Speculation: Sorry to be the one to ask, but what do the Blue Jackets do?

TotalHomer

Registered User
Jan 3, 2022
3,181
4,050
We can get over the cap floor without crippling ourselves with a massive cap hit as our young team all needs new contracts over the next 6 years. I'm good on Huberdeau.

Plus Huberdeau's contract has still seven years left on it. It's an eternity.
 

CBJx614

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 25, 2012
16,331
8,350
C-137
Plus Huberdeau's contract has still seven years left on it. It's an eternity.
Exactly why I said 6 years. We have a ton of young kids on or about to be on bridges, someone like Fantilli will have to go through a bridge and a long term deal, we have a lot of kids on ELCs or bridges that all need new deals over the next few years.
 

Fro

Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
Mar 11, 2009
25,316
4,994
The Beach, FL
I could be ok with Marner...but no to Huberdeau...if a deal comes along, great, if not I am seeing a lot of Cleveland kids playing the right way during preseason
 
  • Like
Reactions: squashmaple

frightenedinmatenum2

Registered User
Sep 30, 2023
2,939
3,307
Orange County Prison
We can get over the cap floor without crippling ourselves with a massive cap hit as our young team all needs new contracts over the next 6 years. I'm good on Huberdeau.

I agree completely.

The premise was not that they should take Huberdeau to get over the cap floor. You are right, that would be ridiculous. Teams don't operate that way. They would take a contract like Backstrom (if he is insured) that has almost no real money owed.

It was a suggestion that they would acquire him because they want him (in the context of the scenario, getting him for free and CGY taking back money).
 

Bottomshelf

Registered User
Sep 16, 2019
110
121
They might as well go for a mid term vet to play in multiple roles, I’d say anything 3 years and less would be fine they are Loaded with young talent but likely want some buffers to help the young guys adjust to the pro game. The question is do they get good players and pay assets or weaponize the cap space and take players that will make the roster but are blatantly overpaid.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
55,837
35,500
40N 83W (approx)
I agree completely.

The premise was not that they should take Huberdeau to get over the cap floor. You are right, that would be ridiculous. Teams don't operate that way. They would take a contract like Backstrom (if he is insured) that has almost no real money owed.

It was a suggestion that they would acquire him because they want him (in the context of the scenario, getting him for free and CGY taking back money).
He's not wanted here. He was a complete non-starter in discussions when it was about moving Laine's contract. And we don't have any "money" to send back to Calgary that makes even the remotest amount of sense (most particularly because of the term on his deal). But some folks just can't or won't take a damn hint even when people are in mourning.
 

stevo61

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
11,826
13,402
Canada
I could see Waddell swinging for the fences next year looking for a high end forward but this year has been relegated back to a focus on internal growth more than points in the standings. At most I'd expect a middle 6 veteran who is considered a good locker room guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fro and Aaaarrgghh

Figgy44

A toast of purple gato for the memories
Dec 15, 2014
13,947
9,280
I agree completely.

The premise was not that they should take Huberdeau to get over the cap floor. You are right, that would be ridiculous. Teams don't operate that way. They would take a contract like Backstrom (if he is insured) that has almost no real money owed.

It was a suggestion that they would acquire him because they want him (in the context of the scenario, getting him for free and CGY taking back money).

Huberdeau's name is too close to Gaudreau. The trade doesn't work at all at the optics level as it'd be like salt into the wounds of both fanbases. Huberdeau does very well in a rush styled system, sure. But due to the current circumstances, that option no longer exists and it should be sealed off and never be revisited.

As a low effort option to reach the floor, CBJ is better off signing some vet or bringing some legacy CBJ player and signing him at a 1.5 AAV contract to sit in the press box and be a pseudo skills coach to meet the floor if they want someone semi useful. Non-useful, take a LTIR contract or appeal to the league to let them amend the Laine trade to retain 1.5 AAV.
 

stevo61

Registered User
Jul 5, 2011
11,826
13,402
Canada
Huberdeau's name is too close to Gaudreau. The trade doesn't work at all at the optics level as it'd be like salt into the wounds of both fanbases. Huberdeau does very well in a rush styled system, sure. But due to the current circumstances, that option no longer exists and it should be sealed off and never be revisited.

As a low effort option to reach the floor, CBJ is better off signing some vet or bringing some legacy CBJ player and signing him at a 1.5 AAV contract to sit in the press box and be a pseudo skills coach (or a 2 way 2.5 AAV if he needs to be in the AHL) to meet the floor if they want someone semi useful. Non-useful, take a LTIR contract or appeal to the league to let them amend the Laine trade to retain 1.5 AAV.
It's hockey, they won't overlook someone because of their name. The issue here is his contract sucks and just because Columbus has room it doesn't mean they need to start spending that money in poorly thought out ways
 

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
56,994
45,413
It's nice the league is giving them an "extension" but honestly they should be exempt from meeting the cap floor for the whole season IMO.
I don't see why. They have plenty of money to spend.

A team like Seattle may well give them a pick to take Tanev's contract. He's already got a $1m bonus, so CBJ would get a $3.5m cap hit for the cost of only $2.5m.
 

Figgy44

A toast of purple gato for the memories
Dec 15, 2014
13,947
9,280
It's hockey, they won't overlook someone because of their name. The issue here is his contract sucks and just because Columbus has room it doesn't mean they need to start spending that money in poorly thought out ways

Agreed. I'm just saying that even if the idea had a semblance of logic, there's reasons from both teams to say no to investigating it further.
 

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,844
4,566
The reasons why Calgary would be looking to move Huberdeau are the same reasons that Columbus would be looking to move him in 6 months.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
29,190
11,313
Pageau, or someone similar is who I would look at
Pageau has a MNTC. I would imagine most vets with some form of trade protection would not wish to go to CBJ for this season. Going to be a tough one for them as a team emotionally and in the standings. Now, he could get placed on waivers and claimed. But, then no additional assets would be received for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bottomshelf

Bottomshelf

Registered User
Sep 16, 2019
110
121
Pageau has a MNTC. I would imagine most vets with some form of trade protection would not wish to go to CBJ for this season. Going to be a tough one for them as a team emotionally and in the standings. Now, he could get placed on waivers and claimed. But, then no additional assets would be received for him.
Good call didn’t realize he had that (should have know with Lou)
 

Boss Man Hughes

Registered User
Mar 15, 2022
17,684
12,028
Because $MY_TEAM is in cap trouble and deserves to be able to foist guys off somewhere else without consequences. Duh.
What the hell are you talking about? My team is not in cap trouble. I am saying there should be no open ended exceptions. There needs to be a deadline even if it is the end of the year or the end of the season. So that if there is a similar situation in the future a precedent has been set.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
55,837
35,500
40N 83W (approx)
What the hell are you talking about? My team is not in cap trouble. I am saying there should be no open ended exceptions. There needs to be a deadline even if it is the end of the year or the end of the season. So that if there is a similar situation in the future a precedent has been set.
Given the way the cap works, the end of the season is a de-facto deadline if nothing else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Figgzfood

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,935
3,489
Columbus, Ohio
The last time I checked teams can carry up to 23 players on a roster. The CBJ currently has a projection of $64.4MM for their CAP in 2024/25 and that's with 21 players. They can carry of roster with 22 players and add a league minimum guy to hit the floor. This has been, and remains, a non-issue. I don't see any world they only keep 21 players. They'll carry at least one extra F and D to get to 22 on the roster. They'll have a move made before Monday as other teams try to become CAP compliant. Someone is going to need to move an asset they don't want - either by waivers or trading a player to get compliant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBJx614

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad