bernmeister
Registered User
I applaud the out of the box creative thought here.How bout NY does this with Tavares instead?
Sign him 8x12 then trade him to SJ @6 mil retained for 2 1st rounders
However, there's a couple of differences here, and I disagree w/the prop.
I intended this as a targeted fix to a potential problem hoping to create a win win. I basically wanted to sell cap space, which is not that novel an idea. The framework was flawed, tho.
I considered it an isolated situation that SJ found Kane a fit and perceived it would have difficulty extending him given he could fetch just above his last 5.25m per = 6m deal now, while also other needs swell payroll.
I am advised it may be the case as to the rest of it, but Sharks fans say they have enough cap to go there w/out help from a cap seller. Even if they go after Tavares.
I postulated that yeah, Kane was UFA, but it was a good fit, he'd want to return, they would want him back. Unfortunately, that element has a time restriction which I did not realize, per mouser. So the deal is dead despite that potential to otherwise extend that existing bond.
In the case of Tavares, there is no existing bond.
But there would be no impetus to save something.
It would be a fresh start, a new association.
So yes, it appears it would be legal.
But why would SJ or any team allow NY or any team to broker cap space unless it was beneficial or necessary?
I guess what I am not eloquently saying is a Kane deal would be an extra effort to get one more piece high end enough to make a difference. So while you don't want to overpay, you do the creative machinations cap wise, over the river and thru the woods, etc.
Tavares would be a build move. Not build like acquiring a younger elc piece. But it would be a commitment to Thornton's replacement at 1c. long term.
It's not just one extra move.
When you strategize how to pay for stuff, you do the build move routinely in ordinary process, usually. When you do the extra move, you see if you need creative options.
----------
That aspect of it, absolutely no.
Eat 6m per for 8 years! For one measly late 1st?!
Surely, you're kidding.
No one bit, is biting, or will bite on Seabs, Ryan, Lucic, etc cause of huge $ and worse, huge term. Example proving the point: Spezza; now 7m, but expiring. He can get moved, not the others.
I would do less return for less cap space provided [were this a doable deal, which due to technicality it is not]. But 4 years is a long time, cap space is a luxury, it must be paid over the entire term of the deal, not a selected portion of it, and you only can retain on 3 deals at any given time. On top of that in this instance I included 2nd round add.
If someone wants to buy my $ and its flexibility, they have to pay for it.