Salary Cap: 24-25 Salary Thread Crosbicles Volume MXVI: End of season wrap up

[Empoleon8771]

If this team pays EK's bonus due on July 1st, and retains 50% (which I'm really skeptical of, cuz Dubas seems to hate retaining big money), they might be able to snag some value in an EK trade. Probably nothing significant, beyond maybe a late 1st or decent prospect, but something. Otherwise, yeah, I think this team's getting like a Kessel to Arizona type return--which is to say, dogshit.

I mean, they got a recent 1st round pick for Kessel in POJ. He didn't really pan out, but I don't think that was "nothing".

I think Karlsson for Walker and a 2026 1st is pretty similar to Kessel for Galchenyuk and POJ.

 

[Gurglesons]

San Jose ate salary on Burns.

They didn't eat 5 million.

 

[MeinerEiner]

In a vacuum

But if he can only go to 1 team and Dubas views it as necessary to move him then not really.

Only way to extract value is by being legitimately willing to keep him if you don’t get an offer you are happy with. Which I’m not sure is the case.

Keep him until the trade deadline and see how he plays under a new coach. If he finds his old form and the team still doesn't make the playoffs, trade him. If not, then he's a rental from the season after next and can be traded for sure.



It's not like he's blocking the path of a young, up-and-coming player.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

I don’t think so either. Dubas has said he’s not stripping it down and not moving them unless it’s for a young roster ready player.

Seems like Buffalo would be an ideal trading partner, yes?

 

[Ugene Magic]

They didn't eat 5 million.

They ate almost 3.0 for 3 years.

They didn't eat 5 million.

They ate 34% for 3 years.

 

[Gurglesons]

They ate almost 3.0 for 3 years.

They ate 34% for 3 years.

Okay. So they didn't eat 5 million.

 

[Empoleon8771]

They ate almost 3.0 for 3 years.

They ate 34% for 3 years.

They ate that when there was a flat cap, while the cap is going to be rising by like $8 million this year. Nor did they give up a long-term deal like Walker's in the Burns trade.

It's not an apples to apples comparison.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Okay. So they didn't eat 5 million.

They ate longer and and I don't see why 5.0 for 1 less year is some talking point difference to a team notorious cheapskates to giving up a 1st.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I want them to compete. Most of us very likely do too.

Your first sentence is the drum we've been beating since Jake was here. Things have only gotten worse and this teams' idea of a big move is grabbing Hayes or Heinen. We're not that team anymore. We need big fish.

Now, I'm all for it. At some point - any point - we're gonna need big fish. So whether we do that now or in 2030 makes little difference to me. Highly unlikely we land McKenna and so - go for it.

The biggest problem is the marginal tweaks - that work their way to irrelevancy - when this roster needs HUGE tweaks, yesteryear. That needs to start before the draft, continue into the draft, and onward after the draft.

I lean towards pessimism because this front office has never shown itself capable of doing that [5-6 major moves in a short time] - and with pessimism comes utter confusion on why we're not selling the other pieces on this roster with value - but not enough clout to make a playoff push. Dead horse but it will continue because regardless of all the talk of a plan - I've only seen abstract action(s).

I do not want them to try and compete. It's a fool's errand.

The time for these homerun swings to try and get more out of the era was after the Habs play-in back in 2020. Way too late now, way too much work to be done, and you're still f***ed regardless once your 1C retires in two years. /shrug

And if you load up on assets by dealing guys like EK, Rust and Rakell, and you end up missing out on McKenna, you're still poised to chase Dupont the year after, and you're still getting exceptional prospects regardless.

This team's not cutting corners back to success. Trying to swing a Marner signing almost assuredly results in you having a team floating in that no man's land of barely in/barely out of the playoffs, and in two years, you'll have a $14M AAV dude with a full NMC so you're getting f***all for the dude when the team has no choice but to bottom out. /shrug

 

[Gurglesons]

They ate longer and and I don't see why 5.0 for 1 less year is some talking point difference to a team notorious cheapskates to giving up a 1st.

Carolina has multiple 1sts in the upcoming drafts.

Penguins would be likely paying a huge bonus for EK and then taking on a 3 year commitment in a player like Walker.

It's a totally different situation than what San Jose did which was "how do we get Burns of this team as easily as possible without taking anything back".

 

[KrisLetAngry]

They ate almost 3.0 for 3 years.

They ate 34% for 3 years.

Okay. So they didn't eat 5 million.

They ate that when there was a flat cap, while the cap is going to be rising by like $8 million this year. Nor did they give up a long-term deal like Walker's in the Burns trade.

It's not an apples to apples comparison.

--

I mean 9 million v 10 million in cap in a rising cap environment is basically the same.

Yes 5 isnt 3 but 9 v 10 when the cap is higher is basically the same. That's the figure we are looking at.

Ignoring real dollars for this comparison

 

[Empoleon8771]

The Burns trade had Burns going for 3 years and $8.6 million going to Carolina at the time of the deal. After his signing bonus is paid, Karlsson is owed $11.5 million in the next 2 years, but San Jose is eating $1.5 million of that. If the Penguins retained Karlsson down to a $6 million cap hit, Karlsson would be going to Carolina with an effectively equal yearly salary ($6 million a year for 2 years) and AAV commitment to what the Canes got from Burns.

If the Penguins just traded that, then yes the return would likely be similar to the Burns trade. But that's not what is being suggested, what's being suggested is them retaining more money and taking back a pretty ugly multi-year deal as a part of the trade. Yes, Karlsson at $6 million for Justin Robidas and a 2026 3rd could be reasonable if the Penguins aren't taking any money back, but the suggestion is the Penguins taking money back.

 

[SEALBound]

If the return is Walker + 1st, I'm fine eating cap. I'd probably be fine eating 50% even. If they are offering anything less than that, the amount of retention goes down. You want EK at $5mil after the bonus has been paid? You need to provide fair value. Now, given the recent mumblings about what a POS organization Carolina is to deal with, it makes me iffy on whether or not there's a reasonable deal to be had.

 

[molon labe]

I do not want them to try and compete. It's a fool's errand.

The time for these homerun swings to try and get more out of the era was after the Habs play-in back in 2020. Way too late now, way too much work to be done, and you're still f***ed regardless once your 1C retires in two years. /shrug

And if you load up on assets by dealing guys like EK, Rust and Rakell, and you end up missing out on McKenna, you're still poised to chase Dupont the year after, and you're still getting exceptional prospects regardless.

This team's not cutting corners back to success. Trying to swing a Marner signing almost assuredly results in you having a team floating in that no man's land of barely in/barely out of the playoffs, and in two years, you'll have a $14M AAV dude with a full NMC so you're getting f***all for the dude when the team has no choice but to bottom out. /shrug

League is flush full of trash teams that have been trash for years and years regardless of draft position. I don't think there's a surefire way back in to contention outside of landing two bonafide greats in a short time.

Trying to suck at the right time for the right 'length of time' is just as much of a fools errand, really. You suck, draft a Bedard - but no other great players come down the pipe in the next couple years? You're left with a Bedard and nothing else... exactly where Chicago sits. And there's no guarantee the natives don't get restless and start demanding trades etc. The idea of sucking then returning to greatness is actually really rare. They didn't get a Malkin to their Crosby or Drai to McD.

I don't know what the best combination is, but I'd guess outside of the obvious (1OA followed by a top 7 which strikes gold).... I'd say you just try and get young talent through trades/signings.

I'd consider trading up in this draft tbh. Especially if you can use a roster player as part of that.

 

[Ugene Magic]

They ate that when there was a flat cap, while the cap is going to be rising by like $8 million this year. Nor did they give up a long-term deal like Walker's in the Burns trade.

It's not an apples to apples comparison.

Carolina has multiple 1sts in the upcoming drafts.

Penguins would be likely paying a huge bonus for EK and then taking on a 3 year commitment in a player like Walker.

It's a totally different situation than what San Jose did which was "how do we get Burns of this team as easily as possible without taking anything back".

The Burns trade had Burns going for 3 years and $8.6 million going to Carolina at the time of the deal. After his signing bonus is paid, Karlsson is owed $11.5 million in the next 2 years, but San Jose is eating $1.5 million of that. If the Penguins retained Karlsson down to a $6 million cap hit, Karlsson would be going to Carolina with an effectively equal yearly salary ($6 million a year for 2 years) and AAV commitment to what the Canes got from Burns.

If the Penguins just traded that, then yes the return would likely be similar to the Burns trade. But that's not what is being suggested, what's being suggested is them retaining more money and taking back a pretty ugly multi-year deal as a part of the trade. Yes, Karlsson at $6 million for Justin Robidas and a 2026 3rd could be reasonable if the Penguins aren't taking any money back, but the suggestion is the Penguins taking money back.

If the return is Walker + 1st, I'm fine eating cap. I'd probably be fine eating 50% even. If they are offering anything less than that, the amount of retention goes down. You want EK at $5mil after the bonus has been paid? You need to provide fair value. Now, given the recent mumblings about what a POS organization Carolina is to deal with, it makes me iffy on whether or not there's a reasonable deal to be had.

Bold is basically what everyone is ignoring.

Carolina would be giving up anything less than a 1st because, that's how they roll.

The Pens would be getting Gostisbehere, Honka and the Dallas 3rd.

Karlsson at 34% = -3.4 x 2 leaving 6.6 Cap hit x 2 (Not actual salary) since his bonus will be paid in year 1.

His actual salary in year 1 for them would be 4.0 and his last would be 1.5 after they pay his final bonus of 6.0.

The retention doesn't take away how cheap Carolina is.

Like, had they traded for him from San Jose, they were not getting him at 4 years with only 1.5 retained. They would give up roster players, lesser prospects and picks. Karlsson @20%/25% = @9.2/8.625 per which is really where Dubas should have been than 13%

This is why you don't want to deal with Carolina.

You're not getting a 1st out of them. I would deal him anywhere else.

There's really no value trading him at 5.0 to them for some crappy return like Walker and a late 20's 1st. And eating 5.0 in the process.

Like pure garbage and not even worth contemplating. It's puke in your Wheaties and keep eating them territory.... and keep puking into them and having a real Groundhog Day of it.

You guys can keep telling yourselves they'll give up a 1st, but I'll believe it when it happens.

 

[Gurglesons]

None of us know what Carolina will or will not offer.

Saying Carolina is cheap is silly. That's why they would pay for EK65. His contract is incredibly low cost compared to his previous money.

 

[Ugene Magic]

None of us know what Carolina will or will not offer.

Saying Carolina is cheap is silly. That's why they would pay for EK65. His contract is incredibly low cost compared to his previous money.

Yet, everyone is okay with Walker and a late 1st at 50% bonus paid on July 1st.?

Pure lunacy.

Like, I'd rather keep him at that point.

 

[eXile3]

Seems like Buffalo would be an ideal trading partner, yes?

I mean Buffalo is stupid and has young players so why not?

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

No idea why EK would waive for Buffalo. There will still be interest from other teams if Pens want to move him.

 

[Empoleon8771]

If you want to make an apples to apples comparison, why are the Penguins taking back Gostisbehere's contract while not getting any more than the Sharks got for Burns? That makes no sense.

Want to argue that the Penguins not taking any money back would result in them getting like a 3rd and a C prospect? Sure. But the Penguins are going to get more in compensation if they take back a multi-year deal, that's simply a fact.

Yet, everyone is okay with Walker and a late 1st at 50% bonus paid on July 1st.?

Pure lunacy.

Like, I'd rather keep him at that point.

So now you're shifting from "Carolina would never pay it" to "it's lunacy to accept that"?

 

[DrDangles]

Karlsson to Montreal could be an interesting option. Young core in need of veteran presence, very weak on the right side.

Karlsson @ 6-7M for Anderson, Beck/Mesar, and Mailloux

 

[Zirakzigil]

Yet, everyone is okay with Walker and a late 1st at 50% bonus paid on July 1st.?

Pure lunacy.

Like, I'd rather keep him at that point.

Pretty much, especially with a new coach.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I am 100% down for selling off whatever can be sold on the current roster. At this point I don't even care a ton about getting some great return. Hardly anyone on this team is getting a great return ya know? The only thing I'm opposed to is taking on more trash players on toxic contracts unless they are coming with a LEGIT prospect or a first round pick. Which almost certainly isn't happening so f*** it.

I understand the concept in theory but in practice it just creates drag on the roster and helps create a poor environment not just in general but for developing young players in particular IMO. It just isn't worth it if last year's returns are what to expect.

 

[Ugene Magic]

If you want to make an apples to apples comparison, why are the Penguins taking back Gostisbehere's contract while not getting any more than the Sharks got for Burns? That makes no sense.

Want to argue that the Penguins not taking any money back would result in them getting like a 3rd and a C prospect? Sure. But the Penguins are going to get more in compensation if they take back a multi-year deal, that's simply a fact.



So now you're shifting from "Carolina would never pay it" to "it's lunacy to accept that"?

Taking back a lesser same term deal is getting paid by way of a roster player instead of a 1st. The value is Karlsson at 50% 5.0 x2 and Gost at 3.2 x2.

I didn't have to shift from anything. Stating what crap you'd do is stating an obvious bad return. Both short-term and long-term.

Karlsson isn't at the return of negative value. He's worth more to the team than that.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Taking back a lesser same term deal is getting paid by way of a roster player instead of a 1st. The value is Karlsson at 50% 5.0 x2 and Gost at 3.2 x2.

I didn't have to shift from anything. Stating what crap you'd do is stating an obvious bad return. Both short-term and long-term.

Karlsson isn't at the return of negative value. He's worth more to the team than that.

The sooner you accept the Penguins are rebuilding, the easier it will be with you to cope with the moves they're going to be making.

This is the Rakell discussion all over again. This team is a seller. Sellers sell players for draft picks. There is literally no reason to say no to something like Walker and a 1st for Karlsson because Karlsson simply will not have more value and there is no benefit to the rebuild for keeping him.