Speculation: Anthony Cirelli offer sheet

greasysnapper

Registered User
Apr 6, 2018
2,588
1,694
It's like you can't read the assumptions in that very tax calculator. But it's ok. Reading is hard for you.

My numbers are correct there bud assuming simplistic calculations and using a tax calculator. There are assumptions but it's a great resource for establishing a base idea. Too bad you have a stick in your butt.

Income Tax Calculator - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

I think I'm a typical HF poster, and you're a typical buzzfeed poster.

ROFL I think reading is hard for you bud. You can't even comprehend 2 sentences. It's okay, we're not all hfposters. Some of us are ornery old grumps who are mad because they can't read and take it out on other people.
 

Halla

Registered User
Jan 28, 2016
14,727
3,779
7 mil would be nutty and TB would easily take the compensation. I think they match anything up to 4.227 (only 2nd rd pick) but above that with a 1st and a 3rd they let him walk
 

Halla

Registered User
Jan 28, 2016
14,727
3,779
glenny would make any roster in nhl as a stud 4 line grinding / pking center or winger , and that 2nd is basically a late 1st and could be the first part of any trade . next is the + asset which i wasnt sure whatd itd take so left it at just + . and reason i thought trade might be feasible is because cap crunch brought up in this thread so figured maybe a good draft pick that could maybe end up replacing cirelli helps take the cap crunch off for now while glendenny helps tbay compete for cup this and next season

Glendenning +2nd is still a pretty terrible offer for a budding 20g/60pt C (pace this year)

Maybe AA retained+ that pick if they are really in a cap crunch
 

AndreRoy

Registered User
Jan 3, 2018
3,637
2,365
Glendenning +2nd is still a pretty terrible offer for a budding 20g/60pt C (pace this year)

Maybe AA retained+ that pick if they are really in a cap crunch

Still don’t see us trading Cirelli within the division for that, especially since AA will be up for a new contract at the end of this year and is (IIRC) only two years away from UFA status. If it came to where we were forced to trade Cirelli we have guys who could fill the hole at center in the short term; what we would be looking for is a prospect with 2C potential, most likely from a team ready to compete now and therefore valuing the sure and immediate benefit Cirelli offers over the cheaper but unproven prospect.
 

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
46,844
22,688
NB
7 mil would be nutty and TB would easily take the compensation. I think they match anything up to 4.227 (only 2nd rd pick) but above that with a 1st and a 3rd they let him walk
Only if we're forced to. We wouldn't trade him for that so we'd try our damnedest to match.

This kid is not quite a superstar, but he's that guy who's gonna go his whole career without people realizing how good he really is. Unless you're watching him every night. He makes a positive impact in every single game.
 

hmc1987

Registered User
Jun 2, 2019
1,378
570
The only challenge I remember being talked about for Carolina matching was the real cash paid out in bonuses. We'd actually be squeezed pretty hard if Cirelli was offered 7m AAV for 5 or less years (compensation of only 1st+2nd+3rd) depending on who made the offer sheet.

Is the main 1st in an offersheet the same 1st as the year the OS is offered in or do those picks begin for the following years? I'd assume the former.

EDIT: And for what it's worth, our only really bad contract at this point is, I think, Yanni Gourde.

Picks begin NEXT season.
 

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
46,844
22,688
NB
Check how our big players contracts are structured - up front money is not an issue.


I also don't disagree with this. The kid has brains, speed, and a motor that doesn't quit. You don't put a ceiling on players like that - you just see how far they rise on their own.

And the speed is still developing. He didn't have this kind of speed last year. To me, that shows a work ethic, because he went from an above average skater to a guy who just caught Barzal on a breakaway and stripped him of the puck. That kind of growth doesn't happen without a lot of work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthProbert

Dekes For Days

Registered User
Sep 24, 2018
20,095
15,266
Unless I'm misreading that, he has 34 ES points.
Yes, he has 34 ES points, but that's not the same as 5v5. That includes 3v3, 4v4, goalie pulled, and empty net situations. He has 26 points at 5v5, 4 empty net points, 3 points with the goalie pulled, and 1 point at 3v3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DFC

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
46,844
22,688
NB
Yes, he has 34 ES points, but that's not the same as 5v5. That includes 3v3, 4v4, goalie pulled, and empty net situations. He has 26 points at 5v5, 4 empty net points, 3 points with the goalie pulled, and 1 point at 3v3.

Ah ok.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,061
33,043
You tell him he can either accept a buyout or consider waiving for a trade. Otherwise, yes, moving him is a problem. Regarding the $6M OS, who is offering it and for how many years?
Not sure a team would want to strong arm a player with a buy out threat. Sends a really bad message.

I think the Jets would love to have Cirelli as a 2C, and might consider a 1st and 3rd in 2021 as a reasonable price. But they might want to fill their RD gap as a higher priority with their cap space.
 

2020 Cup Champions

Formerly Sila v Kucherove
Nov 26, 2013
14,774
4,404
Not sure a team would want to strong arm a player with a buy out threat. Sends a really bad message.

I think the Jets would love to have Cirelli as a 2C, and might consider a 1st and 3rd in 2021 as a reasonable price. But they might want to fill their RD gap as a higher priority with their cap space.
It's not strong arming. If you have to buy someone out, the player might prefer to keep their current contract with another team. At the end of the day, the GM has to do what's best for the team. Letting them know that they might/will be the buyout target and giving them an option beforehand is courtesy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthProbert

FanTheFlames

Registered User
Aug 20, 2017
382
189
I could see a team with later first offering him 5m or so and paying the first and 3rd rounders if Tampa didnt match but i dont see a team jumping to the next teir and giving up the 1,2,3 picks
 

2020 Cup Champions

Formerly Sila v Kucherove
Nov 26, 2013
14,774
4,404
I could see a team with later first offering him 5m or so and paying the first and 3rd rounders if Tampa didnt match but i dont see a team jumping to the next teir and giving up the 1,2,3 picks
They won't know where their first will be until the following year, if I've understood the timeline correctly. Also, balking at the inclusion of a 2nd round pick seems odd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Auston Escobar

Byrddog

Lifer
Nov 23, 2007
7,471
823
We are already paying those players you just mentioned plus the likes of Gourde, Johnson, Palat and Killorn. Vasilevskiys raise doesn't kick in till next year but we are carrying just over 3M in dead weight with the Carle buyout and Condon in the minors so it's really just adding 3M next year. In two years when all three are due, which I doubt we bridge Cernak and Cirelli two years knowing Point is up then too, we should be able to have dumped all of Gourde, Palat, Johnson and Killorn. Even if Cirelli is a 2C and Cernak a top 4 D they aren't getting 7M, especially when they are still RFA, maybe on the open market some team would pay that. The only 2C currently making 7M or more is Krejci who was more a 1b when he signed. The only defender who is similar to Cernak in a defense first style making 7+ is Vlasic who was the 1D at the time, Cernak isn't getting that kind of money.

As for replacements we have several kids in Syracuse getting close to ready. To replace Gourde and Killorn in the bottom 6 we have the likes of Joseph who's played well in the league, Volkov is still hit or miss, Katchouk and Fortier have potential. For top 6 Barre-Boulet is coming along well, Raddysh has the tools and Foote is looking strong. So in two years a few of those guys should be able to replace those four at much cheaper prices.
I am not disagreeing that what you say is true. I am not sure I want to see a Bolts team in three years with Verhaeghe, Stephens, Joseph, Volkov and the rest in the bottom 9. Of those potential guys I can see Raddysh as the only lock to make it the rest are 50/50 or less to have any impact in the league much less on a roster that is accustom to be loaded. Joseph may well have seen his last time on the big roster as well. I like Volkov but just can not see him above 3rd line. That is the whole point I was trying to make All players need to be replaced in time and it is time for Palat to go for sure but finding a home for him and the NTC that all 4 of those who people want moved is problematic. Players with no restrictions are Kuch, Point, Paquett and Maroon. No way Kuch would be moved and Paquett and Maroon Mehhh who cares and it will not make much difference Cap wise. Killorn will probably be lost in the expansion draft him or Johnny but the fact remains there is a lot of Cap tied up and to prevent what you are promoting with all the young guys on the roster one of the Big salaries is going to have to be moved. SO pick your posion gonna keep Kuch or Point? Right now at the end of 21-22 there is already 68.8 committed with Point needing a raise and raises for Cernak, Cirelli, Sergi not even penciled in. The reckoning is coming the impact of the NTC's is real and just throwing out that those guys can be discarded for cost controlled young guys is short sighted at best. It could easily result in a team more resembling the current BlackHawks roster after there run.
 

FanTheFlames

Registered User
Aug 20, 2017
382
189
They won't know where their first will be until the following year, if I've understood the timeline correctly. Also, balking at the inclusion of a 2nd round pick seems odd.

Has less to do with the 2nd round pick and more to do with the additional 2m per year to get to the tier where they pay the 2nd.
 

AndreRoy

Registered User
Jan 3, 2018
3,637
2,365
I am not disagreeing that what you say is true. I am not sure I want to see a Bolts team in three years with Verhaeghe, Stephens, Joseph, Volkov and the rest in the bottom 9. Of those potential guys I can see Raddysh as the only lock to make it the rest are 50/50 or less to have any impact in the league much less on a roster that is accustom to be loaded. Joseph may well have seen his last time on the big roster as well. I like Volkov but just can not see him above 3rd line. That is the whole point I was trying to make All players need to be replaced in time and it is time for Palat to go for sure but finding a home for him and the NTC that all 4 of those who people want moved is problematic. Players with no restrictions are Kuch, Point, Paquett and Maroon. No way Kuch would be moved and Paquett and Maroon Mehhh who cares and it will not make much difference Cap wise. Killorn will probably be lost in the expansion draft him or Johnny but the fact remains there is a lot of Cap tied up and to prevent what you are promoting with all the young guys on the roster one of the Big salaries is going to have to be moved. SO pick your posion gonna keep Kuch or Point? Right now at the end of 21-22 there is already 68.8 committed with Point needing a raise and raises for Cernak, Cirelli, Sergi not even penciled in. The reckoning is coming the impact of the NTC's is real and just throwing out that those guys can be discarded for cost controlled young guys is short sighted at best. It could easily result in a team more resembling the current BlackHawks roster after there run.

I agree that Hose is overly optimistic with regard to some of those young players/prospects, but you are way off the deep end with your analysis. The solution to our cap issues is NOT to trade our young elite 1C on a fantastic deal simply because we’re going to have to give him and a handful of good but less vital players raises in a few years. Point won’t be traded at all, but if in your mind we need to move him because he’s going to demand a roster-crippling contract when his current one ends, then why move him now and not when and if that actually happens? Cernak’s not going to command a $7M contract (unless the cap rises significantly in the next 2-3 years), but if in your mind he will then why not move him at that time?

I’m all for planning for the future (and in fact have taken a good deal of crap on this site for doing so) but you are assuming absolute worst cases for every single one of our players and prospects - that all of our good players will require massive (and in some cases grossly unrealistic) contracts and that none of our prospects will pan out - and then coming up with the worst possible solution to that highly unlikely projection by trading one of our most valuable players now, years before your imagined cap emergency even occurs. That’s not how you run a hockey team, or any organization for that matter.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->