I could stomach Kane on the team very easily... IF the NHL granted us $10M in magical bonus Cap space and we had to give up nothing to acquire him.
Yeah I understand that but if it isn’t multiple years I would want one year so he’s not a UFA at the end.
I think we could fit him in at the deadline if things are going well and are likely one of the few teams that couldI could stomach Kane on the team very easily... IF the NHL granted us $10M in magical bonus Cap space and we had to give up nothing to acquire him.
Since that's not gonna happen... is "neither" an option?
I'll take Anton Stralman at $750k over both those guys.
It makes sense in the context of the cap being flat this year and taking a big jump next year. Trenin hopes that by taking a one year deal and playing well he can score a longer, more lucrative deal next year, whereas Poile already is going to have a lot of mouths to feed next summer and, if he cant get 3 or more years at good money now, is willing to risk him reaching UFA in exchange for knowing that he wont have to give him a raise next summer
The team gets to select the term since Trenin filed. 12.9(c) of the CBA.
Poile and co need some stability going into next season with Jeannot, carrier, and Fabbro as rfas with arbitration rights. Glass could also cause some issues if he has a breakout year. We are gonna be tight against the cap and that extra year of cost certainty would be really helpful
Yeah, in some ways next season is our "all-in" year. We have a bunch of RFAs up next summer and it is unlikely we can keep the whole band together beyond next season. We will have 13 players under contract with $13 mil in cap with Jeannot, Carrier, Fabbro and Glass without a contract.
Not really surprising I guess. Trenin to me has always felt like a guy that really wanted to be somewhere else. That said he has always been willing to play his role even if that is his ambition.
Yeh I think we are going to have to make a trade or buy someone out after this season. I think Fabbro and carrier likely take up Atleast 6-7 between the two and if Jeannot has another season like last there’s another 3-4 and just like that there’s almost all the capspace. Add in Trenin at 2M and I we will struggle to fill out the roster and stay cap compliant even if the cap jumps up to 86
But there is no expectation that the Cap will take a "big jump next year", is there? Everything I've read has been that the escrow debt is so large that it cannot possibly be paid off that quickly, regardless of how optimistic anybody is on revenues, even including how good things were this year, even including new TV deal, etc. There is simply no way it jumps, regardless? Basically, we already know the Cap is only going up $1M next year, no matter what.
www.bleachernation.com
Yes, but I think he has basically wanted to be somewhere else due wholly to being underappreciated pretty much throughout his tenure here, at every level, and the team filing this case at a scant $1.35M is just icing on the cake, really. If he wants to be somewhere else, it's for good reason, and the culpability for that rests wholly on the organization's shoulders, doesn't it?
While I agree with his early tenure in the AHL I don't think he has been held back once he got here, although I guess you could make some bit of a argument under Lavi. He's gotten the same opportunities as about anyone, and played a pretty large role on the team last season, especially considering our 3rd basically became our 2nd. Yeah Poile lowballed him, but just about every team does going into arbitration, just like every player goes in high on the other end.
You could, but then again it's not your money nor are you working daily with those that are giving you that money. It's really easy for us to stand here and say we should just give some player the money, but it's not coming out of our pocket. We also are a cap team now, which means every little bit you can save matters. 400-500k isn't much in the grand scheme, but it is the difference in being able to offer Forsberg 8.5 vs 8 million. It's also the difference in being able to bring a guy up or being able to run a deeper bench through the year. If he continues to grow and perform he will get what he is looking for, whether that is with us or someone else.Anyway, I don't think any of us here would bat an eyelid at the $2.4M number, we haven't done so all summer. If you like the player and would like to keep him, there's no law that says you have to follow the NHL tradition of making lowball arbitration filings highlighting player flaws and limitations. Maybe if you've been an NHL General Manager for 50 years you've learned to filter your feelings out of the process just to save a few hundred thousand dollars for some unknowable contingency fund. But expecting the same understanding from a proud young hockey player seems myopic.
Whereas instead of letting things get to the point of the KHL card being played, you could just recognize the player belonged on the team full-time based on his performance, bump him a little bit from the league minimum to even $800k or something in the last round, a token, a drop in the bucket of the team payroll, you could then at least make an arbitration offer that wasn't just eye-poppingly insulting for the season he just had. It doesn't have to be the full $2.4M. But $1.8M maybe. Something that is at least at some kind of lower threshold of reasonability. It's like they have been going out of their way to antagonize him. Or to demand a level of humility and loyalty that isn't truly owed.
I'm just disappointed because I've liked the way Trenin plays and will be sad to see him playing elsewhere in the near future.
