Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: Weekesbomb: Palat to NJ for five-year deal

devilsblood said:
Zero points in 14 playoff game this past season. 3 points in 27 career playoff games.

Yeah let's bring in a guy like that, that will turn this thing around.
Click to expand...
Its called an example - not saying I would bring him in.

I would prefer him over Palat given their contracts though.

AfroThunder396 said:
If we buy him out in 2025:

2026: 3.533M dead cap (2.466M savings)
2027: 2.533M dead cap (3.466M savings)
2028: 1.483M dead cap (1.483M penalty)
2029: 1.483M dead cap (1.483M penalty)

If we buy him out in 2026:

2027: 2.7M dead cap (3.3M savings)
2028: 1.65M dead cap (1.65M penalty)

Really not that bad at all.

For reference, Cammalleri's buyout was 1.667M in dead cap for 4 years and Schneider's buyout was 2M in dead cap for 4 years, both with a much lower cap.
Click to expand...
Why would we buy him out in 2025 only to have a 2.5M savings the next year? The only year to potentially do this is 2026 and even then its still a relatively large penalty.


If anything you may look to offload the contract in the last year in a trade.
 
tailfins said:
I’m not clear on why people are SO upset with this deal. Evolving Hockey is normally pretty good on salary projections, and they were basically dead on with Palat’s contract.

I’m not a huge fan of this deal: feels like we bought a really nice dining table when still need to do work on our kitchen and baths.

Still, this is market rate for Palat.

And, you’re nuts if you think he is untradeable. If the Devils continue to suck, Palat is pretty quickly one of our top trade chips. The guy has been to four cup finals, won twice, and was a core part of those teams. Maybe the Devils have to retain salary or take back salary, but GMs will want that guy on their team - even in 4-5 years.

I appreciate that Fitz took a swing here even if this deal feels riskier than necessary to me. I would have been happy with Nino - he’ll likely cost less in $$ and term. But maybe Palat pans out? Worst case, the deal likely won’t hurt that bad.
Click to expand...
Nobody is trading for someone in their 30s signed long-term. And we aren't trading him in the first couple of years of the deal regardless.
 
I've warmed up to this signing (I was sour about JH), I think I was underrating Palat.

He's Mr Consistent and was a huge part of the Bolts over the last several years. It's true that the Devils needed someone like this. Hopefully Bratt, Shara and Mercer can learn alot from this guy.

Even better that his contract is structured as is. I'm kind of shocked there was no NTC/NMC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Its Always Sundstrom, OlfactoryHughes, forceten and 3 others
RSeen said:
Nobody is trading for someone in their 30s signed long-term. And we aren't trading him in the first couple of years of the deal regardless.
Click to expand...
of course.

the only issues anyone could possibly have with this deal are years 4 and 5.

Would someone trade for Palat for 1 or 2 playoff runs? I think so. Esp if the Devils retain or take back salary. Palat will have value.

Unless he gets injured (which you could say of almost anyone), he should not be hard to move. And, hopefully, he's not someone we want to move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: My3Sons
britdevil said:
I've warmed up to this signing (I was sour about JH), I think I was underrating Palat.

He's Mr Consistent and was a huge part of the Bolts over the last several years. It's true that the Devils needed someone like this. Hopefully Bratt, Shara and Mercer can learn alot from this guy.

Even better that his contract is structured as is. I'm kind of shocked there was no NTC/NMC.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a part of the 'overpay' moneywise...but yes the way the contract was structured makes more sense from a team standpoint and gives me a little more confidence they aren't just gonna go full Fletcher or McPhee with the cap anytime soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Its Always Sundstrom and Blender
We absolutely paid an extra 500k for no clauses. That and the structure make the deal very movable in year 5 and probably movable in year 4, especially to a younger team looking for some vet presence while they suck.

And let's be honest, this is probably only a real issue if we end up good AND he ends up bad, and if that's the case, I'll happily send some draft capital away if necessary.

It's not perfect, but he absolutely fills a need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: devilsblood, Darkauron, My3Sons and 2 others
ZachaFlockaFlame said:
Yeah they both know that year 4-5 might be the issue, 2025 offseason will be when he gets dumped if there's a decline. Not as worried but that it does a wrench into it a little bit.
Click to expand...
Good luck dumping him... He can easily make it so we can't trade him to a bottom end team. We are stuck with this contract.
 
RSeen said:
Good luck dumping him... He can easily make it so we can't trade him to a bottom end team. We are stuck with this contract.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought it was just years 1 and 2 from quick glance. He's basically tied here for 3 years. I think capfreindly messed up the write up and meant years 1-3 NMC.

Mgd31 said:
How can it be an NMC from 1-5 and also a NTC 4-5? That can’t be right. Puck Pedia has it different
Click to expand...

Maybe they don't know the final 2 years yet? Cause that doesn't make sense to me either rn, lol.
 
Last edited:
Mgd31 said:
How can it be an NMC from 1-5 and also a NTC 4-5? That can’t be right. Puck Pedia has it different
Click to expand...
Fwiw CapFriendly has a similar structure on Hamilton’s deal…a NMC throughout with a modified NTC in the last three years. I guess the NMC is just for waivers/demotions and the NTC is specifically for trades?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Alex NJD and My3Sons
NJDevs26 said:
Fwiw CapFriendly has a similar structure on Hamilton’s deal…a NMC throughout with a modified NTC in the last three years. I guess the NMC is just for waivers/demotions and the NTC is specifically for trades?
Click to expand...
It could mean he has a full NTC until the last three years, too, at which point it becomes a "no waivers, 10 team NTC." Either interpretation seems valid without more information.
 
ZachaFlockaFlame said:
Yeah, I thought it was just years 1 and 2 from quick glance. He's basically tied here for 3 years. I think capfreindly messed up the write up and meant years 1-3 NMC.



Maybe they don't know the final 2 years yet? Cause that doesn't make sense to me either rn, lol.
Click to expand...

NJDevs26 said:
Fwiw CapFriendly has a similar structure on Hamilton’s deal…a NMC throughout with a modified NTC in the last three years. I guess the NMC is just for waivers/demotions and the NTC is specifically for trades?
Click to expand...

Classic Devil said:
It could mean he has a full NTC until the last three years, too, at which point it becomes a "no waivers, 10 team NTC." Either interpretation seems valid without more information.
Click to expand...
To clear this up:

In years 1-3 he has a full NMC, which prevents him from being placed on waivers/loaned, or traded without his consent.

In years 4-5, he has a NMC, which prevents him from being waived/loaned without his consent. The trade portion however is a modified NTC where he specifies 10 teams he can be traded to without his consent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zajacs Bowl Cut, Mgd31, hidek91 and 10 others
MadDevil said:
By the time the contract gets to where it could be a problem there is at least some ability to trade him. I'm not really worried about the full NMC years.
Click to expand...
He submits 10 team trade list in season 4 and 5 so he can just pick teams that have no cap space and then he basically can't be traded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom