Speculation: 2022 Off-Season | Dethroned: What next? - Part 2

[BeingTheThunder]

I think the real argument comes down to how "okay" are we with paying for potential rather than results. I see 8.5 as high end #2 money and I dont think Sergachev is that level of player yet. I would have liked to wait and see what he can do with more responsibility now that McD is gone.

I agree with what you're saying completely. I think we're paying ceiling rates before they've earned that level of compensation. I believe all three of them can grow into the value of their deals but, again, that's just potential.

What I find interesting is the clause structure of their deals. Cirelli having no trade protection for the first two years of his deal. Sergachev and Cernak having no trade protection the first year. Also, all three have to submit a list of 16 teams that they can be traded to in each of the last 4 years of their deals.

Has anyone thought of the possibility of trading Hedman? He is now in the Modified No Trade Clause portion of his contract and had to submit a list of 10 teams he'd accept trades to. I think we should go ahead and re-sign him to a 5 year extension to ensure he spends his whole career as a Bolt. Sure, we got 3 more years on his current deal but it wouldn't hurt to take care of this early.

 

[These Are The Days]

I suspect it's the city, not the team

I don't know what could possibly be so bad about it. I was literally just there for a few days because perhaps my mother's bucket list item was to see the Stampede and thankfully she's only 67 and has her health. Figured I'd go because I wanted to see the Canadian Rockies too.

If there's something so terrible about Calgary I surely didn't see it

 

[Rschmitz]

Calgary I've heard is a pretty good city, Edmonton not so much

 

[garmonbozia]

I agree with what you're saying completely. I think we're paying ceiling rates before they've earned that level of compensation. I believe all three of them can grow into the value of their deals but, again, that's just potential.

What I find interesting is the clause structure of their deals. Cirelli having no trade protection for the first two years of his deal. Sergachev and Cernak having no trade protection the first year. Also, all three have to submit a list of 16 teams that they can be traded to in each of the last 4 years of their deals.

Has anyone thought of the possibility of trading Hedman? He is now in the Modified No Trade Clause portion of his contract and had to submit a list of 10 teams he'd accept trades to. I think we should go ahead and re-sign him to a 5 year extension to ensure he spends his whole career as a Bolt. Sure, we got 3 more years on his current deal but it wouldn't hurt to take care of this early.

I've been contemplating this much more since the McDonough trade. Not necessarily that they should trade Hedman as much that I think we only keep one of Hedman or Stamkos beyond their current contracts.

I think there is a wide assumption that both resign on sweetheart team friendly deals to retire as lifelong Bolts. I don't subscribe to that belief. If Stamkos is still scoring 90+ points the next two seasons... If Hedman remains our best defenseman over the next 3 seasons...they'll both be able to make more than their current AAV, if not here then elsewhere. JBB has shown he won't commit to elder statesmen and is fine moving on from them. I think he only keeps one beyond their current deals and I hope Hedman is the one if that's the case.

 

[BeingTheThunder]

JBB has shown he won't commit to elder statesmen and is fine moving on from them. I think he only keeps one beyond their current deals and I hope Hedman is the one if that's the case.

Agree. I would hope Heddy would be the one we'd keep if it came down to those two... however, Stammer is the only Bolt that has a full No Move Clause throughout the entirety of his contract. Trading him would be a little harder. As much as I'd hate to lose either one of them, I am excited about the potential return we'd get if we make the move before their final contract season.

 

[Felonious Python]

Calgary is easily one of the top two big cities in Alberta.

It did also tie Zurich for 3rd most liveable city in the world in 2022, and first place in North America. https://pages.eiu.com/rs/753-RIQ-438/images/liveability-index-2022.pdf

 

[Hoek]

I suspect it's the city, not the team

Third most liveable city in the world according to this (not that I believe it)

These Are the 10 Best Places to Live in the World

From Japanese foodie havens to Australian coastal cities, these destinations promise a high quality of life.

www.cntraveler.com

 

[Felonious Python]

Third most liveable city in the world according to this (not that I believe it)

These Are the 10 Best Places to Live in the World

From Japanese foodie havens to Australian coastal cities, these destinations promise a high quality of life.

www.cntraveler.com

how many places did the song knock it down, though?

 

[BoltzManConstant]

Lol I don't buy the whole "We could only get 1 year deals" after seeing some of these contracts. Nino for 2 years at 4M is a grand slam of a contract. I actually love this because it makes life tougher on Colorado.

What are you even talking about?

Who is saying "We could only get 1 year deals" ?

 

[Stammertime91]

What are you even talking about?

Who is saying "We could only get 1 year deals" ?

A lot of people mentioned we could only get 1 year deals for players and that's why we ended up with the lesser options, ie, not being able to throw a multi year deal. This was repeated in the FA thread and player signing threads. I disagree after seeing some of the two year deals that were inked.

 

[LightningStrikes]

So how are we going to pass the summer around here? Somebody wanted to do the HFBoardies. Otherwise, we’ve done prospect rankings, (naked) player rankings… other ideas?

 

[JoVel]

So how are we going to pass the summer around here? Somebody wanted to do the HFBoardies. Otherwise, we’ve done prospect rankings, (naked) player rankings… other ideas?

HF Lightning poster rankings.

First vote goes to @JoVel. What a guy.

 

[BoltzManConstant]

A lot of people mentioned we could only get 1 year deals for players and that's why we ended up with the lesser options, ie, not being able to throw a multi year deal. This was repeated in the FA thread and player signing threads. I disagree after seeing some of the two year deals that were inked.

You've got it exactly backwards. We can only _give_ one-year deals.

Giving out 2 years or longer would've given us more opportunities, but would screw up our cap next year when the RFA extensions kick in.

We had to find guys who were willing to only sign for one year. That added a real contraint -- most guys want more term than that.

 

[ThunderRoad]

You've got it exactly backwards. We can only _give_ one-year deals.

Giving out 2 years or longer would've given us more opportunities, but would screw up our cap next year when the RFA extensions kick in.

We had to find guys who were willing to only sign for one year. That added a real contraint -- most guys want more term than that.

Then that doesn't bode well for the near future, next year and beyond, if the team can't absorb reasonable 2 to 3 year deals like what Vatrano, Kulikov, Perron, and Niederreiter just signed. Next season we have even more holes in the forward group with Bellamare, Perry, and Killorn free agents that likely do not return (and Bellamare and Perry were already on terrific cap hits).

Tampa is too top heavy with all of these big contracts and that isn't sustainable unless we had the prospect pool to fill in the gaps. And unfortunately TB does not.

If that is why Tampa could only give 1 year deals this season, not sure what in the world the plan is the following season when the situation is even worse from a cap perspective when the extensions kick in.

 

[Five Alarm Fire]

So how are we going to pass the summer around here? Somebody wanted to do the HFBoardies. Otherwise, we’ve done prospect rankings, (naked) player rankings… other ideas?

I think we should cast the entire Lightning team in a potential Hollywood film. During the playoffs a couple of us were pitching an actor to play Cooper.

 

[RussianGuyovich]

Then that doesn't bode well for the near future, next year and beyond, if the team can't absorb reasonable 2 to 3 year deals like what Vatrano, Kulikov, Perrin, and Niederreiter just signed. Next season we have even more holes in the forward group with Bellamare, Perry, and Killorn free agents that likely do not return (and Bellamare and Perry were already on terrific cap hits).

Tampa is too top heavy with all of these big contracts and that isn't sustainable unless we had the prospect pool to fill in the gaps. And unfortunately TB does not.

If that is why Tampa could only give 1 year deals this season, not sure what in the world the plan is the following season when the situation is even worse from a cap perspective when the extensions kick in.

yes, that is correct. you have just aptly described "cap hell"

 

[ThunderRoad]

yes, that is correct. you have just aptly described "cap hell"

Yeah, that's fine, but then why did BriseBois knowingly make it worse with the RFA deals he just gave out without attempting to achieve a better situation for the team by working to lower the AAV, even if he had to go back and forth longer with the agents. I just can’t see how the final agreed upon AAVs weren’t near the very top end of what the player’s agents could have requested.

BriseBois has just never handed out max AAV contracts without more evidence they are warranted if he indeed was the one handling contracts since he joined the team in 2010. And considering the overall state of the team right now, there is no time like the present to try to negotiate from a hardline stance if Tampa wants to keep the window open.

BriseBois' words have not matched his actions so far this off season, and it's baffling.

 

[RussianGuyovich]

Yeah, that's fine, but then why did BriseBois knowingly make it worse with the RFA deals he just gave out without attempting to achieve a better situation for the team by working to lower the AAV, even if he had to go back and forth longer with the agents. I just can’t see how the final agreed upon AAVs weren’t near the very top end of what the player’s agents could have requested.

BriseBois has just never handed out max AAV contracts without more evidence they are warranted if he indeed was the one handling contracts since he joined the team in 2010. And considering the overall state of the team right now, there is no time like the present to try to negotiate from a hardline stance if Tampa wants to keep the window open.

BriseBois' words have not matched his actions so far this off season, and it's baffling.

all three were eligible for arbitration, see below from the CBA:

12.1 Eligibility for Player or Club Election of Salary Arbitration.​

(a) A Player is eligible for salary arbitration if the Player meets the qualifications set​

forth in the following chart and in Section 12.1(b) below:​

First SPC Signing Age​

Minimum Level of Professional Experience Required to be Eligible for Salary Arbitration​

18-20 4 years professional experience​

21 3 years professional experience​

22-23 2 years professional experience​

​

so, as i understand it, you run the risk of them going to arbitration, getting paid more anyway for a year or two, and then just walking off the team for nothing after the term. for all the "why would we send McD off and make him waive his NTC" crying this board posted, this is the good will that the team created. they were able to avoid arbitration, avoid losing assets for nothing, and buy up some UFA years. THAT'S why the contracts are so expensive, and yes - we did pay for potential that may never materialize, but in five years these are going to be mid-level contracts anyway. these were not MAX contracts in money, just term. all three could have asked for more, and probably did.

anyway, the team did not have the leverage most people think they did, and all are probably pretty fair contracts that are market value, and we're just acting like a bunch of spoiled kids that don't like to eat broccoli "I DUN YIKE IT"


QUESTION #2: why didn't we sign sergachev to a 5 year bridge deal like we did hedman, ensuring that he would be fully vetted for his next contract at 25-26?

this is a good question; probably because hedman had more pedigree and raw talent and it was obvious he would turn into a top tier defenseman back when he was 20-21. perhaps as defenseman take longer to mature, this would be a better option moving forward.

 

[Wester]

all three were eligible for arbitration, see below from the CBA:

12.1 Eligibility for Player or Club Election of Salary Arbitration.​

(a) A Player is eligible for salary arbitration if the Player meets the qualifications set​

forth in the following chart and in Section 12.1(b) below:​

First SPC Signing Age​

Minimum Level of Professional Experience Required to be Eligible for Salary Arbitration​

18-20 4 years professional experience​

21 3 years professional experience​

22-23 2 years professional experience​

​

so, as i understand it, you run the risk of them going to arbitration, getting paid more anyway for a year or two, and then just walking off the team for nothing after the term. for all the "why would we send McD off and make him waive his NTC" crying this board posted, this is the good will that the team created. they were able to avoid arbitration, avoid losing assets for nothing, and buy up some UFA years. THAT'S why the contracts are so expensive, and yes - we did pay for potential that may never materialize, but in five years these are going to be mid-level contracts anyway. these were not MAX contracts in money, just term. all three could have asked for more, and probably did.

anyway, the team did not have the leverage most people think they did, and all are probably pretty fair contracts that are market value, and we're just acting like a bunch of spoiled kids that don't like to eat broccoli "I DUN YIKE IT"


QUESTION #2: why didn't we sign sergachev to a 5 year bridge deal like we did hedman, ensuring that he would be fully vetted for his next contract at 25-26?

this is a good question; probably because hedman had more pedigree and raw talent and it was obvious he would turn into a top tier defenseman back when he was 20-21. perhaps as defenseman take longer to mature, this would be a better option moving forward.

Also Serge had already signed a bridge deal already. To be honest we are in cap hell not because of bad decisions, but because a pandemic happened and it froze the cap.

 

[RussianGuyovich]

Also Serge had already signed a bridge deal already. To be honest we are in cap hell not because of bad decisions, but because a pandemic happened and it froze the cap.

Yeah, to clarify, I meant why didn’t we sign him to a five year bridge INSTEAD of the three year bridge he did sign. And it’s all money and potential i guess.

I imagine we never planned to play McD through the entire contract when we signed him to it, and this was the plan all along.

 

[Byrddog]

How is the team going to be cap compliant opening day?

 

[LightningStrikes]

How is the team going to be cap compliant opening day?

Cirelli and Bogo will start the season on IR.

 

[Byrddog]

Cirelli and Bogo will start the season on IR.

Then what?

 

[BoltzManConstant]

Then that doesn't bode well for the near future, next year and beyond, if the team can't absorb reasonable 2 to 3 year deals like what Vatrano, Kulikov, Perron, and Niederreiter just signed. Next season we have even more holes in the forward group with Bellamare, Perry, and Killorn free agents that likely do not return (and Bellamare and Perry were already on terrific cap hits).

Tampa is too top heavy with all of these big contracts and that isn't sustainable unless we had the prospect pool to fill in the gaps. And unfortunately TB does not.

If that is why Tampa could only give 1 year deals this season, not sure what in the world the plan is the following season when the situation is even worse from a cap perspective when the extensions kick in.

Of course it doesn't bode well for next year, and of course it's why we're only giving out 1 year deals this year.

We're giving $7.5m in raises to three guys for 2023-24, plus however much more Colton and Foote get.

We have limited money freeing up next year to cover that (Killer, plus a little pocket change if we replace Bellemare/Perry/Bogo with league minimum guys). That means a big ol'chunk of the cap space we opened up with the loss of Palat and McD needs to be held back to pay the 2023-24 raises.

But of course, it's not 2023-24 yet, so we have one year where we can spend that money we're holding back. But that means one-year deals. I thought everyone understood this.

Now if JBB was planning to trade away one of those three before their raises kick in (no NTCs until year 2 of their new deals), then he could've gone longer term on the FA's this year. But he's clearly not planning on that, or at least not yet.

 

[BoltzManConstant]

Then what?

If we get to the point where everyone is healthy, Fleury gets sent to Syracuse, and hopefully not lost to waivers.