Rumor: Rumors & Trade Proposals Thread | Post Mortem '23-24 Season: Who Should Stay, Who Should Go & Who Should We Bring In?

[russ99]

This is incorrect. A 50% retention trade is vastly preferable.

A buyout would gain them about a million in cap space this year, then years two and three are about the same, then you get three years of dead cap. Years two and three are where they need cap for Drai, Bouch and McDavid.

Besides, a trade at 50% with the other team doing the buyout is also better than the Oilers buying him out themselves.

The only caveat is we don't know the cost to move him at 50%.

The three years of dead cap are at $1.5M, pretty palatable in buyout terms. the problem is who takes Campbell at his track record for three years, and what sweetener do we have to waste that we could use to acquire help for the team.

Also we save more cap on a buyout than half retention except in year 3.

 

[Fishy McScales]

I will be more explicit: Trading Campbell with retention would be too expensive a proposition. This is why the buyout will be necessary and will not be the end of the world. I am personally frustrated by successive Oilers managers handing out terrible contracts that lead to buyouts and dead cap situations. Three years of 1.5M in dead cap will be unfortunate. It adds pressure to sign better value contracts.

I understood your meaning, in fact I even addressed it. The cost to move him at 50% is unknown and may be more palatable than the certainly unpalatable buyout.

 

[Canovin]

I wonder if Jackson thinks he can get a 1st if we retain Nurse. You don’t trade a 1st like this unless you got another trade to replace that 1st for a deadline move

 

[Fishy McScales]

The three years of dead cap are at $1.5M, pretty palatable in buyout terms. the problem is who takes Campbell at his track record for three years, and what sweetener do we have to waste that we could use to acquire help for the team.

Also we save more cap on a buyout than half retention except in year 3.


View attachment 889269

You know what's even more palatable than three years of 1.5M dead cap? Three years of no dead cap.

The year 2 difference is negligible and almost a wash with the added 100k in year three.

Look, my point is that 50% retention is objectively better than 66% buyout cost running longer into our McDrai years.

We do not know the cost to make the move. It is the unknown variable that may make the buyout the better option, but to say the buyout is flat-out better than retention is factually incorrect.

 

[CycloneSweep]

I wonder if Jackson thinks he can get a 1st if we retain Nurse. You don’t trade a 1st like this unless you got another trade to replace that 1st for a deadline move

we will just trade future firsts for current firsts.

 

[Paralyzer]

I will be more explicit: Trading Campbell with retention would be too expensive a proposition. This is why the buyout will be necessary and will not be the end of the world. I am personally frustrated by successive Oilers managers handing out terrible contracts that lead to buyouts and dead cap situations. Three years of 1.5M in dead cap will be unfortunate. It adds pressure to sign better value contracts.

If you think Edmonton's is bad, there is way worse teams with horrible cap management than us. Minnesota for example. $14M in dead cap. There's more too, but we are far from being 'the worse'.

 

[FlameChampion]

If you think Edmonton's is bad, there is way worse teams with horrible cap management than us. Minnesota for example. $14M in dead cap. There's more too, but we are far from being 'the worse'.

There are worse but Edmonton is pretty bad for this upcoming season.

If we buy out Campbell, it gets worse.

The good news for the Oilers is that this upcoming season is the worst but then things get better. The neal and brown overage will be over.

 

[FunkyChicken]

With Campbell, you also need to consider that roughly $1.25M is saved when you burry him in the minors. So, if you trade him at 50% retention, we're really only saving $1.25M. What kind of asset do you want to attach to save $1.25M cap over 3 years?

 

[bobbythebrain]

In regards to the Walman trade, Yzerman says it's very difficult to move money.

All those hack, nonsensical, backseat GM's take notice. Listening to your horrible takes on Holland and his trades gets even more cringy when reality kicks in

 

[FlameChampion]

In regards to the Walman trade, Yzerman says it's very difficult to move money.

All those hack, nonsensical, backseat GM's take notice. Listening to your horrible takes on Holland and his trades gets even more cringy when reality kicks in

There’s rumours that Yzerman didn’t even shop Walman.

Yzerman is going to turn around and bring in a 8m dollar Trouba.

 

[bobbythebrain]

There’s rumours that Yzerman didn’t even shop Walman.

Yzerman is going to turn around and bring in a 8m dollar Trouba.

Also rumors he did, and alot of teams were interested. So likely they wanted some retention

Also he said he tried hard to move cap

Rumors around this time are highly unreliable. Alot is made up nonsense

 

[McTonyBrar]

Wait so if we buy out Campbell we only gain 1.1 mill in cap space?

 

[StoveTopStauffer]

Wait so if we buy out Campbell we only gain 1.1 mill in cap space?

No this year he's only a 1.1m cap hit. But his hit does increase in years 2 and 3 of the buyout but then down again.

 

[Fishy McScales]

Wait so if we buy out Campbell we only gain 1.1 mill in cap space?

Overall we gain one third of the contract back, so 5 million total.

Year one he would carry a dead cap hit of 1.1. After that it gets uglier.

 

[Paralyzer]

Wait so if we buy out Campbell we only gain 1.1 mill in cap space?

No his CAP HIT would be 1.1M just this year. Next year and the year after it's higher.

 

[McDoused]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807072587819724826

 

[FlameChampion]

No this year he's only a 1.1m cap hit. Most of his money is in bonuses is why he's a low cost buyout.

The nice thing is that his cap hit is pretty low for this year which is the most important thing.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807072587819724826

Seems rich to me. Buffalo such a weird franchise.

Wish we could take advantage of these teams that have a million picks.

 

[StoveTopStauffer]

The nice thing is that his cap hit is pretty low for this year which is the most important thing.



Seems rich to me. Buffalo such a weird franchise.

Wish we could take advantage of these teams that have a million picks.

I had to edit it's not bonuses it's just a mix of his age and buyout rate. But yeah it's a fairly low cost buyout. James Neals 1.9m dead cap hit comes off after next season as well so 2.3m next year is more palatable.

 

[McTonyBrar]

No his CAP HIT would be 1.1M just this year. Next year and the year after it's higher.

View attachment 889297

Okay I kind of understand but let’s say we have 10 mill in cap space. We buy out Campbell. How much do we gain to the 10 mill we already have?

 

[StoveTopStauffer]

Okay I kind of understand but let’s say we have 10 mill in cap space. We buy out Campbell. How much do we gain to the 10 mill we already have?

13.9m this year.

 

[CycloneSweep]

Okay I kind of understand but let’s say we have 10 mill in cap space. We buy out Campbell. How much do we gain to the 10 mill we already have?

3.something

 

[Paralyzer]

Delete

 

[McTonyBrar]

13.9m this year.

Okay yeah that makes more sense. Thanks!

 

[CycloneSweep]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807075848417337781

 

[Kirby]

Okay I kind of understand but let’s say we have 10 mill in cap space. We buy out Campbell. How much do we gain to the 10 mill we already have?

3.9M would be freed up this year ,so we would have 13.9M in space.

I would prefer a trade even at 50% retention, as the buyout is only slightly better in years 2 and 3 in comparison (2.7M vs. $2.5M in year two, $2.4M vs $2.5M in year three) and it adds three additional years of wasted cap from years 4-6.