If teams and owners think that cap is really gonna hit 120, we should look at locking them up long term and taking some risks now, it could really pay off.
2024 Salary Cap and Beyond
- Thread starter EspenK
- Start date
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
I'm skeptical about the cap going that high simply because a fair amount of that is TV revenue, and I'm expecting/hoping Diamond Sports is going to finally crumple and die in tha ttimeframe. They've barely been limping along as is.
Also I think the Canada/USA relationship right now is concerning to say the least. I can't imagine the cap will react kindly to an escalating trade war.
koteka
Registered User
Or a recession caused by tariffs, layoffs, and general economic uncertainty.
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,582
- 4,562
I would be surprised if he didn't.The question is how much? 9mm doesn't seem unreasonable to me. He'll be 22 by time deal starts leaving him the opportunity for another big deal if he lives up to the promise.
Last edited:
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Quite possibly, but that's a volatile enough topic that it's going to end up with multiple site rules violations in short order any time we bring it up so I wasn't going to go there.
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,582
- 4,562
I would be surprised if he didn't.Te question is how much? 9mm doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
Whatever happened to HF politics boards? Was that a thing or did I hallucinate that? I went there once and there were a million posts there and then it was gone. And now I can't fully believe it existed.
Maybe he takes a $9m x 8 if you offer it this summer. I feel confident in thinking that number will be higher if you wait until next year to extend him.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
It was indeed a thing that existed; it was just hidden from easy access. It was removed several years ago and the folks who wanted to keep talking about it set up a site elsewhere for that purpose.
Why was it removed?
What is the new site? I'm not sure I want to use it but I feel impelled to have a peek.
Impelled? Compelled? Another word choice conundrum!
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Confidential reasons that I'm not privy to.
Check your PMs. (And "compelled" is probably better.
)
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,582
- 4,562
But impelled is much better than impaledConfidential reasons that I'm not privy to.
Check your PMs. (And "compelled" is probably better.
Xoggz22
Registered User
Come on... you trade Gudbranson because his contract was 1 year too long when they signed him. You can right that wrong with a simple move this off season.
CBJWerenski8
Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
- Jun 13, 2009
- 42,197
- 29,155
Rumor: Thread 'Columbus/Montreal'
Apparently Waddell was on the radio discussing offer sheet possibilities and mentioned that we have two first round picks. I assume this is implying we’re not afraid to be aggressive with potentially signing an offer sheet and losing it.
However to note, we don’t have our second this year or next.
Any intriguing targets?
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 8,452
- 7,973
Reminder that an offer sheet requires our OWN draft picks and not ones traded for.Rumor: Thread 'Columbus/Montreal'
Apparently Waddell was on the radio discussing offer sheet possibilities and mentioned that we have two first round picks. I assume this is implying we’re not afraid to be aggressive with potentially signing an offer sheet and losing it.
However to note, we don’t have our second this year or next.
Any intriguing targets?
Carolina was not afraid to play the offer sheet game. I just don't know who is eligible for one that the owning team won't match.
I mentioned it in that thread, but, from that description, I don't see him saying anything other than "an offer sheet is not straight-forward since Montréal has our pick, but we have extra draft capital, so look for us to make a move." I don't see anything there.Rumor: Thread 'Columbus/Montreal'
Apparently Waddell was on the radio discussing offer sheet possibilities and mentioned that we have two first round picks. I assume this is implying we’re not afraid to be aggressive with potentially signing an offer sheet and losing it.
However to note, we don’t have our second this year or next.
Any intriguing targets?
But, to answer your question, Samberg and Peterka seem like reasonable offer sheet targets to me.
By my calculations we can go up to $7.42m without needing our 2nd rounder (using puckpedia's 2024 brackets + 8% increase in the cap). Buffalo might just be foolish enough to let Peterka go for a $7.42m x 5 offer.
Winnipeg I think would match that offer for Samberg, and we'd have to get our 2nd back and make a very bold offer. He profiles as the exact sort of shutdown D-man we need and I'm guessing he grades out analytically as an $8m+ caliber D this year. But the Jets are widely speculated to focus on keeping him over Pionk or Ehlers. If they try to keep all of them they're vulnerable, but I don't think they'll do that.
For the most part I've been thinking that we shouldn't get involved in offer sheets while we are so vulnerable to them, with none of our big RFAs signed long term. But teams might hit us either way. It's always worth considering.
cbjthrowaway
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2020
- 1,754
- 4,638
the scenario i have in my head is a double winnipeg offer sheet where they go after both viliardi and samberg. both are picture-perfect fits for the jackets roster needs.
this would also presumably happen after UFA signings. so hypothetically, the jackets could bring back gavrikov, then do the double offer sheet and structure it so that WPG is inclined to choose samberg over viliardi.
that strengthens the top half of the roster at forward and defense while only giving up manageable draft capital + cap space. lets them direct assets toward fixing the goaltending and defensive depth.
as far as non-WPG offer sheet targets go, i think they could overpay for foerster from philly. he'd fit extremely well as a complimentary top-six forward here. i don't think samoskevich on florida is offer sheet eligible, but if he is, he'd be a prime target as well.
He makes it a little more exciting than Jarmo does with the standard line "we're always keeping all possibilities open to making our club better". But it's essentially the same thing of not shutting down options, even if they are very unlikely.
If you want to write more on why Vilardi or Foerster are extremely good targets for the Jackets, that would be interesting to read. I don't know Vilardi beyond being a great netfront guy. And I don't know Foerster much at all. We have a lot of forwards who are very good or soon to be very good so I think you have to make a strong argument about fit, what exactly do they bring that we are likely to be short on in coming years?
I did agree with you that "play connectors" are something we are short on. Gus Nyquist would be a very cost effective signing in that regard.
For the most part I'm focused on the D - so what do we do after we likely strike out on Gavrikov? And how do we get good RD if we lose Fabbro and possibly trade Severson? We'll have zero starting caliber RD.
If we did sign Gavrikov then I actually wonder if we would still have the cap available to make the double offer to Vilardi and Samberg? You can't get all those players to sign and you can't trouble Winnipeg if you aren't offering $8m to each of them, and because of the pick compensation we can't do two of those level of offer sheets at once anyways.
In the more likely scenario that we do not land Gavrikov, and let's say we get Vilardi, then this club could still be in serious trouble. All the giddy talk of forwards we might get - even with an upgrade there we could still be bottom feeders if we downgrade an already mediocre D group.
koteka
Registered User
I think we could get our 2nd back from Philly fairly easily. They have two 1st round picks that are worse than Minnesota’s so we could structure something like Minnesota’s 1st, our 3rd, and Toronto’s 2026 4th for Colorado’s 1st and our 2nd. Or we could start with Anaheim’s 2nd and our 2nd + for the Minnesota 1st. They have a ton of 2025 picks but don’t have extras in 2026. So I could see them being willing to use picks to move up.
I like the idea of doing something like St. Louis did. Can we find a young ok RD that we could target and pay $4.5 million that a team wouldn’t match. Preferably a Canadian team that might not be an attractive option to our future RFAs.
I also wonder if we could find a slightly older RD that is equivalent in value to LDBB — good looking prospect but with plenty of team control. I love LDBB but we need right D. And LDBB woukd be an attractive trade chip. I wonder if we could do something like LDBB for Maveric Lamoureaux. Utah is definitely a team I’d call because they have right D and right D prospects.
I like the idea of doing something like St. Louis did. Can we find a young ok RD that we could target and pay $4.5 million that a team wouldn’t match. Preferably a Canadian team that might not be an attractive option to our future RFAs.
I also wonder if we could find a slightly older RD that is equivalent in value to LDBB — good looking prospect but with plenty of team control. I love LDBB but we need right D. And LDBB woukd be an attractive trade chip. I wonder if we could do something like LDBB for Maveric Lamoureaux. Utah is definitely a team I’d call because they have right D and right D prospects.
cbjthrowaway
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2020
- 1,754
- 4,638
pocke cbj wrote about both of them in his deadline piece. vilardi would be a premium top six wing + netfront PP1 guy, where foerster is a small space play connector, excellent forechecker and potential shutdown guy.
would be very happy with gus. don't think he'd prevent them from adding difference-making play connectors higher in the lineup, either (i'd love to get mccann)
it's not a concern because that's not how the offseason flows, which is:
- pre-draft extensions (i assume fabbro gets done here)
- draft (trades)
- last-minute extensions
- day 1 UFA extravaganza
- slow burn with RFA deals + trades
i view gavrikov as the best fit on defense and vilardi as the best winger fit. the flip side of that (UFA F + offer sheet D) would be something like boeser + samberg? ehlers + dobson? donato + miller? gavrikov imo is the ideal first domino to fall.
even after a big UFA signing they'd have the cap to get funky with multiple offer sheet cap holds.
i'm having an unhinged message board moment here: i don't believe that the bolded here is accurate. st. louis structured theirs last year to land both players, my idea here is to only land one.
as far as i can tell, the draft compensation isn't held the same way the cap space is while an offer sheet is being resolved. for example, if you sign a guy to an offer sheet in the 2nd round pick tier, you can technically trade that pick away before the offer sheet is resolved, it would just void the offer sheet.
so, theoretically, the jackets could sign vilardi and samberg to identical offer sheets, and the instant winnipeg chooses to not match the first, they receive the compensation, which would invalidate the second.
this could all be very wrong, though. maybe someone who's actually read the CBA can chime in lol
Latest posts
-
-
-
Speculation: Does Boston rebuild? Whats Charlie McAvoy worth?- Latest: BackWithaVengeance
-
NHL players who gained more fame after retirement?
- Latest: MetalheadPenguinsFan
