Confirmed with Link: Bernier traded to Ducks for a conditional 2017 draft pick

[Ari91]

how hard is this.

the leafs moved from a expansion friendly contract worth 4.15M to a expansion protected 5M AAV.

so how the blazes is that saving them cap space?

not to mention they still don't have a backup signed.

This really isn't that hard. if you are going to include andersen AND bernier as the one trade, then the leafs did NOT gain cap space in the deal. The Ducks did.

Do the Leafs have a concern with having too many players to protect and not enough selections to protect them with? If so, explain because it sounds like you're concerned with something that isn't really an issue for the Leafs at the moment seeing as how the majority of their players that they would want to keep are protected due to their limited NHL experience.

Garrett Sparks is signed to a two-way contract. This team isn't looking to compete. He could very well be the fall back plan.

 

[Gary Nylund]

not really.

for starters, they get to see Elliot on their team. this coming season with the new equipment, and get to pass the eye test for 2.5M AAV before deciding on what to do.

secondly, Elliot doesn't have to be protected in the draft and he's still virtually protect by nature of the expiring UFA contract.

In other words, they get a heck of alot of potential options, a better trade, a lower AAV if you believe in advanced goaltending stats, a better goaltender and a far more experienced goaltender to backstop a growing team.

OK so according to you, the Leafs goaltending moves were huge blunders. Can you think of any reason they did what they did or do you just think they're brain-dead?

 

[Ari91]

agreed.

however the point was if you are making the trade out like this and I quote:

"Anderson + cap space in exchange for 30th draft pick, Bernier (+pay out of bonuses owed to him)"

how can it possibly be that when the leafs are paying andersen MORE than bernier this coming season.

in essense what the ducks got was Bernier (for 2.15M cash this season) + 1st round pick + 2nd round pick + cap space for Andersen.

and if bernier does well for the ducks, they can do a handshake deal, expose him on the expansion draft and still sign him as the LV team will not take him because he's UFA eligible.

Oh my goodness, I didn't think I would have to break it down so literal for you and I will since you quoted a line from my post.

The comment was that by trading Bernier, the Leafs freed up cap space. It seems like you're talking about cap space based on Andersen OR Bernier. Stop that. That isn't the basis of the reality that was being dealt with. The reality was Andersen AND Bernier. The organization didn't just pluck Andersen's name out of a hat and then trade and sign for him. Obviously they see potential in him. He was there guy and Bernier's contract made him collateral damage.

Andersen + Bernier = 9.15M cap hit
Andersen = 5M cap hit
Back-up goalie <4.15M
Andersen+Back-up = <9.15M

Now simple math, 9.15M is greater than anything lesser than 9.15M. It's about as straight forward as you can get.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Not sure why cap space is such a large issue. Andersen's AAV is basically on par for the average starting goalie in the NHL - that will last for the duration of his contract. Presumably any other goaltending option the Leafs would pursue in the future would have similar cost/cap implications.

Andersen's contract could actually be a steal for us.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Typically Teams offer a pick to the expansion Team to leave their Player. I don't see why this would be any different but as you say this "could" be the situation.

IF the Goalie is so highly thought of that he will lead the new Team as their #1, why wouldn't the Leafs want this guy?

that's something that confused me. At first i thought it meant that teams can also pick players that were exposed. but someone told me that was wrong.

and that teams would be forced to make a move so they wouldn't 'lose" someone.
Okay. and those goalies June Whenever Andersen was traded were

Bishop. (who would have been a UFA and commanded more than 6-7m, and has a glass groin, and other injury issues).
Fleury (who is developing a glass head) and is older than Bishop.
and Andersen.

(oh. and Elliott who is over 30).

Calgary wanted Andersen. (Lou flat out said that a main reason why this deal got done was that our 2nd 1st was 30th. they weren't going to move it if it was higher). Cgy couldn't offer a "first" because they didn't have a second one, and they weren't going to trade their own.

so. that's who was exposed. if other players manage to wiggle free - we could get one and groom them in the backup role and move forward.

for the life of me, I don't understand why people go we aren't expected to do anything so why improve the goaltending. that's so backward. you improve the goaltending to SEE what you HAVE. intending to do anything or not. if you have crap goaltending or sporadic goaltending how on earth is the organization truly supposed to evaluate our defense corps or our forward corps without shooting in the dark because the goaltender can't be trusted? If the goalie is good, the defense can do its thing and the forwards can do their thing, and they win a little bit so yay for the confidence, but we're still not good to like seriously do anything damaging to any rebuilding angle we want to deploy.

we got a relatively decent goalie who could pan out for us, (I think he will) he's the youngest of most of the available goalies, that wouldn't have cost us more assets or picks.

 

[Mad Brills*]

Andersen's contract could actually be a steal for us.

Only if has a vezina season.

If not, it's market value.

 

[rrc1967]

Oh my goodness, I didn't think I would have to break it down so literal for you and I will since you quoted a line from my post.

The comment was that by trading Bernier, the Leafs freed up cap space. It seems like you're talking about cap space based on Andersen OR Bernier. Stop that. That isn't the basis of the reality that was being dealt with. The reality was Andersen AND Bernier. The organization didn't just pluck Andersen's name out of a hat and then trade and sign for him. Obviously they see potential in him. He was there guy and Bernier's contract made him collateral damage.

Andersen + Bernier = 9.15M cap hit
Andersen = 5M cap hit
Back-up goalie <4.15M
Andersen+Back-up = <9.15M

Now simple math, 9.15M is greater than anything lesser than 9.15M. It's about as straight forward as you can get.

oh good lord.

you're serious.

ohh okay then.. carry on in whatever realm you live in.

so basically now you're saying that "Anderson + cap space in exchange for 30th draft pick, Bernier (+pay out of bonuses owed to him)"

isn't what you meant.. but now you mean some new "trade math".

got it.

 

[egd27]

Can't be critical about buying high and selling low.

Come on.

Shouldn't be if the buyer and seller are different people.

so it was really Andersen for 1st round pick , 2nd round pick and Bernier.

Or you could look at like Andersen for the 30th overall, and the Leafs gave up a second to get rid of Bernier and his cap hit.

A few ways of looking at if you consider the 30th was part of the Kessel deal as well.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Only if has a vezina season.

If not, it's market value.

The 18th highest paid goalie has to have a Vezina winning season to be a steal of a contract for the next five years?

He's already paid below market value as a #1. If he even has average numbers overall he's a steal based on what he's getting paid because more then half of the league is paying someone more to do the same job.

 

[Ari91]

oh good lord.

you're serious.

Yeah I am because I was talking about the basic math as the situation stands now and why I made my comment .I wasn't talking about planned future signings, failings, etc. I'm no cap guru so if I'm overlooking the math here then feel free to point out rather than snark. If not, good talk bud.

And to comment on your edited post - I didn't invest some new trade math, you just chose to interpret my comments one way and now that I'm being as literal as possible, you want to accuse me of shifting the goal posts. You're saying the Leafs didn't gain cap space because they're paying Andersen more than they're paying Bernier. It's not like you put in a reservation and say to any team 'I want to trade for x player in year XXXX'. The player was available and they felt they had to make their move now. That left them in the position of having a very expensive goaltending duo. It's seems pretty obvious that the Leafs don't have an issue with having a goalie with a cap hit of 4-5M, they just preferred not to have that being the case for their defaulted back-up. They freed up cap space by getting rid of an unwanted contract and possibly investing that money elsewhere.

 

[Mad Brills*]

Bernier is better than people think.

Andersen has let in a quite a few softies recently.

 

[rrc1967]

OK so according to you, the Leafs goaltending moves were huge blunders. Can you think of any reason they did what they did or do you just think they're brain-dead?

They obviously felt they needed to make a change, and obviously felt that Andersen was better for the long term future of the organization.

Only time will tell .. right?

Either way is not without it's associated risks.. however ignoring them and assuming that everything is perfect in candyland .. or coming up with weird math on how the leafs saved on cap space by exchanging two #1 goaltenders is also a bit odd.

I have never been a fan of trading for a goaltender especially from west to east and immediately signing them to a long term contract without passing an eye test.

even with HD save % reducing the potential for error, we are also tossing in goaltender equipment changes into the mix.

however as with most things.. time will tell - we'll see in around 2 years time just how Andersen is fairing for the leafs.

 

[rrc1967]

Yeah I am because I was talking about the basic math as the situation stands now and why I made my comment .I wasn't talking about planned future signings, failings, etc. I'm no cap guru so if I'm overlooking the math here then feel free to point out rather than snark. If not, good talk bud.

"Anderson + cap space in exchange for 30th draft pick, Bernier (+pay out of bonuses owed to him)"

so now you are saying .. you were totally making that up .. right?

or do you realize that this statement of yours in quotes, and against what you are NOW claiming has zero consistency?

 

[Jack Bauer]

oh good lord.

you're serious.

ohh okay then.. carry on in whatever realm you live in.

so basically now you're saying that "Anderson + cap space in exchange for 30th draft pick, Bernier (+pay out of bonuses owed to him)"

isn't what you meant.. but now you mean some new "trade math".

got it.

Andersen cost Anaheim $1.15 mil last season against the cap.

Bernier will cost them $4.15mil this season against the cap.

So it's really Andersen + (-3mil cap space) for Bernier, 30th, 2nd rounder.

 

[rrc1967]

Andersen cost Anaheim $1.15 mil last season against the cap.

Bernier will cost them $4.15mil this season against the cap.

So it's really Andersen + (-3mil cap space) for Bernier, 30th, 2nd rounder.

that's okay only if you assume that andersen was going to sign for 1.15m in the subsequent season and wasn't part of the reason why the ducks were looking to trade him this season.

however again, I have yet to see anyone use prior year cap savings as an argument.

what's wrong with just looking at it as a .85M cap increase like it really is? is it that hard to admit that in reality the leafs increased their cap hit for the upcoming season for their #1 goaltender, but also have cost certainty for the next 4 seasons after that .. IF he actually works out? If it doesn't then the leafs have a problem on thier hands. we of course all hope it works out. there's risks. either way.

it's a little odd that people have to make up things to make trades look better .. if you have to do that .. then was the trade that good to start off with?

 

[Jack Bauer]

They obviously felt they needed to make a change, and obviously felt that Andersen was better for the long term future of the organization.

Only time will tell .. right?

Either way is not without it's associated risks.. however ignoring them and assuming that everything is perfect in candyland .. or coming up with weird math on how the leafs saved on cap space by exchanging two #1 goaltenders is also a bit odd.

This is where you lose any respect.

Nobody is ignoring the "sky is falling" negativity that you keep bringing up.

People are choosing to wait and see how this particular player does before worrying about past history, random graphs, and other factors that will have absolutely no bearing on how said player will perform here.

If Andersen plays even at the level of an average goaltender then will people like you continue to pollute every Andersen thread with the same tired points that you continue to bring up here no matter how false or out of context they are?

And on the flip side nobody has said he is the perfect answer. But many are choosing to settle that he COULD be a POTENTIAL answer. Notice the really big key words? Could and potential...2 things that indicate that nobody, whether how smart or dumb, know for sure how things will play out.

But fans tend to be willing to slant to the wait and see as opposed to being chicken little. There's an entire season ahead to comment on how the goalie plays after every game.

There's no need to spend all summer talking about how he can't be an answer and come up with insane and silly expectations that he has to hit to somehow be worth the price.

But please, continue being pretentious while adding nothing new that you haven't said and or been wrong on already. You're adding so much here....

 

[I Believe]

Meh, it's tough with goalies. You win some you lose some.

Tampa traded 2 2nds and a 3rd for Lindback. Barely 10 months later they traded for Bishop and it worked out.

I think Andersen can be the guy for us.

 

[Gallagbi]

Bernier is better than people think.

Andersen has let in a quite a few softies recently.

Almost 3 months since he last allowed a goal.

 

[Jack Bauer]

that's okay only if you assume that andersen was going to sign for 1.15m in the subsequent season and wasn't part of the reason why the ducks were looking to trade him this season.

however again, I have yet to see anyone use prior year cap savings as an argument.

There's no argument.

You brought up Anaheim somehow getting cap savings even though they never signed him. How do they get cap savings from a contract they never signed?

I responded to your post with the trade indicating that if you can assume there's cap savings then we can use their actual cap hits going/coming from Anaheim as a better representative of the trade from Anaheim's point of view.

If you want to have an argument get off the internet and go find yourself a girlfriend.

 

[CanadasTeam]

Bernier is better than people think.

Andersen has let in a quite a few softies recently.

Jan 2016: Bernier vs. Andersen

 

[Mad Brills*]

Jan 2016: Bernier vs. Andersen

Exactly.

Andersen isn't going to be anything more than an average goalie here.

 

[Gallagbi]

agreed.

however the point was if you are making the trade out like this and I quote:

"Anderson + cap space in exchange for 30th draft pick, Bernier (+pay out of bonuses owed to him)"

how can it possibly be that when the leafs are paying andersen MORE than bernier this coming season.

in essense what the ducks got was Bernier (for 2.15M cash this season) + 1st round pick + 2nd round pick + cap space for Andersen.

and if bernier does well for the ducks, they can do a handshake deal, expose him on the expansion draft and still sign him as the LV team will not take him because he's UFA eligible.

Looks like Bernier is traded for nothing in that situation, which is where the cap space comes in.

The other option would be keeping him on the roster since he had no value and that obviously eats up more space.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Jan 2016: Bernier vs. Andersen

Exactly.

Andersen isn't going to be anything more than an average goalie here.

And if he is you will cheer for a different team, right?

Not sure how you can claim to cheer for a team if you'll be openly rooting against their #1 goaltender.

The fact the negative ones here are claiming to be Leafs fans shows how sad and pathetic the internet makes pro sports. People cheering against their own team to make sure they're right on an internet message board post about a trade is a special kind of stupid.

 

[rrc1967]

Jan 2016: Bernier vs. Andersen

Exactly.

Andersen isn't going to be anything more than an average goalie here.

I'm not so sure - I think it could go either way.

however.

1) west to east goaltender trades always make me nervous .. especially from defensively sound teams
2) equipment changes, and we don't know if they are the last ones .. considering that it's some of the goaltenders asking for equipment changes this may not be the last changes we have.

Andersen in a big guy for sure, 6'4" 220lbs - however his equipment is going to get smaller, his penchant for dropping to the butterfly may also have to change with a the more offensive eastern teams versus the west. it's interesting to note that he was specifically mentioned in at least one article as being a goaltender who may be impacted by the changes.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl-aims-to-reduce-goaltender-equipment-for-next-season-1.453941

It will be interesting to see the impact the proposed changes will have on specific goaltenders. Suddenly, Vancouver’s Ryan Miller, Anaheim’s Frederik Andersen and both New York goaltenders Henrik Lundqvist and Jaroslav Halak may be taking up much less space in goal. Will they be forced to compensate?
Conversely, change could also highlight the athleticism and agility of goaltenders like Los Angeles’ Jonathan Quick, Nashville’s Pekka Rinne and Pittsburgh’s Marc-Andre Fleury.
“We probably have some of the best goalies we’ve ever had in the league, but we don’t need the blocking and the coverage of the net that isn’t part of the body,” Whitmore said. “I think we are onto something.”


Also then we have the impact of Andersen getting his .. "first big contract" in the NHL. how will that impact his game, and also under the far more heavy microscope of Toronto.

Shrugs.. it will be interesting to see how it all pans out. I am wondering if he'll end up being another Riemer or Bernier where in 3 seasons time we can't wait to get rid of.

IMO I would have loved to have brought in a more experienced goaltender, for less term to stabilize the team, provide some leadership,etc.

It is what is it is.. he's certainly our starter for the next 3-4 years regardless.

 

[Mad Brills*]

People cheering against their own team to make sure they're right on an internet message board post about a trade is a special kind of stupid.

We'd like to be proven wrong, but usually aren't.