Rantanen vs Necas points race to end of season.

[a mangy Meowth]

Stars owner net worth: roughly $4.3 billion
Avalanche owner net worth: roughly $18 billion - not counting his wife who is worth about $12 billion herself


If either of these teams is likely to implement an internal cap, I'm thinking it's probably the Stars.

 

[M88K]

Is Dallas cap compliant if they activated Heiskanen today?

Actually yes they would be as long as Seguin was out until the PO. They can't activate both.
To activate Seguin they have to send someone down with Miros LTIR space.
Miro didn't need to be on LTIR for the roster they dress today, they were trying to make an additional move at the deadline and did so preemptively.

 

[CanesUltimate11]

I really don't agree, but I guess it's subjective. We'll see what they turn the picks into

They’re certainly better now than they were with Rantanen. Are they better with Hall and Stankoven then they were with Necas and Drury is a toss up. Based on play I think Hall and Stankoven will fit better than Necas did in the playoffs for Carolina but we’ll see how it goes.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

1. It was a sign and trade, so I don't understand that comment.
2. They're 2nd in the East and have won 7 of the 9 games after the trade. In the 14 games with Rantanen, they also won 7 games.
3. The 1sts are in future years (26 and 27) and thus could be late 1sts or could be high picks, depending on how Dallas does next season and/or the season after. But in all likelihood, those picks will be packaged for a talented player well before then

1. how was it a sign and trade? CAR traded him because he wouldn't sign

2. thats because CAR was already a good team, he had 6 points in 13 games.... not exactly elite for CAR

3. Dallas is a very good young team, they will be in the mid to late 20's or 30's so not great value and even if packaged for an upgrade they don't hold alot of value downgrading multiple times to get Stankoven and a couple likely late 1sts is pretty terrible imo

 

[Blueline Bomber]

1. how was it a sign and trade? CAR traded him because he wouldn't sign

2. thats because CAR was already a good team, he had 6 points in 13 games.... not exactly elite for CAR

3. Dallas is a very good young team, they will be in the mid to late 20's or 30's so not great value and even if packaged for an upgrade they don't hold alot of value downgrading multiple times to get Stankoven and a couple likely late 1sts is pretty terrible imo

1. Wait…do you think sign and trades happen by having the player sign with the team that’s going to trade him…and then they trade him? No, sign and trades are essentially what Carolina did. They allow the team that’s acquiring said player to negotiate a new contract with the player, then the trade happens with the value as if that player has signed a new contract, and THEN the player signs with the team that just acquired him. Because if sign and trades worked the way you believed it does, what’s to stop Carolina from simply…not trading Ranatanen after he signs the 8-year-deal?

2. Exactly. He wasn’t very good for Carolina…so they traded him…and got better in the process. So you see why saying they downgraded doesn’t make sense…right…?

3. 1st round picks always have value in a trade, especially multiple 1st round picks. And while it’s likely that the picks will be late 1sts, it’s not unheard of for a team to go from contenders to not in the span of a year. Look at the Rangers. ECF last year, struggling to make the 2nd WC this year.

 

[Barrie22]

1. how was it a sign and trade? CAR traded him because he wouldn't sign

2. thats because CAR was already a good team, he had 6 points in 13 games.... not exactly elite for CAR

3. Dallas is a very good young team, they will be in the mid to late 20's or 30's so not great value and even if packaged for an upgrade they don't hold alot of value downgrading multiple times to get Stankoven and a couple likely late 1sts is pretty terrible imo

I believe it had to be a sign and trade as dallas signed him to an 8 year extension. And that ability is only possible by a team that he was on prior to the trade deadline happened.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

1. Wait…do you think sign and trades happen by having the player sign with the team that’s going to trade him…and then they trade him? No, sign and trades are essentially what Carolina did. They allow the team that’s acquiring said player to negotiate a new contract with the player, then the trade happens with the value as if that player has signed a new contract, and THEN the player signs with the team that just acquired him. Because if sign and trades worked the way you believed it does, what’s to stop Carolina from simply…not trading Ranatanen after he signs the 8-year-deal?

2. Exactly. He wasn’t very good for Carolina…so they traded him…and got better in the process. So you see why saying they downgraded doesn’t make sense…right…?

3. 1st round picks always have value in a trade, especially multiple 1st round picks. And while it’s likely that the picks will be late 1sts, it’s not unheard of for a team to go from contenders to not in the span of a year. Look at the Rangers. ECF last year, struggling to make the 2nd WC this year.

1. a sign and trade would have had Rantanen signed long term in CAR....., where is he signed long term right now?

2. I think they should have just avoided Rantanen all together, imo they got worse because of it, Id rather Necas over paying Necas + Drury + 2nd + 4th for Stankoven + 2x late 1sts

3. a little value yeah but not value like a lottery pick would have.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

I believe it had to be a sign and trade as dallas signed him to an 8 year extension. And that ability is only possible by a team that he was on prior to the trade deadline happened.

Im not talking about DAL though, they did a sign and trade, CAR did not. they paid up with not guaranteeing he signs long term. they gambled on trying to win a cup and extending him but gave up

 

[Blueline Bomber]

1. a sign and trade would have had Rantanen signed long term in CAR....., where is he signed long term right now?

2. I think they should have just avoided Rantanen all together, imo they got worse because of it, Id rather Necas over paying Necas + Drury + 2nd + 4th for Stankoven + 2x late 1sts

3. a little value yeah but not value like a lottery pick would have.

1. Rantanen was never signing in Carolina long term. If that was an option, Carolina would have accomplished it. But it was clearly not in the cards. And given how he played for them in those 13 games, it’s probably better that never happened.

2. They tried to trade Necas in this past offseason and never found much interest. The best option for him on his current contract was two 2nds. If he had signed an 8-year-deal, Columbus was (allegedly) offering the 4th overall. But Necas didn’t want to sign an 8 year deal with Columbus, so it never came to pass.

So when a legitimate game changing player like Rantanen becomes available and the cost is a guy you were looking to trade anyway? Carolina would be stupid not to take that chance. Also, if you want to write out the full deal, add Hall and two 3rds to Carolina’s side.

3. Rantanen was only interested in signing with Dallas, Toronto, Florida or Vegas. There were no lottery picks available for him.

 

[tarheelhockey]

2. I think they should have just avoided Rantanen all together, imo they got worse because of it, Id rather Necas over paying Necas + Drury + 2nd + 4th for Stankoven + 2x late 1sts

1) Keeping Necas was not an option. It was already known that he would leave at the end of his contact. It’s easy to say “I’d rather just keep Necas” when they’re not the one holding an empty bag at the end.

2) Somehow people keep leaving out that the Canes also got Taylor Hall and a prospect.

 

[flyfysher]

Im not talking about DAL though, they did a sign and trade, CAR did not. they paid up with not guaranteeing he signs long term. they gambled on trying to win a cup and extending him but gave up

 

[tucker3434]

Here's the link to Elliote Friedman saying he believes the Avs moving Rantanen/not wanting to pay him more is partly due to an internal cap they've set. He expects more teams to do the same. It's near the end of this video. He talked about it more elsewhere too on his podcast but you can look for that if you want

Internal salary structure, maybe. It's pretty clear who they think are the two guys to build around. The Avs immediately used all the space they saved in the Rantanen trade, and they're doing their best to ice a $95m roster in the playoffs. So if they have an internal cap, I guess it's over the NHL's.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

1. Rantanen was never signing in Carolina long term. If that was an option, Carolina would have accomplished it. But it was clearly not in the cards. And given how he played for them in those 13 games, it’s probably better that never happened.

2. They tried to trade Necas in this past offseason and never found much interest. The best option for him on his current contract was two 2nds. If he had signed an 8-year-deal, Columbus was (allegedly) offering the 4th overall. But Necas didn’t want to sign an 8 year deal with Columbus, so it never came to pass.

So when a legitimate game changing player like Rantanen becomes available and the cost is a guy you were looking to trade anyway? Carolina would be stupid not to take that chance. Also, if you want to write out the full deal, add Hall and two 3rds to Carolina’s side.

3. Rantanen was only interested in signing with Dallas, Toronto, Florida or Vegas. There were no lottery picks available for him.

did you just not read what I said? listen I dont need to hear your cope, it was a bad move all together

 

[Arthur Morgan]

1) Keeping Necas was not an option. It was already known that he would leave at the end of his contact. It’s easy to say “I’d rather just keep Necas” when they’re not the one holding an empty bag at the end.

2) Somehow people keep leaving out that the Canes also got Taylor Hall and a prospect.

still they could have found a better longer term option if there was a chance they lose Rantanen faster than Necas. and Hall doesn't really move the needle much

 

[Arthur Morgan]

your welcome to tell me how they didnt give up. they traded for Rantanen to bolster their lineup for a cup push to sell him because they couldnt get something done that should have been done before the trade was made

 

[Blueline Bomber]

did you just not read what I said? listen I dont need to hear your cope, it was a bad move all together

I mean, you’re the one arguing against facts. Also, Hall has 7 goals and 10 points since the deadline. If that’s not “moving the needle much”, I don’t know what to tell you.

 

[flyfysher]

did you just not read what I said? listen I dont need to hear your cope, it was a bad move all together

Yours is an unsophisticated and uninformed POV. And I’m not a Canes fan.

 

[tarheelhockey]

still they could have found a better longer term option if there was a chance they lose Rantanen faster than Necas.

It sure looks like they accomplished a pretty solid long-rental trade return while also taking a shot at a 100-point scorer along the way. I’m not sure what better option would have been on the table.

and Hall doesn't really move the needle much

Hall has scored more times in 22 games with the Canes than Drury has scored in his entire 63-game season.

Last night he scored the GWG; two games before that he scored a hat trick; he’s running at a 30-goal pace with the Canes.

Why are you insisting Drury (and for that matter a 4th round pick) should be counted as part of the trade but not Hall?

In any case, Hall was part of the deal so framing it to exclude him is just deceptive.

 

[D1az]

Aren't you excited to watch Oilers Kings AGAIN?

This isn't perhaps the thread for it, but all I'm thinking is that I'm not watching a single game of that again.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

I mean, you’re the one arguing against facts. Also, Hall has 7 goals and 10 points since the deadline. If that’s not “moving the needle much”, I don’t know what to tell you.

your just ignoring what im saying. Im talking about CAR not getting him to sign and trade. DAL did but CAR did not... once u went on that again I just ignored everything else you said

7 goals and 12 points in 21 games is okay but he's also a UFA, doesn't hold alot of value

 

[RoyIsALegend]

I think you're stretching all of this quite a bit to find reasons to be upset with him. Why is it his fault and not the Avs?

Why is it anybody's fault?

Rantanen, through the work of his agent, set a value of his worth. The Avalanche did not think he was worth that and offered him what they felt was right.

Rantanen didn't accept. The Avs traded him.

It looks like both sides came out happy. Rantanen is getting $12m tax-free annually for the next 8 years on a good team. The Avs got more depth and have more cap space to play with next year before the big cap jumps in following seasons.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

Yours is an unsophisticated and uninformed POV. And I’m not a Canes fan.

how exactly? because I think this all round has been very bad for CAR? they paid up for a player to try and win the cup but couldn;t get him signed long term (something that should have been done before the trade went through) and then sold him for less than what they originally paid. didn't even try to win with Rantanen.

if you can explain that would be appreciated.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

It sure looks like they accomplished a pretty solid long-rental trade return while also taking a shot at a 100-point scorer along the way. I’m not sure what better option would have been on the table.



Hall has scored more times in 22 games with the Canes than Drury has scored in his entire 63-game season.

Last night he scored the GWG; two games before that he scored a hat trick; he’s running at a 30-goal pace with the Canes.

Why are you insisting Drury (and for that matter a 4th round pick) should be counted as part of the trade but not Hall?

In any case, Hall was part of the deal so framing it to exclude him is just deceptive.

I think the Canes were better before Rantanen and then Stankoven. and it sure didnt work out imo.
Hall is UFA and 33 years old. he could have been had pretty cheap anyways.

Hall isn;t the problem.... the problem is paying up for a chance to win it all and giving up because they couldn't get something done that should have been mandatory before the deal was completed.

you bolster your lineup to give up a couple weeks later and downgrade, Id respect it more if they tried to win it all and lose Rantanen for nothing. he was off to a meh start in CAR but chances are he figures it out and prob gives u a better chance to win over Stankoven, nothing against Stankoven either but he's no Rantanen

 

[tarheelhockey]

7 goals and 12 points in 21 games is okay but he's also a UFA, doesn't hold alot of value

8 goals and 13 points in 22 games. He scored again last night.

Compare to Rantanen’s 2 goals and 6 points in 13 games on the same team, skating 4:30 more per game including 1:10 more PP time per game.

Rantanen to be re-signed at $12M for 8 years, Hall will likely get something like $4M for a couple of years which is do-able for the Canes.

These assets are not as different in value as you’re suggesting.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

8 goals and 13 points in 22 games. He scored again last night.

Compare to Rantanen’s 2 goals and 6 points in 13 games on the same team, skating 4:30 more per game including 1:10 more PP time per game.

Rantanen to be re-signed at $12M for 8 years, Hall will likely get something like $4M for a couple of years which is do-able for the Canes.

These assets are not as different in value as you’re suggesting.

still a rental, could have been had for cheap anyways, I never said Hall was an issue.
Im arguing that acquiring Rantanen in the first place without him signed was the mistake.