SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Campbell dump

Créé par: wojohawk
Équipe: 2023-24 Blackhawks de Chicago
Date de création initiale: 7 nov. 2023
Publié: 7 nov. 2023
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Description
Oil get to dump 3 more years of Campbell (after this one), upgrade on Ceci (you can debate how much Murphy is an upgrade, but I think he is at the least some), get a goalie that has been able to stop a beachball while playing in front of a bad D and horrid team), almost 2 million in cap space so you can actually roster a 23 man team &/or bank cap for a TDL piece.

Hawks get a horrid goalie to help their tank this season and decide what to do with Campbell after the season, 2 first, a prospect that was a 1st even if his development has not progressed at that level to this point, and Ceci can fill the role of legit RHD to break in LHD kids the next couple of seasons.
Transactions
CHI
  1. Bourgault, Xavier
  2. Campbell, Jack
  3. Ceci, Cody
  4. Choix de 1e ronde en 2024 (EDM)
  5. Choix de 1e ronde en 2026 (EDM)
EDM
  1. Johnson, Reese
  2. Mrázek, Petr (1 900 000 $ retained)
  3. Murphy, Connor
  4. Choix de 2e ronde en 2024 (LAK)
Rachats de contrats
Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
Frais appliqués
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2024
Logo de CHI
Logo de TBL
Logo de EDM
Logo de CHI
Logo de VAN
Logo de CHI
Logo de OTT
Logo de CGY
Logo de CHI
2025
Logo de CHI
Logo de TOR
Logo de CHI
Logo de DAL
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de NYR
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
2026
Logo de CHI
Logo de EDM
Logo de CHI
Logo de NYI
Logo de TOR
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de OTT
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2383 500 000 $70 310 957 $0 $6 855 000 $13 189 043 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
4 250 000 $4 250 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance505 000 $$505K)
AG, C
RFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
5 000 000 $5 000 000 $
AD, C, AG
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
AG
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
2 650 000 $2 650 000 $
C, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
2 250 000 $2 250 000 $
AG, C, AD
RFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
4 000 000 $4 000 000 $
AG, C, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
950 000 $950 000 $ (Bonis de performance3 500 000 $$4M)
C
RFA - 3
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
775 000 $775 000 $ (Bonis de performance325 000 $$325K)
AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
800 000 $800 000 $
AG, C
RFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
AG, C, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
758 333 $758 333 $
AD
RFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
758 333 $758 333 $
AG
RFA - 1
Logo de Oilers d'Edmonton
925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance250 000 $$250K)
AD
RFA - 2
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
1 250 000 $1 250 000 $
DG
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
9 500 000 $9 500 000 $
DD
NMC
UFA - 7
Logo de Oilers d'Edmonton
5 000 000 $5 000 000 $
G
M-NTC
UFA - 4
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
918 333 $918 333 $ (Bonis de performance1 000 000 $$1M)
DG
RFA - 3
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
4 500 000 $4 500 000 $
DD
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
962 500 $962 500 $
G
RFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
916 667 $916 667 $ (Bonis de performance425 000 $$425K)
DG
RFA - 2
Logo de Oilers d'Edmonton
3 250 000 $3 250 000 $
DD
UFA - 2
Logo de Blackhawks de Chicago
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 Blackhawks de Chicago
1 200 000 $1 200 000 $
C, AD
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
7 nov. 2023 à 16 h 56
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2018
Messages: 1,269
Mentions "j'aime": 732
So you’re really not upgrading the team and giving up a 2024 unprotected first.
7 nov. 2023 à 17 h 5
#2
Smokewise Ganja
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2018
Messages: 1,284
Mentions "j'aime": 306
So you’re trading the oilers salary back, but we give up 2 firsts ? What
7 nov. 2023 à 17 h 13
#3
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 1,111
Mentions "j'aime": 1,454
Quoting: smokewiseganja
So you’re trading the oilers salary back, but we give up 2 firsts ? What


You're netting 2 million in cap space (if you want to bury Reece Johnson in the AHL which is what I would suggest). Mrazek is a pending UFA so you convert 3 more years of Campbell at 5 per for no more years of Mrazek.
7 nov. 2023 à 17 h 19
#4
Smokewise Ganja
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2018
Messages: 1,284
Mentions "j'aime": 306
Quoting: wojohawk
You're netting 2 million in cap space (if you want to bury Reece Johnson in the AHL which is what I would suggest). Mrazek is a pending UFA so you convert 3 more years of Campbell at 5 per for no more years of Mrazek.


Either way I wouldn’t spend 2 firsts to dump Campbell period. Maybe 1. This makes no sense
Fran615 a aimé ceci.
7 nov. 2023 à 17 h 30
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2018
Messages: 1,157
Mentions "j'aime": 500
Way too steep...
Chicago says yes obviously.
7 nov. 2023 à 17 h 32
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 667
Mentions "j'aime": 201
I think you're selling them a Murphy Ceci swap when all they want to buy is a Campbell and Mrazik swap.

I think if I'm Chicago I'm charging at least 1st to take Campbell, honestly, I don't know if that's enough, so add a 2nd on top. Mrazek has had a hot start, but his value is probably virtually zero at 3.8m, call him a 4th and 3rd with retention since you've got leverage.

So I'd say Campbell a 1st, 2nd and 4th for Mrazek 100% or change the 4th to a 3rd for 50% retention. The first would 100% be protected, and you could say 2nd becomes a 1st if they make it to the Stanley Cup, maybe, also top 10 protected.
Hawksguy81 a aimé ceci.
7 nov. 2023 à 18 h 29
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2015
Messages: 551
Mentions "j'aime": 398
Quoting: SGB88
I think you're selling them a Murphy Ceci swap when all they want to buy is a Campbell and Mrazik swap.

I think if I'm Chicago I'm charging at least 1st to take Campbell, honestly, I don't know if that's enough, so add a 2nd on top. Mrazek has had a hot start, but his value is probably virtually zero at 3.8m, call him a 4th and 3rd with retention since you've got leverage.

So I'd say Campbell a 1st, 2nd and 4th for Mrazek 100% or change the 4th to a 3rd for 50% retention. The first would 100% be protected, and you could say 2nd becomes a 1st if they make it to the Stanley Cup, maybe, also top 10 protected.


I can’t speak for other Hawks fans, but if I’m taking on Campbell for 3+ years at that cap hit, I’d need multiple 1sts. They can be protected, but I just don’t think it’s worth it otherwise.
Hawksguy81 a aimé ceci.
7 nov. 2023 à 18 h 35
#8
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: nov. 2022
Messages: 8,926
Mentions "j'aime": 10,827
Hawks probably don't do this. The two 1st's is what it takes to dump the 3+ years left on Canpbell. So Hawks trade Murphy, Mrazak half retained and a 2nd for Bourgault and Ceci? Can't see the Hawks doing that.
OGap12 a aimé ceci.
7 nov. 2023 à 18 h 41
#9
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 667
Mentions "j'aime": 201
Quoting: thesaadfather
I can’t speak for other Hawks fans, but if I’m taking on Campbell for 3+ years at that cap hit, I’d need multiple 1sts. They can be protected, but I just don’t think it’s worth it otherwise.


Yeah, I totally get it. It's such a bad Cap hit. I don't know if anything that bad has ever been dumped. Like that Cap hit will still be there when Bedard is off his ELC. Really Sharks are probably a better target and their Goalies actually aren't playing that bad, its mostly the team in front of them. I mean OEL was maybe worse, but I'm pretty sure the Canucks paid to get that.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage