News Article: Delete

[solidprospect]

I'd say so, Hoffman is taking up 7% though, may need to move him. Can't have anyone making more than Karl.

Are you sure Hoffman is taking up %7 of the cap? I can't figure out the math., just doesn't seem right.

 

[BondraTime]

Are you sure Hoffman is taking up %7 of the cap? I can't figure out the math., just doesn't seem right.

Yes, I was only joking.

The 5-6% you are referring to would be someone making 3.75-4.5 million per season.

 

[Tuna99]

I’m not okay with EK playing somewhere else, but at the same time, it’ll be nice to see what he can do when he’s surrounded by talent

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Here is a question.

Is Erik Karlsson worth taking up %5-6 of the teams salary cap? I know my answer.

Karlsson @ 10M = 14.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson @ 12.5M = 18.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 17.5M = 25.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 20M = 29.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
​

That's assuming our internal budget does not rise as it hasn't risen over the last few years despite the cap going up. Bobby lumped in there based on the opportunity cost of dumping Bobby in a Karlsson trade that is lost by extending Karlsson.

Make of those percentages what you will....

In a fantasy world, if I were in charge of a cap ceiling team, I wouldn't have a problem with paying Karlsson max (16M this upcoming July 1st) if there were no bad contracts already on the books. Obviously, I'd ideally want to get him for less, and it probably won't take max to extend him. Sens aren't a cap ceiling team, and they have oodles of bad contracts. In the Sens shoes, unless there are major changes, I trade Karlsson.

 

[Ray Kinsella]

I’m not okay with EK playing somewhere else, but at the same time, it’ll be nice to see what he can do when he’s surrounded by talent

I agree... but I what to be able to say “it would be” as opposed to “it will be”...

 

[Sensung]

Karlsson @ 10M = 14.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson @ 12.5M = 18.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 17.5M = 25.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 20M = 29.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
​

That's assuming our internal budget does not rise as it hasn't risen over the last few years despite the cap going up. Bobby lumped in there based on the opportunity cost of dumping Bobby in a Karlsson trade that is lost by extending Karlsson.

Make of those percentages what you will....

In a fantasy world, if I were in charge of a cap ceiling team, I wouldn't have a problem with paying Karlsson max (16M this upcoming July 1st) if there were no bad contracts already on the books. Obviously, I'd ideally want to get him for less, and it probably won't take max to extend him. Sens aren't a cap ceiling team, and they have oodles of bad contracts. In the Sens shoes, unless there are major changes, I trade Karlsson.

There is no way you trade Karlsson if he wants to sign here. You do whatever else you have to do, but you sign this player.

The lost revenue from ticket sales alone makes this a bad idea.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

There is no way you trade Karlsson if he wants to sign here. You do whatever else you have to do, but you sign this player.

The lost revenue from ticket sales alone makes this a bad idea.

We're currently 2nd from the bottom....

Assuming the premise that we need to clear bad money to keep Karlsson is true.

Would you bundle the 2nd overall pick in a trade with Ryan+Gaborik to keep Karlsson? We would get back future considerations.

 

[Sensung]

We're currently 2nd from the bottom....

Assuming the premise that we need to clear bad money to keep Karlsson is true.

Would you bundle the 2nd overall pick in a trade with Ryan+Gaborik to keep Karlsson? We would get back future considerations.

Not a chance.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Not a chance.

What happened to "whatever it takes"?

 

[Sensung]

You keep Ryan for at least one more year before Karlsson extension kicks in and hope he has a healthy season. If he does, he'll put up decent numbers and the cost to move 3 years of his deal could be minimal with some retention.

 

[Sensung]

What happened to "whatever it takes"?

That is ridiculous overpayment based on the worst case scenario.

 

[armani]

Karlsson @ 10M = 14.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson @ 12.5M = 18.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 17.5M = 25.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 20M = 29.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
​

That's assuming our internal budget does not rise as it hasn't risen over the last few years despite the cap going up. Bobby lumped in there based on the opportunity cost of dumping Bobby in a Karlsson trade that is lost by extending Karlsson.

Make of those percentages what you will....

In a fantasy world, if I were in charge of a cap ceiling team, I wouldn't have a problem with paying Karlsson max (16M this upcoming July 1st) if there were no bad contracts already on the books. Obviously, I'd ideally want to get him for less, and it probably won't take max to extend him. Sens aren't a cap ceiling team, and they have oodles of bad contracts. In the Sens shoes, unless there are major changes, I trade Karlsson.

In the end, in sports and entertainment industries, you give them what they want to get them to come for more. By making your bad team worse by trading the franchise's best player ever for a return that is highly improbable of fetching a player of similar quality (now or in the future) will further alienate an unhappy paying fanbase.

You sign Karlsson, who's indicated he wants to stay here long term. They will find a compromise somewhere, making him the highest paid defenceman in the league (between $10M-$11M per year).

Build the team around this core:

Hoffman-Duchene-Stone
Karlsson-Chabot
+ 2018 draft pick (hopefully top-2)

The rest of the roster should be available for useful trades, and not just to shed salary to meet an internally set budget. All for trading Ryan to make money available for other players, but not if it is something stupid like giving up Colin White or Logan Brown AND cap retention. On a side note, wonder if a deal around Ryan + Pittsburgh 1st is enticing enough for some teams to have serious interest in a potential move?

Play promising prospects like White in the NHL as part of the re-tool, while reducing the cap hits.

Melnyk needs to invest on the team to get a solid return, and it starts by re-signing Karlsson.

 

[Sensung]

We're currently 2nd from the bottom....

Assuming the premise that we need to clear bad money to keep Karlsson is true.

Would you bundle the 2nd overall pick in a trade with Ryan+Gaborik to keep Karlsson? We would get back future considerations.

Karlsson's extension won't kick in for a year.

Why are you suggesting terrible panic moves now?

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Karlsson's extension won't kick in for a year.

Why are you suggesting terrible panic moves now?

The price of fixing our salary issues is not going to change a year from now. I am trying to illustrate a point, the point being you say we should keep Karlsson at all costs, but where do you yourself draw the line? What would you give up to keep Karlsson?

I am not advocating for those moves. I think given the condition of our salary structure, we should trade Karlsson and rebuild because I do not think we can compete @ 68M with him at market value and multiple bad contracts already on the book.

 

[Sensung]

The price of fixing our salary issues is not going to change a year from now.

You have zero basis for making this statement.

The price WILL change. That is the only certainty.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

In the end, in sports and entertainment industries, you give them what they want to get them to come for more. By making your bad team worse by trading the franchise's best player ever for a return that is highly improbable of fetching a player of similar quality (now or in the future) will further alienate an unhappy paying fanbase.

You sign Karlsson, who's indicated he wants to stay here long term. They will find a compromise somewhere, making him the highest paid defenceman in the league (between $10M-$11M per year).

Build the team around this core:

Hoffman-Duchene-Stone
Karlsson-Chabot
+ 2018 draft pick (hopefully top-2)

The rest of the roster should be available for useful trades, and not just to shed salary to meet an internally set budget. All for trading Ryan to make money available for other players, but not if it is something stupid like giving up Colin White or Logan Brown AND cap retention. On a side note, wonder if a deal around Ryan + Pittsburgh 1st is enticing enough for some teams to have serious interest in a potential move?

Play promising prospects like White in the NHL as part of the re-tool, while reducing the cap hits.

Melnyk needs to invest on the team to get a solid return, and it starts by re-signing Karlsson.

Two things draw, franchise players and winning teams.

Losing eradicates ticket sales regardless.

We cannot build a winning team around your proposed core with Ryan, Gaborik, Phaneuf, and Mac sitting on the books in one form or another as dead salary for the next four seasons. Hoffman is a minimum 6 million on his next extension if not more, Duchene and Stone should fall between 7-8 million, and Karlsson as much as 12.5 million. Even at the 11 million you proposed in your post, that's still 33 million over 4 players before even accounting for Chabot whose ELC will be up 1 year after Karlsson's extension kicks in.

Ignoring Chabot since it will be too hard to predict where his next contract will end up this early in his development, considering that on average we'll have something like 10 million of dead salary on the books for the first 4 years of the Karlsson extension, what your proposing is we build a team where we only have about 25 million in salary to spend on 19 additional players.....that's just not plausible.

The only ways to keep Karlsson and have an opportunity to build a team that isn't a perpetual loser because of the dead money we have on the books already is either our team has to spend to and beyond the cap (via LTIR) like other top teams, or we have to give up major assets to dump our bad contracts, because under our current salary conditions keeping Karlsson at market value and building the best team possible do not go hand in hand.

 

[Sensung]

Mac salary should not be counted as it is paid by insurance.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

You have zero basis for making this statement.

The price WILL change. That is the only certainty.

Sure we'll disagree on that, that's fine, it's not integral to my points.

Here's the rest of my post.

"I am trying to illustrate a point, the point being you say we should keep Karlsson at all costs, but where do you yourself draw the line? What would you give up to keep Karlsson?

I am not advocating for those moves. I think given the condition of our salary structure, we should trade Karlsson and rebuild because I do not think we can compete @ 68M with him at market value and multiple bad contracts already on the book."

1) What would you give up to create a situation where we can keep Karlsson? Now, or a year from now. Whatever.

2) Ultimately, I've shown plenty of my work in these posts and others over the last few weeks going over why I think keeping Karlsson is not a good move for Ottawa.

It's fine if you disagree with it, but can you illustrate scenarios of how you think we can benefit more from keeping Karlsson over the next 4-5 years rather than using Karlsson to kick off a rebuild considering Karlsson wants market value and won't take a discount (as he has said publicly).

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Mac salary should not be counted as it is paid by insurance.

It is rumoured to be covered 80 percent by insurance, that means we are still on the hook for 950k.

 

[solidprospect]

Karlsson @ 10M = 14.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson @ 12.5M = 18.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 17.5M = 25.7 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
Karlsson + Bobby @ 20M = 29.4 percent of a 68M internal salary cap
​

That's assuming our internal budget does not rise as it hasn't risen over the last few years despite the cap going up. Bobby lumped in there based on the opportunity cost of dumping Bobby in a Karlsson trade that is lost by extending Karlsson.

Make of those percentages what you will....

In a fantasy world, if I were in charge of a cap ceiling team, I wouldn't have a problem with paying Karlsson max (16M this upcoming July 1st) if there were no bad contracts already on the books. Obviously, I'd ideally want to get him for less, and it probably won't take max to extend him. Sens aren't a cap ceiling team, and they have oodles of bad contracts. In the Sens shoes, unless there are major changes, I trade Karlsson.

I used a 75M cap I think, to get Karlsson between %5-6 at most 12.5M per year. And maybe by the time Ryan's deal is up the cap is closer to 80-85M? So confusing but I get what you're saying. WE began this year at 72.3 million.

I guess we would have to assume that some young guys will fill the top 6 while Ryan dwindles on the 3rd or 4th line.

 

[Sensung]

Sure we'll disagree on that, that's fine, it's not integral to my points.

Disagree. It is central to your point.

The situation can change drastically in a year. The worst thing the Sens can do right now is panic. Sign Karlsson and then deal with the issues next year.

1) What would you give up to create a situation where we can keep Karlsson? Now, or a year from now. Whatever.

Sorry, but it is not a "whatever" situation.

A year ago, did you think the Sens would be in this situation?

A year can make a massive difference.

2) Ultimately, I've shown plenty of my work in these posts and others over the last few weeks going over why I think keeping Karlsson is not a good move for Ottawa.

It's fine if you disagree with it, but can you illustrate scenarios of how you think we can benefit more from keeping Karlsson over the next 4-5 years rather than using Karlsson to kick off a rebuild considering Karlsson wants market value and won't take a discount (as he has said publicly).

I appreciate the effort you have put in. You are one of posters that adds a ton to this forum and I like reading the detailed posts you contribute.

I think the premise and logic are faulty.

A year from now Ryan could have a 60+ point healthy season under his belt.

A year from now Gaborik may have retired.

A year from now the Sens could have new ownership.

A year from now fan pressure may have gotten the owner to spend 75m.

What you are suggesting is a classic "panic sell low" scenario.

Sign the generational player and then make the moves you have to WHEN HIS NEW CONTRACT STARTS. The Sens world could look mighty different then.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Disagree. It is central to your point.

The situation can change drastically in a year. The worst thing the Sens can do right now is panic. Sign Karlsson and then deal with the issues next year.


Sorry, but it is not a "whatever" situation.

A year ago, did you think the Sens would be in this situation?

A year can make a massive difference.


I appreciate the effort you have put in. You are one of posters that adds a ton to this forum and I like reading the detailed posts you contribute.

I think the premise and logic are faulty.

A year from now Ryan could have a 60+ point healthy season under his belt.

A year from now Gaborik may have retired.

A year from now the Sens could have new ownership.

A year from now fan pressure may have gotten the owner to spend 75m.

What you are suggesting is a classic "panic sell low" scenario.

Sign the generational player and then make the moves you have to WHEN HIS NEW CONTRACT STARTS. The Sens world could look mighty different then.

You can't reasonably sign Karlsson to an extension a year early with the idea that you'll figure the dead salary thing out a year from now without being willing to spend the equivalent current day cost of moving Ryan+Gaborik, because there's no guarantee that Ryan will become anymore trade-able in the next year.

So if we get to the 2019 off season, there's a reasonable chance you're just delaying giving up the A+ asset to dump Ryan with by one year. So if you marry yourself to Karlsson with an extension, you have to do it accounting for the possibility of that future cost being the same as it is today.

 

[PoutineSp00nZ]

If Eric Karlsson wants to stay in ottawa you give him whateer he wants and sign him.

Figure out the rest later.

Trading him is insane.

 

[JD1]

The price of fixing our salary issues is not going to change a year from now.

the price to move or acquire assets varies from year to year. players coming off up years with less term and less money become easier to move, moreso as the cap rises. That's a league reality.

 

[Sensung]

So if we get to the 2019 off season, there's a reasonable chance you're just delaying giving up the A+ asset to dump Ryan with by one year. So if you marry yourself to Karlsson with an extension, you have to do it accounting for the possibility of that future cost being the same as it is today.

There is also a reasonable chance it could cost much less.

Of course you account for the fact that you MAY need to make some tough moves at that point, but it makes ZERO sense to give up huge assets now when we are at the lowest point.

Another big consideration should be the fact that we are trying to ice the best team possible next year to minimize the damage in having to give Colorado the 1st round pick.

Your whole premise is flawed.

As a #Melnykout supporters I hope our idiot owner is stupid enough to trade Karlsson and attach the Ryan deal to it, but the idea is indefensible, especially in a year when we won't have our #1.