Proposal: CGY Kadri for CAR Kotkaniemi+

[bert]

That's a huge stretch. Kadri has always been way overrated defensively. I think its because he's gritty and people get the two confused.

Lol OK. You're not biased. If you're gritty and hard to play against that's part of being good defensively

 

[Minnesota Knudsens]

Some of the takes in here seem crazy to me. I think everyone is getting Kadri mixed up with Huberdeau. With the cap going up, Kadri’s hit is totally reasonable for a team trying to win right now.

If I’m the Flames I wait until the deadline and find a desperate win-now team.

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Oh. Has he already showed signs of regression?

father time is undefeated. whether or not he has shown the signs yet is irrelevant.

 

[Haatley]

father time is undefeated. whether or not he has shown the signs yet is irrelevant.

It certainly is. Especially when his 2 best seasons took place in the last 3 years.

 

[AcerComputer]

Lol nobody is adding a high pick to take Kadri at full cap hit. That contract was a boat anchor the day it was signed.

I would have traded Tavares (with 1 year $11m) for him - But too late now though, since all the good FA are gone.

 

[bleedgreen]

It certainly is. Especially when his 2 best seasons took place in the last 3 years.

He’s a good player. Canes management wouldn’t do this deal. That’s really all there is to it.

 

[dgibb10]

Some of the takes in here seem crazy to me. I think everyone is getting Kadri mixed up with Huberdeau. With the cap going up, Kadri’s hit is totally reasonable for a team trying to win right now.

If I’m the Flames I wait until the deadline and find a desperate win-now team.

Win now teams generally aren't shelling out the 7 mill in cap space required to bring in a kadri at the deadline. They're usually looking at 50 or 75% retained guys that fit into their cap without having to move others out

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

It certainly is. Especially when his 2 best seasons took place in the last 3 years.

No. He is coming into prime regression ages 35-38. You don’t trade for a contract for hoping that a guy beats the regression trend. It requires insurance to help mitigate the risk.

Guys like karlsson, burns and others who had contracts into their late 30s all required retention to move and still didn’t pull good value compared to their production and retention. Kadri would be no different.

Moving kk, who has a super cheap buyout for 2 more offseasons, is the risk mitigation it takes to take on a bad deal like kadri

 

[HighLifeMan]

It's funny how people just pick and chose which contracts will age poorly in the future as if there is some crystal ball, and proceed to determine value off of that.

"Kadri has at best one or two at max seasons left of quality play before he inevitably declines massively due to age" - This despite having his two most productive seasons in the past three years.

"Jaccob Slavin's deal is an absolute STEAL. Who cares if he signed until he's 39"

 

[bleedgreen]

It's funny how people just pick and chose which contracts will age poorly in the future as if there is some crystal ball, and proceed to determine value off of that.

"Kadri has at best one or two at max seasons left of quality play before he inevitably declines massively due to age" - This despite having his two most productive seasons in the past three years.

"Jaccob Slavin's deal is an absolute STEAL. Who cares if he signed until he's 39"

Not all Canes fans think Slavin is a steal.

 

[archangel2]

Why are the canes adding? Kadris contract is that bad

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

It's funny how people just pick and chose which contracts will age poorly in the future as if there is some crystal ball, and proceed to determine value off of that.

"Kadri has at best one or two at max seasons left of quality play before he inevitably declines massively due to age" - This despite having his two most productive seasons in the past three years.

"Jaccob Slavin's deal is an absolute STEAL. Who cares if he signed until he's 39"

3 things to this.

1. the canes would acquiring kadri who is on the precipice age based performance decline. The deal is valued based on the day it is acquired. that alters the math.

2. we know how slavin performs in the system. that also alters the math here. we all know the later 2 years of slavin are going to be bad.

3. slavin's deal is less of a cap hit % than Kadri's and will be an even lesser portion of the cap by years 6-8.

 

[WreckingCrew]

I don't think anyone is arguing that Kadri's current contract value is bad. Nor will it be bad the next couple years IF he reproduces his best 2 seasons from the last 3 years (of course the other season/career average it's definitely a meh value contract). But how many players after 35 DON'T see some sort of regression, sometimes major, and very rapid? A "good" contract for 2 seasons could quickly become an immovable anchor the last 3. Of course he's better than Kotkaniemi, but KK is much cheaper and has a dirt cheap buyout if he doesn't work out for another year. If Kadri were signed for 2 more years Canes would probably be all over it, but 5?

 

[Bounces R Way]

But he might not be as good 4 years from now!!!!

-people who clearly have no idea how GMs think

 

[HighLifeMan]

I don't think anyone is arguing that Kadri's current contract value is bad. Nor will it be bad the next couple years IF he reproduces his best 2 seasons from the last 3 years (of course the other season/career average it's definitely a meh value contract). But how many players after 35 DON'T see some sort of regression, sometimes major, and very rapid? A "good" contract for 2 seasons could quickly become an immovable anchor the last 3. Of course he's better than Kotkaniemi, but KK is much cheaper and has a dirt cheap buyout if he doesn't work out for another year. If Kadri were signed for 2 more years Canes would probably be all over it, but 5?

At what production point does it become "bad" to you, though?

Kotkaniemi is coming off a season where he just got paid 178,500 dollars per point scored. In order for Kadri to match that type of season he would need to dip all the way down to a 39 point pace. I'd put good money that Kadri doesn't have as poor of a season at any point over the next five years than KK just had.

 

[madmike77]

If they need room, which probably isn't the case.
Also if they want to get some assets for him, as he still has positive value (I think...) now.

I just don't see any short-term scenario where the Flames are going to need the cap room. They're already the lowest-spending team in the league, they're going to have more FAs to trade in the next couple of years and no high-priced FAs are going to come to Calgary.

 

[Pure West]

Well if you listened to Canes fans last year, they were doing us a big favour by taking on the scourge of JT Miller and if we wanted to get KK we would have to add big. After all, he's young!

I think a trade like this is pointless for the Flames. Are they getting rid of a contract that may hurt them in 2-3 years to help their tank? Sure. But they're receiving a buyout candidate who is signed for the same amount of time. The Flames are probably a ways away from needing the cap space to re-sign their next core players anyways.

I think trading Kadri with some retention for a future asset would make more sense. There isn't really much point trading a good contract (currently) for a good player which might be tougher to trade in 2-3 years for a worthless player who is impossible to trade now unless you attach an asset.

 

[DJJones]

If you aren't willing to pay for Kadri, why would the Flames move him? I think he retires when he falls off. Worst case he's a slightly overpaid 3C that we can deal with

 

[belair]

Calgary doesn't have the brightest future, and gets much younger here.
Carolina is in 'win now' mode and gets the much better player.

I get it from that perspective for sure - but Kotkaniemi is coming off a season where he only put up 27 points in a full season, and makes 4.820 for 6 more years. Calgary can do way better if they decide they want to move Kadri.

Kotkaniemi put up 27 points playing 11:45 at even strength and just over 1 minute a game on the special teams. He was essentially a fourth liner.

Project that player as a top six center on a rebuilding team and those numbers improve. Kotkaniemi was a high pedigree center buried on a roster trying to compete for a Stanley Cup. It's not a favorable environment for developing a player that just isn't there yet.

When it comes to trading Kadri, there are only so many competitive teams out there that could make the cap hit work. I wouldn't be so certain that 'better' opportunities are out there.

 

[MXD]

Kotkaniemi put up 27 points playing 11:45 at even strength and just over 1 minute a game on the special teams. He was essentially a fourth liner.

Project that player as a top six center on a rebuilding team and those numbers improve. Kotkaniemi was a high pedigree center buried on a roster trying to compete for a Stanley Cup. It's not a favorable environment for developing a player that just isn't there yet.

When it comes to trading Kadri, there are only so many competitive teams out there that could make the cap hit work. I wouldn't be so certain that 'better' opportunities are out there.

One can then easily make the claim that the Hurricanes were a very strong team because they don't have to rely on the likes of Kotkaniemi too much.

 

[CTHabsfan]

Kotkaniemi put up 27 points playing 11:45 at even strength and just over 1 minute a game on the special teams. He was essentially a fourth liner.

Project that player as a top six center on a rebuilding team and those numbers improve. Kotkaniemi was a high pedigree center buried on a roster trying to compete for a Stanley Cup. It's not a favorable environment for developing a player that just isn't there yet.

When it comes to trading Kadri, there are only so many competitive teams out there that could make the cap hit work. I wouldn't be so certain that 'better' opportunities are out there.

Why was Kotkaniemi a fourth liner? The Hurricanes didn't sign KK to a $6.1 million offer sheet, then extend him eight years at $4.82 million per, so he could play on the fourth line. They signed him with the expectation he would be Vincent Trocheck's replacement. His failure to meet expectations has resulted in his becoming a fourth-line player. Even a rebuilding team won't give Kotkaniemi top-six minutes.

 

[banks]

Call me crazy, but I think this would be a total win for Carolina, and the plus would have to be pretty big if I was CGY.

Kotkaniemi is a disaster on the ice, and a total cap dump. He seems like a guarantee to be bought out at some point. Kadri may be overpaid a bit, and has too much term left for his age. But he's still good at hockey. He's got way more value in a trade.

 

[belair]

One can then easily make the claim that the Hurricanes were a very strong team because they don't have to rely on the likes of Kotkaniemi too much.

I think that's the reason why Carolina should be interested in such a deal. Because they've lost a lot of that depth. And they're not really in a position where they can wait on their younger guys to take the next step to fill the vital roles.

Why was Kotkaniemi a fourth liner? The Hurricanes didn't sign KK to a $6.1 million offer sheet, then extend him eight years at $4.82 million per, so he could play on the fourth line. They signed him with the expectation he would be Vincent Trocheck's replacement. His failure to meet expectations has resulted in his becoming a fourth-line player. Even a rebuilding team won't give Kotkaniemi top-six minutes.

Because Carolina loaded up. It doesn't matter what they paid the kid. He wasn't playing over Aho, over Kuz, over Staal. That simple. They'd be a better team with Kadri instead of Kotkaniemi, too. That's also simple.

Odds are that he plays more this season, looking at their current roster. And when he does, you see the results in the previous year where he scored 18 goals and 43 points. A respectable year for a middle six C.

Look at Calgary's roster. Yes, he would play top six center. And he'd probably put up a decent year of production for himself.

 

[SEALBound]

There are so many pros and cons and ups and downs, ins and outs, and whathaveyous here that I think it may be best to just swap them. Kadri gives the Canes the win-now help, KK is a serviceable center for Calgary.

 

[CTHabsfan]

Because Carolina loaded up. It doesn't matter what they paid the kid. He wasn't playing over Aho, over Kuz, over Staal. That simple. They'd be a better team with Kadri instead of Kotkaniemi, too. That's also simple.

Odds are that he plays more this season, looking at their current roster. And when he does, you see the results in the previous year where he scored 18 goals and 43 points. A respectable year for a middle six C.

Look at Calgary's roster. Yes, he would play top six center. And he'd probably put up a decent year of production for himself.

Carolina wouldn't have needed to load up and trade for "Kuz" if Kotkaniemi panned out. His "respectable" 43-point season was the best of his career and it was thanks to a game when he got five points. His next best season (the only other time he cracked 30 points) was his 34-point rookie year.

Looking at Calgary's roster, even without Kadri, I don't see Jesperi Kotkaniemi playing top-six. Kotkaniemi looked promising as an 18-year-old, but is now someone whose biggest selling point is he can be bought out cheaply.