Proposal: Free agency edition Trade Rumours/Proposals [MOD - Stay on Topic] 5

[BondraTime]

The only caveat to me is if they make an adjustment due to the circumstances. I think what you said is correct .

NHL CBA FAQ - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps re RFA

Don't think that would apply to Pinto, signing bonuses are guaranteed for ELC's, and Pinto deosn't need to receive a signing bonus for this season.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Giroux is in every future lineup that has been posted isn't he?

They don't need to lose Giroux to be cap compliant whatsoever, just the usual slight decrease in salary for a retirement deal.

I don't think anybody projects the Senators losing Giroux, but I also wouldn't expect him to get a raise. Another 1-3 year deal at his current cap hit would be what I would expect. Maybe slightly more to account for the cap going up and how Giroux has cemented himself here.

The other thing with Giroux is that he will be 35+, so if they want to go year to year they can sign game the performance bonuses to manage the cap. Which a lot of teams do with older players. Sign him to a 1 year 3M deal where after 10 games he gets a 3.5M bonus. If the Senators exceed the cap by 3.5M, that bonus can be paid off against the cap the season after.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Don't think that would apply to Pinto, signing bonuses are guaranteed for ELC's, and Pinto deosn't need to receive a signing bonus for this season.

Would we not just plug 0 in as the signing bonus in the formula
Cap hit = Signing bonus × total season days / season days remaining + base salary

Otherwise his case may not be not covered in there Q&A

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

As far as Chabot coming off LTIR, their cap right now is a mess. It is astounding how badly it was managed in the off season. This wasn't a scenario like a Vegas or prime Blackhawks type thing where they had all this money committed and they had to sell off players to become compliant. In that sort of scenario, it would have been a bit more understandable. They had cap flexibility to do whatever, and they overspent to the point where they couldn't fill a 21-23 player roster with players hitting IR, and they couldn't sign Pinto without giving up a major asset to undo their spending.

They can become compliant without a trade, they likely have to play short handed some of the time. It is going to be very difficult because they had a very easy schedule to start the season, with minimal road games. Running short-handed on the road especially through longer Western Road trips is going to be a lot more difficult than doing it mostly at home or for short road stints in the East.

 

[Micklebot]

Giroux is in every future lineup that has been posted isn't he?

They don't need to lose Giroux to be cap compliant whatsoever, just the usual slight decrease in salary for a retirement deal.

It's because I said that we would have to make a decision about whether to re-signed him at 38 years old, which we will. Who knows if he'll still be effective at that point, my guess is if anything his cap hit will come down as he ages but maybe he prices himself out of Ottawa. What I never suggested was that we have to lose him along with the money we're paying Tank and Kubalik to make room for Chabot. We will, however need to adjust, like you did with your line.

 

[Big Muddy]

At the expense of two top 6 forwards. To keep a 3rd pairing d man. I can't get behind this logic.

Some ideas & food for thought re: roster & salaries for next year.

It's pretty much the same roster particularly on defense, with Pinto & Grieg on the 3rd line, and $5 m allowed for a 2nd line winger (the same amount being paid to Tarasenko currently). It's a 22-player roster.

And yes, this year's cap issues are bigger with needing to accommodate Chabot & Pinto back into the lineup.

 

[Wondercarrot]

I’ve done the same excercise as Muddy a million times and I really dont see any cap issues with Chabot the lineup after this season.
Works next year, and then raises the following year to Chychrun and Greig are fine with Forsberg salary off the books, and an increase in Cap.

 

[Senovision]

Use this money to get Nylander at 11.5 million.
5 million Batherson.
5 million Tarasenko
4 million dead cap.
Tkachuk Norris Nylander
Joseph Stutzle Giroux
Formenton/ Kubalik Pinto Greig

 

[Bileur]

Use this money to get Nylander at 11.5 million.
5 million Batherson.
5 million Tarasenko
4 million dead cap.
Tkachuk Norris Nylander
Joseph Stutzle Giroux
Formenton/ Kubalik Pinto Greig

Wouldn’t make much sense to me to put a lot of work into setting up an internal cap at the low 8s with Stutzle, Sanderson and Tkachuk all there only to give an outsider 11.5.

I’d rather spend a lower portion of that $ to upgrade 3RW or 2LW.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Use this money to get Nylander at 11.5 million.
5 million Batherson.
5 million Tarasenko
4 million dead cap.
Tkachuk Norris Nylander
Joseph Stutzle Giroux
Formenton/ Kubalik Pinto Greig

Or towards Sanderson’s raise where a little over half will go.

 

[Senovision]

I think I would rather get a couple of mean, nasty, big gallute defensemen that are hard to play against rather than getting Nylander. But I thought it would be fun to throw that idea out there about getting Nylander.

 

[JD1]

Didn't both Vegas and Tbay win that way with Stone and Kucherov on LTIR?

We don't really have cap issues going forward, we have decisions to make concerning Tarasenko, Kubalik and eventually Girouxs dollars. If guys like Greig and Jarventie can become top 6 level regulars, it gives us flexibility to move on from one or more of those guys, alternatively we can look for more budget friendly UFA or trade targets.

I think Giroux retires a Senator and makes the dollars work whatever it takes

 

[Micklebot]

I think Giroux retires a Senator and makes the dollars work whatever it takes

I certainly hope so, that would be ideal

 

[Cosmix]

The only caveat to me is if they make an adjustment due to the circumstances. I think what you said is correct .

NHL CBA FAQ - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps re RFA

Cap hit = Signing bonus × total season days / season days remaining + base salary

Strange how the signing bonus balloons the Cap hit.. Plugging the numbers in here it would end up as the base salary if the signing bonus is 0

That is a very weird way of calculating the cap hit effect of a signing bonus. Do you know the NHL's rationale for this? Did the NHLPA agree to this?

 

[JD1]

He loses the money, the cap hit is still inflated.

Obviously no precedence with a suspended player without a contract holding out into the halway point, NHL may be doing things different here.

It's incredibly odd to me that the team is allowed to have Pinto's suspension already kick in without having a contract in place, but that's better for us.

I don't think this is the same as a holdout player. A holdout player signs and gets the salary they sign for. So if they sign for 8, but there's only 60 games left, they're getting 8 but they're signing for a cap hit of 10.9. that's what happened with Nylander. If Pinto signs for 41 games, he's getting paid for 41 games. His salary will be for 41 and cap hit double. If he wanted 2.50 to sign for the year, the same contract is 1.25 for 41. But word is he's going to have to take a hit. I'll be surprised if he signs for more than 800k to finish the season

 

[GCK]

That is a very weird way of calculating the cap hit effect of a signing bonus. Do you know the NHL's rationale for this? Did the NHLPA agree to this?

To make it simple. If a player signs a 1 year contract with a signing bonus halfway through the league year it works like the following:

2M signing bonus + 2M salary (face value)

2M signing bonus is paid in full and player receives his prorated salary which is 1M.

Player is receiving compensation of 3M for half a season.

Cap hit is 6M.

 

[Ice-Tray]

What’s with folks thinking we’re in “cap hell” next season?

We’re not even in “cap hell” this season unless one is an absolute snow flake who can’t handle even modest adversity. I mean at worst we were one bottom of the line up player trade away from fitting Pinto in, while at best we didn’t have to trade anyone away.

Seems like folks who want to trade Chabot need to stand on the merit of the trade alone and stop pretending that the cap is the issue.

For the record I highly doubt they trade Chabby because he’s better than the mob is giving him credit for and we need him.

He’s just become the next whipping boy it would seem, getting the ‘ol Spezza treatment.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

The Islanders are apparently looking for D and scoring forwards.

What about Brannstrom @ 1.54M for Wahlstrom?

Cap wise, the Islanders stay under the ceiling. It frees up almost enough space for the Senators to add a league minimum body to the roster.

Both have similar pedigrees. Brannstrom has shown more so far in his career, but also has a year on Wahlstrom. Wahlstrom clearly is not sticking with the Islanders, and they probably missed the boat on getting a major asset for him given how far along he should be in his development. Both are arbitration eligible and aren't waiver exempt. The Senators need more right-handed forwards, and even a few 100k worth of cap space could be a difference maker for Ottawa this season.

The Senators would have to make a supplemental trade to acquire a depth defender from somewhere.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

What’s with folks thinking we’re in “cap hell” next season?

We’re not even in “cap hell” this season unless one is an absolute snow flake who can’t handle even modest adversity. I mean at worst we were one bottom of the line up player trade away from fitting Pinto in, while at best we didn’t have to trade anyone away.

Seems like folks who want to trade Chabot need to stand on the merit of the trade alone and stop pretending that the cap is the issue.

For the record I highly doubt they trade Chabby because he’s better than the mob is giving him credit for and we need him.

He’s just become the next whipping boy it would seem, getting the ‘ol Spezza treatment.

Am I missing something, or didn't the owner himself allude to the cap situation being a problem?

The cap was clearly mismanaged this summer. The team had cap flexibility and somehow still ended up in a bad spot. That is the definition of mismanaged.

I don't think analyzing a team's cap and concluding that they messed up makes anybody a snowflake, but I may be out of touch.

 

[Beech]

Some ideas & food for thought re: roster & salaries for next year.

It's pretty much the same roster particularly on defense, with Pinto & Grieg on the 3rd line, and $5 m allowed for a 2nd line winger (the same amount being paid to Tarasenko currently). It's a 22-player roster.

And yes, this year's cap issues are bigger with needing to accommodate Chabot & Pinto back into the lineup.

View attachment 769064

there are 3 goalies in the minors.

2 need a new contract, I think in the summer of 2024 and the 3rd in the summer of 2025. Although it may be the other way around (one in 24 and two in 25)

they are 23 and 24.. will they accept a two way and get 85 K in Belleville? will they want a one way at 800-900 K.. and now what?

you could be looking at 1-3 M in goalies to accommodate. If you move on from all 3.. Now all you have is Forsberg and his knees and possible issues.

There are also 3 players who are due in 2025.. If they want to sign a year out in 2024.. And want the 5 year x Y dollar, now what?

The big picture has many issues to address.

 

[Cosmix]

To make it simple. If a player signs a 1 year contract with a signing bonus halfway through the league year it works like the following:

2M signing bonus + 2M salary (face value)

2M signing bonus is paid in full and player receives his prorated salary which is 1M.

Player is receiving compensation of 3M for half a season.

Cap hit is 6M.

That makes it clearer. Thanks.

What’s with folks thinking we’re in “cap hell” next season?

We’re not even in “cap hell” this season unless one is an absolute snow flake who can’t handle even modest adversity. I mean at worst we were one bottom of the line up player trade away from fitting Pinto in, while at best we didn’t have to trade anyone away.

Seems like folks who want to trade Chabot need to stand on the merit of the trade alone and stop pretending that the cap is the issue.

For the record I highly doubt they trade Chabby because he’s better than the mob is giving him credit for and we need him.

He’s just become the next whipping boy it would seem, getting the ‘ol Spezza treatment.

However, he does need some "accountability" applied.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Am I missing something, or didn't the owner himself allude to the cap situation being a problem?

The cap was clearly mismanaged this summer. The team had cap flexibility and somehow still ended up in a bad spot. That is the definition of mismanaged.

I don't think analyzing a team's cap and concluding that they messed up makes anybody a snowflake, but I may be out of touch.

I think you’re only out of touch in terms of responding to my post. I quoted the constant use of the term “cap hell” and made zero comments about people making mock line ups to work the numbers.

You have introduced the term “mismanaged” and formed your post around that term. Cool, but not really what my post was about.

To your points; I agree that PD made some choices that put us in a bind, but we’ll have to see how it pans out when Pinto is on the verge of returning. As it stands we played one game short handed, we’re able to add bodies to fill all the holes we had, and don’t have to move anyone out at this point.

Andlauer said “a bit of a pickle”, which doesn’t sound a whole lot like “cap hell” to me. Cap Hell sounds a lot like a really bad situation with some really negative consequences, truly one man’s Hell could be another’s Heaven though…

Some people hate pickles so maybe that is Andlauers idea of Hell, even just a bit of a pickle….

That makes it clearer. Thanks.


However, he does need some "accountability" applied.

I mean he was definitly held accountable for the gross negligence surrounding the Daddy trade.

Not much more could be expected to happen.

 

[GCK]

there are 3 goalies in the minors.

2 need a new contract, I think in the summer of 2024 and the 3rd in the summer of 2025. Although it may be the other way around (one in 24 and two in 25)

they are 23 and 24.. will they accept a two way and get 85 K in Belleville? will they want a one way at 800-900 K.. and now what?

you could be looking at 1-3 M in goalies to accommodate. If you move on from all 3.. Now all you have is Forsberg and his knees and possible issues.

There are also 3 players who are due in 2025.. If they want to sign a year out in 2024.. And want the 5 year x Y dollar, now what?

The big picture has many issues to address.

Sogaard will get a 2 way for 1 more year and then replace Forsberg in 2025/26.

Leevi has 3 more season of waiver exemption and will obviously get a 2 way in 2 years.

Mandolese may not get qualified this summer but even so it will be a 2 way

 

[swiftwin]

Am I missing something, or didn't the owner himself allude to the cap situation being a problem?

The cap was clearly mismanaged this summer. The team had cap flexibility and somehow still ended up in a bad spot. That is the definition of mismanaged.

I don't think analyzing a team's cap and concluding that they messed up makes anybody a snowflake, but I may be out of touch.

I think you are missing something. In what way was the cap mismanaged? The plan was almost certainly to dump Joseph for Tarasenko, but with Pinto getting suspended, that was no longer required.

We have tons of flexibility next season with over $5m of dead cap coming off the books, an increase in the cap ceiling, and the only contracts to re-sign are Tarasenko, Kubalik and Brannstrom.

 

[Big Muddy]

Today I learned that even if you trade away a decent player and a draft pick to fit in an inexpensive 10.2.c. that you drafted you are not in a pickle and are actually in good shape cap wise. Good grief.