Proposal: Nyi - la - car

[Riptide]

To CAR:
Jaroslav Halak ($4.5M - 17/18)
Matt Greene ($2.5M - 16/17)
From CAR:
Eddie Lack w/ 50% retention ($1.375M - 17/18)


To NYI:
2017 2nd LA
From NYI:
Jaroslav Halak ($4.5M - 17/18)

To LA:
Eddie Lack w/ 50% retention (1.375M - 17/18)
From LA:
Matt Greene ($2.5M - 16/17)
2017 2nd LA


Why Carolina does this: They upgrade there goaltending at the cost of short-term cap space. For a team with loads of space and goaltending holding them back, this should be a no-brainer.

Why New York does this: They end the 3-headed monster goaltending experiment finally and open up that roster spot. Also acquire a 2nd rounder (presumably for Snow to use to move up as always) and get rid of Halak's cap hit for next season, opening up money for Greiss, Clutterbuck, CDH, and potentially a FA or Seidenberg back.

Why Los Angeles does this: They need a goalie after all the injuries (and even before it, since I don't believe Zatkoff is NHL caliber) and Lack at 1.375 is a steal. Plus they get rid of Greene's cap for this season, potentially opening up space for a TDL acquisiton. The only cost is a 2nd.

And why does CAR want to add 14.75m in salary (in addition to retaining 2.75m on Lack) over the next 2 seasons? I mean this proposal certainly doesn't give them any incentive to do so. You say to "upgrade" their goaltending. If that's the case, why are they taking back Green? Green and Lack both make 2.5m, why wouldn't LA and CAR just flip those guys with someone (likely LA) adding, and then go shopping for a goalie?

Secondly, there's little chance NYI is going to move on from Halak during the season without taking salary back. Even if it's a team like CAR, they're going to want to move one of their two goalies (and not in a flawed proposal like what you listed).

 

[Riptide]

So dump Greene in the AHL, it doesn't matter. The point is you upgrade goaltending at the cost of nothing more than some unneeded cap space. I don't see how this is a no from Canes fans to be honest. Seems like a no-brainer.

And the 17.5m in actual cash that they're paying out over the next 2 years for Halak, Greene and retaining on Lack comes from where? Carolina probably doesn't have an issue spending money on players who can help their team... but that's a boat load to pay for a 3rd pairing D (that they do not need) and a starting goalie over the next 2 seasons.

not really lets not forget that both contracts are 2 years left Greene place on the roster needs to be filled and even if your add a elc player like gravel that 667 500 k to replace him plus the 1.375 for lack is over 2 million so we re not saving that much If lack wasn't at 50% kings wouldn't do a 2nd it would be a 3rd

The Kings get the money to replace Greene by sending one of their goalies to the minors. So strictly from a cap perspective, there's still no need for CAR to retain 50% (if Greene is coming the other way).

 

[KingCanadain1976]

And the 17.5m in actual cash that they're paying out over the next 2 years for Halak, Greene and retaining on Lack comes from where? Carolina probably doesn't have an issue spending money on players who can help their team... but that's a boat load to pay for a 3rd pairing D (that they do not need) and a starting goalie over the next 2 seasons.



The Kings get the money to replace Greene by sending one of their goalies to the minors. So strictly from a cap perspective, there's still no need for CAR to retain 50% (if Greene is coming the other way).

I think canes should get the islander to retain on halak or take part of greene's cap Imo Halak is not worth a 2nd without retaining

 

[rajuabju]

This might be the first time I've ever seen a 3-way proposal more or less making sense.

Well done.

 

[Chan790]

This might be the first time I've ever seen a 3-way proposal more or less making sense.

Well done.

Except the part where it doesn't make any cap or fiscal sense for the Canes. Halak is an improvement, but not at this kind of $$ or cap price.

The economics of it are bad for the Canes, as others have pointed out.

 

[YP44]

Seems like a no brainer for LA however I don't think I do it for one reason. Lack would be exposed for expansion.
Right now LA is able to protect all their key pieces and leave undesirable contracts exposes. I know it is a slim chance that Brown gets selected but picking up anyone who has term past this year that is exposed makes that chance even slimmer.