OilerTyler
Disgruntled
I think the bonus is applied to our cap at the end of the regular season meaning we won't be able to trade the bonus away.
Confirmed with Link: Oilers sign Connor Brown to 1-year incentive laden deal ($775K caphit, potentially $3.25M in bonuses)
- Thread starter AddyTheWrath
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
I think the bonus is applied to our cap at the end of the regular season meaning we won't be able to trade the bonus away.
brentashton
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2018
- 16,399
- 23,759
I haven’t seen a definitive answer.
Maybe try a question to Hart Levine and his CapFriendly gang at:
[email protected]
You never know.
duul
Registered User
- Jun 21, 2010
- 10,462
- 5,083
I'll never forget Draisaitl, Connor, Purcell on spittin chiclets together making fun of the Edmonton river valley. Their primes being pissed away stacking up points on a club that has been wholly mismanaged for decades.
As to your point about Tkachuk and Mackinnon and Toronto...
Florida's D:
Montour
Forsling
Ekblad
Gudas
Colorado's D:
Makar
Toews
Byram
Manson
Now compare to the Leafs and Oilers for a moment:
Ekholm
Nurse
Bouchard
Ceci
Rielly
Brodie
Giordano
McCabe
For anyone who watches these games intently, the contrast is brutal. Colorado and Florida both playing with vastly superior D corps. Should we look at who Vegas won the Cup this year with?
Theodore
Pietrangelo
Whitecloud
Hague
McNabb
Martinez
The reason I put all six of Vegas D here is because all of them are damn solid, would all be playing in our top four. They can roll out any D pair and they'll be wholly competent and effective out there. Think about how we feel when anyone besides Ekholm-Bouchard was out there. The differnce is hilarious at this point.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
In realtime the thing that was impressing me with Vegas was their depth and playoff experience.
Or that they could roll so many lines or D pairs. Guys like Hutton didn't even see a minute against us because they don't need it. Strictly there for insurance. He'd be replacing Ceci in our lineup. Still, we had the opportunity this season due to Tampa reign being over and the AV's having their post cup win fallback season. Next season will be much tougher in playoffs.
Deserves to be said the only teams we've beaten in playoffs in the last several years are Calgary and LA. The only convincing series W over several seasons, or indeed over the entire McDrai canon is against Calgary. Against any stiff opposition in playoffs the Oilers record is deplorable.
McDrai era playoff accomplishment is apparently being the best team in Alberta in playoffs. Wheres the trophy? We're so far down the radar LA Kings actually get upset losing to us (barely)
Last edited:
duul
Registered User
- Jun 21, 2010
- 10,462
- 5,083
Lmao. Beautiful day here just north of Toronto, having some cake for a family birthday. Spit out a piece just now reading the last two paragraphs. Thanks for that.
It's true, the team is a joke that will never be capable of hanging in a seven game series versus a truly deep contending team because we will spend over half of it at a severe disadvantage. Can you image the Vegas guys licking their chops when they got out on the ice vs Desharnais, Broberg, Nurse, and our bottom 6? It's a players dream.
When Marchessault spoke about us, I watched the clip myself -- he was referencing our scoring prowess which is obvious. Yes, this team would kill you if you took a penalty. That's our saving grace is having McDrai to run a PP. Not much else. He also mentioned that once they started taking pucks to the net there was no solution possible for us to stop them. They had free reign once they realized how soft and easy it was to just crash our net from the corner or off the rush and pound pucks in on a goalie who was overwhelmed by the pressure and a D corps who is running antiquated strategies in a modern NHL. Absurd that we're still probably the only team doing this pseudo man on man coverage thing in the D zone where our own D are ending up at the blueline sometimes following 'their guy'. I don't know what the f*** is going on out there.
Marchessault is the type of player who wins you Cups. That whole team was constructed with this in mind. Guys who are never going to stop battling, and who have the skill to capitalize once they win their battle. The antithesis to our group.
Now let's see if we have done anything to address the issues that cost us a playoff win...
I know that, but still think you shouldn't pay too much or give too much term if there's no good reason. Like when Hyman was signed many fans liked it, but immediately thought it could bite back in the final years. Now that might not happen, but it may include more risk than the slight increase per player in the cap. Campbell is one example, if he performs badly it'd be better to have a shorter contract. How about Yamamoto and Puljujarvi, isn't it good they didn't have longer contracts? IMO a bad manager throws millions here and there "as the cap would likely rise" while a good one only counts on that when it's absolutely necessary to get a player he wants. It's a good excuse like I said, but best GMs handle the situation in ways that find good use for the extra cap instead of having inflated contracts that suck the cap before you realize. Sorry for I know it all-attitude, I don't mean it like that, but quite frankly (while you probably don't mean it either) there's a bit of it in your replies too.
harpoon
Registered User
- Dec 23, 2005
- 14,762
- 12,945
The win against the Kings was convincing as well. The Oilers carried the play the entire series. If that isn't a convincing series win, then the Knights win over the Oilers certainly wasn't either.So the most important one then.
It was a beautiful thing.
Pay me later deal will hurt the new gm next season.
The amount deferred is not a small amount and we will loose someone good next year because of this.
There is no guarantee the cap will grow significantly.
I understand the win now but next few seasons are critical in hanging on to mcdrai.
As a player Brown is a good add.
The amount deferred is not a small amount and we will loose someone good next year because of this.
There is no guarantee the cap will grow significantly.
I understand the win now but next few seasons are critical in hanging on to mcdrai.
As a player Brown is a good add.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Multiple of the overpays were within the Covid time frame. Was Holland residing in some bat cave?
As others have mentioned if GM's require constant cap inflation in order to acquire assets it isn't sound management in the first place. Its instead dubious financial planning like anybody that spends all their new money or pay raises the moment they think they are getting it.
Astute cap management is just that. Holland has never been good at it. In any cap environment he'll be pressed hard against cap and regardless of whether the players value is commensurate.
Last edited:
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Not as simple as that. The Oilers carried the play in the series, yes, but the Oilers were also in a ton of trouble in the series and needed Jack Campbell to save them. Pretty ironically from a coaching standpoint. I wonder if Woody even reflects on it.
Edmonton Oilers rally from 3-0 down for OT win over Kings - Edmonton | Globalnews.ca
Zach Hyman scored 10:39 into overtime to give the Edmonton Oilers a come-from-behind 5-4 win over the Los Angeles Kings Sunday night. “Three overtime games and then the other one was tight down to the wire,” Hyman said after the game. “Not much space. Obviously two good teams. Two good...
globalnews.ca
Oilers were down 2-1 in series and were down 3 goals in the must have game 4. 3/4 of the first games went to OT. Game 6 was also tied 4-4 in 3rd period with Kings coming from behind twice. Perhaps oddly 3 of the Oilers goals that game were from players not even here now.
I wonder if people forget this too in that third period:
Matt Roy got in behind the defence and beat Campbell to make it 4-3 Kings 4:28 into the third. Campbell kept the Oilers alive by stopping Arvidsson on a breakaway with 5:46 remaining.
The Knights win I don't know can be considered "convincing" either. The coaching disparity and schemes and strategies were a convincing win for Vegas coaching. The play on the ice could be said to be even. The series was lost clearly on coaching, and coaching deployment decisions.
Last edited:
KeithIsActuallyBad
SPEEN!
Maybe, but putting Campbell in doesn't make Nurse's IQ any higher or any of the other rubes play harder. We lost the series for a lot of reasons, not just Skinner. And to be frank once we lost game 5 the series was done, we weren't going to go into Vegas for a pressure packed game 7 and win.
Also the Knights basically eviscerated any goalie they came across. Skinner was hardly the only goalie that played poorly against them. That's what a good team does, they expose weaknesses. And expose the Oilers weakness they did.
KeithIsActuallyBad
SPEEN!
We lost to the Knights because the Oilers played like a team that would assume they'd win and failed to put in the effort required to win hockey games, just like the failed to put in the effort in the first period of game 4 against the Kings.Not as simple as that. The Oilers carried the play in the series, yes, but the Oilers were also in a ton of trouble in the series and needed Jack Campbell to save them. Pretty ironically from a coaching standpoint. I wonder if Woody even reflects on it.
Edmonton Oilers rally from 3-0 down for OT win over Kings - Edmonton | Globalnews.ca
Zach Hyman scored 10:39 into overtime to give the Edmonton Oilers a come-from-behind 5-4 win over the Los Angeles Kings Sunday night. “Three overtime games and then the other one was tight down to the wire,” Hyman said after the game. “Not much space. Obviously two good teams. Two good...
Oilers were down 2-1 in series and were down 3 goals in the must have game 4. 3/4 of the first games went to OT. Game 6 was also tied 4-4 in 3rd period with Kings coming from behind twice. Perhaps oddly 3 of the Oilers goals that game were from players not even here now.
The Knights win I don't know can be considered "convincing" either. The coaching disparity and schemes and strategies were a convincing win for Vegas coaching. The play on the ice could be said to be even. The series was lost clearly on coaching, and coaching deployment decisions.
We lost to the Knights because they were better than us in every facet of the game except power play. If anything the Kings showed that the Oilers had weaknesses, the Knights just exploited them. Sadly the Knights were never once in danger of losing that series.
Maybe when this team pulls up their pants and acquires a killer instinct they'll win it all. But we're eight years into the McDavid era and it still hasn't happened yet.
CantHaveTkachev
Cap Space > NHL players
Oilers lost two O.T games, both while the Kings were on the PP...and in Game 1 were like 10 seconds away from winning in regulationNot as simple as that. The Oilers carried the play in the series, yes, but the Oilers were also in a ton of trouble in the series and needed Jack Campbell to save them. Pretty ironically from a coaching standpoint. I wonder if Woody even reflects on it.
Edmonton Oilers rally from 3-0 down for OT win over Kings - Edmonton | Globalnews.ca
Zach Hyman scored 10:39 into overtime to give the Edmonton Oilers a come-from-behind 5-4 win over the Los Angeles Kings Sunday night. “Three overtime games and then the other one was tight down to the wire,” Hyman said after the game. “Not much space. Obviously two good teams. Two good...
Oilers were down 2-1 in series and were down 3 goals in the must have game 4. 3/4 of the first games went to OT. Game 6 was also tied 4-4 in 3rd period with Kings coming from behind twice. Perhaps oddly 3 of the Oilers goals that game were from players not even here now.
The Knights win I don't know can be considered "convincing" either. The coaching disparity and schemes and strategies were a convincing win for Vegas coaching. The play on the ice could be said to be even. The series was lost clearly on coaching, and coaching deployment decisions.
Kings were lucky to win 2 Games
KeithIsActuallyBad
SPEEN!
The Oilers are 3-10 in playoff overtimes in the McDavid era. Clearly something is missing.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Kings were unlucky not to have won game 4. Thing is people can talk about margin of play and everything now. The series sure wasn't a cakewalk and if you walk it back to that point in time most people here were not exactly pleased with how things were going. Go back and look at comments here when the Kings were winning game 4 by scores of 3-0, and 4-3 late in game.
Anyway the sub discussion occurred because I mentioned that the Oilers have only won one series easy, against Calgary.
Thing is in the McDrai cannon we've been clobbered 3X in series by game counts of 4-0, 4-0, 3-1.
We've only won the one series against Calgary in a quick out. Its an area that has to be addressed. you don't go far in playoffs if you always lose game 1 and find yourselves behind the 8 ball in every series.
CantHaveTkachev
Cap Space > NHL players
yes, the King "best" game was Game 4, the one they blew and should've won.
I agree, but Game 1's have been a problem since BEFORE McDavid though...haven't beaten a team not named the Ducks in a Game 1 since 2003
even look at 2006...1-3 in Game 1s yet went to the Cup Final
KeithIsActuallyBad
SPEEN!
The Oilers lack any sort of urgency in playoff hockey unless they're behind the 8-ball. They consistently play from behind or lay back when ahead. Every game against Vegas we had a lead at one point and didn't capitalize on it. They're also more often than not on the wrong side of the "clutch" moments.
I'm aware of what happened in the series, and that save on Roy was one of the best I've seen. The Oilers were clearly the better team in that series throughout, regardless of what almost happened. They should've been up 3-0 after the first three games. Shit happens.Not as simple as that. The Oilers carried the play in the series, yes, but the Oilers were also in a ton of trouble in the series and needed Jack Campbell to save them. Pretty ironically from a coaching standpoint. I wonder if Woody even reflects on it.
Edmonton Oilers rally from 3-0 down for OT win over Kings - Edmonton | Globalnews.ca
Zach Hyman scored 10:39 into overtime to give the Edmonton Oilers a come-from-behind 5-4 win over the Los Angeles Kings Sunday night. “Three overtime games and then the other one was tight down to the wire,” Hyman said after the game. “Not much space. Obviously two good teams. Two good...
Oilers were down 2-1 in series and were down 3 goals in the must have game 4. 3/4 of the first games went to OT. Game 6 was also tied 4-4 in 3rd period with Kings coming from behind twice. Perhaps oddly 3 of the Oilers goals that game were from players not even here now.
I wonder if people forget this too in that third period:
Matt Roy got in behind the defence and beat Campbell to make it 4-3 Kings 4:28 into the third. Campbell kept the Oilers alive by stopping Arvidsson on a breakaway with 5:46 remaining.
The Knights win I don't know can be considered "convincing" either. The coaching disparity and schemes and strategies were a convincing win for Vegas coaching. The play on the ice could be said to be even. The series was lost clearly on coaching, and coaching deployment decisions.
I'm not interested in getting into a debate about coaching. The Oilers ran the same system in the playoffs that they ran to great success during the regular season, and during the first round. Skinner was horrific. The Oilers win that series in a walk if he plays .900 sv% hockey. No system is going to work when your goalie is stopping 80% of pucks. The only mistake Woodcroft made was not giving Campbell a start. But hey, he was coming off the worst year for a starter in team history, so I can see the logic.
I know we just disagree on this, it's all good.
bucks_oil
Registered User
- Aug 25, 2005
- 8,964
- 5,372
…. Wow, fatalism, negativity and laziness… , it’s on the front page of capfriendly. Note the number of teams already OVER the cap without a full roster signed.
Nearly all of the contenders and plenty of pretenders.
As for your other comment regarding “natural progression” and linking in @Drivesaitl …
1) if it was “natural progression” that we’d improve each year with McDrai, why did Chiarelli go in the opposite direction? The guy won a Stanley Cup before he got here.
2) if Chiarelli was so bad (which he was) surely that would hamstring Holland’s ability to effect change no? Why haven’t either of you had the courage to comment on the roster that Holland inherited vs the one he’s icing today. He’s turned over AND improved at literally every position other than McDrai, Nuge and Nurse.
You guys aren’t debating in good faith. And I honestly don’t think it’s your fault… I wish you happier days ahead.
Drivesaitl
Finding Hemingway
Can't speak for others but part of it is being an Edmonton Sports fan. Few of us here get to experience the agony of Oilers playoff exits and then have the football team start losing every game.…. Wow, fatalism, negativity and laziness… , it’s on the front page of capfriendly. Note the number of teams already OVER the cap without a full roster signed.
Nearly all of the contenders and plenty of pretenders.
As for your other comment regarding “natural progression” and linking in @Drivesaitl …
1) if it was “natural progression” that we’d improve each year with McDrai, why did Chiarelli go in the opposite direction? The guy won a Stanley Cup before he got here.
2) if Chiarelli was so bad (which he was) surely that would hamstring Holland’s ability to effect change no? Why haven’t either of you had the courage to comment on the roster that Holland inherited vs the one he’s icing today. He’s turned over AND improved at literally every position other than McDrai, Nuge and Nurse.
You guys aren’t debating in good faith. And I honestly don’t think it’s your fault… I wish you happier days ahead.
I would just give up but I'm a sports addict. Really my only addiction so i guess thats OK. By and large thats limited misery once a week with the Elks who are now 0-6. Or 0-20 at home making it an all time all pro sports record for futility. They're now tied with a 1950's STL baseball team that lost 20 in a row at home but they play so many baseball games that was probably only a few months streak. Elks haven't won at home ever, and the team hasn't won at home for 4years now. Just incredible, in all the wrong ways.
I've totally lost the script though. I've said as much. belief in Edmonton teams seems gone.
As far as Holland I had defended him resolutely pretty much every other offseason on the sum and total of work and players added. yes he's improved the club in time here. but I've given up on him too. Just frustrated to see yet another year where we are going to be in utter cap hell. Already anticipating the team having to juggle so much and play limited lineups just to fit under cap. Patience has just entirely run out.
Capwise I do feel we are the Maple Laughs West version out here. Totally spent cap, nothing to show for it. Most teams that are up tight against cap have cup(s) to show for it. We still don't have anything better than 8 post season wins. Even a joke team like Panthers got to the final. ffs
Last edited:
Fourier
Registered User
There is more to a contact than just the term and the AAV. With long term contracts the structure of the deal is important. Take a look at Hyman's deal. It is significantly front loaded. After his bonus is paid in the second last year he is owed $6M for the last two years of his deal. That matters because it makes him a movable player if he still functional which at 34 there is no reason he would not be. The only reason that a guy like Hyman would not be good value at $3M per season in real money with a cap of probably close to $100M is if he had a major injury. In that case he goes on LTIR. In that same year his NMC becomes a M-NTC with a small trade list.
Typically older players will accept a trade if the alternative is being bought out. If you have to make it palatable you may need a third team involved. In a rising cap world its actual dollars that tend to cost you in such a deal so the fact that it would only be $2M for a third party to eat 1/3 of his deal but that team gets $3.66M in cap space. This makes it potentially attractive to a team like Arizona that may be still challenged to hit the floor without taking on such deals.
For the Oilers the downside of a front loaded deal is that it makes it a bit more complicated to buy it out if you are looking to save cap space. But it also makes it cheaper and potentially more attractive to trade the deal so that a second or third party can do the buyout. This is a strategy that several teams have used. For example, if the Oilers were to want to buy out the last year of Hyman's deal they don't get a lot of relief since the cap hit would be $3.7M in that year and $883K the next year. But they could trade him to a second team with 50% retained and that team moves him to a third team with 50% retained and the third team buys him out.
Oilers: Actual cost in real money $1.5M Cap hit: $1.88M in year one $447K in year 2
Team 2: Actual cost in real money $750K Cap hit $940K in year 1, $225K in year 2
Team 3: Actual cost in real money $750K Cap hit $940K in year 1, $225K in year 2
At worst that might cost you couple of very late draft picks but it is easy to take back some small contract to even mitigate that cost. The Oilers save $3.7M in cap space at minimal cost. If they need more they could reduce the retention to say 1/3 and it still would not cost them that much.
This is what I mean when I say that the CBA allows multiple ways to get out of long term mistakes on the deals that go bad. But if you go short term all the time you almost always guarantee that you will never have a good deal on the books unless you are in a prime location where players will play at a discount.
As far as Campbell is concerned I'd say that goalies are a completely different kettle of fish. I am always nervous about big money and term on almost any goalie since their role is so fickle. That Campbell deal made me nervous right from the start.
From July 2022:
Last edited:
duul
Registered User
- Jun 21, 2010
- 10,462
- 5,083
Using capfriendly as a resource in the middle of the offseason is silly, you must know that. Look at all the cap space we have!…. Wow, fatalism, negativity and laziness… , it’s on the front page of capfriendly. Note the number of teams already OVER the cap without a full roster signed.
Nearly all of the contenders and plenty of pretenders.
As for your other comment regarding “natural progression” and linking in @Drivesaitl …
1) if it was “natural progression” that we’d improve each year with McDrai, why did Chiarelli go in the opposite direction? The guy won a Stanley Cup before he got here.
2) if Chiarelli was so bad (which he was) surely that would hamstring Holland’s ability to effect change no? Why haven’t either of you had the courage to comment on the roster that Holland inherited vs the one he’s icing today. He’s turned over AND improved at literally every position other than McDrai, Nuge and Nurse.
You guys aren’t debating in good faith. And I honestly don’t think it’s your fault… I wish you happier days ahead.
The contracts Chiarelli had left us with were actually great, or at least they were low risk. Draisaitl especially in hindsight is the best value deal in the league. Kudos to Chiarelli. When we say someone is bad or good, we do not mean every single move they've ever made was bad or good of course. Chiarelli, while helplessly flailing in his trade history, had a talent for signing. Rather, he strayed away from signing big ticket contracts for guys who were not assuredly going to be our top two players. I think that's commendable. It's not him who put us in the cap hell we are in now. In fact, his primary focus seemed to be keeping us out of that while our stars developed. Holland came in right place right time as they were peaking to build a contender. Chiarelli took over a basement dwelling team with two budding superstars in the making. Yes, I remember those days where , and well , I'm shuddering honestly looking back at some of the players we had here. Chiarelli and Holland had two totally different teams to work with at different points of generational development. Chiarelli allowed for a huge amount of freedom for the next GM coming in. Holland has done the opposite, for better or for worse. The worst thing Chiarelli did was the 3 year deal for Koskinen which sucked as he was on his way out the door.
I believe we are debating in good faith. All three of us want the team to win a Cup. We have varying levels of what is acceptable or not, or reasonable rather.
Fourier
Registered User
I would argue that Chia, Holland and bad luck share the responsibility for the cap situation. And bad luck might be the biggest culprit.
Chia is basically the root of the $1.9M in dead cap space for the Neal buyout. Not just for the original Lucic signing but s much for the bad moves he made at the end of his tenure that forced the buyout of Neal in the first place.
Holland's issues have been outlined many times and I won't expand on these in this post but I will say that bad luck has been an issue. The most obvious part of this is that the pandemic flattened the cap at a terrible time for the Oilers. Had the pandemic lasted one year less we would probably have a cap at $87M today. But the other significant piece of bad luck was the Klefbom injury. This was a big deal because not only did it deprive the team of a really valuable player on a great contract, but having to navigate LTIR has also had a negative impact on the teams cap situation. Without Klebom's LTIR for example, they probably have no carry-over this year. Combine the Neal buyout and the overage and you have another $2.7M in cap space this year.
