SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

nuxfan

Membre depuis
24 juin 2016
Équipe favorite
Canucks de Vancouver
Messages dans les forums
931
Messages par jour
0.3
Forum: Armchair-GM30 sept. 2020 à 20 h 13
Sujet: Next Season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>villenash</b></div><div>Is Benn really that bad? He had a bad season last year, but looking at his stats over the past couple of years, he seems like a totally serviceable 3rd pairing defender. Is it just a bad fit in VAN? Also, I don't understand the pick swap in this trade, but considering how Benn would be a cap dump, I don't see NSH adding a pick to the deal - more likely VAN would have to though.

edit: also, if Schneider is just put on LTIR then why would NJD consider that trade?</div></div>

I don't think Benn is that bad; he is a serviceable 3rd pairing defender and is likely just a bad fit in VAN. He plays better on his off side however, he primarily played on the left side in VAN which gave rise to a bad year. When Myers went down during the playoffs Benn played on the right side and was much better. I wanted to be prudent so I treated Benn as somewhat of a cap dump in the trade.

Benn is older and has a 2M cap hit while Santini is younger and has a 1.4M cap hit. Benn is owed 50K less than Santini in actual $$$ and likely carries more value than Santini since he has cleared waivers in the past and is not as established as Benn; thus there is a minor draft pick swap where VAN moves up 9 slots in the 6th round.

I put Schneider on LTIR because when I bought him out VAN received the full 2M cap hit for the buyout despite NJD retaining 25%. If I'm not mistaken NJD would assume 25% of the buyout so 500K. I created the buyout as a player so it shows up correctly against the cap for VAN at 1.5M x 4 years.
Forum: Armchair-GM30 juill. 2020 à 13 h 3
Sujet: Trading Eriksson
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>The fallacy in your thinking is the idea that Eriksson is "a serviceable forward" for Anaheim. The Ducks have young forwards that they are integrating into the future core that are all more valuable than Eriksson and deserve more ice time: Heinen, Milano, Jones, Comtois and even Des Lauriers are the LWs on the squad now who merit playing time, and that's not counting Rakell and someone being promoted this year (like Braden Tracey). Moreover, your financial premise is wrong: Anaheim's insurer pays 80% of Kesler's compensation, so the Ducks won't show a monetary profit on this exchange until Eriksson's cost comes down below $1,335,000 per year (or $2,670,000 in the aggregate).

<a href="/users/Seider53" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><a href="/users/Seider53" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Seider53</a></a> has it right: you'd have to give up quite a bit to get anyone to take Eriksson, and you'd probably have to retain about $1.5 or $2 million while doing it. Look at the David Backes trade. By that standard, Eriksson with $2 million retained plus *Jett Woo for someone like Max Jones is about the right price.

Late edit: as <a href="/users/Seider53" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><a href="/users/Seider53" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Seider53</a></a> points out, I left out the first-round draft pick to make this comparable to the Backes exchange</div></div>

I understand Anaheim has players who need more ice time, so Eriksson would end up being a healthy scratch who could step in for an injured player or perhaps sent to the minors and called up if need be. My financial premise was based on Anaheim's insurer "pay[ing] less than 62.5% of Kesler's salary"; I too had understood an insurer covers 80% of an LTIR player's salary until I stumbled upon this article <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/how-the-nhls-salary-cap-has-created-a-secondary-market-of-injured-players-and-costlycontracts/article36220762/" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/how-the-nhls-salary-cap-has-created-a-secondary-market-of-injured-players-and-costlycontracts/article36220762/</a> which states "Insurance sometimes covers up to 80 per cent of the salary of a player on long-term injury reserve."; however, in the event that Anaheim's insurer covers 80% of Kesler's compensation, you would be correct in stating Anaheim would not show a monetary profit in this deal.
Forum: Armchair-GM30 juill. 2020 à 13 h 3
Sujet: Trading Eriksson
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Seider53</b></div><div>Ok, and what are you going to add to the New Jersey and Anaheim deals to make the value even vaguely reasonable? I'd look at a 1st, but depending on the GM you may well need to add. The 30 other GMs know how screwed the Canucks are if you don't dump cap.</div></div>

The Schneider for Eriksson trade seems relatively reasonable given they both have little to no trade value; perhaps a swap of late picks would seal the deal. Also, Schneider is owed more $$$ than Eriksson so something like Schneider + 3rd rounder for Eriksson + 4th rounder? I understand that some GMs will be looking for a considerable return for taking on cap given Vancouver's situation and the flat cap; however, the Leafs gave up a 1st rounder to dump Marleau while the Canucks gave up a 1st rounder to take JT Miller off Tampa's hands. Not trying to compare Miller to Eriksson, rather the idea that dumping cap will require a package that works for both teams. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see how the Canucks manage their cap going forward.
Forum: Armchair-GM17 juill. 2020 à 19 h 2
Sujet: Trading Eriksson
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>canucks_Fan_53</b></div><div>i think it really depends on LE... he is and was never a good fit for the Canucks, for what ever reason it just never worked out, not he looks like a bottom 6/AHL level player. but don't forget he had 3 consecutive 70 point seasons as well as 2 more over 60 points. i really wonder if all that is just gone? or if he just needs a change of scenery, which would make a trade just the thing he needs. but who's gonna gamble 6 mil for 2 years on a hope and a prayer.</div></div>

I wonder if playing in a Canadian market had an adverse impact on his play so perhaps a change of scenery could be the spark he needs to get going again. Given it is unlikely that a team takes the gamble on Eriksson, perhaps the savings in real dollars for either Anaheim or New Jersey justifies the swap.
Forum: Armchair-GM17 juill. 2020 à 18 h 58
Sujet: Trading Eriksson
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Seider53</b></div><div>Why would either of those teams take Eriksson for Free? Kesler can just sit on LTIR in Anaheim, and New Jersey has more than enough cap space.</div></div>

Eriksson is owed $5M for the remainder of his contract (excluding his signing bonus from this year which would be paid prior to any trade).

Anaheim takes this deal if their insurer pays less than 62.5% of Kesler's salary while he is on LTIR because the swap would provide savings in real dollars. Essentially, Anaheim saves money while adding a serviceable forward with a decent defensive game.

New Jersey takes this deal as Schneider is owed $7M more than Eriksson for the remainder of his contract. Additionally, Eriksson is still a serviceable forward with a decent defensive game whereas Schneider has managed to clear waivers in the past and evidently struggles at the NHL level.