Value of: Canucks Taking Your Team's Bad Contracts

[Horse McHindu]

Alright... there was a thread started on the Canucks board posing the question of what to do with the money the Canucks will save if the Sedins retire after this season. An early solution that is favored by some fans is to take on bad contracts in exchange for picks.

So, lay it on me. We got some cap space. What do you have to offer. Let's see what the market is at for your bad contracts.

Obviously we'd be looking for draft picks and/or prospects.

I’m not sure that I’m on board with this idea as a Canucks fan.

It all depends on what type of contracts we’re receiving back, but this type of solution almost always leads to nightmarish cap problems in the future.

Most “bad contracts” that we’d have to take on would be 4 or more years long. So, even in the event that the 1st round picks that we’d be receiving turn out to be gold (I.e. playing at a high level well before their ELC’s expire), these top picks will be due to hefty raises in 3 years.......while we would still likely have those other horrid contracts on our books.

In the event that the first round picks that we acquire are NOT that good (and don’t require substantial raises when they become RFA’s), now we’ve just taken on long term horrible contracts for what was essentially mediocre young players.

Attempting to acquire 1st round picks for horrible contracts usually doesn’t end well. The only way this strategy “works” is if the acquiring team draft a gem with the 1st round pick AND the guy with the incoming horrible contract rediscovers his game on his new team.......both factors of which lead to said team making a cup run in the new 3 year window before said first round pick becomes an RFA.

It’s just not worth the risk in my opinion. The nightmarish future cap situation would outweigh any short term benefit of “praying” that the first round pick turns into a star player in his 1st/2nd year of his ELC.

 

[Horse McHindu]

I think a far better thread would have been, “if the Canucks win the Rasmus Dahlin or Andrei Svechnikov sweepstakes, what would you be willing to give up if the Canucks offered you Louie Eriksson + 2019 1st so that the Canucks could clear cap space and take a realistic run at someone like Tavares, Carson, or Kane?”

 

[Horse McHindu]

Alright... there was a thread started on the Canucks board posing the question of what to do with the money the Canucks will save if the Sedins retire after this season. An early solution that is favored by some fans is to take on bad contracts in exchange for picks.

So, lay it on me. We got some cap space. What do you have to offer. Let's see what the market is at for your bad contracts.

Obviously we'd be looking for draft picks and/or prospects.

I’d be on board with this idea if we were lookin to acquire 2nd and 3rd round picks by taking on “bad contracts” that would expire in possible 2-3 years. But again, I haven’t done the math in terms of looking at Vancouver’s long term cap situation.

If our incoming “bad contracts” don’t interfere with the year when guys like Pettersson, Dahlen, Gaudette, etc, become RFA, then I’d be on board with this idea.

However, our expectations for what we’d want back would have to be lowered. We would have to look at 2nds and even 3rds. I’d be on board with this idea, but again......not if it potentially interferes with reupping the aforementioned players in a few years.

 

[FameFlame069]

Add in Flames 1st in 2019

No, no, no, he's not Loui/Bobby/Milan bad contract bad, if you want a 1st and 2nd for a 2 year cap dump, you're crazy, plus we're not in a Hawks cap trouble phase so we wouldn't pay that much, I'd do a 3rd and give ya a choice of Lazar or Klimchuk with him for a 2nd, actually you can have both players if you promise to bench Lazar when you play us

 

[FameFlame069]

I’d be on board with this idea if we were lookin to acquire 2nd and 3rd round picks by taking on “bad contracts” that would expire in possible 2-3 years. But again, I haven’t done the math in terms of looking at Vancouver’s long term cap situation.

If our incoming “bad contracts” don’t interfere with the year when guys like Pettersson, Dahlen, Gaudette, etc, become RFA, then I’d be on board with this idea.

However, our expectations for what we’d want back would have to be lowered. We would have to look at 2nds and even 3rds. I’d be on board with this idea, but again......not if it potentially interferes with reupping the aforementioned players in a few years.

Dude, how about Brouwer and a 2nd for a 3rd?(the 2nd would have to be in the following years though because i think the next two are gone?

 

[Horse McHindu]

I’m being unrealistic, but go with me on this. Eriksson + twins = 20 million off the books.

Canucks win Dahlin sweepstakes = yay!

Canucks pull a “Minnesota Wild” and simultaneously sign Evander Kane and John Tavares. 12.5/7 for Tavares 8/7 for Kane.

Qualify and trade Baertschi for a pick for more cap room flexibility. Hutton = same thing.

Kane-Tavares-Virtanen
Leipsic-Horvat-Boeser
Archibald-Sutter-Gagner
Dahlen-Gaudette-Pettersson (this line moves ahead of our garbage 3rd line if they start killing it obviously).

Dahlin-Tanev
Edler-Gudbranson
Juolevi-Del Zotto

 

[Horse McHindu]

Dude, how about Brouwer and a 2nd for a 3rd?(the 2nd would have to be in the following years though because i think the next two are gone?

I’d personally consider it, but again - I haven’t really looked hard at capgeek.com to see what Vancouver’s cap would look like in 2-3 years?

How long does Brouwer have left on his contract?
As long as his contract expires at the time when we need to re-up our future core RFA’s, then yes.....I’d likely consider that.

 

[FameFlame069]

The 2nd I'm talking about is in 2020 (due to Flames missing the playoffs this season Isles get 2019 2nd)

 

[FameFlame069]

I’d personally consider it, but again - I haven’t really looked hard at capgeek.com to see what Vancouver’s cap would look like in 2-3 years?

How long does Brouwer have left on his contract?
As long as his contract expires at the time when we need to re-up our future core RFA’s, then yes.....I’d likely consider that.

2 years if im correct, it's 4.5m, I can check quickly?

 

[FameFlame069]

During the upcoming offseason, Brouwer has 2 years remaining at 4.5M I'd add in our next 2nd (2020) for a 3rd this draft (because our first pick is in the 3rd round this draft)

I got this all from Capfriendly (not sure if Brouwer had a front or back loaded)

 

[slg1963]

NYR - Staal and a 2nd

 

[Canuck Luck]

NYR - Staal and a 2nd

lol looking at history where 2 years at 4-5M means a 1st, what makes you think 3 years at 5.7M means a 2nd? more like your 1st round pick and Staal

 

[Horse McHindu]

Chicago-Vancouver deal:

To Vancouver: Brent Seabrook + 1st
To Chicago: ????

As I mentioned earlier, I’m not really a fan of the idea of accepting firsts for long term contracts, but I’m willing to think about this one.

The Canucks have a huge need on that right side D. Even an aged and diminished Seabrook would be better than most of our d-men coming up.

Chicago’s 1st would give the Canucks another shot of doing well in the lottery. Chicago’s freed up cap space could allow them to take a run at a big name UFA (Carlson?) and could allow them to get back into the playoffs.

Thoughts?

 

[Unspecified]

Want a Spezza?

 

[My3Sons]

This. It never happens. There's been a few instances of taking injured players which is covered by insurance or retiring players (Datsyuk) but that's because the team doesn't actually have to pay the contract.

More likely, a non playoff team with lots of cap space can circle a good team in cap trouble like we've seen with the Blackhawks having to sell Byfuglien or Teravainen on the cheap. However this would require smart, forward thinking management so this wouldn't apply to the Canucks.

And usually there is good value in these trades but not just a free asset.

 

[Ori]

Chicago-Vancouver deal:

To Chicago: Brent Seabrook + 1st
To Vancouver: ????

As I mentioned earlier, I’m not really a fan of the idea of accepting firsts for long term contracts, but I’m willing to think about this one.

The Canucks have a huge need on that right side D. Even an aged and diminished Seabrook would be better than most of our d-men coming up.

Chicago’s 1st would give the Canucks another shot of doing well in the lottery. Chicago’s freed up cap space could allow them to take a run at a big name UFA (Carlson?) and could allow them to get back into the playoffs.

Thoughts?

Nucks are rebuilding - so they won`t move their 1st and it has been a while since I follow the team, but just my view on it in the 2018 draft.

 

[leeroggy]

Add in Flames 1st in 2019

They don't have one, it's Isles property for the Hamonic trade

 

[Ori]

NYR - Staal and a 2nd

Yes, I`m tempted to use the conditional Tampa Bay 1st/2nd pick in 2019 to move Marc Staal`s contract. And I`m not sure how good Brendan Smith is next year another 4 mil $ contract who barely saw any NHL hockey this season and was out of shape beginning of this season.

 

[leeroggy]

How about we send you Ladd and Clutterbuck and our own 2019 1st and Josh Ho-Sang for Tanev or Hutton and a 2019 3rd?

 

[tony d]

Bobby Ryan + Cody Ceci + Pittsburgh's 1st for Chris Tanev?

 

[TOGuy14]

Every fanbase of non playoff teams throws this idea out there every year as if they think a real world owner will spend real money to buy a mid to low round pick.

Toronto Maple Leafs legitimately did this a couple of times.

 

[CREW99AW]

How about we send you Ladd and Clutterbuck and our own 2019 1st and Josh Ho-Sang for Tanev or Hutton and a 2019 3rd?

Ladd has a nmc for 2 more seasons. I doubt he uproots his family and waives.
Not interested in giving up a 1st only one yr after being a draft lottery team.

 

[danyhabsfan]

Hometown boy Carey Price

Sutter Markstrom and 1st will do it

 

[leeroggy]

Ladd has a nmc for 2 more seasons. I doubt he uproots his family and waives.
Not interested in giving up a 1st only one yr after being a draft lottery team.

We do have two of them in 2019 and if we really need it more than the cap space and getting rid of the dead wood, while getting a Top 4 defender back then you really have to wonder why we even exist as a franchise. Even if JT doesn't re-sign a trade like this leaves us with 3 1sts and 4 2nds in 2018 and 2019 combined, as well as the ability to trade for an established player or two with the freed space.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Nucks are rebuilding - so they won`t move their 1st and it has been a while since I follow the team, but just my view on it in the 2018 draft.

Sorry, typo on my part.

I meant Chicago gives Vancouver Seabrook and *their* 1st........to Vancouver. Vancouver would then give Chicago.........????