Why is Nick Shore for Nate Thompson being overlooked?

[Xspyrit]

Phaneuf isn't overpaid at the rate LAK got him for. They got him for 5.25M minus not having to incur a Gaborik buyout, it comes out to about only having to add 3M long term to their cap to add Phaneuf.

Nothing you've said has really changed my mind. I don't think Shore is a big enough consideration that he really matters when assessing the trade. If we got a 4th round pick instead of Shore, I wouldn't be sitting here running down the numbers of the trade, trying to figure out the potential pluses and minuses of the deal for Ottawa, and then go "oh yeah but we got a 4th". It wouldn't even matter.

Yes but Phaneuf has 3 years left on his deal and could end up being overpaid, even at 5.25

Even with Phaneuf at that price, Gaborik salary is cheaper and decreasing with more possibilities to eventually get out of the contract (LTIR, buyout, retirement). Phaneuf is younger and a fitness freak, pretty sure he'll play until the end of his contract

The problem is most people always assess trades and other moves only looking at the cap hit. Personally, I look at dollars because "cap hit" isn't a currency in real life. It's just a sports ceiling established to give a chance to all the teams, and not just the rich ones.

So it was a financial move for Ottawa, save a bit of money and get a younger, cheaper cost controlled 4th liner to replace Thompson. Shore also fits the new NHL more than Nate.

Phaneuf and Gaborik used to be really big names in hockey but time passes and now they are at the end of their careers, enough to consider Nick Shore as a significant asset in this trade, even if he is just a 4th liner with possible 3rd line potential.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Yes but Phaneuf has 3 years left on his deal and could end up being overpaid, even at 5.25

Even with Phaneuf at that price, Gaborik salary is cheaper and decreasing with more possibilities to eventually get out of the contract (LTIR, buyout, retirement). Phaneuf is younger and a fitness freak, pretty sure he'll play until the end of this contract

Financial move for Ottawa, save a bit of money and get a younger, cheaper cost controlled 4th liner to replace Thompson. Shore also fits the new NHL more than Nate.

But ok, you can have your own assessment of the trade. Phaneuf and Gaborik used to be really big names in hockey but time passes and now they are at the end of their careers, enough to consider Nick Shore as a significant asset in this trade, even if he is just a 4th liner with possible 3rd line potential.

When I say Phaneuf @ under 3M, I am viewing it from the Kings side of things.

Yes, I have my own assessment. My assessment is that this trade for the Senators is 100 percent a financially motivated transaction, and that's where the value for Ottawa is. My initial point was that getting Shore does very little to move the needle value wise in this trade, that it's not unfair to completely ignore it in terms of evaluating whether this trade was good or bad for Ottawa.

 

[Xspyrit]

When I say Phaneuf @ under 3M, I am viewing it from the Kings side of things.

Yes, I have my own assessment. My assessment is that this trade for the Senators is 100 percent a financially motivated transaction, and that's where the value for Ottawa is. My initial point was that getting Shore does very little to move the needle value wise in this trade, that it's not unfair to completely ignore it in terms of evaluating whether this trade was good or bad for Ottawa.

Well, first I don't really see trades as wins or losses. I think teams target a certain goal with each trade they make. The most usual is dealing from a position to fill a position of need. They also need to fix their cap situations or in some cases do financial moves

Personally, I am not ignoring Nick Shore as an asset in this trade, even though he's not a very valuable asset. If you don't put too much importane in Phaneuf and Gaborik's names, then he is undoubtedly an asset.