Value of: NYR - SJS cap space deal

[bernmeister]

How bout NY does this with Tavares instead?

Sign him 8x12 then trade him to SJ @6 mil retained for 2 1st rounders

I applaud the out of the box creative thought here.
However, there's a couple of differences here, and I disagree w/the prop.
I intended this as a targeted fix to a potential problem hoping to create a win win. I basically wanted to sell cap space, which is not that novel an idea. The framework was flawed, tho.

I considered it an isolated situation that SJ found Kane a fit and perceived it would have difficulty extending him given he could fetch just above his last 5.25m per = 6m deal now, while also other needs swell payroll.
I am advised it may be the case as to the rest of it, but Sharks fans say they have enough cap to go there w/out help from a cap seller. Even if they go after Tavares.

I postulated that yeah, Kane was UFA, but it was a good fit, he'd want to return, they would want him back. Unfortunately, that element has a time restriction which I did not realize, per mouser. So the deal is dead despite that potential to otherwise extend that existing bond.

In the case of Tavares, there is no existing bond.
But there would be no impetus to save something.
It would be a fresh start, a new association.

So yes, it appears it would be legal.
But why would SJ or any team allow NY or any team to broker cap space unless it was beneficial or necessary?

I guess what I am not eloquently saying is a Kane deal would be an extra effort to get one more piece high end enough to make a difference. So while you don't want to overpay, you do the creative machinations cap wise, over the river and thru the woods, etc.

Tavares would be a build move. Not build like acquiring a younger elc piece. But it would be a commitment to Thornton's replacement at 1c. long term.
It's not just one extra move.

When you strategize how to pay for stuff, you do the build move routinely in ordinary process, usually. When you do the extra move, you see if you need creative options.

----------

That aspect of it, absolutely no.
Eat 6m per for 8 years! For one measly late 1st?!
Surely, you're kidding.

No one bit, is biting, or will bite on Seabs, Ryan, Lucic, etc cause of huge $ and worse, huge term. Example proving the point: Spezza; now 7m, but expiring. He can get moved, not the others.

I would do less return for less cap space provided [were this a doable deal, which due to technicality it is not]. But 4 years is a long time, cap space is a luxury, it must be paid over the entire term of the deal, not a selected portion of it, and you only can retain on 3 deals at any given time. On top of that in this instance I included 2nd round add.

If someone wants to buy my $ and its flexibility, they have to pay for it.

 

[bernmeister]

I think it’s a safe to say we’re okay. No need to haggle or even really consider any of this

Agreed.
There is no deal to be had, as I said since p2.
But it is an interesting philosophical ? about the relative worth of cap space and term sold to a buyer and what is the minimum a seller would require to make that worth its while.

 

[bernmeister]

Bottom line: if the Sharks need to find $2M to re-sign Kane, they’ll move Karlsson for future’s considerations or buy out Paul Martin.

That's fine.
Again, my not happening hypothetical gave you alternate options.
If Karlsson fetches a good price, you should sell him; if not, you don't want to be shortchanged. If everyone sees you need cap, they may offer less.
As to buy outs, that is also something that could be worthwhile or not; buyouts vary from year to year with amount necessary to buy out.
peace out, but I remain interested in what you consider current market price of draft picks for cap relief sold.

 

[Shootertooter]

But why would SJ or any team allow NY or any team to broker cap space unless it was beneficial or necessary?

Isn't this the exact reason why your proposal is not realistic? It is not necessary.

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Bahahaha.

 

[MagnumForce2]

This song should automatically play when opening a Bernmeister trade proposal.

 

[bernmeister]

Isn't this the exact reason why your proposal is not realistic? It is not necessary.

My OP proposal was based on the reasonable expectation Sharks APPEARED to need cap relief for all internal needs + extend Kane + pursue Tavares as has been speculated.
Shark fans chimed with not so fast, that may appear to be the case, but it is not.

The quote I made was as to not financing Tavares, which is obviously not doable cap wise or profitable as to return.

 

[bernmeister]

This song should automatically play when opening a Bernmeister trade proposal.

While there is a burn/bern factor, that is not the most applicable.
Besides, a handful of exceptions aside, disco sucks.

The applicable tune should be "Dialogue" by Chicago.
Robert Lamm's all time lyric includes

...will you try to change things
with the power that you have
the power of a million new ideas...

 

[Riptide]

Bla bla bla

No surprise that bern posted a terrible proposal that really only benefits NY, and then goes on defending said terrible proposal despite being told by many that it's a terrible proposal.

I would be interested in theoretical discussion, in a vacuum, as to cap savings vs picks. I hear your objections. What ratio do you think is fair?

LV retained 2m in cap space (and around 2m in cash over the course of the contract) for this season and next season on Brassard before sending him to Pittsburgh. They received a marginal prospect, a 4th and Ryan Reaves (a pending FA who played RS games, but no PO games for them).

But yes, of course NYR would/should get a pair of 1sts.

 

[Riptide]

However, is there anything preventing a team from making a deal with another team a player to a deal just to retain and trade him to that other team immediately? (Assuming that that player was not on the other team the year prior, as Kane is with San Jose in this original scenario).

You mean like Brassard being traded from OTT to LV then to PIT with 40% retention?

 

[bernmeister]

....LV retained 2m in cap space (and around 2m in cash over the course of the contract) for this season and next season on Brassard before sending him to Pittsburgh. They received a marginal prospect, a 4th and Ryan Reaves (a pending FA who played RS games, but no PO games for them).

But yes, of course NYR would/should get a pair of 1sts.

I would say McPhee did somebody a favor.
If somebody is taking on an expiring deal, eg Spezza, the retention is a lot less level than 4 years projected for Kane or the longer term for Seabs, Ryan, Lucic.

Be that as it may there is a technical basis for my OP to be voided
And even if that were not the case, while the return could be less than what I sought, I would not give up cap space unless it was well worth my while

 

[Alluckks]

You mean like Brassard being traded from OTT to LV then to PIT with 40% retention?

Well. That was someone already under contract and another team facilitating a trade. There is a difference.

I was talking about a team having an agreement with another team prior to even signing the player to the contract. Basically a sign-and-trade but with retention. It is something that has not yet been done and seems kinda fishy, but I could not find anything that specifically goes against it in the CBA (other than if the player was playing on the team he was being traded to the year prior).

 

[Juxtaposer]

That's fine.
Again, my not happening hypothetical gave you alternate options.
If Karlsson fetches a good price, you should sell him; if not, you don't want to be shortchanged. If everyone sees you need cap, they may offer less.
As to buy outs, that is also something that could be worthwhile or not; buyouts vary from year to year with amount necessary to buy out.
peace out, but I remain interested in what you consider current market price of draft picks for cap relief sold.

Your hypothetical didn’t give me anything. These were options that already existed before you ever thought of this insane proposal.

I don’t care if Karlsson fetched a “good price” (he won’t). I want him and his contract off my team. Offer me future considerations and we’ll have a deal. I’m sure there are some bad teams for whom he would actually be an upgrade in their bottom-6.

I place zero value on cap relief. As, apparently, does the league. Vegas got a 4th round pick and a bad 4th liner for being a vital part in facilitating the Brassard trade.