You are incorrect to state that those two ideas are incompatible. Let me run the numbers because it seems you haven't. Arizona can still save significant cash owed by retaining salary. They can also spread out the amount of cash owed instead of paying the required lump sum signing bonus in his contract.
Let's take for example a hypothetical trade—let's pretend Arizona is completely desperate and this is the only offer that comes along... worst case scenario stuff...
ARI: Olli Juolevi (let's assume signed $1.00mm x 2y) , Loui Eriksson (to be bought out), Jay Beagle (to be bought out)
VAN: Oliver Ekman-Larson ($2.75mm retained)
Would Arizona still save any money? Even with salary retention and taking on bad contracts?
Yes, they would save over $30,000,000 !!! They would only have
$19,300,000 in salary committed instead of
$50,000,000 committed!
| Juolevi
Cash Owed | Eriksson
Cash Owed
(bought out) | Beagle
Cash Owed
(bought out) | Ekman-Larsson
Cash Owed
(salary retention) | Trade Package
Cash Owed
Total | Ekman-Larsson
Cash Owed
If not traded... | Arizona
Cash Saved
Total |
2021-22 | $1,000,000 | $1,000,000 | $400,000 | $2,750,000 | $4,150,000 | $10,500,000 | -$6,350,000 |
2022-23 | $1,000,000 | $1,000,000 | $400,000 | $2,750,000 | $4,150,000 | $10,500,000 | -$6,350,000 |
2023-24 | | | | $2,750,000 | $2,750,000 | $10,500,000 | -$7,750,000 |
2024-25 | | | | $2,750,000 | $2,750,000 | $8,000,000 | -$5,250,000 |
2025-26 | | | | $2,750,000 | $2,750,000 | $5,250,000 | -$2,250,000 |
2026-27 | | | | $2,750,000 | $2,750,000 | $5,250,000 | -$2,250,000 |
Total | $1,000,000 | $2,000,000 | $800,000 | $16,500,000 | $19,300,000 | $50,000,000 | -$30,700,000 |
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
And that's using $2,750,000 in salary retained as an example... Let's imagine other scenarios with various amounts of salary retained (using that same hypothetical worst case scenario trade package):
Ekman-Larsson
Cash Owed
(salary retention) | Trade Package
Cash Owed
Total | Arizona
Cash Saved
Total | Cash % that
Arizona
saves? |
$0 | $2,800,000 | -$47,200,000 | 94% |
$500,000 | $5,800,000 | -$44,200,000 | 88% |
$1,000,000 | $8,800,000 | -$41,200,000 | 82% |
$1,500,000 | $11,800,000 | -$38,200,000 | 76% |
$2,000,000 | $14,800,000 | -$35,200,000 | 70% |
$2,500,000 | $17,800,000 | -$32,200,000 | 64% |
$3,000,000 | $20,800,000 | -$29,200,000 | 58% |
$3,500,000 | $23,800,000 | -$26,200,000 | 52% |
$4,000,000 | $26,800,000 | -$23,200,000 | 46% |
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
Would Arizona love to save 94% of the cash committment? I'm sure they would. But there isn't a single owner in this league that is going to throw Arizona a life-preserver like that. They are going throw them anchors and they are going to expect Arizona to share the burden of risk for a player with a questionable record and an expensive long-term deal.
For the sake of an argument, if Arizona were to simply buy out OEL's contract this off-season, they would still be on the hook for paying him
$35,083,333 total between now and 2032-33. Here's how that would look like versus the hypothetical worst case scenario trade package:
| Trade Package
Cash Owed
Total | Trade w/Arizona
Cash Saved
Total | OEL Buyout
Cash Owed
Total | Buyout
Cash Saved
Total |
2021-22 | $4,150,000 | -$6,350,000 | $2,486,111 | -$8,013,889 |
2022-23 | $4,150,000 | -$6,350,000 | $7,736,111 | -$2,763,889 |
2023-24 | $2,750,000 | -$7,750,000 | $2,486,111 | -$8,013,889 |
2024-25 | $2,750,000 | -$5,250,000 | $2,486,111 | -$5,513,889 |
2025-26 | $2,750,000 | -$2,250,000 | $2,486,111 | -$2,763,889 |
2026-27 | $2,750,000 | -$2,250,000 | $2,486,111 | -$2,763,889 |
2027-28 | | | $2,486,111 | +$2,486,111 |
2028-29 | | | $2,486,111 | +$2,486,111 |
2029-30 | | | $2,486,111 | +$2,486,111 |
2030-31 | | | $2,486,111 | +$2,486,111 |
2031-32 | | | $2,486,111 | +$2,486,111 |
2032-33 | | | $2,486,111 | +$2,486,111 |
Total | $19,300,000 | $30,700,000 | $35,083,332 | $14,916,668 |
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
If Arizona simply wants to get out of paying that contract, their break-even point for salary retention in that worst case scenario (versus a buyout) would be retaining as much as $5,375,000—which is of course way beyond the 50% max for salary retention. This is just used to illustrate how enormous that OEL contract is, and how even with
A LOT of salary retention involved Arizona stands to save a bunch of money.