Skjei is a much better skater if not also def player than Gardiner, who you can flip to Montreal for a cheap pick/cap relief.
combo package of smaller deals
Skjei + Deangelo + Georgiev + Buch 3.25 rfa x 2 at half = 1.625 per + Rangers 2021 2nd
rough cap = 7.592
4 players + 1 pick
for
Canes 2020 1st, Leafs 2020 1st
Edmundson 3.1, or Reimer 3.4 x 2
TVR 2.3
Claesson .7, McKeown .7 all expiring
rough cap = 6.8
4 players + 2 picks
deal is cap, roster size compliant
analysis
- Skjei is upgrade over Gardiner who is dealt cheap for cap recovery. At. 5.25 he is slightly overpriced by .75, but this diminishes over deal, which has term, finishing as Skjei hits 30.
- Geo is rfa controlled and upgrades Reimer who is moved either this deal or another
- Deangelo is emerging higher end RD
- Buchnevich is talented but yet to fully hit all cylinders. He is a bargain at half and Rangers eat his half next year.
- Canes retain the 2nd this yr for Fox and get a 2nd for next yr
the D and G moves are obvious and Buch fits middle 6 in that lineup
Rangers
- wince at loss of Geo, but immediate path for Shesty and we have other guys who move up
- have emerging LD and get structural cap reform moving Skjei and to lesser extent Buch/Deangelo.
- give Buch mins to Strome, Howden
and not least, have 2 1sts to add to their own.
did I miss something?
Bern, again too many pieces moving, simplify it .
not guilty as charged.
People want simple solutions to complex problems. That is not the real world, where to get somewhere you accept a phase one and then continue to smooth the edges, with subsequent moves.
An example in NHL is after we had McDonagh deal, Stevie Y felt like holding up GMJG threatening to kill it unless he could extract Miller for Namest. That is basically one larger deal, but it was realized as 2 separate transactions.
That one may be more blatantly obvious, but I don't doubt that, while they are different levels of connectedness, many time a move triggers a reaction.
But when we post, we are used to a minimum. Take my word, you are going to see larger not smaller deals, whether it is direct in one transaction or a sequence. Because the harder the cap is, the more difficult it is to work around, and it can not be ignored. That means either:
- no deal
- a smaller deal where someone takes a bit of a loss
- or a larger deal that attempts to keep refining the balancing.
----------------------
On this one, how much do you think there is to cut?
If you go back on it carefully, and realize the clubs also want to do something besides Dea for a 1st and Geo for another 1st, how big a whoop is it to have a combo deal, which is what I noticed at the beginning?
I was a tad too generous with a future Ranger 2nd. If that is not a deal killer, that can come out.
What does that result in, 4 for 6 asset wise?
What is that, 2 for 3 x 2?
this is a very delicate balancing act