Value of: Lehtonen to Calgary

[lanceuppercut75]

I'm not a DAL/CGY fan but I thought this idea was interesting. Dallas pays a steep price to unload Lehtonen so they can acquire Fleury or Bishop. Calgary gets some young guys with upside for eating the 2nd year of Lehtonen's deal.

I think this might piss of Stars fans for how much they give up, and I think it might piss off Flames fans for having to pay Lehtonen's full 5.9 next year. But the more I think about it, the more i like it.

FAKSA - 1y RFA @ 0.8634
OLEKSIAK - 1y RFA @ 0.9188
LEHTONEN - 2y UFA @ 5.9000
total cap hit = 7.6822

for

STAJAN - 2y UFA @ 3.1250
ENGELLAND - 1y UFA @ 2.9167
JOHNSON - 1y UFA @ 1.7000
total cap hit = 7.7417

NOTES

Futures could be added to tweak the value.

Also, Faksa could be replaced by Cracknell + decent prospect without changing the cap much. Dallas has several decent alternatives to Faksa.

Dallas could offer more to get Engelland @ retained cap, if their priority is saving cap.

Calgary could buyout Lehtonen (if healthy) in the summer, at the cost of 2.95 for two years, and next year use a cheap backup or Jon Gillies. This would cost under 4 million, which isn't a lot more than not trading and paying Stajan his 3.1250.

Click to read more...

 

[Captain Controversy]

Faksa is playing on the first line. Dallas probably says hell no.

 

[Lunatik]

Neither team says yes.

Flames can't take on that terrible Lehtonen contract for next year and the Stars won't want to give up Faksa to shed maybe 2.5 million for next year.

 

[East Coast Icestyle]

Maybe try not to make a proposal for teams you don't know.

We just signed our two goalies, we have played 6 games, and we are not going to send out the cheaper of the two just so that we can take Dallas' goalie situation and make the exact same thing here.

 

[BurgoShark]

I'd say this is fair value in that Dallas gives up the best player in the deal as a payment for Calgary to take on the bad contract... though I'm not sure there is quite enough incentive for Calgary here - are they desperate to dump Stajan?

Dallas are also quite high on Faksa, even though he has taken a while to find his game in the NHL.

 

[SB84]

This flames fan says yes. Seems like good value for taking on a year of Kari when the only really pressing contract we have coming up is Bennett's and we are due to shed a ton salary, most notably the contracts of Wideman, Smid and Engelland. Not sure who they are targeting in free agency though. If it's Bishop then maybe this won't work. I'm high on Faksa, I would love to get him.

 

[BigRangy]

Trading for Lehtonen sewers any hopes they have of contending next season. Unworkable on that basis.

 

[lanceuppercut75]

Trading for Lehtonen sewers any hopes they have of contending next season. Unworkable on that basis.

Even if you buy him out and use a $1 million or less backup? That's under $3.95 and you were already paying Stajan $3.125.

 

[East Coast Icestyle]

Even if you buy him out and use a $1 million or less backup? That's under $3.95 and you were already paying Stajan $3.125.

So, you're suggesting we trade our cheap backup, and a 3m player, just to buyout the person we trade for, for a higher 3m+ cap hit, and then get another backup, who will no doubt be worse?

 

[BurgoShark]

Even if you buy him out and use a $1 million or less backup? That's under $3.95 and you were already paying Stajan $3.125.

This is true, but Dallas aren't trading Faksa just to get rid of Kari, so again there is no incentive for Calgary. They don't improve this season AND ... why acquire a guy making $6m to buy him out when you could just buyout the guy making $3m?

... having said all that, Kari's been the better Dallas goalie so far. Niemi is cheaper - they might have more luck offloading him.

 

[lanceuppercut75]

So, you're suggesting we trade our cheap backup, and a 3m player, just to buyout the person we trade for, for a higher 3m+ cap hit, and then get another backup, who will no doubt be worse?

Your $1.7M backup isn't cheap, and you left out the part where you also get Faksa and Oleksiak and only have to add Engelland. Which is compensation for all the stuff you mentioned.

EDIT - or you can use Gillies as your cheap backup next year. Word on the street is that he's not so bad, maybe even better than Chad Johnson.

 

[East Coast Icestyle]

Your $1.7M backup isn't cheap, and you left out the part where you also get Faksa and Oleksiak and only have to add Engelland. Which is compensation for all the stuff you mentioned.

EDIT - or you can use Gillies as your cheap backup next year. Word on the street is that he's not so bad, maybe even better than Chad Johnson.

1.7 is pretty cheap for what Johnson has shown he can be the last few seasons.

We don't need Oleksiak, he's a nobody, if we're lucky, he becomes Engelland.
We don't really need Faksa either. Would be nice. Not necessary. Not even remotely. Monahan, Bennett, Backlund, Jankowski, cheap UFAs, etc. Gillies probably won't be ready next year. Could be, but probably needs another year.

And rolling back to your buyout plan. Okay, offseason; Wideman is gone, Smid is probably done playing, buyout Stajan. No need for this weird, sideways trade.

 

[Klumppa]

Horrible

 

[BurgoShark]

1.7 is pretty cheap for what Johnson has shown he can be the last few seasons.

We don't need Oleksiak, he's a nobody, if we're lucky, he becomes Engelland.
We don't really need Faksa either. Would be nice. Not necessary. Not even remotely. Monahan, Bennett, Backlund, Jankowski, cheap UFAs, etc. Gillies probably won't be ready next year. Could be, but probably needs another year.

And rolling back to your buyout plan. Okay, offseason; Wideman is gone, Smid is probably done playing, buyout Stajan. No need for this weird, sideways trade.

I agree with your sentiment, but Faksa is probably a little better than what you describe here. He would be the sole reason Dallas doesn't do this.

 

[Andre Palot]

Calgary could of had Pavelec for free, why would they wanna trade assets for a comparable goalie in K.L.

 

[BurgoShark]

Calgary could of had Pavelec for free, why would they wanna trade assets for a comparable goalie in K.L.

I think the idea in the OP is that they get to 1) dump some contracts, and 2) acquire some assets in the process.

 

[Lunatik]

I'd say this is fair value in that Dallas gives up the best player in the deal as a payment for Calgary to take on the bad contract... though I'm not sure there is quite enough incentive for Calgary here - are they desperate to dump Stajan?

Dallas are also quite high on Faksa, even though he has taken a while to find his game in the NHL.

The Flames are not desperate to move Stajan, in fact Stajan has been excellent thus far and by all accounts is a key guy in the locker room. If we are in a cap crunch next year we might look to move out his contract which could be appealing to budget teams as his salary in the final year is just $2.5 million.

 

[Lunatik]

Your $1.7M backup isn't cheap, and you left out the part where you also get Faksa and Oleksiak and only have to add Engelland. Which is compensation for all the stuff you mentioned.

EDIT - or you can use Gillies as your cheap backup next year. Word on the street is that he's not so bad, maybe even better than Chad Johnson.

We'd rather re-sign Elliott than take on the albatross that is Lehtonen. The only reason to entertain this possibility would be to get Faksa but it honestly is not enough to get the Flames to do it and Dallas would likely reject as well. Give it up dude, it's another terrible proposal.

 

[Ghost of Kyiv]

Absolutely not.

You're never taking Faksa away from me. Never.

Also, your math is wrong, Lehtonen's buyout only costs $1.667 in each of the next two years.

u can have Oleksiak tho, he sux

 

[Satan]

If you want elite hockeyboy Radek Faksa, I want Douglas Hamilton

 

[Lunatik]

If you want elite hockeyboy Radek Faksa, I want Douglas Hamilton

The OP is not a Flames fan, we don't like this trade either.

 

[Skobel24]

Pass. Don't want Lehtonen, and both Stajan and Engelland have been doing quite well under Glenutzen.

 

[SirPaste]

Elliott is a much better goalie than Lehtonen, why would Calgary do this

 

[Skobel24]

Elliott is a much better goalie than Lehtonen, why would Calgary do this

The details are in the OP. Calgary wouldn't acquire Lehtonen to have him as the starter.

Regardless of said details, it doesn't really make sense.

 

[Volica]

Pass. Don't want Lehtonen, and both Stajan and Engelland have been doing quite well under Glenutzen.

That's one way to spell Gulutzan.