Toggle sidebar

GDT: Free Agency/Offseason 2013

EDM

Registered User
Mar 8, 2008
6,273
2,065
Because it seems more and more likely that Vinnie will not be back, the remainder of the leadership core, Dubie, JJ, Nick, Tyutin, RJ (sigh), will be back in order to keep a strong character base in the locker room. I think there is zero chance that Dubie will be traded anywhere for anyone.
 
EspenK

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,445
I assume we have made qualifying offers to Savard & Goloubef among others but I can't find the official news anywhere.

According to CapGeek they were making 900k +/-. Considering Calvert is at 987k and Cam is at 1.15 mm how much are those guys worth?

I cant believe they will get much more than the qualifying amount.

Anyone know anything about their negotiations?

Also why does Skille count as the 23rd guy on our roster? Is it an age thing? NHL experience?
 
Nanabijou

Nanabijou

Booooooooooone
Dec 22, 2009
2,993
659
Columbus, Ohio
EspenK said:
Also why does Skille count as the 23rd guy on our roster? Is it an age thing? NHL experience?
Click to expand...

I believe it's because he was on the Panthers roster when their season ended. With the signing, he transferred over from their NHL roster to ours, according to cap geek.
 
EspenK

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,445
Nanabijou said:
I believe it's because he was on the Panthers roster when their season ended. With the signing, he transferred over from their NHL roster to ours, according to cap geek.
Click to expand...


Thanks. So if he starts in Springfield he has to clear waivers?
 
Nanabijou

Nanabijou

Booooooooooone
Dec 22, 2009
2,993
659
Columbus, Ohio
EspenK said:
Thanks. So if he starts in Springfield he has to clear waivers?
Click to expand...

Yes he will. So will a number of other vets. It is usually not an issue because most teams have their rosters set at training camp and he would have to be put on the nhl roster if someone claims him.
 
BoobaFett

BoobaFett

Registered User
Nov 23, 2010
254
0
Dorchester, Ma
Looking at Grabovski

Hey guys,

I've always been a jackets fan. I do a ton of reading and not a lot of posting, but I was wondering what you'd think of a Grabovski signing. I'm not to familiar with the cap limitations of the team, but I feel he would be a great addition to the roster. Guy brings it every game and with a player like Gaborik on his wing, I think he could flourish. Thoughts?

Also, Horton will be a great addition to the team. He is a streaky player and has a tendency for long cold stretches but you'll see his impact. Especially once you hit the playoffs


Ps: mods if this is already being talked about somewhere please merge and I'll hopefully find it.
 
Sore Loser

Sore Loser

Sorest of them all
Dec 9, 2006
7,622
1,220
Spokane, WA.
Our team currently sits 6th in the NHL in total salary, with just over $2mil to spare ... I don't think we're in the Grabovski discussions unless he's willing to take a substantial pay cut to be here; or we're looking at dealing away a higher paid player from our team.

I just don't see us making space for that player, personally.
 
Mayor Bee

Mayor Bee

Registered User
Dec 29, 2008
18,087
535
I almost have to wonder if the plan isn't to send Murray right to the AHL as soon as possible just to clear that (ELC-inflated) cap space right off the bat.

By my math, there's about $2 mil open right now. If Murray were sent down and replaced with Melart (to keep 7 D on the roster), that would save another $2.5 mil to leave $4.5 mil total.

The other problem is that there's 43 players signed right now out of a maximum of 50. There's 4 more who have been qualified as RFAs; if they all sign at the RFA tender, that's 47 contracts occupied. It doesn't leave very much room, unless there's a trade for an unsigned prospect or draft pick brewing. It's a far cry from the days of Howson carrying between 40-42 contracts to maximize flexibility.
 
Iron Balls McGinty

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
9,163
7,244
Mayor Bee said:
I almost have to wonder if the plan isn't to send Murray right to the AHL as soon as possible just to clear that (ELC-inflated) cap space right off the bat.

By my math, there's about $2 mil open right now. If Murray were sent down and replaced with Melart (to keep 7 D on the roster), that would save another $2.5 mil to leave $4.5 mil total.

The other problem is that there's 43 players signed right now out of a maximum of 50. There's 4 more who have been qualified as RFAs; if they all sign at the RFA tender, that's 47 contracts occupied. It doesn't leave very much room, unless there's a trade for an unsigned prospect or draft pick brewing. It's a far cry from the days of Howson carrying between 40-42 contracts to maximize flexibility.
Click to expand...

According to capgeek, putting Murray in the AHL and keeping Melart on the NHL roster actually leaves less core cap space for this season. So much of Murray's contract is tied up in the bonuses that he would count against next year's cap if he actually met those goals.

By keeping Melart this season, the remaining cap space actually drops below 2 million.
 
EspenK

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,445
Mayor Bee said:
I almost have to wonder if the plan isn't to send Murray right to the AHL as soon as possible just to clear that (ELC-inflated) cap space right off the bat.

By my math, there's about $2 mil open right now. If Murray were sent down and replaced with Melart (to keep 7 D on the roster), that would save another $2.5 mil to leave $4.5 mil total.

The other problem is that there's 43 players signed right now out of a maximum of 50. There's 4 more who have been qualified as RFAs; if they all sign at the RFA tender, that's 47 contracts occupied. It doesn't leave very much room, unless there's a trade for an unsigned prospect or draft pick brewing. It's a far cry from the days of Howson carrying between 40-42 contracts to maximize flexibility.
Click to expand...

Too bad Howson never pulled off that 2 for 10 trade that would have taken advantage of the low number of contracts.:sarcasm:

I'm guessing it had more to do with $.

As to your other point I could see that being viable. Give Murray a year to really develop,save a year of his ELC and bring another big physical guy into the mix.
 
EspenK

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,445
Iron Balls McGinty said:
According to capgeek, putting Murray in the AHL and keeping Melart on the NHL roster actually leaves less core cap space for this season. So much of Murray's contract is tied up in the bonuses that he would count against next year's cap if he actually met those goals.

By keeping Melart this season, the remaining cap space actually drops below 2 million.
Click to expand...


But if he is in the A how does he make the bonuses?

I just played around a bit with CapGeek and your right because of the way bonuses affect things sending Murray down doesn't help. Now sending Joey down adds a mill.
 
Last edited:
Nanabijou

Nanabijou

Booooooooooone
Dec 22, 2009
2,993
659
Columbus, Ohio
Mayor Bee said:
I almost have to wonder if the plan isn't to send Murray right to the AHL as soon as possible just to clear that (ELC-inflated) cap space right off the bat.

By my math, there's about $2 mil open right now. If Murray were sent down and replaced with Melart (to keep 7 D on the roster), that would save another $2.5 mil to leave $4.5 mil total.

The other problem is that there's 43 players signed right now out of a maximum of 50. There's 4 more who have been qualified as RFAs; if they all sign at the RFA tender, that's 47 contracts occupied. It doesn't leave very much room, unless there's a trade for an unsigned prospect or draft pick brewing. It's a far cry from the days of Howson carrying between 40-42 contracts to maximize flexibility.
Click to expand...

I really don't see the contract limit being a significant issue at this point. I'm also not really sure why sitting way below the limit, around 40-42, would be desirable except for maybe when you are heading into free agency period.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
Mayor Bee said:
I almost have to wonder if the plan isn't to send Murray right to the AHL as soon as possible just to clear that (ELC-inflated) cap space right off the bat.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as others noticed it really won't do much. We're allowed to go over the cap because of the bonus's. If we finish over the cap because of bonus's there is a penalty next season.
 
Xoggz22

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,930
3,474
Columbus, Ohio
Mayor Bee said:
I almost have to wonder if the plan isn't to send Murray right to the AHL as soon as possible just to clear that (ELC-inflated) cap space right off the bat.

By my math, there's about $2 mil open right now. If Murray were sent down and replaced with Melart (to keep 7 D on the roster), that would save another $2.5 mil to leave $4.5 mil total.

The other problem is that there's 43 players signed right now out of a maximum of 50. There's 4 more who have been qualified as RFAs; if they all sign at the RFA tender, that's 47 contracts occupied. It doesn't leave very much room, unless there's a trade for an unsigned prospect or draft pick brewing. It's a far cry from the days of Howson carrying between 40-42 contracts to maximize flexibility.
Click to expand...

I think the best players will play in Columbus regardless of our CAP situation. Murray is going to have to earn it as will Melart. Keep in mind Nikitin is in the last year of his deal and could be a candidate to be moved if both Murray and Melart push for the big club. Really, who knows how it plays out. We're still learning Jarmo's handling of the team.

As for the number of contracts, the CBJ typically carried 45-46 contracts on the reserve list as I recall. There are no less than 11 UFA's within the current reserve list and additional RFA's (Blombqvist, Weber, Gabriel, Hansen) that could end up not being qualified. Clearly some of those will be back but you'll have 3 1st round picks that are likely to be signed before next year which probably continues to leave around 10-15 spots open for signings next year. I don't see the number of contracts as an issue right now. Get all 4 RFA's signed and make your final decision on VP and move on. Any deal made could be a 2 for 1 or 1 for 2 and we'd still be OK.
 
Mayor Bee

Mayor Bee

Registered User
Dec 29, 2008
18,087
535
Nanabijou said:
I really don't see the contract limit being a significant issue at this point. I'm also not really sure why sitting way below the limit, around 40-42, would be desirable except for maybe when you are heading into free agency period.
Click to expand...

I think it would be because teams have a tendency to want to accumulate talent, causing some of them to get jammed. Philly a couple times has had to trade both a contract and an asset of some type to clear a spot just to make a minor deal.

Viqsi said:
1 for 3 isn't enough? It sure caught everybody's attention at the time...
Click to expand...

2 for 3; Steven Delisle was sent to the Rangers as part of that deal.

I think that even after the Nash deal, there were only 42 contracts in the system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom
X