Proposal: PIT-VGK
- Thread starter Shaffer
- Start date
Not sure how Wilson is seen as a negative asset.
So PIT gets Haula for 2.1M, that's pretty good. I would do that too if I were PIT.
If Vegas has to take cheap 1-way contracts back they will be below the floor by time. And what will Wilson do for Vegas, Nothing. And some people even don't want to pay a 1st. No thanks.
I'm happy to have Haula and will keep him.
ColePens
RIP Fugu Buffaloed & parabola
For the record... I value Haula on this team at a 1st + Wilson. I would make that trade and I actually value Wilson a lot for our bottom 6 depth. I just think Haula would fit this team perfectly. Pay to get the player you want.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
No you wouldn't. They are comfortably above the cap floor right now with Stoner and Haula healthy. With Haula and Stoner healthy, I think the Knights are at $60.23 million with 13 forwards, 11 D and 2 goalies. They obviously have to trade some of their defensemen, so that could change if they move like Garrison, but they're comfortably above the cap floor, assuming they move like Reinhart and Merrill from their defense.
It also becomes less of an issue if it happens later in the season, like in December or January, or if they take back a contract like Hagelin's.
No, not even remotely close to being true. Haula still carries a 2.75m cap hit. That doesn't magically change if Pittsburgh is sending a player the other way. Especially when Pittsburgh doesn't need to send out salary to acquire Haula.
You mean other than be a useful semi skilled depth player who's a legit NHL player who still has some upside - while costing next to nothing? I don't think for a second that Wilson has some great value trade wise around the league... but he is still a legitimate depth winger at the NHL level, who had a decent season last year and has some room for improvement.
You act like it's some hardship for LV (or whomever) to take Wilson in return - it isn't.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
If you end up trading say Merrill and Reinhart and waiving Hunt, they should have something like this:
Smith-Shipachyov-Marchessault
Perron-Eakin-Neal
Leipsic-Karlsson-Haula
Nosek-Bellemare-Lindberg
Carrier
Schmidt-Theodore
McNabb-Engelland
Garrison-Miller
Sbisa-Stoner
Fleury-Subban
I think that lineup is about $2.5 million over the cap floor. If you make that trade at the halfway mark of the season, you're only gaining half of the cap space you'd normally be gaining, since you already paid Haula for half of the year. Making the Wilson and a 1st for Haula trade after the midway point of the season would take that $2.5 million above the cap floor to about $1.5 million above the cap floor. At the deadline, I'm expecting Vegas to be taking short term cap dumps back in rental trades anyway, so that should keep them above the cap floor.
Smith-Shipachyov-Marchessault
Perron-Eakin-Neal
Leipsic-Karlsson-Haula
Nosek-Bellemare-Lindberg
Carrier
Schmidt-Theodore
McNabb-Engelland
Garrison-Miller
Sbisa-Stoner
Fleury-Subban
I think that lineup is about $2.5 million over the cap floor. If you make that trade at the halfway mark of the season, you're only gaining half of the cap space you'd normally be gaining, since you already paid Haula for half of the year. Making the Wilson and a 1st for Haula trade after the midway point of the season would take that $2.5 million above the cap floor to about $1.5 million above the cap floor. At the deadline, I'm expecting Vegas to be taking short term cap dumps back in rental trades anyway, so that should keep them above the cap floor.
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,587
- 21,126
We'd be more than happy to keep Wilson and just give up the 1st if for some crackpot reason you wouldn't want him included. He wasn't included so we could get rid of him.
I wrote "CONTRACTS".
Vegas might want to trade many guys, especially their UFA. If they take a cheap 1-way contract back in every trade they will be below the floor.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
Why are they going to be taking back cheap 1 way contracts in every trade? Why are you making that a scenario? This is just this single trade. If you're going to keep doing those kind of trades, yeah, you'll run into some cap issues, but I don't know why that's relevant here.
Last edited:
Blue Goose
Registered User
Not sure how Wilson is seen as a negative asset.
Because we have too many waiver-eligible players on our roster as it is, and the whole idea of us trading any of them out is specifically to not bring any back in?
Empoleon8771
Registered User
How are you planning on staying above the salary floor without bringing in anyone?
At least speaking logically, they'll likely trade a defenseman or two for purely picks and waive another one. At that point, they'll have to start bringing in NHL bodies (some of which will be cap dumps) in any trade, because they'll fall below the floor if they only ship out guys.
Blue Goose
Registered User
You do realize that we still have the dead cap hits from Clarkson and Grabovski?
Empoleon8771
Registered User
Then why was Vegas Lies making such an issue about falling below the cap floor by taking back guys like Wilson then
I don't think folks realize the benefits of having LTIR when you are low cap team. And why shouldn't Vegas be low cap team, they have a lot of fringe NHLers on the team. Too many folks think they can take some of the better Vegas for scraps. Vegas is trying to build a fan base and just scraps or possible futures really doesn't cut in trades.
I wasn't aware offering up a 1st and a good young roster player was "scraps".
Empoleon8771
Registered User
A 1st in a deep draft are scraps now? What?
People aren't realizing that this isn't a deal that would go down now, this would probably be a December or January deal to happen. It works better with the cap for the Penguins that way and Vegas has more of a chance to evaluate their players over a larger sample size (plus they'll likely be near the bottom of the league by then, easier to justify selling off players at that point).
stepdad gaary
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2011
- 7,249
- 814
Jared Dunn
Registered User
Is that why Hanzal was moved for a 1st+?
Anyways, even if his value is closer to Wilson+2nd, Vegas needs extra incentive to move one of their better players
Especially if it's well before the TD or whenever LV feels like moving some of these guys.
BleedBlue14
UrGeNcY
That too. Just as an example, last year, Washington's pick was #27th - and they went out in the 2nd round. Odds are Pittsburgh will probably make the 2nd round... Which means we're talking about at least a pick that's 25+.
phlocky
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2007
- 7,566
- 389
Most Pens fans in this thread seem fine with giving up a 1st in this trade and I too feel it's probably pretty fair. I can see why VGK fans wouldn't want to do it (they are playing well right now and they do need to give they fans base they are trying to build something to look forward to) but I think this is a trade that they SHOULD do. Haula is a fine 3rd line center but with as deep as this coming draft is even a player taken 31st SHOULD turn out to be a top 6/top 4 player. I think that it's a deal that makes Vegas better in the long run. Pens are trying to win now so they don't mind giving up the better future player to make their team better today. Vegas isn't in a win now mode so although it is important to try and win some games now, if they have a chance to build an even stronger team for the long term future then they should be open to the idea
GoldenSeal
Believe In The Note
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Fort Marcy Stakes (Gr. 2) - BELMONT AT THE BIG A - RACE 8Wagers: 2Staked: $5,500.00Event closes- Updated: