Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLVII

  • 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
  • We're expeting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
Status
Not open for further replies.
1) don't think the Rangers dodged a bullet as they were never in on him, despite what the pundits want to state.
2) San Jose is in their window and are looking to win it all over next 3 years or so. They may well pay for it later, but if they win the cup, they will deem it to be worth the price.

They may "still be in their window" but that window is rapidly closing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pld459666
I’d be shocked if Hayes signs elsewhere.

Seems pretty clear he wants to stay in the NorthEast

He’s not that far from his pals in NYC living in Philly
 
Trouba may or may not sign a long term extension this summer with the acquiring team. If a contract extension is part of the trade, Winnipeg will want more. The contract will be very lucrative. It's a very expensive deal all around. Expensive rental. Trouba signs a long term contract next summer with the Red Wings.

Trouba isn't even a great D. He is a good D. I am a little dubious of the Rangers going after Trouba after their failed Shattenkirk experiment. What are the Rangers doing with Shattenkirk if they do somehow trade for and sign Trouba? According to Brooks, there is little to no market for Shattenkirk at 50% retention. Don't tell me they will buy him out. The cap hit for 20-21 is $6,083,333. They save $566.557.

They better be careful because a new CBA will probably be signed this summer and the players main issue is escrow. Changing the cap calculation without the 5% inflator will help alleviate escrow concerns. The actual revenue is used. Nothing else. If the cap is $78M, it's $78M. There was a whole big article yesterday on the CBA negotiations. The players are also concerned about the slow growth in revenue streams. A new US TV contract isn't pumping a lot of new money into the system to make a significant contribution to the cap going up.

Just because a player is available doesn't make him a #1D. We heard it with Shattenkirk.
There will be a new US Television contract in two years, most likely a multiple network contract and it will pump a significant amount of new money into the system. The industry (which happens to be my industry) estimates the annual rights fee will double.

There's also a good chance there will be at least one compliance buyout in the next CBA. It's a tradition.
 
If we were talking about a Doughty/Karlsson contract for Trouba, I'd absolutely agree with you. But so long as we're in the ~$8MM range, we're talking 25-33% less than that. I'm more than willing to pay that for Trouba for years 26-33 in the current cap environment.

EDIT: that said, I'm intrigued by the idea of Risto... depending on the price.
You will be paying for years 25-31. He wouldn't be eligible for a seven year contract unless it was a sign and trade. He doesn't turn 26 until February 26, 2020.
 
Montreal traded Pacioretty to Vegas right before the season. He was a potential Group III this summer. Nick Suzuki who went 13th overall in 2017, Tatar and a 2nd round pick in 2019 for Pacioretty. Vegas later gave Pacioretty $28 million over 4 years. No state income tax.

Vegas gave up a ton for Tatar who never fit with them. He had a good year in Montreal. 25 goals. 58 points.

Something like that for Kreider. The Rangers get the prospect already drafted in the first round instead of a 1st rounder. Suzuki.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wafflepadsave
There will be a new US Television contract in two years, most likely a multiple network contract and it will pump a significant amount of new money into the system. The industry (which happens to be my industry) estimates the annual rights fee will double.

There's also a good chance there will be at least one compliance buyout in the next CBA. It's a tradition.

It had happened in the last 2 CBAs because in the first, the salary cap was established and teams needed a way to get compliant. In the second, the cap went down, and teams needed a way to get compliant.

I don't see the cap going down in the next CBA. They may haggle over what counts as HRR and make changes to reduce/eliminate escrow, but I don't see either resulting in a lower cap.
 
Karlsson contract is fine FOR San Jose. To not pay him after giving Kane 7/49 would be pretty dumb. Good for them. Hopefully they'll be able to survive having a defenseman who gets .9 PPG in a "down" year for multiple seasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Siddi and McCartney
Montreal traded Pacioretty to Vegas right before the season. He was a potential Group III this summer. Nick Suzuki who went 13th overall in 2017, Tatar and a 2nd round pick in 2019 for Pacioretty. Vegas later gave Pacioretty $28 million over 4 years. No state income tax.

Vegas gave up a ton for Tatar who never fit with them. He had a good year in Montreal. 25 goals. 58 points.

Something like that for Kreider. The Rangers get the prospect already drafted in the first round instead of a 1st rounder. Suzuki.
If I understand correctly, you're proposing a deal like Nick Suzuki, Montreal 2nd, and Montreal 3rd for Kreider?

I'm game for that if the Rangers can flip some of those assets to move up from 20 to take a center.

Does 20th and Sukuki get you the 8th to 11th overall?
 
It had happened in the last 2 CBAs because in the first, the salary cap was established and teams needed a way to get compliant. In the second, the cap went down, and teams needed a way to get compliant.

I don't see the cap going down in the next CBA. They may haggle over what counts as HRR and make changes to reduce/eliminate escrow, but I don't see either resulting in a lower cap.

Didn't those buyouts also count against the players share of revenue last time around? And increase escrow?

And if they do eliminate/reduce escrow by getting rid of the escalator, wouldn't that actually offset some of the cap rise?
 
Didn't those buyouts also count against the players share of revenue last time around? And increase escrow?

And if they do eliminate escrow by getting rid of the escalator, wouldn't that actually offset some of the cap rise?

It may have counted against the players' share. I don't recall.

Yes, if they get rid of the escalator, that will likely result in more of a flat cap. It will still go up as revenue goes up, but without the artificial inflation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Sides
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad