Value of: Dumping Campbell with 1.5 retained

[Jared Dunn]

Oilers are a wagon again, Corey Perry signing is a NICE little add as long as the moms are locked away.

I know trading Jack Campbell has been beaten to death as an impossible task -price to move him likely being somewhere from 1st + 2nd to 2 1sts- and it doesn't make sense for the Oilers to do that given what a summer buyout looks like. That being said, Oilers window is wide open but they could still use a top 4 upgrade and a better goalie to pair with Skinner. They need the cap space now and don't really have other options to create it.

So curious what the cost of dumping Campbell at 3.5 would be? What would they have to add to Campbell @3.5 to send him to a rebuilder, say for Mrazek @50% or Kahkonen? Even if the acquiring team bought Campbell out in the summer of 2025, I don't really see tying up a retention slot long-term as an issue for Edmonton

Click to read more...

 

[kmwtrucks]

the hawks are probably one of if not the best fit at this point. there is just no way the next 2 years we will be anywhere near the cap. my guess is a 1st and 2nd and Campbell at 3.5 with mzarek going back at 50%. 2nd this year and 1st next year. top 12 protected.

 

[ManofSteel55]

It would need to be more than 1.5M for it to make sense for Edmonton. They can bury 1.2M (roughly) in Bakersfield, so they are only making up 300K if the deal only retains 1.5M. They'd probably be better off buying him out this summer if all they are saving is 300K more than what they are saving by keeping him in the AHL.

 

[ElPrimeTime]

the hawks are probably one of if not the best fit at this point. there is just no way the next 2 years we will be anywhere near the cap. my guess is a 1st and 2nd and Campbell at 3.5 with mzarek going back at 50%. 2nd this year and 1st next year. top 12 protected.

Sign me up! But I think the latest word had the Hawks re-signing Mrazek.

 

[ManofSteel55]

the hawks are probably one of if not the best fit at this point. there is just no way the next 2 years we will be anywhere near the cap. my guess is a 1st and 2nd and Campbell at 3.5 with mzarek going back at 50%. 2nd this year and 1st next year. top 12 protected.

There needs to be more retention on that deal if we're including a 1st and 2nd. The price to take him completely was reported to be two 1sts when he was first sent down.

 

[Jared Dunn]

It would need to be more than 1.5M for it to make sense for Edmonton. They can bury 1.2M (roughly) in Bakersfield, so they are only making up 300K if the deal only retains 1.5M. They'd probably be better off buying him out this summer if all they are saving is 300K more than what they are saving by keeping him in the AHL.

? Retaining 1.5 means the cap hit is 1.5 - right now they're hit with 3.85 cap hit by burying him. That is much more of a difference than 300K

the hawks are probably one of if not the best fit at this point. there is just no way the next 2 years we will be anywhere near the cap. my guess is a 1st and 2nd and Campbell at 3.5 with mzarek going back at 50%. 2nd this year and 1st next year. top 12 protected.

I thought something sorta like Campbell @3.5 + Broberg + 1st for Mrazek @50 + 3rd might be a fit considering Chicago doesn't have a ton of D prospects

 

[ManofSteel55]

? Retaining 1.5 means the cap hit is 1.5 - right now they're hit with 3.85 cap hit by burying him. That is much more of a difference than 300K

"Retaining 1.5M typically doesn't mean the cap hit would only be 1.5, it means that we are paying 1.5M and the other team takes the rest.

Your OP literally says you want to dump Campbell at 3.5M cap hit. His cap hit right now is 3.85M. If we trade him with 1.5M retention, that's retention off of his NHL amount, not his AHL amount.

Or are you are asking for a team to retain 3.5M (which isn't possible without a 3rd team involved), leaving us with 1.5M cap hit?

 

[Jared Dunn]

Your OP literally says you want to dump Campbell at 3.5M cap hit. His cap hit right now is 3.85M. If we trade him with 1.5M retention, that's retention off of his NHL amount, not his AHL amount.

Brother, you are beyond lost here. Dumping him at 3.5M cap hit means you're getting rid of 3.5 million, keeping a cap hit of 1.5. Is 3.85M only 300K more than 1.5 million? Did they change math and forget to tell me?

 

[Mrfenn92]

? Retaining 1.5 means the cap hit is 1.5 - right now they're hit with 3.85 cap hit by burying him. That is much more of a difference than 300K


I thought something sorta like Campbell @3.5 + Broberg + 1st for Mrazek @50 + 3rd might be a fit considering Chicago doesn't have a ton of D prospects

Not sure I see the fit for Chicago. Mrazek by all indication will be extended. Also broberg while nice isn’t really needed due to the lefty dmen already in the system

 

[Mr Kot]

the 1.5 retained is pretty close to what the buyout cap would be. Might as well just buy him out at that point.

 

[Jared Dunn]

Not sure I see the fit for Chicago. Mrazek by all indication will be extended. Also broberg while nice isn’t really needed due to the lefty dmen already in the system

Who do they have there past Korchinski?

the 1.5 retained is pretty close to what the buyout cap would be. Might as well just buy him out at that point.

But that ignores the entire premise of wanting to go for it this year, which I think they (and especially lame duck Holland) will want to do

 

[Mrfenn92]

Who do they have there past Korchinski?

Vlasic. Ethan Del Mastro, Nolan Allen, Wyatt Kaiser and Isaak Phillips.
Could be wrong on my end but just don’t see him as a piece of interest

 

[Jared Dunn]

Vlasic. Ethan Del Mastro, Nolan Allen, Wyatt Kaiser and Isaak Phillips.
Could be wrong on my end but just don’t see him as a piece of interest

Fair, I thought Del Mastro was a right tbh

 

[Mrfenn92]

Fair, I thought Del Mastro was a right tbh

No sir.

 

[Jared Dunn]

"Retaining 1.5M typically doesn't mean the cap hit would only be 1.5, it means that we are paying 1.5M and the other team takes the rest.

Your OP literally says you want to dump Campbell at 3.5M cap hit. His cap hit right now is 3.85M. If we trade him with 1.5M retention, that's retention off of his NHL amount, not his AHL amount.

Or are you are asking for a team to retain 3.5M (which isn't possible without a 3rd team involved), leaving us with 1.5M cap hit?

What are you on about? I'm saying the Oilers retain 1.5 million of his contract and trade him. It's really straight forward, you misunderstood and that's okay you don't need to gaslight my post lol

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

I don't think there's any market for him without a horrible contract going back, defeating the purpose. 3.5 years is just too long. He's gonna have to get bought out this offseason.

 

[ManofSteel55]

What are you on about? I'm saying the Oilers retain 1.5 million of his contract and trade him. It's really straight forward, you misunderstood and that's okay you don't need to gaslight my post lol

Nobody is gaslighting you dude, get over yourself. You made a post with an ambigous title, proposing something that is against the CBA (dumping 3.5M of a 5M contract is over the 50% maximum).

So going back to your OP, nobody will do what you are asking. Because they aren't allowed, without getting a 3rd team involved.

 

[Mr Kot]

Who do they have there past Korchinski?


But that ignores the entire premise of wanting to go for it this year, which I think they (and especially lame duck Holland) will want to do

nvm

 

[Jared Dunn]

I don't think there's any market for him without a horrible contract going back, defeating the purpose. 3.5 years is just too long. He's gonna have to get bought out this offseason.

I just think for a team like Chicago or San Jose who will not be anywhere near competing next year they could soak 3.5 for a year and then in the likely scenario that he doesn't bounce back, buying out the last one or two years @3.5 shouldn't be too big of a hurdle if it returns a 1st round pick. I agree a summer buyout is still the most likely scenario but especially for a team like San Jose who has only one retention slot available for this season and next I wonder if they could see it as a smart-ish use of cap space to buy assets

 

[Mr Kot]

I just think for a team like Chicago or San Jose who will not be anywhere near competing next year they could soak 3.5 for a year and then in the likely scenario that he doesn't bounce back, buying out the last one or two years @3.5 shouldn't be too big of a hurdle if it returns a 1st round pick. I agree a summer buyout is still the most likely scenario but especially for a team like San Jose who has only one retention slot available for this season and next I wonder if they could see it as a smart-ish use of cap space to buy assets

They could, for sure. But they are not obligated, so they have no reason to accept anything less than a pretty penny. One ting is that it's still 3.8 over 4 more years, which is quite a long time in NHL contracts.

 

[Marner4Life]

Brother, you are beyond lost here. Dumping him at 3.5M cap hit means you're getting rid of 3.5 million, keeping a cap hit of 1.5. Is 3.85M only 300K more than 1.5 million? Did they change math and forget to tell me?

It’s because he’s seeing cap friendly or some other sight posting campbell with 3.85 cap hit when it’s 5 mil

 

[Kamus]

Nobody is gaslighting you dude, get over yourself. You made a post with an ambigous title, proposing something that is against the CBA (dumping 3.5M of a 5M contract is over the 50% maximum).

So going back to your OP, nobody will do what you are asking. Because they aren't allowed, without getting a 3rd team involved.

Sorry man. You are wrong here. Reread the OP before over exaggerating and making yourself look worse.

 

[Drake1588]

Three years beyond this one is a really long time for a contract that big. Friedman has suggested that one first rounder per year remaining is the cost to move a contract like that. Granted, that's just one opinion.

I don't see a market this trade deadline or summer. Next year's trade deadline is the earliest I could see movement. That doesn't really fit with the urgency in Edmonton to get it off the books immediately, but it's just such a big ticket. We've also seen traditional dumping grounds like Arizona improve and lose motivation to accept these castoffs.

 

[Jared Dunn]

Nobody is gaslighting you dude, get over yourself. You made a post with an ambigous title, proposing something that is against the CBA (dumping 3.5M of a 5M contract is over the 50% maximum).

So going back to your OP, nobody will do what you are asking. Because they aren't allowed, without getting a 3rd team involved.

It's time for me to get off this merry-go-round so you can let me know when you're on the same page as literally everyone else in the thread

 

[Suntouchable13]

Nobody is gaslighting you dude, get over yourself. You made a post with an ambigous title, proposing something that is against the CBA (dumping 3.5M of a 5M contract is over the 50% maximum).

So going back to your OP, nobody will do what you are asking. Because they aren't allowed, without getting a 3rd team involved.

You are confused. You can retain up to 50%. Edmonton can retain 1.5M of his deal, and the other team will be on the hook for the rest. When the Leafs traded Kessel, they retained 1.2mil, Pittsburgh didn’t get him for a 1.2 mil cap hit LMAO.