Speculation: Roster Building Thread LIX: To trade or not to trade CK?

[GoAwayPanarin]

Saying Smith can be waived is like saying I can ask Margot Robbie on a date. While technically true, nothing would come from either of those events. Nobody is picking up a replacement-ish dman @ 2* 4.35 off waivers

No I agree, but they’d save money with him in Hartford.

 

[Tawnos]

Saying Smith can be waived is like saying I can ask Margot Robbie on a date. While technically true, nothing would come from either of those events. Nobody is picking up a replacement-ish dman @ 2* 4.35 off waivers

I think Smith should be bought out, if anyone is, but his point is that we can save some cap by burying him in the AHL.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

No I agree, but they’d save money with him in Hartford.

I think Smith should be bought out, if anyone is, but his point is that we can save some cap by burying him in the AHL.

True. How much cap would that save?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

True. How much cap would that save?

A touch over a mill.

 

[TheTakedown]

https://nypost.com/2019/07/17/the-salary-cap-hell-the-rangers-are-still-trying-to-navigate/



Who wants to inform Brooks the Rangers can't use a buyout on a player who wasn't on the Rangers reserve list last February?

The Rangers are stuck with the cap situation. They get what they deserve.

The Rangers should not have gotten involved with Shattenkirk at all. Smith too.

It's OK, there are easy fixes to this problem. Here's my solution to this issue. If you buy Staal out NEXT YEAR, you can effectively spread out the money saved on smith by pushing down the road a year with Staal's cap hit.

I made this sheet myself, it encompasses all of the dead money, calculates the savings for the buyouts, and then shows you the actual costs of dead money.



Smith buyout right now alleviates 2019-20 cap crunch
Girardi Buyout $ drop + Staal Buyout in 2020-21 alleviates Smith's buyout hit in this year
This effectively extends the Girardi Buyout Money for 2 more years beyond this year, but it opens up cap space for the next 2 years. at the end of that 2020-21 season, the Shattenkirk Contract falls off.

All about balance

EDIT: Am going to redo this later with buying out Staal first + burying Smith. If the rangers are strictly looking for cap relief, there's an extra net of $1M for this year in buying out Staal + burying smith.

 

[GAGLine]

Remember that the rangers can only buy out ONE player in this buyout window this year.

Are you sure about that? There's nothing in section 11.18 of the CBA (page 51) that mentions that. The only limits mentioned are:

1) there can only be a max of 3 over the life of the CBA (we haven't done any yet)
2) the player must have been on our reserve list as of that last trade deadline
3) the player must make at least 2.75 mil (increases yearly based on average SPC increase)

This is what CapFriendly says:

Buyouts Outside of the Regular Period

Clubs whom have 1 or more arbitration filings may be permitted to perform a buyout outside of the regular window. This gives teams another opportunity to become cap compliant following an arbitration case.

Clubs are permitted to perform a buyout outside the regular period during the 48 hour period beginning on the third day after the final of [CBA 13(c)ii]:

1. Settlement of the Club's final arbitration case, or
2. Receipt of the Club's last arbitration award

Requirements:

1. A buyout can only be performed on a player who was on the clubs reserve list at 3:00pm on the most recent trade deadline
2. The player must have a cap hit of at least $3,455,438 for the 2019 offseason

Section 13(c)ii of the CBA (page 318) doesn't mention it either.

 

[TheTakedown]

Saying Smith can be waived is like saying I can ask Margot Robbie on a date. While technically true, nothing would come from either of those events. Nobody is picking up a replacement-ish dman @ 2* 4.35 off waivers

It's to get the $1.1M back in cap space

 

[TheTakedown]

Are you sure about that? There's nothing in section 11.18 of the CBA (page 51) that mentions that. The only limits mentioned are:

1) there can only be a max of 3 over the life of the CBA (we haven't done any yet)
2) the player must have been on our reserve list as of that last trade deadline
3) the player must make at least 2.75 mil (increases yearly based on average SPC increase)

This is what CapFriendly says:

Section 13(c)ii of the CBA (page 318) doesn't mention it either.

Buyout *A* Player...

I think its only one player

 

[TheTakedown]

I think Smith should be bought out, if anyone is, but his point is that we can save some cap by burying him in the AHL.

This is a good point.... I could actually redo my spreadsheet I just did, but buyout Staal first... That would allow you to stuff Smith in the minors for this year, you'd still effectively claim a ton of cap space back. The differences in the buyouts are miniscule over the course of the 4 years

 

[SA16]

It's OK, there are easy fixes to this problem. Here's my solution to this issue. If you buy Staal out NEXT YEAR, you can effectively spread out the money saved on smith by pushing down the road a year with Staal's cap hit.

I made this sheet myself, it encompasses all of the dead money, calculates the savings for the buyouts, and then shows you the actual costs of dead money.



Smith buyout right now alleviates 2019-20 cap crunch
Girardi Buyout $ drop + Staal Buyout in 2020-21 alleviates Smith's buyout hit in this year
This effectively extends the Girardi Buyout Money for 2 more years beyond this year, but it opens up cap space for the next 2 years. at the end of that 2020-21 season, the Shattenkirk Contract falls off.

All about balance

EDIT: Am going to redo this later with buying out Staal first + burying Smith. If the rangers are strictly looking for cap relief, there's an extra net of $1M for this year in buying out Staal + burying smith.

Why would we need to buy out someone next year when the cap won't be a problem next year?

 

[GAGLine]

Buyout *A* Player...

I think its only one player

Yeah, I figured that's what you were looking at. I think that's just an issue with the specific language that they used on CapFriendly. The CBA doesn't state that and if that were the case, I would imagine that CapFriendly would have stated it in a more explicit fashion.

 

[RGY]

Do you think we can sell Beleskey to a team with a 6th round pick attached?

 

[Vitto79]

No one cared much about the bad contracts cause the team won’t be ready to compete for a few yrs

Now Trouba and Panarin accelerate things and the 2 yr bad contracts likey get spread into 4 this yr or 2 next

I figure Smith is the logical choice and then Names or Strome traded for peanuts

 

[LORDE]

Staal needs to do us a solid and hang em up.

LOL funny u say this.

I had a dream last night that he did (I don't ever dream about hockey stuff so this is the one time I'll be mentioning something like this)

 

[TheBloodyNine]

I really want to know what RangerBoy thinks of the Smith and Shattenkirk signings. Wish he'd stop hiding his thoughts and just come out with it already.

I mean, he called it 100% on Shattenkirk from jump street so he's allowed to take all the victory laps he wants on that one.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

LOL funny u say this.

I had a dream last night that he did (I don't ever dream about hockey stuff so this is the one time I'll be mentioning something like this)

I hope your dream world is a portal to the future.

 

[SA16]

If Rantanen comes in at 10M Colorado will be 7M under the cap with only potential Makar bonuses. Ottawa is going to be like 16M under the cap. There has to be a fit where we can give either of them something for very little or in the case of Ottawa pay them to resolve all the cap issues at once. For example right away I'm certain we could deal Strome for Condon as is. It would cost Ottawa 200k in real dollars. It would save us 1.7M in cap space. I'd like more relief than that but that's one easy way to do it.

 

[Leetch3]

A touch over a mill.

that's only if he doesn't need to be replaced on the roster...otherwise its $300k or less

 

[Leetch3]

No one cared much about the bad contracts cause the team won’t be ready to compete for a few yrs

Now Trouba and Panarin accelerate things and the 2 yr bad contracts likey get spread into 4 this yr or 2 next

I figure Smith is the logical choice and then Names or Strome traded for peanuts

everyone cared about those bad contracts VERY much...90% of timelines were based on what year those contracts would be gone. the only thing that changed here is the desire/need to get rid of those contracts sooner than letting them just run out...

second we still won't be good for 2 years, panarin and trouba make us better over the next 2 years in the transition but we'll be good when the dead weight it gone and the kids are ready to contribute. panarin and trouba don't change that. they alone don't make us good

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

that's only if he doesn't need to be replaced on the roster...otherwise its $300k or less

He won’t need to be.

 

[Leetch3]

He won’t need to be.

that means carrying less than 23 players...its an option but likely depends on what the roster looks like

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

So no one wants Vlad, and god knows what’s happening with Kreider

Cool

 

[Avery16]

https://nypost.com/2019/07/17/the-salary-cap-hell-the-rangers-are-still-trying-to-navigate/



Who wants to inform Brooks the Rangers can't use a buyout on a player who wasn't on the Rangers reserve list last February?

The Rangers are stuck with the cap situation. They get what they deserve.

The Rangers should not have gotten involved with Shattenkirk at all. Smith too.

Someone please inform Larry that there is no cap crunch. We will have 20 million in cap space after the TV deal.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

that means carrying less than 23 players...its an option but likely depends on what the roster looks like

For sure.

That’s the one plus of keeping smith around though. Could serve as both the 7th D and 13th F.

 

[JimmyG89]

Brooks also live in a fantasy land where Kreider is still on the roster and extended. Can't see that as an option anymore. Trade Kreider for futures and you could buy out Smith.

Let's not even mention that with arb dates still to come, teams aren't going to go long term on all their players. Could open some space for other teams to make moves.

I would expect little on Namestnikov while teams are working on their own RFAs and potentially going for more than a short term deal. They can't limit themselves in talks with players that they are committed to for the long run. You can trade for that player on a 1 year deal after, especially if you have some money to spare.