Speculation: Caps Roster General Discussion (Coaching/FAs/Cap/Lines etc) - 2022-23 Season Part 1: Free Agent Edition

[traparatus]

Yeah, that gets overlooked a lot. A lot of people (even some of the professional "pundits" in the media) misunderstand how that part of the cap works. They think a guy with a 9.2m hit has the same hit all year long. The nuance of the cap spending downward as the season unfolds is harder to wrap your head around. So yeah, that's exactly how it works. You can kinda gameplan and either just spend the portion you can afford or overspend and worry about the incongruity of that next year.

Are you talking about LTIR? That's absolutely not how LTIR works.

 

[McVechkin]

Didn’t the nhl put in a “legal tampering” period for free agency a couple years back? That not in place this year?

 

[SecretaryofDefense5]

Trading Eller would be a welcomed change.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I like the feeling in here….people are amped up!

Let’s go!

Trading Eller would be a welcomed change.

Agreed. He’s been fringe core. Another I thank forever for his service and the goal. Younger legs are needed, and CMM is ready.

 

[Hivemind]

Sure, sign the guy to a contract you don't want that you could easily get stuck with at a time when you can't afford it.

Don't need to sign him to anything. Just extend the QO and trade him to Minnesota (or Montreal or whoever).

Or maybe a superior goalie made to look bad by a much shittier team that costs a third of what Sammy likely will. And maybe they're pissed at Talbot and wanted to ship him to a hockey prison for a year.

Gustavsson is not a superior goalie. I doubt you'd fine more than one or two scouts who would claim he is. He was dramatically outplayed by Matt effing Murray and Anton Forsberg.

Based on a lot of actual information, study, and conversations you have no idea about.

All the RFA comparable contracts are public knowledge. Stop with these dumb Appeal to Authority arguments. If you're going to pretend that GMs can't make mistakes and are always operating off of some amount of secret knowledge and foresight we don't have, you would both be eliminating the purpose of a hockey discussion board AND also setting up for the same type of arguments to be used as defense for moves like the Forsberg-Erat trade.

Yeah, and they likely talked to his camp about it and their likelihood of signing it. How do you think that went?

They don't have to have him sign the QO. The QO retains their rights to him as a player, whether or not he signs it. It enables them to get value for him via trade.

Uh huh. And it's entirely possible that the people who actually know and do these things for a living considered and tried all of those things and arrived at the conclusion that the best thing for them to do was to let him walk.

Once again, a crappy Appeal to Authority argument. Previous RFA deals, which are used as the justification for arbitration deals, are public knowledge. Moreover, these professionals can and do still make mistakes. We spend half of our time on these boards roasting Chuck Fletcher and Kyle Davidson for their perplexing asset management and terrible moves, but as soon as someone criticizes a move by GMBM we have flocks of people jumping to the "He'S a ProFeSsIoNaL" line.

I guess we've come full circle back to George McPhee's classic line from 24/7 "If you knew the game you'd be in it"

 

[Carlzner]

It's actually really, really simple. If a team acquired Samsonov via trade, they would have to pay him at least $3M.

Nobody wants to pay him $3M.

 

[Hivemind]

It's actually really, really simple. If a team acquired Samsonov via trade, they would have to pay him at least $3M.

Nobody wants to pay him $3M.

No, they would have to pay him at least $2M (his qualifying offer). Everything else is between that team, Samsonov's agent, and possibly the arbitrator. But most of his RFA goaltender comparable have come in short of $3M (Vejmelka 3x$2.75M, Rittich 1x$2.75M, Korpisalo 2x$2.8M). Alex Nedelkovic only got 2x$3M coming off a season where he had a .932sv% and 1.90GAA. Samsonov's numbers, well, they aren't those numbers. Not even close. Moreover, even if Sammy got a high award in line with his comparables ($2.75-2.8M), the club could still very easily opt for a 1-year deal and retain his RFA right again next season.

Further still, this is a world in which Alexander Georgiev was worth 2x 3rd round picks and a 5th round pick (and Colorado then signed him for more than Samsonov money) and that Filip Gustavsson was able to be traded for Talbot.

This isn't the first time that GMBM has balked at a player going to arbitration (Connolly, Vrana, etc). Seems to be a potential blind spot in GMBM's management style is only considering worst-case-scenario arbitration deals.

 

[Carlzner]

No, they would have to pay him at least $2M (his qualifying offer). Everything else is between that team, Samsonov's agent, and possibly the arbitrator. But most of his RFA goaltender comparable have come in short of $3M (Vejmelka 3x$2.75M, Rittich 1x$2.75M, Korpisalo 2x$2.8M). Alex Nedelkovic only got 2x$3M coming off a season where he had a .932sv% and 1.90GAA. Samsonov's numbers, well, they aren't those numbers. Not even close. Moreover, even if Sammy got a high award in line with his comparables ($2.75-2.8M), the club could still very easily opt for a 1-year deal and retain his RFA right again next season.

Further still, this is a world in which Alexander Georgiev was worth 2x 3rd round picks and a 5th round pick (and Colorado then signed him for more than Samsonov money) and that Filip Gustavsson was able to be traded for Talbot.

This isn't the first time that GMBM has balked at a player going to arbitration (Connolly, Vrana, etc). Seems to be a potential blind spot in GMBM's management style is only considering worst-case-scenario arbitration deals.

General Managers of every single hockey team have staff members with better financial knowledge than you or I. It was widely reported that Samsonov could get a contract above $3m if decided by an arbitrator.

Why would Samsonov's agent accept anything less if his QO was tendered?

You genuinely think GMBM is so incompetent at his job that he didn't even look for takers for his 25 year old former 1st round draft pick goaltender instead of the possibility that nobody wanted to pay him $3M? In the midst of a crowded goalie market and a tight cap?

It's a truly asinine argument.

 

[Jags]

Okay, so my assumption that this decision was made based in part on things that went on behind closed doors that probably justify it is far more outlandish than your uninformed idea that our GM just decided not to get value for this guy when he easily could have.

Sorry, Hive, you can call it authority bias if you really want to, but you've clearly jumped to a pretty big conclusion here based on very few facts. It's ridiculous to suggest that our front office didn't try to get something for him. You have no way of knowing that. The only way you can look at it as dodgy asset management is the rumor that we could have dealt him in February. That we didn't move him at a time when options are limited has nothing to do with our ability to move him now that every team has plenty of options, especially since Samsonov doesn't set the bar very high.

 

[Hivemind]

General Managers of every single hockey team have staff members with better financial knowledge than you or I. It was widely reported that Samsonov could get a contract above $3m if decided by an arbitrator.

No, it was widely reported that the Capitals didn't QO him because they feared/projected a $3M+ arbitration. That's not the same thing as reporting his arbitration would actually be above $3M.

The rest of that statement is an appeal to authority fallacy.

Why would Samsonov's agent accept anything less if his QO was tendered?

His QO is $2M.

You genuinely think GMBM is so incompetent at his job that he didn't even look for takers for his 25 year old former 1st round draft pick Goaltender over nobody wanting to pay him $3M? In the midst of a crowded goalie market and a tight cap?

It's a truly asinine argument.

I think GMBM made a mistake. I think he's an above average GM, but not a flawless one. He didn't handle his assets properly here, and locked himself out of a market for Samsonov. I think, specifically, he has a weakspot when it comes to arbitration outcomes, as this isn't the first time he's apparently over-estimated what a RFA would earn given arbitration leverage (see the "cost certainty" logic behind the Vrana trade).

We know Montreal had interest in Samsonov at the deadline, and has a goalie opening now. We know Minnesota was interested in off-loading Talbot, and willing to take a young goalie with questionable results as a return. I think GMBM found a trade partner for Vanecek, got enough traction with Kuemper's camp to slot him in as Plan A, and then panicked about Sammy's arbitration leverage given the QO deadline. He took the risk averse approach of bailing on the QO rather than holding onto Samsonov and risking the arbitration award if he couldn't finalize a trade.

As it stands, the Capitals are walking away from their 2015 first round pick with literally zero in return for it, AND are keeping the same goalie coach that not only failed to develop him but also got marginal results devleoping Vitek Vanecek AND ruined Braden Holtby's career as part of their coaching staff. If you don't see that as a blunder, you're being asinine.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

Georgiev got $3.4M. Not a chance Sammy’s arb award would be less than $3M. It’s entirely possible he signs a short term deal for less than $3M/year if he thinks it’s a good fit but this $2M qualifying offer talk is misguided.

 

[Carlzner]

No, it was widely reported that the Capitals didn't QO him because they feared/projected a $3M+ arbitration. That's not the same thing as reporting his arbitration would actually be above $3M.

His QO is $2M.

Yeah, again, teams are better at this stuff than you and I. They are tight run businesses with financial departments.

He wasn't going to accept a new contract until arbitration, and he was going to get above $3M.

We know Montreal had interest in Samsonov at the deadline, and has a goalie opening now.

Montreal just balked at trading Allen, why do they want to spend $3m on a backup goaltender?

We know Montreal had interest in Samsonov at the deadline, and has a goalie opening now. We know Minnesota was interested in off-loading Talbot, and willing to take a young goalie with questionable results as a return.

Why does a contending team that just had to trade one of their stars due to the cap want to pay a backup goaltender $3m+?

 

[Hivemind]

Georgiev got $3.4M. Not a chance Sammy’s arb award would be less than $3M. It’s entirely possible he signs a short term deal for less than $3M/year if he thinks it’s a good fit but this $2M qualifying offer talk is misguided.

Ullmark, Vejmelka, Korpisalo, Hill, and Rittich all came in under $3M. Georgiev is the exception. When compared to the goalies getting over $3M, they all had massively better stats than Samsonov (Nedeljkovic, Grubauer, Sorokin).

Yeah, again, teams are better at this stuff than you and I.

I guess that George McPhee's trade of Erat-for-Forsberg is flawless and shouldn't be questioned either, then. Because, after all, teams are better than this still than you and I.

 

[Silky mitts]

Players drafted by the Caps likely to be on the roster to start the season
Ovy
Kuzy
McMichael
Carlson
Orlov
Fever

Probably 1 more forward, maybe 1 more guy, possibly 2, has to be by far the least since the lockout

 

[Carlzner]

I guess that George McPhee's trade of Erat-for-Forsberg is flawless and shouldn't be questioned either, then. Because, after all, teams are better than this still than you and I.

I'm saying organizations have financial staff that are paid a salary to be able to predict future contracts, especially ones that are likely to go to Arbitration. We can pull examples back and forth of previous contracts but at the end of the day, they know more than we do about that stuff.

What we do know, as simpletons on a message board, is that agents are always going to try and make the most money for their clients. Given his situation, there is no chance the QO contract negotiation would avoid arbitration.

 

[895]

I can agree that maybe in this situation GMBM did the best he could but a better GM wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

I have noticed that a lot lately. People will defend a lot of GMBM's moves on the basis that it was the best thing at the time or given the information available or the team's situation. However, it's on the GM to be proactive and put the team in a better situation to begin with.

A reactive GM is not going to build a contending team unless they're exceptionally lucky.

 

[Hivemind]

I'm saying organizations have financial staff that are paid a salary to be able to predict future contracts, especially ones that are likely to go to Arbitration. We can pull examples back and forth of previous contracts but at the end of the day, they know more than we do about that stuff.

And I'm saying it wouldn't be the first time a team has gotten an arbitration estimate wrong, it wouldn't even be the first time GMBM's crew has gotten an arbitration estimate wrong.

Yes, we can pull examples back and forth of previous contracts - because previous contracts are exactly what are used as justification in arbitration cases.

"They know more than we do" is just an appeal to authority. Why discuss anything about hockey and roster decisions? Why discuss how much ice time a player should get, the coaching staff knows more than we do. Why discuss any trades, the GMs know more than we do.

 

[Carlzner]

I'm not talking about the Washington Capitals, I'm talking about the entire league.

The entire league was aware his contract was likely to go to arbitration, and end up in overpayment. They didn't want any part of it. Neither would I.

 

[Jags]

He didn't handle his assets properly here, and locked himself out of a market for Samsonov.

I think the market locked him out of an opportunity to patiently and methodically try to get blood from a stone. Samsonov may have had a little value mid-season when pickings are slim. A reporter heard that Montreal contacted us about Sammy. They could easily have contacted 20 other teams about their goalies, too. A rumor about a discussion doesn't mean anything.

I think, specifically, he has a weakspot when it comes to arbitration outcomes

As evidenced by what? This one has a lot more moving parts than just arbitration. The teams most in need of a keeper are making moves in the next couple days. The time to get something for him was now. Your other examples were Connolly, who we didn't have the cash for regardless of the ask and wasn't a chemistry piece for us, and...

(see the "cost certainty" logic behind the Vrana trade).

...Vrana, where you're leaving out the "Vrana is an asshole" logic behind the trade.

I see little merit to the idea that he "fears" arbitration outcomes. Waiting for arbitration in this case would have served little purpose, and you have no proof that he could have been traded in the meantime. There's better UFA goalies that teams don't have to trade for at all.

We know Montreal had interest in Samsonov at the deadline, and has a goalie opening now...

...and a whole host of better keepers to choose from without giving up any assets now that the season is over. And if they're gonna trade for one instead, why not aim higher than Mr. Floppy 89%?

We know Minnesota was interested in off-loading Talbot, and willing to take a young goalie with questionable results as a return.

Or we know that Minnesota was capped out and made a cap move to free up $3 million on the eve of free agency.

I think GMBM found a trade partner for Vanecek, got enough traction with Kuemper's camp to slot him in as Plan A, and then panicked about Sammy's arbitration leverage given the QO deadline. He took the risk averse approach of bailing on the QO rather than holding onto Samsonov and risking the arbitration award if he couldn't finalize a trade.

I disagree. I think he's been shopping Samsonov from the first moment he could and heard crickets because of the plethora of superior options out there and the likelihood that any team interested in him would see the chess pieces in motion and take the safe risk that he might end up a free agent. If GMBM was shopping him aggressively (and he had ZERO reason not to) then the writing was on the wall that the Caps didn't want to go to arbitration over him. So they take the "risk" of not making an offer knowing that there's a good chance they could get him without having to trade for him at all.

And if that "risk" didn't pay off, then OH NO! They'd just have to make due with one of many other options, shrug their shoulders, and never think about it again.

keeping the same goalie coach

Yes, we can agree that keeping Murray is asinine. At least we have that.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Twabs, I love your enthusiasm for finding a solution to the John Carlson problem.... but if my faulty memory serves me correctly, the last time the Caps traded big parts of their core for other high level players, while they were actually competitive (not rebuilding), was Mike Gartner and Larry Murphy in 1989. The Caps lost that trade by a trillion miles, as both Gartner and Murphy went on to long careers ending in the HHOF, and Dino only played with the Caps for 3+ years.

Anyone else who doesn't have Alzheimers know of an example when the Caps won trading out a major part of their core, outside of a rebuild? Rod Langway in 82 is the only example I can think of but the Caps had never made the playoffs and were about the be moved then, that's not a comparable situation.

Bobby Carpenter for Mike Ridley and Kelly Miller.

Al Iafrate for Joe Juneau

Clint Malarchuk for Calle Johansson

Just to name a few.

 

[Silky mitts]

The only option known to us for Sammie was exposing him in the expansion draft potentially saving the 2nd round pick traded for VV, even with 20/20 hind sight would it have been worth potentially losing Jensen or a 2nd 2nd rounder?

 

[twabby]

Twabs, I love your enthusiasm for finding a solution to the John Carlson problem.... but if my faulty memory serves me correctly, the last time the Caps traded big parts of their core for other high level players, while they were actually competitive (not rebuilding), was Mike Gartner and Larry Murphy in 1989. The Caps lost that trade by a trillion miles, as both Gartner and Murphy went on to long careers ending in the HHOF, and Dino only played with the Caps for 3+ years.

Anyone else who doesn't have Alzheimers know of an example when the Caps won trading out a major part of their core, outside of a rebuild? Rod Langway in 82 is the only example I can think of but the Caps had never made the playoffs and were about the be moved then, that's not a comparable situation.

I guess I’m curious what people expect out of Carlson next postseason should the Caps make it. It’d be one thing if he had 4 disappointing postseasons in a row, but the truth is he’s been far worse than disappointing. He’s been the worst player on the ice for the past 4 postseasons. I think Washington will be lucky to get a serviceable version of Carlson in the postseason, and that the most likely outcome is what we’ve seen the past 4 postseasons. There’s no urgency or intensity to his game and that hurts when time and space are at a premium.

I keep hearing about the risk in trading Carlson, but I think there is significantly more risk in keeping him. There’s also a big opportunity cost in keeping him.

 

[Hivemind]

As evidenced by what? This one has a lot more moving parts than just arbitration. The teams most in need of a keeper are making moves in the next couple days. The time to get something for him was now. Your other examples were Connolly, who we didn't have the cash for regardless of the ask and wasn't a chemistry piece for us, and...

As evidenced by his handling of multiple arbitration eligible players in the past.

This wasn't him walking away from Connolly as a UFA (that was when we were priced out), but rather when he opted not to qualify Connolly as an RFA prior to that. They ultimately came to a deal before Connolly hit the open market (something I thought may have still been a possibility with Samsonov, but doesn't seem to be the case given recent reporting). He balked at Connolly's $892.5K QO because he feared arbitration, but was able to agree to a $1.5M deal with him (something that clearly wouldn't have broken the bank if they hit arbitration).

...Vrana, where you're leaving out the "Vrana is an asshole" logic behind the trade.

I see little merit to the idea that he "fears" arbitration outcomes. Waiting for arbitration in this case would have served little purpose, and you have no proof that he could have been traded in the meantime. There's better UFA goalies that teams don't have to trade for at all.

The organization specifically cited the "cost certainty" and fears of arbitration settlement as logic behind dealing Vrana. They never once said he's an asshole (and I don't view his inconsistent play as any more assshole-ish than the inconsistent play of Mantha). But ultimately the Capitals' fears of an arbitration of Vrana costing more than Mantha were off-base. Vrana's camp only asked for $5.7M in arbitration (exactly the same as Mantha's AAV), meaning it was literally impossible for Vrana to cost more than Mantha. And Vrana and the Red Wings would come to a $5.25M deal, nearly a half million cheaper than Mantha. This is a literal case of Capitals' evaluation of an arbitration case being incorrect. And the roster move that those evaluations drove are a perfect example of those fears.

GMBM has now three times either refused to extend a QO or traded a player because he thought the upper bound of an arbitration award could result in a negative outcome for the team. He's allowing the worst-case-scenarios to drive his decision-making in this realm.

As for whether Samsonov could have been traded in the meantime, look no further than Gustavsson's trade today and another team thinking Georgiev is worth $3.4M. There's no guarantee Sammy could have been traded before tomorrow, but arbitration doesn't happen tomorrow, and the Capitals certainly don't have to be cap compliant tomorrow. They would have plenty of time to get a deal done. This is a league where Matt Murray has been traded twice in the past 24 months and the Buffalo Sabres just gave a one-way contract to Malcolm Subban.

 

[Jags]

"They know more than we do" is just an appeal to authority. Why discuss anything about hockey and roster decisions? Why discuss how much ice time a player should get, the coaching staff knows more than we do. Why discuss any trades, the GMs know more than we do.

I have no problem questioning anyone's judgment when there are tangible, definitive reasons to. You're speculating, assuming things not in evidence, drawing conclusions based on limited perspective, then insisting that those that choose to form their opinions based on something a bit more concrete from a much broader perspective are weak-minded folks that don't belong on a hockey discussion board to begin with because we're just blindly trusting the experts.

In other words, you'd just rather we appealed more to your authority than theirs. You are the arbiter of proper hockey discussion, after all.

Meanwhile, the only real difference between us on this topic is that you're more willing to make assumptions than I am.

 

[RedRocking]

I guess I’m curious what people expect out of Carlson next postseason should the Caps make it. It’d be one thing if he had 4 disappointing postseasons in a row, but the truth is he’s been far worse than disappointing. He’s been the worst player on the ice for the past 4 postseasons. I think Washington will be lucky to get a serviceable version of Carlson in the postseason, and that the most likely outcome is what we’ve seen the past 4 postseasons. There’s no urgency or intensity to his game and that hurts when time and space are at a premium.

I keep hearing about the risk in trading Carlson, but I think there is significantly more risk in keeping him. There’s also a big opportunity cost in keeping him.

I expect Carlson to make me feel assured as he QB’s the PP, retrieves and keeps Ovi’s misses in the zone, and generally makes smart decisions with the puck on said PP.

Otherwise, I expect a lot of slow, labored skating, and lack of timely defense - all accompanied by terrible body language, and a resting bitch face

Prove me wrong Johnny!