Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread | With Klingberg in the Mix Who Are Our 7D After the Deadline?

[Spawn]

Not really. If the cap is 97M, we can fit both Rantanen(14) and Bouchard(10) if we move Kane and Arvid and Jeff Skinner is off the books

You could make it work, but you’d need to run the same defense we’ve run thus far this season and would need to scrape the barrel for 3 bottom 6 wingers, and would probably only be able to run a 20 player roster.

That assumes someone is taking Kane and Arvidsson at their full cap with zero money coming back.

 

[Fourier]

Just curious what's the last day until a player like Jonathan Toews can sign with a team and still play in the playoffs?

The trade deadline.

 

[K1984]

You could make it work, but you’d need to run the same defense we’ve run thus far this season and would need to scrape the barrel for 3 bottom 6 wingers, and would probably only be able to run a 20 player roster.

That assumes someone is taking Kane and Arvidsson at their full cap with zero money coming back.

You'd also have to gamble that the cap is going to continue to escalate significantly over the next 5 or so years as to not screw ourselves down the line.

At the moment that appears like a fairly safe bet, but there is quite a bit of economic uncertainty at the moment that could change that outlook fast if things went sideways.

 

[Spawn]

The trade deadline. The problem is that he would have to go through waivers. I wonder what sort of shenanigans teams (and by that I mean Vegas) would play if he signed with a team like the Oilers.

Why would he need to go through waivers? Klingberg didn’t need to. I thought that was just if he had played in another league this season?

 

[Fourier]

You'd also have to gamble that the cap is going to continue to escalate significantly over the next 5 or so years as to not screw ourselves down the line.

At the moment that appears like a fairly safe bet, but there is quite a bit of economic uncertainty at the moment that could change that outlook fast if things went sideways.

Economic problems have to be extreme to stop revenue growth. Aside from Covid revenues have always gone up. Even the financial crisis could not do the trick. Moreover, even current revenue levels probably get you at cap of $105M+ if everything was normal.

Why would he need to go through waivers? Klingberg didn’t need to. I thought that was just if he had played in another league this season?

Your are correct!! I lost my mind there for a minute. I will delete that part of my post so as to not confuse people.

 

[Canovin]

You could make it work, but you’d need to run the same defense we’ve run thus far this season and would need to scrape the barrel for 3 bottom 6 wingers, and would probably only be able to run a 20 player roster.

That assumes someone is taking Kane and Arvidsson at their full cap with zero money coming back.

Trade a late pick for his rights. Negotiate with him for the 8 years. Maybe 13M. That'll bring our roster to 21 lol

 

[K1984]

Economic problems have to be extreme to stop revenue growth. Aside from Covid revenues have always gone up. Even the financial crisis could not do the trick. Moreover, even current revenue levels probably get you at cap of $105M+ if everything was normal.


Your are correct!! I lost my mind there for a minute. I will delete my post.

I don't think there's risk of revenue growth stopping, but I think there's risk of it not clicking along at the same rate it has been resulting in lesser cap bumps than forecasted.

If we made a Rantanen bet on the assumption that the cap will continue to bump ~$5M per year, then I think we would just want to think hard about that assumption. Friedman mentioned last week that the NHL is considering setting the salary cap in advance 2 or 3 years out - I really like this and I think it would produce more movement and better teams.

 

[McTonyBrar]

he doesn’t wanna stay in friggin Carolina. Just come to Edmonton Mikko!

 

[Oilers88]

he doesn’t wanna stay in friggin Carolina. Just come to Edmonton Mikko!

He wants to be an Oiler so bad, it's obvious

 

[Mr Positive]

Even if we'd add Rantanen ( which we wouldnt), it wouldn't be until the summer

So it's just not that interesting. We are laser focused on the cup.

 

[McTonyBrar]

Yeah I wouldn’t pay him 16m either lol

Rantanen was only asking for 11.75 mill..

 

[iCanada]

Yep- just like they did back then. People on here hated Pronger too until the playoffs.

Idk about that. No one hated Pronger in the slightest until he left.

Pronger was like if you took the best of Ekholm, mixed in the best of Bouchard, mixed in the best of Nurse, and then had him play 35 minutes a night while hitting everything and never making mistakes.

Pronger was f***ing bulletproof.

 

[McTonyBrar]

Bob Stauffer - “Don’t be surprised if John Klingberg is in the lineup on Thursday”.

 

[Seachd]

Trade a late pick for his rights. Negotiate with him for the 8 years. Maybe 13M. That'll bring our roster to 21 lol

7 years max.

 

[Fourier]

I don't think there's risk of revenue growth stopping, but I think there's risk of it not clicking along at the same rate it has been resulting in lesser cap bumps than forecasted.

If we made a Rantanen bet on the assumption that the cap will continue to bump ~$5M per year, then I think we would just want to think hard about that assumption. Friedman mentioned last week that the NHL is considering setting the salary cap in advance 2 or 3 years out - I really like this and I think it would produce more movement and better teams.

As I said though there is a fair bit of cover already from the current revenue which Bettman suggested would be in the $6.7M+ level for this year. That would already be enough to support a cap of about $100M without any significant escrow from the players. Even modest growth in 3% range gets you to close to $110M by year two of the McDavid deal.

One thing that is often ignored is that many of the Leagues biggest sponsorship deals have built in escalators.

One question mark is the next Canadian TV deal. There have been claims that Rogers lost money on the last deal but that may not matter. There is speculation that the move to streaming may trigger a huge gain in the total package. CNBC has suggested that the combined package could be $10B which would be close to double the last deal.

The NHL has suggested that their revenue target for the end of the decade is $10B per year. That boggles the mind but so far they have been pretty good at hitting their targets. At that revenue level the players share might be close to $150M per year. Personally, I remain skeptical of this number but I could easily see a $120M cap by then.

Report: NHL looking for double amount in Canada media rights deal

 

[Messrules11]

Who needs defence or goaltending when you're scoring 5+ goals a game.

Gretzky did

 

[alphahelix]

As I said though there is a fair bit of cover already from the current revenue which Bettman suggested would be in the $6.7M+ level for this year. That would already be enough to support a cap of about $100M without any significant escrow from the players. Even modest growth in 3% range gets you to close to $110M by year two of the McDavid deal.

One thing that is often ignored is that many of the Leagues biggest sponsorship deals have built in escalators.

One question mark is the next Canadian TV deal. There have been claims that Rogers lost money on the last deal but that may not matter. There is speculation that the move to streaming may trigger a huge gain in the total package. CNBC has suggested that the combined package could be $10B which would be close to double the last deal.

The NHL has suggested that their revenue target for the end of the decade is $10B per year. That boggles the mind but so far they have been pretty good at hitting their targets. At that revenue level the players share might be close to $150M per year. Personally, I remain skeptical of this number but I could easily see a $120M cap by then.

Report: NHL looking for double amount in Canada media rights deal

I am seeing a lot of optimistic revenue projections being supported around the NHL, but everyone is more or less universally assuming Ceteris Paribus outside of the hockey world. Why would anyone be assuming that with a majorly depressed CAD (and dropping), substantive threats of cataclysmic trade wars and 25% universal tarrifs, international instability, market instability, even border uncertainty—- lots of extremely serious questions.

I wouldn’t be comfortable making massive growth projections like these without even a hint of a mention of major externalities that are potentially even just days away (or already underway).

 

[GreeningOil]

Honestly I would not be married to idea of having to keep Arvidsson let alone Jeff Skinner. It doesn't look like either one is working out the way it was intended, same goes for Henrique. I wouldn't be opposed to moving any of these guys out to facilitate a trade.

The July 1 spending spree has been largely a bust, I don't think we should be beholden to keep these guys just because.

Also if you're not going to use a player next time FFS maybe Knob and the front office need to have some communication on who's brought in. Amateur hour over here in that respect.

Yeah. Especially the impact Rantanan would have.

It would be completely bonkers. Not to mention adding an extreme value player for 0 assets

 

[Fourier]

I am seeing a lot of optimistic revenue projections being supported around the NHL, but everyone is more or less universally assuming Ceteris Paribus outside of the hockey world. Why would anyone be assuming that with a majorly depressed CAD (and dropping), substantive threats of cataclysmic trade wars and 25% universal tarrifs, international instability, market instability —- lots of extremely serious questions.

I wouldn’t be comfortable making massive growth projections like these without even a hint of a mention of major externalities that are potentially even just days away (or already underway).

The growth projections are not as a massive as they might seem. The cap has artificially been held back because of covid. But all of that is now behind the NHL. At $6.7M in revenue under the old rules the cap ceiling would be in $105-110M already for next year. Much of that prediction you find optimistic is already baked in. It is mostly about trying to get to normal in an orderly way.

Again, even in the global financial crisis, by far the worst financial situation in my lifetime, growth still happened. In fact it averaged close to 5% over a three year period. To get to $120M from where we are you only need to have growth average around 1.5-2% if they go back to the same rules. I suspect that they will modify them somewhat to reduce escrow but 2.5-3% growth gets you very close to that number. If the Canadian rights are anywhere close to what is being speculated that would be almost automatic.

 

[Canovin]

7 years max.

Why is it 7 years when we could trade for his rights like Hyman?

 

[The Nuge]

Why is it 7 years when we could trade for his rights like Hyman?

Hyman was going to be a sign and trade to make it 8 years

 

[North]

Hyman was going to be a sign and trade to make it 8 years

Yeah but that doofus, Dubas, didn’t want to “bend the knee”.

 

[McSuper]

The Oilers would be losing Jeff Skinner, Arvid and Kane who are hardly helping the Oilers at the moment in order to sign Rantanen. The rest of the roster remains the same.

McDavid Hyman
Rantanen Draisaitl
Podkolzin RNH
Philp Kapanen

Brown, Perry, Janmark and prospects to fill out the rest

Arvidsson, Kane and Skinner out is 12.5 million . That’s about max I would go on a winger.

 

[Ritchie Valens]

Yeah but that doofus, Dubas, didn’t want to “bend the knee”.

He’s such a putz. Good to see him floundering in Pittsburgh.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

He’s such a putz. Good to see him floundering in Pittsburgh.

Seriously. What an overrated weenie.