Speculation: Caps Roster General Discussion (Coaching/FAs/Cap/Lines etc) - 2022-23 Season Part 3: Drop the puck!

Status
Not open for further replies.

HTFN

Registered User
Feb 8, 2009
12,556
11,475
Not a capologist and don't know the terms of the CBA on this situation, but Hagelin being on LTIR, can his contract be traded to a team that's up against the cap so that the team acquiring Hagelin could then use his LTIR status to go over the cap?
Don’t think it works like that. LTIR makes Hagelin’s cap hit invisible, so to speak, but adding it on the top to “add more” cap doesn’t really work because any team spending to the limit has already used his invisible space. They certainly look like they’re spending more money but the only way it cheats the system is if they decided, for whatever reason, to dress Hagelin in the playoffs
 
  • Like
Reactions: BiPolar Caps

BiPolar Caps

Registered User
Feb 9, 2010
9,662
2,886
NOVA
what for?
Provide some cap relief to potential trades partners. If doable/permissible it would have to be part of a package deal. For discussion purposes, say a team is up to or nearly at the max on cap, but they're interested in a Capitals UFA, but don't have cap space to make it work, would there taking on the additional Hagelin LTIR contract provide them with cap room and make it work from a a cap point.

Quite a few teams that may be buyers are up against or near the cap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ovechkins Wodka

RedRocking

Registered User
Jan 8, 2022
7,372
8,806
NoCal

I may be in the minority, but just move Orlov. I think Fever has a shot to be able to take his place, given some time. He’s physical, can skate, and actually does have some good offensive tools when able to use them.

I think in terms of cap space and assets, this team might do well sacrificing a bit of D for better offensive forwards. I know defense wins championships - but the league has flipped towards more offense, and this team can’t score.
 
Last edited:

ClevelandCapsfan

Registered User
May 24, 2021
2,144
1,746
B4C5E352-1777-4BB2-A9CB-EA637E9F5577.png
 

Jags

Mildly Disturbed
May 5, 2016
1,980
2,383
Central Florida
Why though? If he is willing to sign for a reasonable amount who cares about the term. The lower the cap the easier he will be to trade should a need come. For now you are getting a good defenseman for at least 3,4 or maybe 5-6 more years. History says he is durable and from all accounts loyal to the team and wants to stay here.

What's a reasonable amount, and will it still seem reasonable when he's 36? The big term deals we did a few years back made sense because a bunch of those years figured to be contending years for us. Now we need contracts we can flip, and to get value from as many positions as possible because we've entered the final, tough years of those deals and they're weighing us down.

So if we want a product on the ice worth watching while Ovi goes for 895, and certainly if we want even a snowball's chance at contending, we can't throw money around like that anymore. Give Orlov big term at a realistic number ("team friendly" usually isn't huge) and the back half of that deal will be eating up space when we're trying to rebuild. And paying him more for shorter term doesn't fit in with our short term plans, either.

So unless he's being EXTREMELY reasonable, there's a real chance we lose him. And if he were being that charitable the deal would be done by now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: koalabear9301

Langway

In den Wolken
Jul 7, 2006
32,972
10,166
Does this logic apply to Gmbm and all the other long term deals everyone here hated at the time?
When a franchise essentially stops drafting and developing certain sacrifices need to be made. Lacking heir apparents necessitates doing such things IF they dare not risk taking a step back. (Again, Fehervary isn't that guy.) If it were different they could afford to be more selective and strategic. Alas these situations are unavoidable.

They could in theory maybe save $2-3M by going with more of a value fringe 2LD. But what's the point? Where are they going to spend the savings to make an impact? As we've seen pretty clearly, they're already well on the path to being terrible post-Ovechkin no matter how much they come to Jesus on term going forward. What's done is done. Either move forward and restructure as needed or get used to mediocrity. Misapprehending what drives even more modest success can be a quick one-way trip to purgatory. If they miscalculate like that in the coming months...that might be it for MacLellan and this team having any mojo. So much to sort out...seemingly a list only growing longer with time well against them.

But I still don't quite buy that they may sell off. I doubt it's a decision that comes lightly. We'll see. Such hard line thinking on term seems like a bluff given all that we know about Ted wanting to remain highly competitive. Also very hard to be strict on pending UFAs on the one hand and then sort of treat a subsection of your core group as essentially write-offs. It's a sobering reality to be sure but what are you going to do? Get weaker for the sake of...something...five or six years from now? Precedent has already been set. Full marks for trying to drive a hard bargain but good players have this franchise over a barrel and they've shown little inclination to walk away and risk getting weaker. I don't doubt that basic logic continues to prevail at the deadline.
 

Brian23

Registered User
Dec 3, 2011
5,853
2,740
Yeah, it's hard to pick a side on the Orlov front without knowing the actual terms. Are we talking 3 years 6.5 million? Or 8 year 6 million?

I love Orlov. He's always been underrated on this team. Neither of those things means he deserves to be a Capital lifer. There's a price piont/term point that means he's not worth it. Honestly, everyone bar Ovi has that in my mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WanderingCapsFan

ClevelandCapsfan

Registered User
May 24, 2021
2,144
1,746
Yeah, it's hard to pick a side on the Orlov front without knowing the actual terms. Are we talking 3 years 6.5 million? Or 8 year 6 million?

I love Orlov. He's always been underrated on this team. Neither of those things means he deserves to be a Capital lifer. There's a price piont/term point that means he's not worth it. Honestly, everyone bar Ovi has that in my mind.
Let’s be real. Orlov will be seeking a 5 or 6 year term. If so, the Caps should thank him for his contributions and go in a different direction.
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
14,165
15,701
What's a reasonable amount, and will it still seem reasonable when he's 36? The big term deals we did a few years back made sense because a bunch of those years figured to be contending years for us. Now we need contracts we can flip, and to get value from as many positions as possible because we've entered the final, tough years of those deals and they're weighing us down.

So if we want a product on the ice worth watching while Ovi goes for 895, and certainly if we want even a snowball's chance at contending, we can't throw money around like that anymore. Give Orlov big term at a realistic number ("team friendly" usually isn't huge) and the back half of that deal will be eating up space when we're trying to rebuild. And paying him more for shorter term doesn't fit in with our short term plans, either.

So unless he's being EXTREMELY reasonable, there's a real chance we lose him. And if he were being that charitable the deal would be done by now.

I generally agree with being careful with Orlov's next contract should they keep him, but we don't even know what the salary cap is going to look like after the next few years or what the next CBA is going to look like for that matter. Will the cap increase a lot as they are currently projecting? ($92 million by 2025-26) Will the next CBA offer compliance buyouts for instance?

Generally speaking I'm not worried about 2026 or later (the end of Ovechkin's contract). If in the team's estimation Orlov can be a good player until 2026 and the cap hit is low enough then I'm not sure I care what the contract looks after that point.

Of course I’m on record as saying I won’t care as much about the team after Ovechkin retires. If you don’t share this viewpoint then your opinion about Orlov’s contract in years 2026 and beyond is certainly more than valid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crazy8888

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
22,573
15,663
Almost Canada
Definitely not. However; we also didn’t have to try to make multiple guys caps their entire career which is part of why we are where we are.
Fair, but as I've noted several times, the lifetime status for 8 and 19 was a directive from Ted. It's not going to change.

The Oshie and Carlson deals were term vs AAV decisions. Carlson's been terrible in recent playoffs but critical to getting there every year (including this one, obvs). Oshie's been bad in regular seasons but a playoff warrior. So they've each continued to contribute at least somewhat.

Overall though, I don't think the objective was to make the whole Cup roster lifers or anything. Otherwise Holtby would still be getting paid and Eller--Cup goal scorer--wouldn't be on an expiring deal, etc. These contracts were financial decisions made for the moment when dollars were few but time was available. I'm sure GMBM knew that some would be challenging later, but he's been pretty adept at unloading pricey guys, so he probably figured he could do it again. And he may well be able to.
 

HTFN

Registered User
Feb 8, 2009
12,556
11,475
Did anyone really think this team could have drafted its way out of being very suck for a spell after Ovie hangs 'em up?
Drafted? Depends on how you define it.

They weren’t going to replace the retiring talent with new equally good talent, no. I think there’s an alternate future where they could have been more forward thinking about where they could Moneyball their production and better bridged this instead of letting the Eller-to-Hagelin tier of players show themselves out first but obviously once you’ve made the moves it’s no guarantee what you get so there’s a natural risk that we may feel more inclined to take in hindsight.

Yeah, it’s dynasty level but not impossible, Tampa Bay has been excellent at this in the 2010’s. More dangerous RFA’s and team controlled players playing on the second and third lines let them bridge the balance between their least productive contracts. In other sports it seems like the Patriots are very, very good at this type of thing (and adjusting how they play from year to year as it suits their roster in the process). Hell, honestly the Sharks were also great at this through the Thornton/Marleau era, and made the follow up play (which is to take their money and spend big on a UFA when they're gone) but kind of sputtered on Karlsson until just this year and didn't see the results you'd hope for.

Still, it's possible in theory
 

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
22,573
15,663
Almost Canada
Yeah, actually. They've turned out a lot of young talent. They just haven't kept them because of Coaches preferring the older players. None of them were Ovi level, but you don't need Ovi level to not suck.
I not sure I actually believe this. What do you think Trotz or Lavi would've done if instead of the vets they'd had only young guys to work with, not iced a team? Management thought, and maybe they were wrong, that those vets were better At. The. Time. The focus has always been on now, not later.
 

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
22,573
15,663
Almost Canada
I think many of are upset that the Capitals are trending quickly towards being suck before Ovie hangs 'em up.
It's a legit concern, but I'm not sure that's necessarily a long-term trend. I still have hope that they can retool. I think it's self-evident that this offseason was already planned for a shake-up, whether cap-driven or age-driven or whatever. I doubt they expected this season going the way it has with all the injuries to key players, but they were clearly anticipating some changes regardless. The collapse just makes the spotlight on the expiring deals brighter.

I know there are posters who believe all hope is lost and they'll never put together a decent roster together around Ovie again, but I'm not in that camp.
 

HTFN

Registered User
Feb 8, 2009
12,556
11,475
I not sure I actually believe this. What do you think Trotz or Lavi would've done if instead of the vets they'd had only young guys to work with, not iced a team? Management thought, and maybe they were wrong, that those vets were better At. The. Time. The focus has always been on now, not later.
There's a missing name in there that I think is important. Rierden wasn't a good coach but the fact that they didn't go straight from one proven veteran quantity to another means they were slightly willing to roll those dice, just at the wrong level.

I think they were willing to build a longer term bridge, saddled themselves to a bad horse, and then pivoted to double on the Laviolette bump right as Covid f***ed everything up and probably robbed them of what he does best.

EDIT: this is maybe a stretch but I think part of this plan also related to the way Covid slammed the cap down and essentially mandated teams be able to squeeze what they had if they weren't already in prime positions to strike regardless of the cap
 
Last edited:

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
22,573
15,663
Almost Canada
There's a missing name in there that I think is important. Rierden wasn't a good coach but the fact that they didn't go straight from one proven veteran quantity to another means they were slightly willing to roll those dice, just at the wrong level.

I think they were willing to build a longer term bridge, saddled themselves to a bad horse, and then pivoted to double on the Laviolette bump right as Covid f***ed everything up and probably robbed them of what he does best.

EDIT: this is maybe a stretch but I think part of this plan also related to the way Covid slammed the cap down and essentially mandated teams be able to squeeze what they had if they weren't already in prime positions to strike regardless of the cap
All very good points.
 

Brian23

Registered User
Dec 3, 2011
5,853
2,740
I not sure I actually believe this. What do you think Trotz or Lavi would've done if instead of the vets they'd had only young guys to work with, not iced a team? Management thought, and maybe they were wrong, that those vets were better At. The. Time. The focus has always been on now, not later.
I don't even know if it was a better at the time. It was that the Coach wasn't putting them on the ice, using them at all, so they went and got some value for them elsewhere. It's not even a hypotehtical though, we've seen multiple younger guys now be traded and are either able to excel or at least be big time contributors for other teams almost instantly.

Like it wasn't even a now vs later thing. We've literally watched younger guys walk because the coach had them in the dog house, and they immediately became big time contributors for other teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drakon and Hivemind

Misery74

Registered User
Nov 20, 2017
2,531
2,501
Orlov and Hathaway seemingly would have tons of interest. Especially if we let Orlov negotiate an extension. The could be multiple firsts.
 

IafrateOvie34

Registered User
May 14, 2009
12,316
9,206
I think many of are upset that the Capitals are trending quickly towards being suck before Ovie hangs 'em up.

It won't be so bad unless they trade picks and players like Suz, Miro, Chesley, Lapiere, etc. If they do that then it will be a long, long rebuild. Hopefully they get a coach who is great with young players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Misery74
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad