Value of: Goaltender to EDM

[bucks_oil]

I think the Habs would definitely be open to retaining salary or taking on a contract that doesnt have too much term and is a positive presence in the locker room. Both you guys seems to have a better handle on the Oilers than me (im going on a "the athletic" article and a few other sources), so i it interesting that you differ in opinion as to who of Petrov and Bourgault is unavailable to the habs in this type of trade.

I am curious on Petrov as he is apparently pure offense, which is something i dont see on the habs. Bourgault seems like a well adjusted TWF, which we have a few, like Suzuki and Beck.

Sounds to me like you both agree to some extent that there are starters for disussions, but htat there are a lot of considerations and tweeks needed.

Well I'm a bit behind the times maybe... this is Petrov's first AHL season and he's struggling a bit relative to "player of the year" type seasons in junior.

Cap still remains the problem. You'd have to retain 50% on Allen to make him worth taking on... that brings him to $2M, which means only $1M in dead cap buried if we found a better solution this summer.

So let's say Allen at 50% + 3rd for Kulak + Savoie. Kulak is in there to balance cap, we'd want a 3rd for him... Savoie for 50% of Allen... but it's still robbing from Peter to pay Paul. I'm not sure we end up a better team afterwards.

 

[Fishy McScales]

For example, there were multiple variations on Georgiev/Geo + Buch, etc etc to Oil.
You guys laughed like you're laughing now.
Meanwhile Avs got Geo cheap and won a cup.

but what does bern know... ... more than you care to admit

Well one thing that bern clearly doesn't know is that the Avs got Georgiev AFTER winning the cup.

 

[Drytoast]

Samsonov is available!

 

[bernmeister]

What on earth are you on about now. Everyone and their dog knows the Oilers need to create cap space.

RETAINING $4.6M annually to rid yourself of your #2 defenseman, only to have to replace him does not CREATE cap space... it CRATERS it. I don't know why you are loath to admit that... are your math skills that poor?

Very simply: $4.6M Nurse retention + replacing Nurse on the roster >>> $9.25M current Nurse cap hit.

You cannot get a #2 defenseman for $4.6M... and even if you assume Nurse is just a #3 (he's not playing like one, but whatever), even then a #3D are typically in the $4.5M to $5.5M range unless they are still on ELC (and those guys don't move).

So where is the cap savings Bern?

It's like Godfather III
just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in.

don't want to do full rehash here, just succinct answer the ? and move on.

Nurse is 9.2 whatev FOR LONG TERM
hence reference to 'STRUCTURAL CAP'

You eat half. You then get out from under 4.6 whatev on the half a suitor is taking.

Literally a club or 2 might have enuf space to say something LIKE
give me coupla better picks + Nurse for coupla lesser picks
as justified basis to eat long term cap

whether or not and to what extent Nurse NOW, at this immediate moment MAY OR MAY NOT have counterargument to offset that somewhat due to his immediate production is a separate argument betw the parties.

It is assumed he will look good next coupla yrs, may decline middle of his pact, be an albatross contract if he declines further.
That, plus need to get instant cap relief, is why you might go there now, but again, the value here is long term and structural cap relief.

Returning to what is immediate, most clubs do not have abundance of cap to offer.
So you might [likely] have to take back a contract, preferably one expiring, and if so, retained.

So using NYR, AGAIN ONLY FOR EXAMPLE, NOT AN ACTUAL SUGGESTION, FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES only b'c you insist on having it visualized for you....
Goodrow is not 1 yr, IF IF IF he were 1 yr at 3.6 ish and Rs retained half, then
4.1-ish - Good retained to 2.0 would = around 2m cap saved this yr, and again 4.1-ish every year after

Forget Good.
Wheeler actually is 1 yr expiring 800k.
4.1-ish - .8 = 3.3ish saved this yr

Prob there is Rs do not have 3.3 actual cap available atm for that.

But you get my pt.

There are restrictions on posts that add up to self promotion.
pm/convo me and I will demonstrate recognition in economics which includes as to math skills you maligned.

 

[bernmeister]

Well one thing that bern clearly doesn't know is that the Avs got Georgiev AFTER winning the cup.

that's fair
even bern gets a brain fart now and then
but
the core point was correct
Oil would have been ahead if they dealt for Geo now

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Oilers just need a goalie who is good enough. Look at Darcy Kuemper? Or Hill last year? Billington one year. Edmonton have all the other parts. A big name like Gibson going to cost a bundle plus he has two years left at 6million. Going to hurt going forward with Drai and McDavid need reupping in few years.

I like to see Oilers win a cup or at least get to Finals. Canadian team plus I am sick of hearing how you can't win with a McDavid or Matthews. Those antitank guys always perch that.

Maybe Acquire depth for a 3rd and go with three goalies. Out of them one should get hot during playoffs.

Oilers arent anywhere near the Avs or Vegas. Skinner wasnt much worse than Kuemper (who sucked in the playoffs) and look how that went.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

that's fair
even bern gets a brain fart now and then
but
the core point was correct
Oil would have been ahead if they dealt for Geo now

Georgiev's .894 on a better team than the Oilers isn't making the difference you think it will. Skinner is better.

Oh wow, what a shame the Oilers are gonna miss out on that sweet Samsonov for Campbell trade.

What a loss.

Yes, really quite terrible that we can't get our hands on arguably the worst goalie in the entire NHL

 

[SupremeTeam16]

Underline: this was only a standby to discuss what value of would work for Rs. I said, properly, they should hold on to LaF, his skating would continue to improve, and he would emerge as the next Steve Vickers.
bern was right!!! deal w/it.

bold: no one is cramming anything down yours or anyone else's throat.
I have made various suggestions over the years, and often, I was proven correct overall.
For example, there were multiple variations on Georgiev/Geo + Buch, etc etc to Oil.
You guys laughed like you're laughing now.
Meanwhile Avs got Geo cheap and won a cup.

but what does bern know...
... more than you care to admit



And people say I'm on drugs.
Nurse half or otherwise does not sniff Shesty
core pieces there are Shesty and Drai

Obv we are not talking cap dump
soup is an immovable, sunk cost at present
his $$$ and his term are both just a little bit too much to move.

Hence why, as constructive pt raised, not trolling, I pointed out IF getting cap help, not only short term but also ideally structural long term relief as even POSSIBILITY to create mechanism to have short term moves, dealing Nurse on surrender terms may be lesser of 2 evils

Again, as I said, Rs would have to retain again after to flip and get out from under long term, so NY has no interest unless profit can be had
AND this was really more for honest discussion than best possible strategy.

Howev, no interest on yr side about this as such.
So let's see how you get out of yr own mess.
Am happy to watch from sidelines.


FINALLY!
The other shoe has dropped!!

bern is vilified for speaking truth as to how crippling Oil cap situation is, but NOW
now we see an admission creating cap would be "require{d}".

I invited discussion about what else could be done to get meaningful cap, but ZERO constructive replies were submitted.

I do not intend to comment further in this thread, though I reserve my right to do so if necessary.

Let's see what 'in a vacuum' pure G deals this thread generates.
Let's see what cap moves, if any, can be offered to help.

As ever, I leave you all without rancor and in the spirit of HONEST promotion of competition of ideas

Avs acquired Geo after they won the cup, smart guy.

Paying to get rid of Nurse with half retained and then paying to acquire a replacement that likely isn’t as good as Nurse, just to come out roughly with the same amount of cap space is the kind of idea an idiot would have.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

I realize I didn't quote every goalie trade made in the last 10 years. I think my original thread post was long enough. I mean, yes, there have been the occasional trade that was an overpayment. These to me seem to be outliers. For every Anderson trade there are 10 or more trades for future considerations. Maybe I should have posted those too along with the Schneider and Anderson trades to fuller illustrate my point.

Goalies don't land much in trades, but starting goaltenders don't get moved a whole lot.

A lot of hyperbole here. A goalie being traded for future consideration is obviously not as valued at the time as Freddy Andersen.

A goalie good enough to win the cup without a stacked roster like the Avs or Vegas, is gonna cost a pretty penny.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Skinner, after a poor start to the season, is 16-4-0 with a .918 and 2 shutouts since November 10th.

This idea that Edmonton is desperate and needs to pay whatever anyone else demands is nonsense. Heck even Pickard is putting up league average numbers as backup right now.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

It's like Godfather III
just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in.

don't want to do full rehash here, just succinct answer the ? and move on.

Nurse is 9.2 whatev FOR LONG TERM
hence reference to 'STRUCTURAL CAP'

You eat half. You then get out from under 4.6 whatev on the half a suitor is taking.

Literally a club or 2 might have enuf space to say something LIKE
give me coupla better picks + Nurse for coupla lesser picks
as justified basis to eat long term cap

whether or not and to what extent Nurse NOW, at this immediate moment MAY OR MAY NOT have counterargument to offset that somewhat due to his immediate production is a separate argument betw the parties.

It is assumed he will look good next coupla yrs, may decline middle of his pact, be an albatross contract if he declines further.
That, plus need to get instant cap relief, is why you might go there now, but again, the value here is long term and structural cap relief.

Returning to what is immediate, most clubs do not have abundance of cap to offer.
So you might [likely] have to take back a contract, preferably one expiring, and if so, retained.

So using NYR, AGAIN ONLY FOR EXAMPLE, NOT AN ACTUAL SUGGESTION, FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES only b'c you insist on having it visualized for you....
Goodrow is not 1 yr, IF IF IF he were 1 yr at 3.6 ish and Rs retained half, then
4.1-ish - Good retained to 2.0 would = around 2m cap saved this yr, and again 4.1-ish every year after

Forget Good.
Wheeler actually is 1 yr expiring 800k.
4.1-ish - .8 = 3.3ish saved this yr

Prob there is Rs do not have 3.3 actual cap available atm for that.

But you get my pt.

There are restrictions on posts that add up to self promotion.
pm/convo me and I will demonstrate recognition in economics which includes as to math skills you maligned.

Nurse at 4.6 isn’t a cap dump.

Your idea is still dumb and you clearly don’t have a clue.

You think you’d clue in on it when no one agrees with you.

 

[bucks_oil]

It's like Godfather III
just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in.

don't want to do full rehash here, just succinct answer the ? and move on.

Nurse is 9.2 whatev FOR LONG TERM
hence reference to 'STRUCTURAL CAP'

You eat half. You then get out from under 4.6 whatev on the half a suitor is taking.

Literally a club or 2 might have enuf space to say something LIKE
give me coupla better picks + Nurse for coupla lesser picks
as justified basis to eat long term cap

whether or not and to what extent Nurse NOW, at this immediate moment MAY OR MAY NOT have counterargument to offset that somewhat due to his immediate production is a separate argument betw the parties.

It is assumed he will look good next coupla yrs, may decline middle of his pact, be an albatross contract if he declines further.
That, plus need to get instant cap relief, is why you might go there now, but again, the value here is long term and structural cap relief.

Returning to what is immediate, most clubs do not have abundance of cap to offer.
So you might [likely] have to take back a contract, preferably one expiring, and if so, retained.

So using NYR, AGAIN ONLY FOR EXAMPLE, NOT AN ACTUAL SUGGESTION, FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES only b'c you insist on having it visualized for you....
Goodrow is not 1 yr, IF IF IF he were 1 yr at 3.6 ish and Rs retained half, then
4.1-ish - Good retained to 2.0 would = around 2m cap saved this yr, and again 4.1-ish every year after

Forget Good.
Wheeler actually is 1 yr expiring 800k.
4.1-ish - .8 = 3.3ish saved this yr

Prob there is Rs do not have 3.3 actual cap available atm for that.

But you get my pt.

There are restrictions on posts that add up to self promotion.
pm/convo me and I will demonstrate recognition in economics which includes as to math skills you maligned.

I'm not trying to beat the dead horse here, honestly. But you continue to ignore the fundamental point that breaks your logic.

NURSE IS A DEFENSEMAN PLAYING THE MOST MINUTES PER NIGHT ON THE OILERS - HE WILL NEED TO BE REPLACED WITH A DEFENDER CAPABLE OF (AT THE VERY LEAST) TOP-3 PLAY. WE DON'T HAVE A GUY THAT CAN STEP INTO THAT ROLE.

A TOP THREE DEFENDER IS WORTH MORE THAN $4.6M, SO $4.6M RETAINED + MORE THAN $4.6M ADDED TO REPLACE NURSE IS GREATER THAN $9.25M

That's true now (so there is no short term benefit) and it's even MORE TRUE in the future, since a top-4 defender will cost more in later years of Nurse contract. So there is no "structural cap" benefit either, not once Nurse is replaced at FMV for a top-4 defender... in fact that $4.6M retention prevents us from having the cap for a replacement.

This idea that Nurse, now 28, will be so poor as a defender at age 34 that we are "escaping" the impending doom of that contract, is frankly rediculous.

Now, if you wanted to continue to pursue this argument and suggested Nurse is retained at say 20-25% of the value AND the Oilers have a way to replace him with a guy making, say $6M,... well no duh, we'd consider it... because the carried retention would be less than $2M/season. That's manageable... and we end up saving a net $1.25M [ ie ($9.25 x 20%) + $6M saves us ~$1.25]. The cap benefits are realized... short term and potentially long term.

But then it wouldn't allow your Rangers to afford Nurse within your $5.2M cap available (a number magically close to Nurse's $4.6M retained... a point not lost on anyone)

This is what makes your suggestion ludicrous... $4.6M is a HUGE burden to carry for 7 years. It would mean that Nurse can't be effectively replaced and thus our overall cap burden goes UP not DOWN. It is a 'STRUCTURAL CAP BURDEN'.

PS: the fact you suggested Goodrow, again means you don't get the fundamental point... if Nurse goes he must be replaced by a defender capable of 22-24mins a night. That guy won't be cheap to acquire and more importantly won't be coming in at less than half of Nurse's salary. Once that happens there is no cap savings and no way to upgrade any other position with Goodrow or anyone else unless they are currently paid on an ELC.

 

[Scomerica]

Guessing at this point the Kraken would love to dump Grubauers contract. Probably a situation where we'd have to give Edmonton something nominal to take it on. Not sure they'd work with another team competing for the wild card though

 

[bernmeister]

Georgiev's .894 on a better team than the Oilers isn't making the difference you think it will. Skinner is better.
...

ok, but proposed Geo to Oil goes back like 3-sh seasons
Would have helped then and now, tho acknowledged, if Skinner NOW is performing better and is cheaper, I presume, then by def he is the better value
NOW

 

[bernmeister]

Avs acquired Geo after they won the cup, smart guy.

Paying to get rid of Nurse with half retained and then paying to acquire a replacement that likely isn’t as good as Nurse, just to come out roughly with the same amount of cap space is the kind of idea an idiot would have.

right
and
wrong [as detailed, you def get long term structural cap relief, and have potential to get some relief short term. Dif betw what you replace Nurse with
and cap hit = gap that varies with dif teams and situations. But you do you and want your cake and eat it too.]

 

[bernmeister]

I'm not trying to beat the dead horse here, honestly. But you continue to ignore the fundamental point that breaks your logic.

NURSE IS A DEFENSEMAN PLAYING THE MOST MINUTES PER NIGHT ON THE OILERS - HE WILL NEED TO BE REPLACED WITH A DEFENDER CAPABLE OF (AT THE VERY LEAST) TOP-3 PLAY. WE DON'T HAVE A GUY THAT CAN STEP INTO THAT ROLE.

A TOP THREE DEFENDER IS WORTH MORE THAN $4.6M, SO $4.6M RETAINED + MORE THAN $4.6M ADDED TO REPLACE NURSE IS GREATER THAN $9.25M

That's true now (so there is no short term benefit) and it's even MORE TRUE in the future, since a top-4 defender will cost more in later years of Nurse contract. So there is no "structural cap" benefit either, not once Nurse is replaced at FMV for a top-4 defender... in fact that $4.6M retention prevents us from having the cap for a replacement.

This idea that Nurse, now 28, will be so poor as a defender at age 34 that we are "escaping" the impending doom of that contract, is frankly rediculous.

Now, if you wanted to continue to pursue this argument and suggested Nurse is retained at say 20-25% of the value AND the Oilers have a way to replace him with a guy making, say $6M,... well no duh, we'd consider it... because the carried retention would be less than $2M/season. That's manageable... and we end up saving a net $1.25M [ ie ($9.25 x 20%) + $6M saves us ~$1.25]. The cap benefits are realized... short term and potentially long term.

But then it wouldn't allow your Rangers to afford Nurse within your $5.2M cap available (a number magically close to Nurse's $4.6M retained... a point not lost on anyone)

This is what makes your suggestion ludicrous... $4.6M is a HUGE burden to carry for 7 years. It would mean that Nurse can't be effectively replaced and thus our overall cap burden goes UP not DOWN. It is a 'STRUCTURAL CAP BURDEN'.

PS: the fact you suggested Goodrow, again means you don't get the fundamental point... if Nurse goes he must be replaced by a defender capable of 22-24mins a night. That guy won't be cheap to acquire and more importantly won't be coming in at less than half of Nurse's salary. Once that happens there is no cap savings and no way to upgrade any other position with Goodrow or anyone else unless they are currently paid on an ELC.

can't waste more time explaining it to you yet again
Uncontrovertibly, there is structural long term cap relief
Short term is huge # of possibilities, variables.
Whether or not that is worth it is a separate ?.
But like everyone else, you likely can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

[Seachd]

Paying to get rid of Nurse is obviously an idea that hasn’t been thought through at all. It makes the team worse, and saddles them with dead cap forever.

It takes quite an imagination to believe you could get paid to receive Nurse at 50%, retain more, and flip him for a tremendous profit.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

can't waste more time explaining it to you yet again
Uncontrovertibly, there is structural long term cap relief
Short term is huge # of possibilities, variables.
Whether or not that is worth it is a separate ?.
But like everyone else, you likely can't have your cake and eat it too.

How is retaining 4.6 creating long term cap relief.

 

[Seachd]

How is retaining 4.6 creating long term cap relief.

I don’t see what the big deal is. He’s just suggesting a great way for the Oilers to turn their #2D into a #4D and continue to pay half his entire contract so another team can profit. Why wouldn’t they jump at that chance?

 

[bucks_oil]

Guessing at this point the Kraken would love to dump Grubauers contract. Probably a situation where we'd have to give Edmonton something nominal to take it on. Not sure they'd work with another team competing for the wild card though

I love it... Grubauer @ 0.880SPCT and $5.9M requires "something nominal" for Edmonton to acquire.

Meanwhile HF Hivemind has us paying multiple 1sts to unload Campbell @ 0.880 SPCT & $5.1M cap. Term is the same.

I'm not picking on you... it just struck a funny bone.

 

[Scomerica]

I love it... Grubauer @ 0.880SPCT and $5.9M requires "something nominal" for Edmonton to acquire.

Meanwhile HF Hivemind has us paying multiple 1sts to unload Campbell @ 0.880 SPCT & $5.1M cap. Term is the same.

I'm not picking on you... it just struck a funny bone.

It's a weird one in that Grubauer can be elite at times. He seems to flash it like in the play offs last year and obviously showed enough to get a big contract. Then...doesn't. I'm not sure what Seattle would need to pay to dump it. It's not urgent as he can be an expensive backup.

 

[Homesick]

.
For example, there were multiple variations on Georgiev/Geo + Buch, etc etc to Oil.
You guys laughed like you're laughing now.
Meanwhile Avs got Geo cheap and won a cup.

but what does bern know...
... more than you care to admit

Bern obviously knows nothing because Georgiev was bounced in the first round last year(Had nothing to do with them winning the Cup the year before)
Oilers fans were laughing at you then and everyone else is right now

 

[SupremeTeam16]

right
and
wrong [as detailed, you def get long term structural cap relief, and have potential to get some relief short term. Dif betw what you replace Nurse with
and cap hit = gap that varies with dif teams and situations. But you do you and want your cake and eat it too.]

You’re trying to solve a hypothetical problem in the future at the expense of todays team. Teams don’t say “hey we should trade our best defenseman today because possibly in the future we might have cap issues” (which is impossible to know without knowing where the cap is going to be in 3/4/5 years time, especially considering there’s likely to be a new cba between now and then, and that’s not even taking into account things like player injuries and ltir)

It’s a stupid idea for a team hoping to contend today. You’re getting Ceci, Graves, Gudas level players for 4-4.5M and even if you ponied up to get someone in Nurses range with a cap hit in the 4.5 range chances are you are going to have to pay that person in the next 3-5 years likely 6-7M+ on a long term deal so there goes all the hypothetical long term structural cap relief.

Every year Nurses deal becomes less of a percentage of the cap and less of a burden. The guy is 28, he’s not falling off a cliff any time soon. What you’re suggesting would be idiotic for the Oilers, it would be terrible asset management.

 

[bucks_oil]

can't waste more time explaining it to you yet again
Uncontrovertibly, there is structural long term cap relief
Short term is huge # of possibilities, variables.
Whether or not that is worth it is a separate ?.
But like everyone else, you likely can't have your cake and eat it too.

You are right. I totally get it now.

So while we are at it, we can return the favor by creating longer term "structural cap" for you by taking Zibanejad @50%. After all, he's 30 and you might need that $4.25M in 2028, 2029 and 2030, when he's 34, 35 and 36. Plus, there are "all sorts of possibilities and variables" involved in replacing him short term right? And think of what you could do with that $4.25M in cap space

 

[bucks_oil]

Duplicate