GDT: Trade and Free Agency Thread - The Madness Continues

[Sypher04]

Taxes is just an excuse...Marner is paid huge amounts of upfront money in signing bonuses, and those are taxed less...he also gets millions in endorsement money because he plays for the Leafs, which he wouldn't get in another market...the thing that people try to argue is that Tampa could sign players cheaper because of taxes, but that's bogus...greedy players will take more money regardless where they sign...Bobrovsky signed with the Florida Panthers, a place like Tampa that is supposed to have lower taxes, but he still bent over the Panthers for $10 million per year...Marner bent the Leafs over with his contract, not because of taxes, but because he was greedy...one of the reasons why he only signed for 6 years with the Leafs is because with an 8 year deal, he would have demanded McDavid money...how ludicrous is that? While Brayden Point took a 3 year at $6.75 million per for his bridged deal, Marner wanted $9 million per if Toronto wanted to bridge him.

That's not how taxes work. And endorsements do not count. They are money paid for work done outside of your NHL contract.

The tax thing, is not just an excuse.

Consider this:

Tampa's core:
Point - 9.5
Kuch - 9.5
Vasi - 9.5
Stamkos - 8.5
Hedman - 7.875
Total cap hit: 44.875
Every single one considered team friendly at the time of signing

AAV required to pay the same players the same in net for Toronto:
Point - 12.75
Kuch - 12.75
Vasi - 12.75
Stamkos - 11.5
Hedman - 10.5
Total cap hit: 60.25m

... But yeah, just an excuse

No tax state teams have a clear advantage. And it really becomes noticeable when the Team is good, or great like Tampa, and can leverage themselves as a destination

 

[Leaffan1991]

If we do end up getting Saad, I'd go with,

Bunting-Matthews-Nylander
Saad-Tavares-Marner
Mikheyev-Kampf-Kerfoot (Ideally traded for cap space)
Spezza-Brooks-Simmonds

to get Saad we would need to trade Kerfoot but I would slot in Robertson or Anderson in that slot

 

[SprDaVE]

Risk would be high. It would cost at least a 2nd rounder on the retention alone and probably more.

The reward is also high, though: Vladimir Tarasenko in pre-injury form for this year and next at $3.75M.

So, yeah, I'd be interested. Especially with his price supposedly dropping. But I'd also want to check and double-check with our medical staff before making any deal.

I think the Leafs could really make a big swing with Tarasenko. His shoulder injuries do worry me a bit long-term.

With that said, in the article, it says that New Jersey and Carolina are the 2 teams that are interested because they can acquire him without retention... which makes sense. Islanders were also interested. I don't think the Blues want to retain for 2 years for good reason.

 

[aingefan]

to get Saad we would need to trade Kerfoot but I would slot in Robertson or Anderson in that slot

I’m not sure where Anderson slots right now. Or Malgin, actually.
I hoped for one of Spezza/Simmonds then a competition between those two for a RW spot. Right now they look to be #5/6 on the depth chart, though maybe Malgin competes for the 3RW to add some offence to Mik/Kampf?

 

[Leaffan1991]

I would be fine with just trying to get Ritchie at 3 million per and then moving Engvall and trying to Grab a 5-6 RHD with the rest of the little money we have

 

[The Podium]

Sleeping on it, I wouldnt hate a bottom 6 of:

Kerfoot - Kampf - Mikheyev
- Wouldnt score much obviously, but thats one hell of a shutdown line. Can be played like the Andrew Cogliano - Jason Dickinson - Blake Comeau that Dallas used on their cup run.

Robertson/Anderson - Brooks - Spezza/Simmonds
- Play the kids. Energy, two-way play with some vet leadership. Not the ideal 4th line, but at least there is some potential here.

All it'll take is another LW:

Bunting - Matthews - Marner
LW - Tavares - Nylander
Kerfoot - Kampf - Mikheyev
Robertson/Anderson - Brooks - Spezza/Simmonds

 

[SprDaVE]

I would be fine with just trying to get Ritchie at 3 million per and then moving Engvall and trying to Grab a 5-6 RHD with the rest of the little money we have

I am not sure why anyone would want Ritchie at a 3M cap hit. What the hell am I missing? Am I going crazy? Is it really just because he's a big guy that takes a lot of penalties?

Career high 31 points. Career high 15 goals. Questionable work ethic and consistency. And we want to give him 3M per year?

 

[aingefan]

I would be fine with just trying to get Ritchie at 3 million per and then moving Engvall and trying to Grab a 5-6 RHD with the rest of the little money we have

I don’t mind the idea of Ritchie, ideally less than $3M, then mix n match the LW’s on lines 1-3 to see what fits.
There’d be some excess to move for futures. Engvall in this case, who without this move looks like the 3LW.

 

[Dreakmur]

That's not how taxes work. And endorsements do not count. They are money paid for work done outside of your NHL contract.

The tax thing, is not just an excuse.

Consider this:

Tampa's core:
Point - 9.5
Kuch - 9.5
Vasi - 9.5
Stamkos - 8.5
Hedman - 7.875
Total cap hit: 44.875
Every single one considered team friendly at the time of signing

AAV required to pay the same players the same in net for Toronto:
Point - 12.75
Kuch - 12.75
Vasi - 12.75
Stamkos - 11.5
Hedman - 10.5
Total cap hit: 60.25m

... But yeah, just an excuse

No tax state teams have a clear advantage. And it really becomes noticeable when the Team is good, or great like Tampa, and can leverage themselves as a destination

Now calculate the interest earned by paying most of the contract up front in bonus money….

 

[Sypher04]

I am not sure why anyone would want Ritchie at a 3M cap hit. What the hell am I missing? Am I going crazy? Is it really just because he's a big guy that takes a lot of penalties?

Career high 31 points. Career high 15 goals. Questionable work ethic and consistency. And we want to give him 3M per year?

I'm with you. I'd only really be interested in the cheap

 

[aingefan]

I am not sure why anyone would want Ritchie at a 3M cap hit. What the hell am I missing? Am I going crazy? Is it really just because he's a big guy that takes a lot of penalties?

Career high 31 points. Career high 15 goals. Questionable work ethic and consistency. And we want to give him 3M per year?

0.5ppg the past two years, the connections, and seeing the rehab job on Gally? I agree though, south of 3.

 

[Sypher04]

Now calculate the interest earned by paying most of the contract up front in bonus money….

We don't really have any examples of people taking less money/AAV due to bonus structure. Also what players do with their money after its paid is outside the scope of what we are discussing. And going even further, Tampa pays out like 50% of the contracts in bonuses anyway, so not exactly a small amount. I'm certainly not saying taxes are the only imbalance in the system, but they are the biggest imo, and I'd be fine with doing away with the massive signing bonuses to even out the tax issue - teams have to be careful with overloading signing bonuses anyway, in case a trade is eventually required.

 

[SprDaVE]

I'm with you. I'd only really be interested in the cheap

Like I understand the attraction. He's still relatively young and certainly is physical... but giving him 3M seems completely excessive for someone that has shown zero growth in his game since entering the league. At least players like Tatar and Saad reached much higher levels of contributions and probably can do it again under the right circumstances.

Why not just give Galchenyuk another go instead of Ritchie and save about 2M in cap space?

0.5ppg the past two years, the connections, and seeing the rehab job on Gally? I agree though, south of 3.

Why not just keep Galchenyuk for probably a ton cheaper for relatively similar production and a much cheaper cap hit?

 

[TopProspect91]

I wonder if Tarasenko could be an option? Obviously Kerfoot would have to go the other way and the Blues would have to retain a bit, but he seems like a worthy gamble.

Does anyone know if he’s played on the LW?

 

[aingefan]

Why not just give Galchenyuk another go instead of Ritchie and save about 2M in cap space?


Why not just keep Galchenyuk for probably a ton cheaper for relatively similar production and a much cheaper cap hit?

I’m not on the 3mil bandwagon, but they both seem decent options.
Both flawed, neither have had optimal upward development. Ceilings and floors are probably pretty similar.
Both have a chance to be ok 3rd wheels.
Don’t have a good read on Gally’s play of the market is all.
It’s been goofier than I thought.
I’d be fine with either, really.

 

[dubplatepressure]

I wonder if Tarasenko could be an option? Obviously Kerfoot would have to go the other way and the Blues would have to retain a bit, but he seems like a worthy gamble.

Does anyone know if he’s played on the LW?

I'm sure he could. We may have to part with Kerfoot + one of Robertson, Sandin, Amirov, and/or our 1st in 2021 to do that though.

 

[TopProspect91]

I'm sure he could. We may have to part with Kerfoot + one of Robertson, Sandin, Amirov, and/or our 1st in 2021 to do that though.

I’d be willing to part with Amirov. Still has 2 years left and relatively young. As long as his shoulder injuries aren’t an issue, he could be our new Mogilny.

 

[SprDaVE]

I'm sure he could. We may have to part with Kerfoot + one of Robertson, Sandin, Amirov, and/or our 1st in 2021 to do that though.

Amazing to me that other teams issues require similar packages to to Eichel. Retention does cost a lot though.

 

[Dreakmur]

We don't really have any examples of people taking less money/AAV due to bonus structure. Also what players do with their money after its paid is outside the scope of what we are discussing. And going even further, Tampa pays out like 50% of the contracts in bonuses anyway, so not exactly a small amount. I'm certainly not saying taxes are the only imbalance in the system, but they are the biggest imo, and I'd be fine with doing away with the massive signing bonuses to even out the tax issue - teams have to be careful with overloading signing bonuses anyway, in case a trade is eventually required.

We’re blaming leafs failures on a tax system, right?

 

[Sypher04]

We’re blaming leafs failures on a tax system, right?

Please point out where I remotely said that

 

[Dreakmur]

Where did I say that?

We overpaid because of taxes.

 

[Sypher04]

We overpaid because of taxes.

Whether you like it or not, taxes are an obvious component of why we paid what we did, but no, my bigger point was Tampa is getting their players consistently below market because of tax advantages, in conjunction with being very good. Obviously a team that isn't good, cannot leverage the lack of state tax nearly as effectively

Hell Stamkos spoke openly about it when he signed

 

[Dreakmur]

Whether you like it or not, taxes are an obvious component of why we paid what we did, but no, my bigger point was Tampa is getting their players consistently below market because of tax advantages.

Hell Stamkos spoke openly about it when he signed

Ok, I was right the first time. We’re blaming leaf failures on the taxes.

 

[Sypher04]

Ok, I was right the first time. We’re blaming leaf failures on the taxes.

Again. No, not what I said, at any point. If you don't intend to use basic reading comprehension then just ignore my posts thanks.

The Leafs can be both makers of their own problems and at a tax disadvantage at the same time. They are in no way mutually exclusive

 

[dubplatepressure]

Amazing to me that other teams issues require similar packages to acquire than Eichel. Retention does cost a lot though.

Unfortunately we have nothing to show for proof on that. Tank @ 50% is going to cost something and then something.