SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

BeterChiarelli

Ban Price trades
Membre depuis
29 oct. 2017
Équipe favorite
Oilers d'Edmonton
Messages dans les forums
6482
Messages par jour
2.7
Forum: Armchair-GM20 févr. à 13 h 14
Sujet: dreaming
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JuanDamienNebraska</b></div><div>If EDM were truly desperate for a very solid 2nd goalie then I’d say the trade makes sense. However, Pickard has exceeded expectations backing up Skinner. In a vacuum, the value is pretty fair, but EDM just doesn’t <em>need</em> to make the move. They’re better off keeping the RFA McLeod unless Pickard completely falls off in the coming weeks.

I’m sure DAL would want to use the cap space gained in the Guentzel trade toward a bigger piece at RD, such as Tanev. Therefore, including Ruhwedel in that trade really wouldn’t be necessary.</div></div>

Even if we assume the wheels fall off the Pickard wagon, why is the philosophy here that moving McLeod is Edmonton's sole answer for a goaltender? This is a roster player with term and club control and the Oilers are going to be strapped for value contracts over the next two seasons. McLeod is a strong #3C and plays exceptionally well on Draisaitl's wing: where else is Edmonton finding THAT specific thing for $2.1M?

I mean no point of exaggeration here but I would rather the Oilers coughed up a first-round pick for a rental goaltender than make a McLeod/Eller+Ned swap. Eller is at best in the twilight of his career and has barely out-produced McLeod in 39 more games played (it's a 7 point difference). The sum of the loss of the roster certainty for what could be the remainder of the Draisaitl-McDavid Oilers and drop-off in player quality between Eller and McLeod far outweighs whatever gains are had by having Nedeljkovic over Pickard.

The trade as presented is virtually nonsensical.
Forum: Armchair-GM19 févr. à 12 h 31
Sujet: Kings perspective
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>Matt Roy may indeed go somewhere at the trade deadline, but I highly doubt that it will be Toronto.</div></div>

If not Toronto, then who?

By my eye, the Kings are in theory piggybacking off of the Tanev trade talks if they're legitimately kicking the tires on moving Roy. The teams I see attempting to acquire Tanev the most on these boards are (in no particular order) Dallas, Edmonton, and Toronto. One of those teams is an immediate Pacific division rival (potential 1st or 2nd round matchup), one is (as of right now) a 50% chance to be the Kings' third round opponent God forbid they make it past two of Vancouver/Edmonton/Vegas.

It would seem - by my eye at least - that if these are the three highest bidders for Tanev and Roy, it would serve the Kings well to get him out to The Center of the Universe as fast as possible, even if (assuming the mission is to move Roy at all costs) you're only getting 80% value from Toronto. Is the gap in value worth one of Edmonton or Dallas trouncing the Kings?

Granted, the option of "do not trade Matt Roy" is still on the table but I can't imagine a deal of 1st, 4th, and a lesser prospect (Villeneuve?) being completely balked at.
Forum: NHL18 févr. à 21 h 19
Sujet: 2023-2024 NHL Discussion Thread #3: After Further Review...
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>What on Earth are you two looking at? He was tapping his post. He didn't even know the player was behind him. The player skated toward him. And Binnington immediately went to check on him/apologize for the accident.

The motivated perception around here is surreal.</div></div>

This is the same league that awards power plays to teams that accidentally clip their own teammates with their own sticks, what are you looking for here?

This is also the same league that penalizes the follow-through of a shot as high sticking. The league has been pretty consistent with the whole "you must be in control of your stick at all times" shtick. Would be a lot easier to see in the replay if those tinted glasses of yours weren't casting everything in a shade of Blues.

Compared to the average working man, the league made Binnington fork over the equivalent of $40. Again, mountain of a molehill.
Forum: Armchair-GM17 févr. à 15 h 12
Sujet: Edmonton Oilers
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>Are you sure that the bonus doesn't travel with the player?

Because you'll note that it doesn't show up on the recap above.</div></div>

The AGM functionality regarding bonuses is highly oversimplified. Edmonton <em>paid</em> Brown's bonus in mid-November and the cap hit for said bonus won't apply to Edmonton's cap hit until next season. I did a <a href="https://premium.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/794645" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">deeper dive</a> here if you want more details.

Logically you'd see teams up against the cap or those inundated with bonuses (the late 2010's Rangers come to mind) trying to circumvent those overages with trades. This hasn't been the case. Bonuses only move with players if they haven't been reached yet. Only Edmonton will have to navigate that $3.225M nightmare.
Forum: Armchair-GM17 févr. à 15 h 9
Sujet: 3 way trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BadaBing</b></div><div>Flames paid a 1st rd to take Monahan's contract. This trade is worth about $6M in Cap. A 2nd and a 4th is a bargain. Penguins get 3x 1st. rounders, a heavy price for Guentzel. Penguins get 3 pieces for a rebuild</div></div>

Except come the deadline neither of those players are owed their full-fat cap hits for the season. Foegele is owed approximately $616k and should Montreal be doing the actual 50% retention on Guentzel, another $672k for that. The reality of the dollars owed is (with a lot of rounding in your favour) $1.3M.

Using Monahan's contract as a comparable (seeing that's your preference), that sort of retention should only cost about 20% of the first round pick that Calgary paid Montreal. Most draft pick values would suggest that for the Flames' pick currently being ninth overall, Edmonton would owe Montreal a late second. OP actually overpaid here.
Forum: Armchair-GM27 janv. à 23 h 3
Sujet: A Few Possibilities 2024 TDL
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Sprak</b></div><div>Then the caps go to the other teams listed in the description of the trade for a similar return</div></div>

I too will eat my own feces if Washington is able to con another franchise into giving them a first round pick for <em>just</em> Dowd. No retention? No auxiliary pieces? An unretained Dowd is fetching a second round pick, maybe a throwaway prospect could be included, but nothing more. The market for #4C's usually hovers around a 4th to 5th round pick: double that value and you can account for Dowd's term.

Consider the types of players that get moved for first round picks, the teams willing to part with their draft capital, and what their true wants and needs are. There isn't a team in the league set enough to spend a first round pick on a #4C. Madness.
Forum: Armchair-GM27 janv. à 14 h 19
Sujet: If Edm doesnt achieve playoff success
The Oilers' depth issues are vastly overblown.

They're running three quality forward lines, almost every line and pairing has been winning the shots battle since Knoblauch was hired, and the Oilers have outscored opposing teams 58 to 23 (more than a two-to-one margin) over their last 15 consecutive wins. That's not something a team with depth issues can do. McDavid only has 8 of those goals, Draisaitl has 9, and Hyman has 11. Less than half of their goals during this streak have come from their "big three".

The Oilers, at least in terms of the skaters, are at a point of luxury. They can add a top-six forward if they want to, but no longer need to. They can upgrade on Ceci but there isn't a vast list of names that constitute as known upgrades. The only piece Edmonton must acquire today is a goaltender they can tandem with Skinner strictly to lighten his load, not because they need an upgrade to Skinner.

There are pieces Edmonton would like to acquire from Columbus sure, but those are likely pieces the Blue Jackets have no intention of moving (Marchenko, Chinakov, and Severson intrigue me). Probably not a fit for either team here.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 janv. à 18 h 11
Sujet: ALL IN FOR PARAYKO
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mm1010</b></div><div>if you look at his buy out is would regularly be just over 2 Million
since he had high base salary on the front end and lower on the back in those years his cap hit is 3.7M for the last 3 years of his deal.... so 1.7M more expensive to buy him out</div></div>

Two things:

1. You're assuming the buyout happens at the end of this season? The math looks totally different than what you present: it's about $550k for two years, $2.2M for a season, $3.7M as you identify from 2027 through 2030, then drops to about $2.05M for six years. I get the point that you're making (more expensive versus conventional contract) but the uber-expensive buyouts that you're referring to were the back-diving deals like what Crosby, Ovechkin, Keith, and Weber were signed to many moons ago. <a href="/users/AC14" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@AC14</a> sets up a scenario where it's likely to be only the +35 years that the buyout focuses on. I believe that sets up June 2028 as the timeframe to look at this buyout from.

2. The four years of Parayko's buyout in 2028 onward progress as:

2028-29: $3.3M
2029-30: $3.3M
2030-31: $1.6M
2031-32: $1.6M

As long as the buyout happens after 2026, there's no fluctuation to the cap hit Parayko's buyout holds.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 janv. à 18 h 3
Sujet: No Firsts For Rentals
<a href="/users/CD282" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@CD282</a>

Wanted to pick your brain on this because you understand the numbers better than I do. Forgive the scaling on the image sizes.

<img class="for_img" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GEtnRtka0AEEzkZ?format=jpg&amp;name=4096x4096" alt="GEtnRtka0AEEzkZ?format=jpg&amp;name=4096x4096">
<img class="for_img" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GEtndmqa0AIVlX0?format=jpg&amp;name=4096x4096" alt="GEtndmqa0AIVlX0?format=jpg&amp;name=4096x4096">

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NHLGoldenBoy</b></div><div>Dante Fabbro is much stronger at defending zone entries and moving the puck. Those are both ideal for playing with Darnel Nurse. He also has good results against elite competition.</div></div>

Is the usage the only real concern here? The TOI? I personally like Fabbro's DFF% (PuckIQ) against all three flavours of competition that WoodGuy recognizes on his site. Perhaps a bit pie-in-the-sky to expect him to come in to top minutes or for Coffey to transform him into what, at least visually, others keep interpreting these numbers to mean.
Forum: NHL25 janv. à 16 h 46
Sujet: How are performance bonuses handled when traded?
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PurpleHippo</b></div><div>Brown's Cap hit has not hit our current year cap hit, technically that would happen right at the end of this season and go against next seasons cap.</div></div>

Correct, this is the $775k value that he is owed and the number shown on the Oilers team page and when Brown appears in the AGM section.


<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>But if he is traded before then, would that not then transfer to the new team given it is now their contract (and the bonus/salary/cap is include in that contract), meaning a team like say Nashville could make a trade with us and take Browns cap (as it hasnt hit our books) and free the cap hit this season (as no overages are needed).</div>

The remainder of his $775k cap hit would transfer, which pro-rates to $339,063 (84 days left in the season should he be traded today). Edmonton paid the bonus in November, that money is spent and will only count towards Edmonton's salary cap.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>To further that, what happens if someone ends the season on LTIR "freeing up" cap for us, does his cap hit then technically hit this season?
It's a weird one, likely one of the few times in history someone with a bonus of this size gets traded as a "cap dump".</div>

Teams don't go into LTIR unless they're directly up against the cap ceiling.

Teams accrue salary cap space the same way contracts cost less in cap dollars the later into the season you progress: if the NHL deadline takes place with 42 days left in a 195-day season, a $1M salary would pro-rate to $215,385. The inverse works the same for cap space: if a team has exactly $1M in salary cap space from the day the season starts to the deadline, they have the equivalent of $4,642,857 in cap space at the deadline. If a team is in LTIR, they cannot accrue this cap space: their salary expenditure (how much they're spending on the roster) exceeds the cap ceiling even though the player on LTIR does not directly count towards the cap while on LTIR. No matter how many players you stick on LTIR, the same thing happens: Brown's bonus is just pushed to next season.

The only way Edmonton gets out of Brown's bonus for next season is if they free up $3.225M in cap space come the deadline, and I think it has to be a real $3.225M, not pro-rated.
Forum: Armchair-GM25 janv. à 16 h 29
Sujet: The Only Way
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dilldoughs</b></div><div>Do you think Caps would want 2024 2nd + 2026 2nd to part with Dowd/Lindgren? Doubtful. Maybe if EDM is moving the 1st, they get Caps to retain on Dowd like you mentioned, to make things a bit easier next year. I still think WSH would ask for a 1st for both players, and from an EDM perspective that pick won't be helping for the next ~3 years so I say move it for players in positions of need, with good cap/term. Dowd/Lindgren fit that quite well imo. Maybe it's a different prospect than Niemo, and a lower pick than 3rd with less conditions, but to me this is pretty close to fair on both sides :)</div></div>

They can ask for whatever they want on the market, it's a matter of whether or not they get it.

The noise surrounding Habs fans and Monahan absolutely fetching a first at the deadline led me to deep-dive what equivalent players went for last year. Rental #3C's go for a second round pick on average. Dowd wouldn't be a rental but he's also very much a #4C. Rental #4C's range from a 4th round pick to a pair of 5ths from what I could note. If I just double THAT value to account for Dowd having an extra season on the end of his deal, unretained one would be looking at something in the ballpark of a 3rd and a C-prospect. A second round pick covers the bill in full on a retained Dowd, or at the very least should and sentiment is clouding the judgment of those who would ask for excessively more than that. More or less why I would argue that Coleman and Goodrow are poor comparisons: those were top-nine pieces (when they were moved) with term. A second round pick and a crapshoot prospect is more than market enough.

Likewise, which team is objectively close enough to being a legitimate Stanley Cup contender to shed a first on their #4C? Boston and Colorado both want a top-six center, Florida and Dallas probably want a top LHD. Edmonton has need for a 1B goaltender, legitimate Ceci upgrade, and one could split hairs on whether or not they should prioritize a #2RW or #4C.

Lindgren will never fetch a first, term be damned. The only time first round picks are exchanged for goalers are when they happen to be incidental parts of a larger deal. I made it to the summer of 2015 before giving up on my search to find any goaltenders that had been directly traded for a first round pick at the deadline and could only find Fleury for a conditional first. Besides that, the closest we get to this is Kuemper four days following the 2021 draft. Lindgren has been a good piece for the Caps this year but doesn't come with the name power that Fleury did nor does he have the resume.

Realistically the only thing that would dissuade Washington from taking the 2024 and 2026 Oilers' seconds is having to wait until 2026 to collect on the second pick.

I'll clarify: I don't necessarily hate using the 2024 1st but my priority for that pick is to upgrade on Ceci. If that cannot happen I don't mind using it plus the 2025 3rd to acquire both Dowd and Lindgren, I just want full value for that trade. A first and a third, plus whatever minor prospect is sent out, far exceeds that ballpark pair of seconds mark, even if we're looking at retention on Dowd. Hence my ask of late picks offset by the same range that Edmonton's picks would be offset by.
Forum: NHL25 janv. à 15 h 50
Sujet: How are performance bonuses handled when traded?
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PurpleHippo</b></div><div>I have this question in regards to the cap hit as my understanding with Connor Brown's contract is the cap hit moves with him (though EDM would still pay the dollar amount of the bonus).

Do you know what happens to the cap hit on trades? Specifically on trades where the milestone has already been hit (so not like the Jagr to Panthers trade).</div></div>

I figured this would either pertain to Connor Brown or someone would ask. As far as I know:

1. Edmonton paid Connor Brown is godforsaken $3.225M bonus on November 18th 2023 (or the 19th, minor detail). That cash value went directly to CB28's bank account. Good for him.
2. Bonuses achieved do not directly count towards the salary cap: NHL teams may exceed the salary cap by (I believe) 7.5% throughout the season in terms of bonuses. Whatever cap space the club has left at the end of the season covers the bonuses owed and the remainder is applied to the salary cap of that team for the following season.
3. The cap hit is applied as soon as the bonus is achieved: the only way Edmonton avoids the bonus overage in 2024-25 is by freeing up $3.225M in cap space by the end of the regular season (will not happen).
4. I am uncertain as to who would have been ultimately responsible if Edmonton had traded Brown before hitting the 10-games played threshold. I believe in this case it would have been the receiving team (bonuses are just paid out when the thing happens) responsible for the bonuses.

For what it's worth, I think that any trade or assignment to the minors to avoid that 10-game threshold would have been met with a grievance from the NHLPA as it's effectively cap circumvention by way of withholding the bonus owed.