Proposal: Trade Proposal Thread: Part 61

[McPhees Moustache]

Not really...I just find it hilarioius that what you're essentially saying is that you want the owner to cut a cheque for a over 51M to pay half of the salaries for 3 players (Price, Petry & Gallagher) so that they can play elsewhere, in an effort to rebuild???

And you think this is at all realistic.

It's not lol but that's just me...maybe he would.

This Money was already agreed to be spent the day these contracts were signed - no one's saying we should be replacing these salaries dollar for dollar with equivalent contracts. Presumably these spots would be filled by players on entry level deals - At the end of the day the ownership group would actually be spending less than they'd agreed to when the contracts were signed - regardless op the optics of paying a portion of players salaries while they're on other teams

 

[417]

This Money was already agreed to be spent the day these contracts were signed - no one's saying we should be replacing these salaries dollar for dollar with equivalent contracts. Presumably these spots would be filled by players on entry level deals - At the end of the day the ownership group would actually be spending less tn hathey'd agreed to when the contracts were signed - regardless op the optics of paying a portion of players salaries while they're on other teams

All of this makes sense - and if Carey Price was totally washed and useless, it would make sense.

But again, you have to put yourself in the shoes of the owner and not look at it from the perspective of tank-thirsty Habs fan.

You're talking about trading and paying half of the salary of a player who a few months ago, was 3 games short of winning you a Cup and winning the Conn Smythe.

Now all of a sudden, we're so desperate to get rid of him, I've (Geoff Molson) got to pay half of his salary so he can go try to win that with another team? And not only that, but i've got to do this for Gallagher & Petry too?

I get the logic from OUR perspective...but I don't think it would play out that way with those who have to live with the consequences of these decisions.

 

[Mandalorian]

Question 1: So I gotta cut Team X a cheque for 22M for Carey Price?

I know you dismissed the Wild topic pretty quickly yesterday, but I still wonder what's a good argument for defending the fact that bill Guerin was allowed to bill over 40M$ in total contract buy out for the Wild while not gaining any assets. But it's outrageous to ask one of the most profitable NHL organization to retain 15-20M$ in order to aquire prime assets for their rebuild.

Molson is already paying for Petry, Gallagher and Price. If he retains on them and replace them with ELC contracts for the next few years, he will actually save money.

 

[sampollock]

I don't think he's getting moved, is it impossible?

Of course not.

If you require me to come on here and say I was wrong, I will...but I was under the presumption that these are all just our thoughts, not guarantees.

oh I agree it is our own thoughts,

but when someone says he will be moved, some are told there are wrong

fun times ahead , ton's of guessing for sure

 

[Habs Halifax]

Not really...I just find it hilarioius that what you're essentially saying is that you want the owner to cut a cheque for a over 51M to pay half of the salaries for 3 players (Price, Petry & Gallagher) so that they can play elsewhere, in an effort to rebuild???

And you think this is at all realistic.

It's not lol but that's just me...maybe he would.

Actually, the numbers in actual dollars are as follows (if we retain 50% on all 3). It's not one check of $51M all at once and it don't even add up to $51M. Lets "pretend" that they are moved this off season for money example purposes. You are not wrong, it is a business. But this is about if we want to rebuild and not doing a half ass job on it. If anybody can absorb retention and still make a profit yearly, it's the Habs!

What are the numbers that have to presented to Molson? I believe I got the 50% numbers accurate (Correct me if I am wrong). I think the Habs can still make profits after this but it's not something I would be afraid of asking a question to Molson

22/23:
* $4.875M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $6M prorated as the season moves along

23/24:
* $4.75M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $7.25M prorated as the season moves along

24/25:
* $3.75M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $7M prorated as the season moves along

25/26:
* $2.75M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $4.25M prorated as the season moves along

26/27:
* $0M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $2M prorated as the season moves along

 

[417]

I know you dismissed the Wild topic pretty quickly yesterday, but I still wonder what's a good argument for defending the fact that bill Guerin was allowed to bill over 40M$ in total contract buy out for the Wild while not gaining any assets. But it's outrageous to ask one of the most profitable NHL organization to retain 15-20M$ in order to aquire prime assets for their rebuild.

I didn't dismiss it... I addressed it.

You're referring to BUYOUTS...we're talking about SALARY RETENTION.

Those two things are NOT the same.

I afforded it the time required. But apples to apples.

Molson is already paying for Petry, Gallagher and Price. If he retains on them and replace them with ELC contracts for the next few years, he will actually save money.

It's a wonder why this doesn't happen way more often then.

 

[417]

Actually, the numbers in actual dollars are as follows (if we retain 50% on all 3). It's not one check of $51M all at once. Lets "pretend" that they are moved this off season for money example purposes. You are not wrong, it is a business. But this is about if we want to rebuild and not doing a half ass job on it. If anybody can absorb retention and still make a profit yearly, it's the Habs!

It's also about acting like these decisions are so easily done...if this was a simple as you've suggested it is.

You'd see teams do this way more often.

What are the numbers you have to present to Molson? I believe I got the 50% numbers accurate

22/23:
* $4.875M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $6M prorated as the season moves along

23/24:
* $4.75M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $7.25M prorated as the season moves along

24/25:
* $3.75M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $7M prorated as the season moves along

25/26:
* $2.75M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $4.25M prorated as the season moves along

26/27:
* $0M as signing bonus paid in the off season
* $2M prorated as the season moves along

I didn't get into specifics of the contracts, just looked at it from a general perspective about how much money was left for all 3 players and totaled the amount. In either case, it's going to be a lot of money.

I don't know how accurate the numbers above are...but if they are, do it for Gallagher and Petry as well...calculate the total and ask yourself if it's a realistic ask of the Owner.

Put aside the "this is the only way we can rebuild" angle...just fiscally, is this something you think is realistic.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Question 1: So I gotta cut Team X a cheque for 22M for Carey Price?

No you don't. That money is spread out over 3-5 years. See other post I replied to you on showing the yearly actual dollars

 

[Habs Halifax]

Clean up surgery doesn't take this long...he has CHRONIC knee/hip issues.

Take that to the bank

It don't add up but the LTIR reasons are in that mix as well. I think he would be playing today if we were chasing a playoff spot. My hunch says they are choosing the patience road cause we have a tank season.

 

[Mandalorian]

I didn't dismiss it... I addressed it.

You're referring to BUYOUTS...we're talking about SALARY RETENTION.

Those two things are NOT the same.

I afforded it the time required. But apples to apples.


It's a wonder why this doesn't happen way more often then.

And what is so different about the two situations? They are quite alike actually.

Your points against retaining are paying for a player who 1. doesn't play with the team 2. can help another team win.

In both case, you are playing for a player who isn't paying on your team, and who could play on another team (which is the case for Suter and Parise actually).

Doesn't matter it's a buyouts or a salary retention. It's about freeing some cap space and making room for the future.

 

[1909]

Price and Gally to Edmonton for Bourgeault or Holloway + 2022 1st round pick. IF they want habs to retain %, add young assets and picks.

 

[Habs Halifax]

It's also about acting like these decisions are so easily done...if this was a simple as you've suggested it is.

NO, I'm not acting that way. You're planting this false seed in your head that I am and it's disingenuous. What the hell do you think "Historic Move" and "Tough Decisions" type comments are. I must have said it a hundred times now.

You lost me after your first sentence so I avoided the rest. Don't spin things back at me that I am not saying. Nowhere did I say it was simple. Rethink your spin narratives please.

 

[Sterling Archer]

FYI Price's salary is heavily frontloaded.

Huh??? It’s a linear $10.5M.
Carey Price Contract, Cap Hit, Salary and Stats - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

 

[HuGort]

I don't have a list. But it could be someone in Junior or NCAA but is not far from turning pro. Or it could be someone in the AHL who is in their first or second year pro and is on the cusp of playing in the NHL.

I could go for a prospect like Suzuki when Habs acquired him in the Max trade. Suzuki was still in Junior, but we all knew he wasn't far from being NHL-ready.

If I will list an example, seeing as I brought up St. Louis, if Habs can get a Jake Neighbors in the deal, then I don't need the 1st round pick. I could go for a 2nd round pick if Habs get Neighbors.

Just looked up Neighbors numbers. If you can get him for Chiarot. Take it. He is closer to being NHL ready and likely better than anybody we draft around 20th. Adding Neighbors and having 2nd overall pick in draft is good start.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Huh??? It’s a linear $10.5M.
Carey Price Contract, Cap Hit, Salary and Stats - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

I think he was talking about Cap Hit vs Actual Salary.

Once his singing bonus is paid this summer, 70.83% of his actual salary is paid. 29.2% to be paid out over 4 years ($23.5M spread over 4 years). If you retain 50%, it's half that for each team.

The biggest negative is he still has a fair amount of singing bonus left which is one big check every summer. Some owners like to avoid those one time big check pay outs before they earn money for that season. But then they can use season ticket holder revenue to pay that? It's deep with context

 

[DAChampion]

Huh??? It’s a linear $10.5M.
Carey Price Contract, Cap Hit, Salary and Stats - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

No, it's not. Look at the "total salary" column.

 

[salbutera]

Huh??? It’s a linear $10.5M.
Carey Price Contract, Cap Hit, Salary and Stats - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

I think he’s talking actual salary vs AAV. Price by the end of this season will have made something like $55M of the $84M payout including bonuses which were heavy the first 4-years of the deal

 

[Mandalorian]

Price and Gally to Edmonton for Bourgeault or Holloway + 2022 1st round pick. IF they want habs to retain %, add young assets and picks.

For it to work, Habs would have to retain 50% on Gallagher and Price, and take back Ducan Keith and Zach Kassian.

 

[jaffy27]

Kypreos said he might be and could shut it down for the season.

Oh…..he’s been right quite a few times….we will see

 

[Mandalorian]

No, it's not. Look at the "total salary" column.

Lol .

Cap friendly to the rescue, once again.

 

[417]

No you don't. That money is spread out over 3-5 years. See other post I replied to you on showing the yearly actual dollars

Correct me if i'm wrong but the salary retention is over the remaining years of the contract and is directly tied to the cap hit.

So whatever pro rated amount left this year (assuming he's traded this year) + 4 more years at 10.5M contract.

I might have all of this wrong..

 

[Habs Halifax]

Correct me if i'm wrong but the salary retention is over the remaining years of the contract and is directly tied to the cap hit.

So whatever pro rated amount left this year (assuming he's traded this year) + 4 more years at 10.5M contract.

I might have all of this wrong..

His Actual salary and Cap Hits per year are not exactly the same. The Actual Salary is $84M and if you divide that by 8 years, you get his $10.5M AAV which is the cap hit. Cap hit remains constant but actual salary fluctuates

For example. This year he got $11M paid up front this past summer. Then $2M prorated for the season. After his bonus is paid this summer ($6.75M), he has about $24M - $25M of actual money to be paid spread over 4 years.

If we retain 50%, the cap hit is $5.25M but the actual money fluctuates year to year but it's still half of whatever the actual structure is. 50% retention applies equally to both cap hit and actual salary but the tricky part that might be to our advantage (finically) is we could try to move him after his signing bonus this summer. Of course Molson, would have to approve that

 

[417]

And what is so different about the two situations? They are quite alike actually.

Maybe on the surface...but not quite.


Your points against retaining are paying for a player who 1. doesn't play with the team 2. can help another team win.

In both case, you are playing for a player who isn't paying on your team, and who could play on another team (which is the case for Suter and Parise actually).

Doesn't matter it's a buyouts or a salary retention. It's about freeing some cap space and making room for the future.[/QUOTE]
Not quite...my main argument, i'll list it again.

1. All three 3 players are still very much capable, i'm not desperate to get rid of either of them

2. They have between 3 to 5 years left on their contracts, that's too much term left to carry IMO

The other points about helping another team win or them potentially winning a Cup elsewhere, are really just sidebars. +

And yes, again, salary retention vs buyouts, are not the same. There's no need to keep portraying it that way

 

[417]

NO, I'm not acting that way. You're planting this false seed in your head that I am and it's disingenuous. What the hell do you think "Historic Move" and "Tough Decisions" type comments are. I must have said it a hundred times now.

You lost me after your first sentence so I avoided the rest. Don't spin things back at me that I am not saying. Nowhere did I say it was simple. Rethink your spin narratives please.

lol i'm not spinning anything.

I keep repeating the idea of eating half of the salary of 3 players is a fantasy.

You keep discussing it like it's an actual possibility.

If anyone is spinning anything...it's you

 

[417]

His Actual salary and Cap Hits per year are not exactly the same. The Actual Salary is $84M and if you divide that by 8 years, you get his $10.5M AAV which is the cap hit. Cap hit remains constant but actual salary fluctuates

I'm aware of this.

For example. This year he got $11M paid up front this past summer. Then $2M prorated for the season. After his bonus is paid this summer ($6.75M), he has about $24M - $25M of actual money to be paid spread over 4 years.

If we retain 50%, the cap hit is $5.25M but the actual money fluctuates year to year but it's still half of whatever the actual structure is.

THis is the part I was fuzzy about - thanks for clearing that up.

Doesn't really change the argument but adds more context, which is appreciated.

So because in actual salary, it might not quite be 51M for all 3 players...but without calculating, it's still going to be in upwards of 30M...still a lot of money.