Mr Positive
Cap Crunch Incoming
- Nov 20, 2013
- 36,501
- 17,046
They don't have capable defenders with Schultz, so I'm not sure how that's a good negotiating angle.
How does our thin blueline make our best asset back there expendable?
They don't have capable defenders with Schultz, so I'm not sure how that's a good negotiating angle.
the Subban deal was signed in a very different situation. Montreal had almost no cap space at all, the cap was artificially tanked because of the lockout, and that is a huge factor when making a good faith deal with a player. It's hard to justify chiseling Schultz on his deal when we have cap space laying around doing nothing.
I also got to love everyone getting angry and wanting him traded. First off, this is just speculation. Second, moving Schultz isn't a big option for us. We need him a lot more than he needs us. He is a big piece of this team going forward and he'll get a fair contract I'm sure.
I don't feel some cap alterations can justify giving a lazy kid who can't play D 20% more than a recent Norris trophy winner.
That opinion is only held by small minority of the fanbase and exactly no one in charge of the team.
the Subban deal was signed in a very different situation. Montreal had almost no cap space at all, the cap was artificially tanked because of the lockout, and that is a huge factor when making a good faith deal with a player. It's hard to justify chiseling Schultz on his deal when we have cap space laying around doing nothing.
I also got to love everyone getting angry and wanting him traded. First off, this is just speculation. Second, moving Schultz isn't a big option for us. We need him a lot more than he needs us. He is a big piece of this team going forward and he'll get a fair contract I'm sure.
And that is why we are last every year.
I don't feel some cap alterations can justify giving a lazy kid who can't play D 20% more than a recent Norris trophy winner.
Our D is what it is this year. With Scrivens and Fasth we are a .500 team. Add the fact Oilers have 2 dangerous top 2 lines. We should be borderline playoffs team. If we can add Markov, kulemin, fayne, etc. Who knows? Oilers could go pretty far.
Subban didn't sign that contract after winning the Norris.
Our D is what it is this year. With Scrivens and Fasth we are a .500 team. Add the fact Oilers have 2 dangerous top 2 lines. We should be borderline playoffs team. If we can add Markov, kulemin, fayne, etc. Who knows? Oilers could go pretty far.
You're not going to do anything productive in the NHL with the core of:
Yakupov/Hall/Eberle/RNH/Schultz/Perron/Scrivens
I guess it's going to take a few more years of not making the playoffs to get the message across.
I guess it depends what your definition of 'anything productive' is.
If it's being taken to mean "be one of the top 8 teams in the Western Conference", and you're saying that we have no chance of making the playoffs with that core, then of those 7 players which ones would you consider worth keeping? Or do they all suck in your eyes and should be kicked to the curb and the re-re-re-re-rebuild should start all over again?
this trade Schultz stuff is alarming. First off, this guy is an RFA and hasnt really done too much to warrant a significant return.
And Schultz has put up similiar numbers in his first 2 seasons in the NHL as Subban, Yandle, Letang and a majority of other top offensive D. yes Schultz is older, but he has been thrown into the fire as a pro. It wouldnt suprise me to see a breakout year next yeat. He has basically played 1.5 NHL seasons with no help.
Also offering him a bridge contract is not the way to go, as we are seeing with Subban.
I would risk it and offer him 4.5 * 6 years (even tho his FV right now is around 3). Heres why:
Scenerio A: Bridge contract is offered, Schultz doesnt improve: His value in a trade is basically what it is now. So we can either keep Schultz as a 3rd pairing MAB, or trade him for a bottom 6 player
Scenerio B: Bridge contract, Schultz excels in next 2 years: His value sky rockets to 6-6.5 Mil, screwing use cap wise
Scenerio C: 4.5 * 6 contract, Schultz doesnt develop: His value is the lowest in this scenerio. But he can still be traded for a 4th liner or pick. His value in A is a bit higher, but not much
Scenerio D: 4.5 * 6 years, Schultz develops into a top pairing OFD: Gravy. We have Schultz locked for 6 years at a bargain price.
even if Schultz develops into only a second pairing D, 4.5 million in years 3-4 will be the market rate for these type of D
the Subban deal was signed in a very different situation. Montreal had almost no cap space at all, the cap was artificially tanked because of the lockout, and that is a huge factor when making a good faith deal with a player. It's hard to justify chiseling Schultz on his deal when we have cap space laying around doing nothing.
I also got to love everyone getting angry and wanting him traded. First off, this is just speculation. Second, moving Schultz isn't a big option for us. We need him a lot more than he needs us. He is a big piece of this team going forward and he'll get a fair contract I'm sure.
I couldn't care less about J Schultz. The kid is obviously a delusional *******. He's half the player McD is in New York. Nurse, Klefa and Marincin will all be better players.
This team will go nowhere playing players like Schultz, RNH and Eberle 6+ million a season. Hall is the only one that's earned his money.
Have you seen the guys your comparing Schultz to play? They all looked like they had much higher upside but hadn't put it together. For me Schultz at max is a 40 point two way dman. Valuable sure but not something I wouldn't trade if there was a better option on the table.
Have you seen the guys your comparing Schultz to play? They all looked like they had much higher upside but hadn't put it together. For me Schultz at max is a 40 point two way dman. Valuable sure but not something I wouldn't trade if there was a better option on the table.
Offensive D who took a bit of time before they broke out. And yes schultz is older, but Wisconsin hasnt really produced many NHL ready D from college.
I doubt well find a D with as much potential as Schultz in trade. Well find some ageing 2nd pairing D, or some D that has been in the league for 4 years that hasnt lived up to the billing. And they will come to the Oilers and be worse than Schultz, and it will suck watching him emerge as a very good offensive D
this trade Schultz stuff is alarming. First off, this guy is an RFA and hasnt really done too much to warrant a significant return.
And Schultz has put up similiar numbers in his first 2 seasons in the NHL as Subban, Yandle, Letang and a majority of other top offensive D. yes Schultz is older, but he has been thrown into the fire as a pro. It wouldnt suprise me to see a breakout year next yeat. He has basically played 1.5 NHL seasons with no help.
Also offering him a bridge contract is not the way to go, as we are seeing with Subban.
I would risk it and offer him 4.5 * 6 years (even tho his FV right now is around 3). Heres why:
Scenerio A: Bridge contract is offered, Schultz doesnt improve: His value in a trade is basically what it is now. So we can either keep Schultz as a 3rd pairing MAB, or trade him for a bottom 6 player
Scenerio B: Bridge contract, Schultz excels in next 2 years: His value sky rockets to 6-6.5 Mil, screwing use cap wise
Scenerio C: 4.5 * 6 contract, Schultz doesnt develop: His value is the lowest in this scenerio. But he can still be traded for a 4th liner or pick. His value in A is a bit higher, but not much
Scenerio D: 4.5 * 6 years, Schultz develops into a top pairing OFD: Gravy. We have Schultz locked for 6 years at a bargain price.
even if Schultz develops into only a second pairing D, 4.5 million in years 3-4 will be the market rate for these type of D
How does our thin blueline make our best asset back there expendable?