


Hockey Nerd. Sutter has 1 month remaining on his contract and Vancouver is not making the playoffs. There is no need to dump the salary. I'm not sure why that is difficult for you to understand.

Jmoney, fair point. As I said, it could be any B level prospect not necessarily McLeod.
31 mars 2021 à 12 h 29
#9
Roster Architect
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2021
Messages: 2,643
Mentions "j'aime": 909
Quoting: sedin33
Hockey Nerd. Sutter has 1 month remaining on his contract and Vancouver is not making the playoffs. There is no need to dump the salary. I'm not sure why that is difficult for you to understand.


I'm not so sure why it's so difficult for you to understand that Sutter is not worth his contract, you're retaining on his deal, and you aren't getting anything significant back - the definition of a cap dump. Edmonton doesn't even have to move Turris to fit Sutter in, so even more reason for Edmonton to NOT include Turris as a "cap dump" as you're saying, while having to also give Vancouver a solid prospect for no reason. Just because you're the one making the deal and clearly not making playoffs doesn't mean that every other team has to help you out. Think of this deal from the other side, if you were an Edmonton fan and not a Vancouver fan.. you'd be outraged to give up a top prospect. It's not just about your favourite team's need, it has to work for both sides. & this trade has no logic to it at all.
CD282 a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 12 h 35
#10
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2018
Messages: 3,920
Mentions "j'aime": 2,064
Quoting: Hockey_Nerd
I'm not so sure why it's so difficult for you to understand that Sutter is not worth his contract, you're retaining on his deal, and you aren't getting anything significant back - the definition of a cap dump. Edmonton doesn't even have to move Turris to fit Sutter in, so even more reason for Edmonton to NOT include Turris as a "cap dump" as you're saying, while having to also give Vancouver a solid prospect for no reason. Just because you're the one making the deal and clearly not making playoffs doesn't mean that every other team has to help you out. Think of this deal from the other side, if you were an Edmonton fan and not a Vancouver fan.. you'd be outraged to give up a top prospect. It's not just about your favourite team's need, it has to work for both sides. & this trade has no logic to it at all.


I'll explain this very simply to you. Vancouver doesn't need to move Sutter. His contract expires in a month! He is only being traded because someone wants him. Therefore, he is not a cap dump. A cap dump is a team that needs to unload a salary. By definition Vancouver doesn't need to do that.

You confusing this with Turris. Vancouver doesn't need nor want him and more importantly can't afford him. However, Oilers' fans keep adding him to a Sutter deal. The post is a response to the multiple trade proposals for Sutter that include Turris. The only way we would take Turris is outlined.
31 mars 2021 à 12 h 42
#11
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2017
Messages: 23,753
Mentions "j'aime": 7,634
Why would Edmonton trade McLeod and retain $750k just to move Turris? You know that they can just bury him in the AHL and it only costs them $525k, right? So this deal costs them more AND they lose a good prospect. Dumb.
sedin33 a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 12 h 50
#12
Roster Architect
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2021
Messages: 2,643
Mentions "j'aime": 909
Quoting: sedin33
I'll explain this very simply to you. Vancouver doesn't need to move Sutter. His contract expires in a month! He is only being traded because someone wants him. Therefore, he is not a cap dump. A cap dump is a team that needs to unload a salary. By definition Vancouver doesn't need to do that.

You confusing this with Turris. Vancouver doesn't need nor want him and more importantly can't afford him. However, Oilers' fans keep adding him to a Sutter deal. The post is a response to the multiple trade proposals for Sutter that include Turris. The only way we would take Turris is outlined.


& I'll explain this the clearest anyone can make something:

You're trade logic is terrible.
CD282 a aimé ceci.
31 mars 2021 à 12 h 57
#13
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2018
Messages: 3,920
Mentions "j'aime": 2,064
Quoting: Hockey_Nerd
& I'll explain this the clearest anyone can make something:

You're trade logic is terrible.


You're new to this forum wish you the best of luck here, but I'm not interested in engaging with you again. Blocked
31 mars 2021 à 13 h 0
#14
Roster Architect
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2021
Messages: 2,643
Mentions "j'aime": 909
Quoting: sedin33
You're new to this forum wish you the best of luck here, but I'm not interested in engaging with you again. Blocked


Cool? .. I'm sorry your feelings are hurt that you can't have a debate about hockey without taking it personally. That's called being a grown up. When I see more likes on my comments and every other comment telling you your trade is far off, to me that doesn't say that I'm wrong here or have done anything wrong at all. But if you wish to take it personally, go ahead. We all grow up sometime! Take care!
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage