Goal Caufield50
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2007
- 925
- 323
Armia has 2 years at 3.4$m and Mantha 1 at $5.7 m. Would either team consider as the players are each not performing. Both can possible rejuvinate their careers. Thoughts?-
Don’t see the caps trading a first to move manthaIf I’m mtl I would take Mantha but I rather have a sweetener to take the cap dump which historically for 5m$ would be a 1st or something close rather than moving Armia…
I don’t see it either but there are teams looking for cap space and Mtl is one of the few team that have it, they need to get the most out of it.Don’t see the caps trading a first to move mantha
Got ya.I don’t see it either but there are teams looking for cap space and Mtl is one of the few team that have it, they need to get the most out of it.
I get it but the length of the terms kills it for the Caps.Armia has 2 years at 3.4$m and Mantha 1 at $5.7 m. Would either team consider as the players are each not performing. Both can possible rejuvinate their careers. Thoughts?-
Armia has 2 years at 3.4$m and Mantha 1 at $5.7 m. Would either team consider as the players are each not performing. Both can possible rejuvinate their careers. Thoughts?-
Thst extra year is a higher salary than the cap so it isn’t buyout friendly.Don’t think the caps want that extra year
Yeah buyout friendly means nothing to them. No reason to have a extra year when mantha is done after this yearThst extra year is a higher salary than the cap so it isn’t buyout friendly.
If you bury armia is is 2.2$m each year . If you bury mantha it is a hit of 4.5$. Depends if you believe army can help you and I believe both teams would benefitWashington would be better off trading Mantha with 50% retention vs taking Armia back in return.
They're a bottom five roster so probably will need to tank or retool. All their old guys except ovy have fallen off completely with nothing coming through the system.Don’t think the caps want that extra year