Confirmed with Link: Walman and a 2nd Round Pick traded to SJ

[JediOrderPizza]

Still miffed we had to attach a 2nd, but I'm more worried about what we do with it than the 2nd and Walman. I don't think no Walman is that big of a deal with a full time Ed.

 

[RRhoads]

If it is an agreement of Holl on waivers there, it is a much better deal than buying out Holl, imo.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Biggest confusion to me is what was the rush to do this right now?

I get that a week from now teams have less cap space, but it seems like you could have reached an agreement with the Sharks for this deal IF NEEDED. Wings had nearly 30 mil in cap space even before this so there was no rush at all to clear anything out. Especially if we consider the possibility that maybe some teams would have been interested in Walman as a plan B or plan C if they strike out in Free agency.

So many things about this seems illogical or unnecessary. Everything points in the direction that there must be more to this than we can see right now.

 

[Carmine Cirella]

I think there are way too many conspirancy theories based on how unexpected it was - we need to accept the reality:

- Yzerman wanted to get rid of at least one maybe more defensemen, at decided on Walman, based on ??? (like his play last year or off-ice reasons for him being benched or whatever)
- Walman's value was ridiculously low
- Yzerman still decided that having Walman and his cap around is more detriment than waiting for his value to rebound and try to move somebody else
- There is no backroom agreements between Grier and Yzerman - if they wanted they could have included Holl or swap 14th and 15th picks in this trade.
- Everybody need just to take off from main board if they cannot handle stupidity of Sens' fans

Basically we can agree or disagree with Yzerman, but the market's gives him some kind of confirmation in his wish to get rid of him - Walman just does not seems like a hot commodity.

Be honest. 48 hours ago someone asks how you’d suggest clearing 3.4m in cap space and one roster spot. You can suggest, idk, a dozen options that you think are reasonable paths to getting there.

Is trading a 2nd round pick to dump Jake Walman on your list of suggestions?

I mean, even if you absolutely don't want Walman on the team anymore, why isn't your first option putting him on waivers and see if anyone claims him? Are there even any precedents of other cap dumps where the guy directly was traded with a pick attached without even trying waivers first?

 

[Frk It]

So we all think the thing that justifies this trade is the clearest circumvention of a NTC of all time? And the league and/or players association is going to do nothing about it?

Bold move, cotton.

 

[Hen Kolland]

- There is no backroom agreements between Grier and Yzerman - if they wanted they could have included Holl or swap 14th and 15th picks in this trade.

...not if Holl had San Jose on his 10 team no trade list...

As a 32 year old Minnesota native whose career is very clearly reaching its end after this contract, I would put money on him not wanting to uproot his life to move to California to be a part of the worst team in the league with zero opportunity of competing for anything other than the #1 draft slot.

If there is a legitimate loophole where the Wings can give assets with some assurances that Holl still ends up in a place that he contractually can prevent himself being traded to, without actually trading him, well that would be a marvelous use of the gray area that falls right in line with cap circumventing with LTIR like Vegas.

 

[Run the Jewels]

So we all think the thing that justifies this trade is the clearest circumvention of a NTC of all time? And the league and/or players association is going to do nothing about it?

Bold move, cotton.

Cap Friendly lists it has a modified NTC where Walman can select 10 teams where he will not accept a trade. Has there been anything to suggest this wasn't the case? I legit don't know so this is why I'm asking.

 

[norrisnick]

Cap Friendly lists it has a modified NTC where Walman can select 10 teams where he will not accept a trade. Has there been anything to suggest this wasn't the case? I legit don't know so this is why I'm asking.

I believe the NTC being referred to here is Holl's not Walman's.

Ie we give you Walman and a 2nd so you claim Holl later when we waive him.

 

[Hen Kolland]

So we all think the thing that justifies this trade is the clearest circumvention of a NTC of all time? And the league and/or players association is going to do nothing about it?

Bold move, cotton.

Can they really do anything about it postmortem? Seems like if it happens, the NHL and PA would have to develop a new rule to prevent it from happening again.

Kinda hard to say that a team can't utilize waivers as they want, and that a team can't claim a player that they "want". Also, do we have to define what "future considerations" are, or is it plausible to be assumed that it is to facilitate a cap dump.

 

[Frk It]

Cap Friendly lists it has a modified NTC where Walman can select 10 teams where he will not accept a trade. Has there been anything to suggest this wasn't the case? I legit don't know so this is why I'm asking.

The circumvention of a NTC would be Holl’s in this hypothetical.

 

[Run the Jewels]

I haven't seen this posted yet.



I agree with two general sentiments expressed here:

1. If this was done to run it back with Gost and Kane I will be disappointed
2. If you were in a hurry to move the Walman contract, there better be a big move planned

 

[Frk It]

Can they really do anything about it postmortem? Seems like if it happens, the NHL and PA would have to develop a new rule to prevent it from happening again.

Kinda hard to say that a team can't utilize waivers as they want, and that a team can't claim a player that they "want". Also, do we have to define what "future considerations" are, or is it plausible to be assumed that it is to facilitate a cap dump.

Do you want to find out over Justin Holl?

I do not get the urgency around any of this.

If you’re the league or especially the players association you have to do something about this, IMO. You can’t have teams using waivers to circumvent NTC’s. NTC’s exist for a reason and are a benefit to the players.

 

[DoMakc]

...not if Holl had San Jose on his 10 team no trade list...

As a 32 year old Minnesota native whose career is very clearly reaching its end after this contract, I would put money on him not wanting to uproot his life to move to California to be a part of the worst team in the league with zero opportunity of competing for anything other than the #1 draft slot.

If there is a legitimate loophole where the Wings can give assets with some assurances that Holl still ends up in a place that he contractually can prevent himself being traded to, without actually trading him, well that would be a marvelous use of the gray area that falls right in line with cap circumventing with LTIR like Vegas.

But then, why Holl is still not waived? It's not like you need to wait for buyout period and stuff, you can waive him yesterday.

 

[Run the Jewels]

The circumvention of a NTC would be Holl’s in this hypothetical.

Thanks. Is there anything substantial behind this sentiment? Buying him out would cost $1.133 million per year. Not great, but not much with a cap that is expected to grow in the coming years.

 

[r0bert8841]

So we all think the thing that justifies this trade is the clearest circumvention of a NTC of all time? And the league and/or players association is going to do nothing about it?

Bold move, cotton.

I agree. The only way this becomes acceptable is if SJ plans on buying out Holl after claiming him on waivers. But I am no cba expert so idk if thats an option.

 

[JediOrderPizza]

I haven't seen this posted yet.



I agree with two general sentiments expressed here:

1. If this was done to run it back with Gost and Kane I will be disappointed
2. If you were in a hurry to move the Walman contract, there better be a big move planned

Iyer is totally gonna go full Konnan mode with Walman.

Never forget!

 

[Ulysses31]

If it is an agreement of Holl on waivers there, it is a much better deal than buying out Holl, imo.

wonder about the legality of that kind of move

 

[DTR]

wonder about the legality of that kind of move

SJ just did this exact thing with Goodrow.

 

[Axel Sandy Pelikan]

Thaaaaank you, the over-contextualizing here is so out of hand. Everyone on this board thought Walman was one of our four best blue liners last year. Nobody even remotely thought his 2x3 was a cap obstacle. I don’t know how people see this and just put their hands up like “Oh well, nothing else Yzerman could’ve done to clear 3m in cap space. I’m sure future moves will justify it.” Like what on earth?

It’s weird that a seemingly okay D with a really manageable salary is sent with a payment (when we were getting a second to take the corpse of Marc Staal.

But honestly, what Stevie probably looks at this like is…

Andrew Gibson had a long road to hoe to make the Wings. Trade him for a second and Kiiskinen, you now have a freed up second and a player who profiles as someone you’d probably hope to take with a second in the next draft, so you then have an extra second to clear Walman’s salary.

I don’t understand the urgency or need to dump him…. but Yzerman probably sees it as we got a second and a prospect for a player we wouldn’t use and we used that second to deal away a player we weren’t going to use.

So it ends up being Walman and Gibson for Kiiskineb

wonder about the legality of that kind of move

It’s not legal. Or if it is… an emergency ruling will pass and it will become not legal immediately after

 

[Hen Kolland]

But then, why Holl is still not waived? It's not like you need to wait for buyout period and stuff, you can waive him yesterday.

Because we don't get to see waiver transactions in real time like the Twitter feed. I don't know what the deadline is, but it's possible that the deals were made after said deadline to place him on waivers yesterday. He could be on today.

Do you want to find out over Justin Holl?

I do not get the urgency around any of this.

Why not? I'm sure the legal team has spent a long time figuring out what they are capable of doing in the gray area. The likelihood of punishment is minimal. The league also has already authorized the trade, otherwise the team wouldn't have announced it. So, IF (and that is a massive if) this is a Holl waiver dump NTC circumvention, the league has kinda already said their piece, no?

Independent of the trade, what stops us from putting him on waivers for purpose of sending him to the AHL and the Sharks say "oh we want him because look at our defensive corps." Now you are going into a different gray area where the league/PA would be creating issues because they are trying to manipulate the waiver process. There's a lot of gray area, but you signed a contract with a no trade clause, not a no move clause. Unfortunately, I can't see how you are protected from this.

 

[Frk It]

SJ just did this exact thing with Goodrow.

I’m just reading up on this, this is pretty relevant.

Main difference here though is we made a trade with the team with the team potentially claiming off waivers the day before. The optics on that look much worse, IMO.

NY and SJ didn’t do a trade prior to that waiver claim, did they?

 

[Run the Jewels]

I still don't get the Holl rumors here. Why not just trade Walman, Holl + 2nd for "future considerations"? San Jose gets nothing by waiting to claim him off waivers. Hell, we could even eat part of the contract but buying him out results in a meager $1.133 million cap hit.

 

[Ulysses31]

I still don't get the Holl rumors here. Why not just trade Walman, Holl + 2nd for "future considerations"? San Jose gets nothing by waiting to claim him off waivers. Hell, we could even eat part of the contract but buying him out results in a meager $1.133 million cap hit.

get around holl's m-ntc

 

[Frk It]

Because we don't get to see waiver transactions in real time like the Twitter feed. I don't know what the deadline is, but it's possible that the deals were made after said deadline to place him on waivers yesterday. He could be on today.



Why not? I'm sure the legal team has spent a long time figuring out what they are capable of doing in the gray area. The likelihood of punishment is minimal. The league also has already authorized the trade, otherwise the team wouldn't have announced it. So, IF (and that is a massive if) this is a Holl waiver dump NTC circumvention, the league has kinda already said their piece, no?

Independent of the trade, what stops us from putting him on waivers for purpose of sending him to the AHL and the Sharks say "oh we want him because look at our defensive corps." Now you are going into a different gray area where the league/PA would be creating issues because they are trying to manipulate the waiver process. There's a lot of gray area, but you signed a contract with a no trade clause, not a no move clause. Unfortunately, I can't see how you are protected from this.

Because it’s (very clearly) disregarding why NTC’s exist and how waivers are supposed to be used.

I still don't get the Holl rumors here. Why not just trade Walman, Holl + 2nd for "future considerations"? San Jose gets nothing by waiting to claim him off waivers. Hell, we could even eat part of the contract but buying him out results in a meager $1.133 million cap hit.

The assumption is that San Jose isn’t in Holl’s list of teams in his no trade clause. So they would be doing this with waivers to skirt around that with a hand shake deal with San Jose.

Which for a last place team, would check out.

 

[Ricelund]

“You’re just speculating that the team had issues with Walman!”

…

“They could’ve traded him without attaching a second!”