Contract most likely to be moved

[Celtic Note]

I do have a question for our contracts experts. If you do off day, paper transactions does that reduce the players actual pay?

 

[EastonBlues22]

I do have a question for our contracts experts. If you do off day, paper transactions does that reduce the players actual pay?

Only if it's a two-way contract (and all ELCs are).

Edit: Signing and performance bonuses (if earned) are not reduced, just the salary.

 

[Celtic Note]

Only if it's a two-way contract (and all ELCs are).

Edit: Signing and performance bonuses (if earned) are not reduced, just the salary.

IN that case it is all the more reason not to play the paper game with Dunn. If you are sitting on the bench collecting a paycheck because you haven’t earned a spot, then I get the paperwork move. But a guy on the rise who has earned the spot should be paid all of his earned salary. Otherwise we are telling players we don’t value their contributions enough to pay then their worth.

 

[BlueDream]

I literally can't believe anyone is even suggesting Dunn in the AHL. even for just 5, 10, 15 games or whatever you're suggesting. Why are you blatantly willing to just sit out one of our better offensive players for even 5 games? That's making it harder to win when you really don't have to do that. Given that we missed the playoffs by 1 point last season, and not having an abysmal powerplay could have prevented that... you'd think you would learn your lesson about an idea like this. I guess not.

Instead, why don't we just get rid of a veteran that doesn't provide all that much?

Carl freakin Gunnarsson, for example, isn't that important. Just ship him out instead of bending over backwards with all these dumb transactions to keep 8 defensemen... this doesn't need to be made into a challenging situation. It's pretty easy actually.

It's like when we traded Kris Russell for a 5th round pick. Did anyone care? Will anyone really miss Gunnarsson? We'll still have plenty of young depth.

And I also strongly disagree that your #6 defenseman is going to be a factor in winning the Cup or not. Take a look at the previous Stanley Cup winners' #6 defensemen and tell me that you're impressed by any of them... Bortuzzo or Schmaltz should easily be good enough given the guys we have ahead of them. I'll be damned if anyone points the finger at those 2 for why we didn't win a Cup.

 

[KirkOut]

agreed. That would be a great strategy on NHL18. Not so much when dealing with real people

 

[A Real Barn Burner]

My biggest worry with Dunn is a sophomore slump, would seem to me that starting him the AHL would invite that by killing his confidence.

Hope they make the right decision on who to send packing between Gunnarson and Boud. Would of been great to get a first round pick for one of em at the TDL (Never would of happened I know) but not worth Dunn starting in the AHL.

 

[yogintheaveragebears]

Does any1 wanna list the big three trade targets contracts and clauses I'm super lazy. I feel it may help voters

 

[STL fan in MN]

Bouw and Steen have full NTCs so not them. That pretty much leaves Gunnar. I could also see Schmaltz being the one to go (either via waivers or if they don’t see him making the team and are able to get a mid to later-round pick for him before putting him on waivers) but he won’t save much of anything on the Cap so him leaving wouldn’t really help with the Cap crunch.

So I’d say Gunnar, but I would suspect he’s unlikely to be traded until he’s shown he’s recovered from his torn ACL and can play at a decent NHL level.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Does any1 wanna list the big three trade targets contracts and clauses I'm super lazy. I feel it may help voters

Steen and Bouw have full NTCs (although Steen’s expires just before the 2021 trade deadline so he can be traded his last of his contract if so desired). Gunnar with no clause at all.

And if anyone ever wants this info just google the player’s name and then “capfriendly” and it’ll come up.

 

[MissouriMook]

Bouw and Steen have full NTCs so not them. That pretty much leaves Gunnar. I could also see Schmaltz being the one to go (either via waivers or if they don’t see him making the team and are able to get a mid to later-round pick for him before putting him on waivers) but he won’t save much of anything on the Cap so him leaving wouldn’t really help with the Cap crunch.

So I’d say Gunnar, but I would suspect he’s unlikely to be traded until he’s shown he’s recovered from his torn ACL and can play at a decent NHL level.

I think this idea is getting overstated to some degree. After all, he was coming off surgery when we traded for him, and likely why we got the additional pick. If his medical reports are showing no signs of setback in his recovery, I don’t see why it isn’t possible or even likely that someone would trade a conditional pick for him before the season, especially if we had some retention.

 

[STL fan in MN]

I think this idea is getting overstated to some degree. After all, he was coming off surgery when we traded for him, and likely why we got the additional pick. If his medical reports are showing no signs of setback in his recovery, I don’t see why it isn’t possible or even likely that someone would trade a conditional pick for him before the season, especially if we had some retention.

It’s possoble and you’re right that the Blues traded for Gunnar when he was still recovering from surgery but it’s still not something that happens all too often. Most of the time GM’s are fairly cautious.

And there are usually quite a few trade and PTO options at the start of the season too so not a ton of reasons for a GM to trade for an injured Gunnar when there are likely going to be safer options also available for cheap as well.

 

[Brian39]

Out of curiosity, how high of a pick are people willing to give up in order to move Gunnar right now if there is no one willing to take on the contract for free? If the 'Dunn to AHL for a month' is an unacceptable 'best worst case scenario,' how much are you willing to pay to avoid it? Obviously your ideal scenario is to move Gunnar for a pick, but if that can't materialize, how high are you willing to go in order to move Gunnar?

If the answer is that you wouldn't be willing to give up anything to move him, are you bridging Ed to avoid the possibility of stashing Dunn for a month or sending Thomas down?

I think all of this will be moot because I don't see Ed getting more than the $4 mil AAV that would necessitate sending Dunn down with our existing roster. However, I'm curious what asset it would be worth to avoid it. Assuming Ed's deal necessitates a move or create cap management, my ranking of 'bad outcomes' is as follows:

Move Gunnar now for a 3rd or better. If that can't happen, keep him now but continue trying to find a dance partner at that prices where we retain some salary. Realistically, we don't need all $2.9 mil of the space, so retaining a million or so lessens the financial gamble taken by the other team. Clearing $2 mil of Gunnar's $2.9 mil gives us all the wiggle room we need and would let us bank some cap space throughout the year for a depth rental if needed.

If we can't get a 3rd or better with salary retained on Gunnar, I'd rather keep him for camp and let the chips fall where they may. It creates the possibility of having to stash Dunn in the AHL for a spell, but there is a good chance that we could move Gunnar during camp (or right after) or that someone would suffer an LTIR worthy injury that makes all of it moot.

 

[rumrokh]

I don't understand all of the theoretical gymnastics about a minor contract, especially when not all of the options are represented. You could also trade or waive Schmaltz and play Bouwmeester on the right side, where he has played plenty before at the NHL level.

 

[Oberyn]

I don't understand all of the theoretical gymnastics about a minor contract, especially when not all of the options are represented. You could also trade or waive Schmaltz and play Bouwmeester on the right side, where he has played plenty before at the NHL level.

Schmaltz is in a peculiar situation where he won't garner much trade value but will most certainly be claimed on waivers if exposed. Considering he'll likely be making the least money out of all our defenseman, I don't see the incentive in shipping him out.

Gunnarsson is still the guy I would like to see moved, hopeful sooner rather than later.

 

[MissouriMook]

Out of curiosity, how high of a pick are people willing to give up in order to move Gunnar right now if there is no one willing to take on the contract for free?

To me, the point is moot. Cap space is only valuable if you need it, and right now we don't need it. If we are looking to move Gunnarsson for a pick and no one bites, I send him to San Antonio 101 times out of 100 before I give something of value to lose his cap hit. We'll get $1.025M in relief while his contract is buried, and again we don't really need the space. The downside risk is that we lose him for nothing to a waiver claim. That's still better than paying someone to take the entire contract.