Confirmed with Link: Kraken sign Grubauer (5.9M x 6)

Fistfullofbeer

Moderator
May 9, 2011
30,205
8,923
Whidbey Island, WA
Point still stands. This reportedly number friendly organization making a number error is troublesome when combined with the other behavior.

Do you get some kind of perverse satisfaction pointing out all the wrong doings the Kraken are doing? Or is this something you do for all the other 31 teams in the league? Seems like the only time you come to our boards is to do so.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,486
73,657
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Do you get some kind of perverse satisfaction pointing out all the wrong doings the Kraken are doing? Or is this something you do for all the other 31 teams in the league? Seems like the only time you come to our boards is to do so.

All 31 other teams. But I’m a fan of all of them and acknowledge both positives and negatives. I don’t see a lot to be excited about in Seattle right now.
 
Last edited:

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,486
73,657
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
We haven't even played 1 darn game yet...

I think the Seattle team will do decent in the Pacific. They have a comparable roster to everyone but Vegas.

I guess my question is what is their thought process. They aren’t going to compete for a cup. They aren’t going to fail out for a top pick. They have not amassed any picks and their cap space is basically being used for nothing. Cap space doesn’t move over to the next year so what was the point?
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,742
I think the Seattle team will do decent in the Pacific. They have a comparable roster to everyone but Vegas.

I guess my question is what is their thought process. They aren’t going to compete for a cup. They aren’t going to fail out for a top pick. They have not amassed any picks and their cap space is basically being used for nothing. Cap space doesn’t move over to the next year so what was the point?

they rather not have bad high salary and term contracts that will make things difficult long term. Look at Vegas and the win now attitude where has that really got them. Not any wear closer to winning the cup then they were the previous year and what exactly have they done to improve that? Not a darn thing besides trade players with out even telling them first. They are still in cap hell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Irie

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,486
73,657
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
they rather not have bad high salary and term contracts that will make things difficult long term.

But, they could’ve gotten better players with less contracts.

For example. If they are trying to avoid that. The very contract this thread is about.

The Wennberg and Oleksiak contract.

If you want to save cap space why not have Philly pay your for Ghost instead of giving Oleksiak what they did?
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,742
But, they could’ve gotten better players with less contracts.

For example. If they are trying to avoid that. The very contract this thread is about.

The Wennberg and Oleksiak contract.

Compared to what other players gotten at FA? Those contracts are nothing.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,742
No compared to what they had available to them in the expansion draft. I don’t really think these contracts are nothing.

Realistically you just gave Wennberg the exact contract he was bought out of.

Difference being we don't have a 10m AAV goalie with a NMC. its easier when you are building a roster from 81.5 of cap space, its another to try to maintain one with current contracts on the book.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,486
73,657
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Difference being we don't have a 10m AAV goalie with a NMC. its easier when you are building a roster from 81.5 of cap space, its another to try to maintain one with current contracts on the book.

Price wasn’t the only available goalie. Why not force Vancouver to pay a small pick and take Holtby instead of Dreidger?

If the plan was to sign Grubs there were plenty of other routes besides giving a guy who played really well this year but realistically has one good year the Scott Darling contract.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,742
Price wasn’t the only available goalie. Why not force Vancouver to pay a small pick and take Holtby instead of Dreidger?

If the plan was to sign Grubs there were plenty of other routes besides giving a guy who played really well this year but realistically has one good year the Scott Darling contract.

Seattle didn't want to take Holtby on that contract unless it was a side trade and Vancouver eats salary... Regarding Grubs, the team didn't actual expect he would actually hit the FA market. He was the protected goalie for Colorado. Seattle grabbed him the moment he became available.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,486
73,657
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Seattle didn't want to take Holtby on that contract unless it was a side trade and Vancouver eats salary... Regarding Grubs, the team didn't actual expect he would actually hit the FA market. He was the protected goalie for Colorado. Seattle grabbed him the moment he became available.

Why though? They aren’t a Grubs away from contention. And if they were trying to ice a contender why did they not make more contention ready picks?
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,742
Why though? They aren’t a Grubs away from contention. And if they were trying to ice a contender why did they not make more contention ready picks?

Cause they don't want to put them into a situation where they are in cap hell the next several years.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,742
But this doesn’t make sense.

They did exactly that with the Schwartz, Grubs, and Oleksiak signings. They signed a bunch of 29 year olds to win now contracts that go for six years.

But they didn't take contracts at the draft that are 7m 8m for several years. They have 16m in cap space left. They could had easily picked enough contracts at the draft that puts them exactly at 81m Meaning no FAs.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,486
73,657
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
But they didn't take contracts at the draft that are 7m 8m for several years. They have 16m in cap space left. They could had easily picked enough contracts at the draft that puts them exactly at 81m Meaning no FAs.

I think you are missing my point.

If the idea is to not get locked down into contracts that become problems, I'm not talking about taking Price or JVR.

I'm asking why didn't they take Dillon and get a few picks out of it or why didn't they take Ghost and get a few picks out of it instead of signing one of Larsson or Oleksiak?

Ghost is cheaper in contract and actual cost and has less term plus Philly would've paid for them to take him.

Why wouldn't they take Zucker over Tanev if they were planning on signing Schwartz? Same cap hit, but two years less in term. And it isn't like Tanev's contract is some easy go.

I understand some of the team's picks. Gourde, Eberle. They are nice players. But, a lot of their approach just seems extremely scatterbrain and without reason. The Grubs signing is a perfect example.

We wanted to save cap space. But oh, a goaltender who has largely been playing in one of the best environments available is available let's give him a ton of years and money. Doesn't make sense. Now if they were changing their mind for a player like say Eichel or Hamilton, I'd get it. But, I dunno. Just seems very haphazard without any plan.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,403
2,742
Perhaps they had no interest in Dillon. We took washington's goalie instead. And who says they had zero interest in ghost. Ever consider it takes 2 sides to make a trade...

We were planning originally to take McCann from pitts before he was trade to the leafs...

Good lord seriously...

Seattle had no darn idea Grubby was gonna make it to FA. I think everyone assumed he would re-sign with colorado... There is nothing wrong with taking a top goalie. 6x5.9 is fine... That's sure better than taking price and his 10m for the next 5 years contract... Both our goalies combined make less than him...
 
  • Like
Reactions: MustySeason34

Name Nameless

Don't go more than 10 seconds back on challenges
Apr 12, 2017
6,548
3,004
Seattle didn't want to take Holtby on that contract unless it was a side trade and Vancouver eats salary... Regarding Grubs, the team didn't actual expect he would actually hit the FA market. He was the protected goalie for Colorado. Seattle grabbed him the moment he became available.

Arizona-fan in peace. Yeah, the team who blundered here was the Avs, not Kraken. When they protected Grubs in the draft, I am fairly sure everybody assumed they had a handshake-deal on his next contract, but just failed to meet the deadline on the roster-freeze or something. And then they ended up protecting him for absolutely nothing.
 

Gniwder

Registered User
Oct 12, 2009
14,130
7,492
Bellingham, WA
Arizona-fan in peace. Yeah, the team who blundered here was the Avs, not Kraken. When they protected Grubs in the draft, I am fairly sure everybody assumed they had a handshake-deal on his next contract, but just failed to meet the deadline on the roster-freeze or something. And then they ended up protecting him for absolutely nothing.
It's a moot point because they didn't have any other goaltender worth protecting. Each team gets to protect one, their choices were:

Grubauer, Philipp 29 G $3,333,333 UFA (2021)
Dubnyk, Devan 35 G $2,166,667 UFA (2021)
Miska, Hunter 26 G $725,000 RFA (2022)
Johansson, Jonas 25 G $700,000 RFA (2022)

Grubauer was the obvious choice for them.
 

Irie

Registered User
Nov 14, 2010
4,385
4,197
Pacific Northwest
I think you are missing my point.

If the idea is to not get locked down into contracts that become problems, I'm not talking about taking Price or JVR.

I'm asking why didn't they take Dillon and get a few picks out of it or why didn't they take Ghost and get a few picks out of it instead of signing one of Larsson or Oleksiak?

Ghost is cheaper in contract and actual cost and has less term plus Philly would've paid for them to take him.

Why wouldn't they take Zucker over Tanev if they were planning on signing Schwartz? Same cap hit, but two years less in term. And it isn't like Tanev's contract is some easy go.

I understand some of the team's picks. Gourde, Eberle. They are nice players. But, a lot of their approach just seems extremely scatterbrain and without reason. The Grubs signing is a perfect example.

We wanted to save cap space. But oh, a goaltender who has largely been playing in one of the best environments available is available let's give him a ton of years and money. Doesn't make sense. Now if they were changing their mind for a player like say Eichel or Hamilton, I'd get it. But, I dunno. Just seems very haphazard without any plan.

Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean there isn't a plan.

This is a different cap environment. Seattle wants to remain cap flexible, which they mostly have.

Most of their guys aren't really overpaid, and if they are, it's only by 1 - 1.5 million. They don't have big anchor contracts bogging them down, so it is not an issue.

Seattle was never going to be competitive if they went with the traditional route, strong offensive players in the top 6, strong top pairing for special teams, a strong defensive unit to counter other teams superstars, and a 4th line to be physical and chew up soft minutes. Look at the exposed lists. If they had picked up the top players, they would be in cap hell, and all the guys that were exposed were trending downward with age or injury.

Francis targeted guys with a strong work ethic to run the locker-room, and players that will be difficult to play against, while maintaining a fairly large amount of free cap. Character was a huge factor in the selection process (Tanev over Zucker, Eberle over Bailey, nobody over Voracek)

The team does not have to waste cap just because it doesn't carry over. This years UFA crop is limited. It is much smarter to not spend and make sure you have a lot of free cap next year and the year after while the other GMs will have further tied their hands with the bad deals and buyouts they gave out this year.

Right now, the team will have 3 middle six lines that they will likely roll out indiscriminately. Other teams won't have a set strategy for easy coaching match-ups, and the hope is that some of these guys (Gourde, Appleton, McCann, Geekie, etc) will step up in larger roles.

As for the goalie situation, Vanecek was the best option available. The pick was an insurance pick. But Between him and Driedger, there is a huge amount of uncertainty as to whether or not Seattle actually had starter caliber goaltending. As others have stated, Grubauer was a pipe dream, but when he became available, Francis swapped Vanecek for him and got a 2nd in the process.

Plans change as opportunities arise. This team is built differently because it has to be. They don't have young guys on ELCs in the pipeline up and coming to replace guys as their contracts expire. They will rely on the UFA market for a couple of years to pick up a few bargains until their first crop of prospects are ready. This requires being cap flexible.

If the plan fails miserably, well then, finishing bottom 3 in the next two drafts would be a pretty huge consolation prize. I would think you as a Penguins fan would understand this more than most.
 

UnkleKraker

Registered User
May 31, 2007
3,380
862
Washington State
Arizona-fan in peace. Yeah, the team who blundered here was the Avs, not Kraken. When they protected Grubs in the draft, I am fairly sure everybody assumed they had a handshake-deal on his next contract, but just failed to meet the deadline on the roster-freeze or something. And then they ended up protecting him for absolutely nothing.

Avs fan for a few decaades while I waited for my hometown team. I think it is as simple as this: Sakic was asking for at least a small hometown discount for the opportunity to chase a cup. Grubauer opted to take the best financial deal instead. Completely his right to max dollars. Some of his comments make it seem that he was a little unhappy that he was Sakic's third priority but I think Joe was right to lock up the captain and future Norris winner first. If Landy hadn't taken so long I think Joe would have had a better shot at Groob. Now I get to watch him in Seattle so I am not upset.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,486
73,657
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean there isn't a plan.

And just because you or they say there is one, doesn't mean there is a plan.

This is a different cap environment. Seattle wants to remain cap flexible, which they mostly have.

Most of their guys aren't really overpaid, and if they are, it's only by 1 - 1.5 million. They don't have big anchor contracts bogging them down, so it is not an issue.

Cap hit is never the issue. Term is. The Kraken stated they wanted to avoid getting in a cap situation that caused issues but they proceeded to give two middle pairing guys four plus years and significant salaries. A top six guy who is often injured and is at the age where wingers decline and isn't an elite talent 6 years. And then a goaltender who has been insulated by one of the best systems in the league 6 years and 6 mil. I can very easily see a world where all of the contracts signed this offseason are anchors as soon as two years.
Seattle was never going to be competitive if they went with the traditional route, strong offensive players in the top 6, strong top pairing for special teams, a strong defensive unit to counter other teams superstars, and a 4th line to be physical and chew up soft minutes. Look at the exposed lists. If they had picked up the top players, they would be in cap hell, and all the guys that were exposed were trending downward with age or injury.

Fair point. I don't really have any problem with the concept of how they built their team. The concept I have issue with is they are saying they need cap space and flexibility and they've done nothing with it. Once again, cap space and flexibility do not carry over to the next year. There is no reason to not take Ghost over Oleksiak. There is no reason to not take Demelo over Laarsson. Both of these players provide similar skill sets for less term and less cap hit and in Ghost's case you likely could've gotten Philly to pay you to do it.

Francis targeted guys with a strong work ethic to run the locker-room, and players that will be difficult to play against, while maintaining a fairly large amount of free cap. Character was a huge factor in the selection process (Tanev over Zucker, Eberle over Bailey, nobody over Voracek)
The team does not have to waste cap just because it doesn't carry over. This years UFA crop is limited. It is much smarter to not spend and make sure you have a lot of free cap next year and the year after while the other GMs will have further tied their hands with the bad deals and buyouts they gave out this year.

Once again. Your team literally gave the contract that was boughten out by Columbus to Wennberg. How many of the deals the Kraken just signed in Oleksiak, Larsson, Wennberg, Schwartz, and Grubs clear waivers if they were put on waivers last year?


Right now, the team will have 3 middle six lines that they will likely roll out indiscriminately. Other teams won't have a set strategy for easy coaching match-ups, and the hope is that some of these guys (Gourde, Appleton, McCann, Geekie, etc) will step up in larger roles.

I like the roster. I just don't like the plan. They had the league bent over and could've taken advantage of them and instead didn't. Just seems foolish. You get one opportunity to do this. Maybe that changes before puck drop.
As for the goalie situation, Vanecek was the best option available. The pick was an insurance pick. But Between him and Driedger, there is a huge amount of uncertainty as to whether or not Seattle actually had starter caliber goaltending. As others have stated, Grubauer was a pipe dream, but when he became available, Francis swapped Vanecek for him and got a 2nd in the process.

I've never been a fan of Grubauer so that probably alters my perception.

Plans change as opportunities arise. This team is built differently because it has to be. They don't have young guys on ELCs in the pipeline up and coming to replace guys as their contracts expire. They will rely on the UFA market for a couple of years to pick up a few bargains until their first crop of prospects are ready. This requires being cap flexible.

If the plan fails miserably, well then, finishing bottom 3 in the next two drafts would be a pretty huge consolation prize. I would think you as a Penguins fan would understand this more than most.

The path to Seattle being a champion is easy. You build a competitive team on ice by forcing picks and prospects to you from other teams. The Vanecek deal is smart in a vacuum until you realize the Kraken could've taken Dillon likely for a pick from Washington to protect Vanecek and then swapped him to Winnipeg for the picks Washington got.

To your point. If you are going to take the risk to compete, but also the chance you bottom out, collect as many 1st and 2nds as possible for insurance purposes.
 

Irie

Registered User
Nov 14, 2010
4,385
4,197
Pacific Northwest
And just because you or they say there is one, doesn't mean there is a plan.

Cap hit is never the issue. Term is. The Kraken stated they wanted to avoid getting in a cap situation that caused issues but they proceeded to give two middle pairing guys four plus years and significant salaries. A top six guy who is often injured and is at the age where wingers decline and isn't an elite talent 6 years. And then a goaltender who has been insulated by one of the best systems in the league 6 years and 6 mil. I can very easily see a world where all of the contracts signed this offseason are anchors as soon as two years.
You are literally going out of your way to create a controversy that doesn't exist in order to support a flawed argument that you are peddling to stir up controversy.

Their cap situation for the foreseeable future is actually quite good.

Look. After 2 years the team only has 42 million committed cap. After 3 it is only 28. And after 4 years, they have less than 16 million, and Schwartz and Oleksiak will be off the books at the end of that year(5 years, not 6). Cap should start to rise again by then giving the team a ton of flexibility. Their first prospects should just be coming off of their ELCs at that point.


Fair point. I don't really have any problem with the concept of how they built their team. The concept I have issue with is they are saying they need cap space and flexibility and they've done nothing with it. Once again, cap space and flexibility do not carry over to the next year. There is no reason to not take Ghost over Oleksiak. There is no reason to not take Demelo over Laarsson. Both of these players provide similar skill sets for less term and less cap hit and in Ghost's case you likely could've gotten Philly to pay you to do it.
Yes, Schwartz and Oleksiak are overpaid and their deals are too long, but it isn't like they are getting 8x9 or 8x11. Their contracts are not that large, they are only overpaid by 1.5 million, they are insured, and if either player is injured, the team should have LTIR slots. Francis targeted them and overpaid because he wants to create a culture, and those guys are good locker room guys, good community guys, and will lead by example with their strong work ethic.


Once again. Your team literally gave the contract that was boughten out by Columbus to Wennberg. How many of the deals the Kraken just signed in Oleksiak, Larsson, Wennberg, Schwartz, and Grubs clear waivers if they were put on waivers last year?
In the league today, no teams have free cap. If they do, they are on internal budgets because all of the franchises are hemorrhaging cash. Half the players in the league that have signed UFA contracts would pass through waivers right now. Some guys that are exactly worth their contract value would pass through, so your scenario is completely misleading and out of context.

I like the roster. I just don't like the plan. They had the league bent over and could've taken advantage of them and instead didn't. Just seems foolish. You get one opportunity to do this. Maybe that changes before puck drop.

The path to Seattle being a champion is easy. You build a competitive team on ice by forcing picks and prospects to you from other teams. The Vanecek deal is smart in a vacuum until you realize the Kraken could've taken Dillon likely for a pick from Washington to protect Vanecek and then swapped him to Winnipeg for the picks Washington got.

To your point. If you are going to take the risk to compete, but also the chance you bottom out, collect as many 1st and 2nds as possible for insurance purposes.
As far as your plan, you are living in 2017. You believe Francis could have picked up players and easily flipped them in today's cap which is false. Francis asked for 1st round picks to take on cap. Other GM's scoffed. Not taking on the bad contracts for 2nds in this weak draft was the best move Seattle could have made to position themselves to build a competitor. Had he taken some of those contracts, Seattle would be at the cap this year and next, if not longer, have no flexibility for free agents, and would have declining players that are underperforming and probably would not want to be in Seattle, creating a toxic locker-room.

Vanecek WAS the smart move. Had Colorado not failed to sign Grubauer, Vanecek would be the back up and insurance for Driedger who has never handled a starters workload. Dillon is not worth 2 2nds. Chevy overpaid. But that is totally irrelevant, because Seattle wanted Vanecek until Grubauer became an option. All of your arguments are unrealistic because they assume Francis could know the future and ignore the reality of the situations as they transpired.

I get it, you're angry. Pittsburgh didn't lose just one, but two of their top bottom six players and in return got a prospect that has a better than average chance of never being a regular NHLer in return. They are the present day version of the Panthers/Ducks/Wild of 2017. They gave up a really good player with the hopes Seattle would relieve them of a bad contract they are desperately trying to shed, and instead, lost another solid asset and didn't even get much cap relief in the process. It sucks, but don't blame Francis.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->