Speculation: Pietrangelo's future (reports: to go to FA)

[Blueston]

St. Louis local radio his Tim McKernan interviewed Doug the other day.
The Tim McKernan Show Ep. 348 – Doug Armstrong - insidestl.com

8:37 mark Doug joins - league coming back, random chatter, etc.
19:55 - Pietrangelo talk picks up

Take aways - Doug and Alex have been together since the beginning for the both of them. "He's our captain... I know he wants to be here I know we want to keep him here", "We are going to do everything we can to get Alex under contract and keep him here, and I know that's what he wants, its just a timing issue now". Doug talks about summer signings, getting creative with Alex, then extends into the future, the "window", and core group of players, some names named.

Enjoy.

Thanks. Along with what seemed like high confidence in resigning Petro, I found it interesting that he talks about Perunovich being on team next year. This to points to Dunn potentially being dealt if we resign Petro, which many of us have been speculating.

Also mentions that they hope to have "fair number" of listed core players (specifically listed Petro, Parayko, Faulk, Schenn, Schwarts, ROR, Perron) for next 4-5 years. I assume not listing Tank was inadvertant omission?

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Thanks. Along with what seemed like high confidence in resigning Petro, I found it interesting that he talks about Perunovich being on team next year. This to points to Dunn potentially being dealt if we resign Petro, which many of us have been speculating.

Also mentions that they hope to have "fair number" of listed core players (specifically listed Petro, Parayko, Faulk, Schenn, Schwarts, ROR, Perron) for next 4-5 years. I assume not listing Tank was inadvertant omission?

In very comfortable Pietro will re-sign. There is no smoke to the effect that he wants to explore the open market. If there were, we’d have gotten that sense from at least one side.

As for the ‘core’ players, it’s interesting that Faulk was included. I don’t think any omissions here are significant, since it’s such an informal setting it is easy to forget someone. But it makes the priority to re-sign Schwartz look higher and makes it look like there is a plan for Faulk to integrate better. 3 RHD in the core is very interesting.

 

[MissouriMook]

Thanks. Along with what seemed like high confidence in resigning Petro, I found it interesting that he talks about Perunovich being on team next year. This to points to Dunn potentially being dealt if we resign Petro, which many of us have been speculating.

Also mentions that they hope to have "fair number" of listed core players (specifically listed Petro, Parayko, Faulk, Schenn, Schwarts, ROR, Perron) for next 4-5 years. I assume not listing Tank was inadvertant omission?

I'm not sure that is a conclusion I would jump to. If you can get Dunn under contract for next season at a cap hit that is relatively close to Gunnarsson's, why would you move out Dunn and keep Gunnarsson instead of the other way around? DA certainly has an interesting offseason ahead of him regardless of when it might start.

 

[Brian39]

I'm not sure that is a conclusion I would jump to. If you can get Dunn under contract for next season at a cap hit that is relatively close to Gunnarsson's, why would you move out Dunn and keep Gunnarsson instead of the other way around? DA certainly has an interesting offseason ahead of him regardless of when it might start.

I agree that Dunn on a short term, low AAV deal makes sense over Gunnar. However, the D is getting crowded if Petro is extended. Most of us think Mikkola is likely to be an NHLer next year. If Army's plan is to have Perunovich here as well, then that is 8 D even without Gunnar (Petro, Parayko, Faulk, Scandella, Dunn, Bortz, Mikkola and Perunovich).

If Perunovich makes the roster is it at the expense of Bortz, Mikkola, or Dunn? I don't see them moving Bortz. He is the only "nastiness" on the blue line and he has appeared to have embraced being a guy who bounces in and out of the lineup. I think it is reasonable to believe that Perunovich making the roster (and a Petro extension) means Dunn is the odd man out. I wouldn't say the writing is on the wall, but it is a reasonable conclusion to come to.

However, I think this is just Army doing his thing and being intentionally vague/misleading/unclear about his overall plan. He is in an ongoing negotiation with Dunn, who is a mobile, offensive D man. He's got a mobile, offensive D prospect who is coming off a Hobey Baker win and is only a couple years younger than Dunn. Even if Army is 100% sure Perunovich needs a year of AHL development, he has every incentive to talk him up in the media. It boosts the confidence of Perunovich, creates genuine cap battles AND is a piece of leverage in the ongoing negotiations with Dunn. Additionally, it bolsters his argument with the league that Perunovich should be allowed to burn a year of his ELC and be playoff eligible if the season resumes this year. For now, the league seems to be standing by their "NCAA players can't get contracts for this year" stance, but a number of teams seem miffed by this stance and it doesn't make sense since NCAA players have typically been able to jump straight onto playoff rosters. Comments like this in public bolster Army's argument if he is trying to convince the league to change this stance. We don't know Army's intentions, but he has everything to gain by talking about Perunovich like this and nothing to lose.

 

[Mike Liut]

With a flat cap next year, I can’t see a legitimate place that Petro could go. I guess the Avs have room, but they’ll have tough decisions down the road.

 

[TheGoldenGod]

St. Louis local radio his Tim McKernan interviewed Doug the other day.
The Tim McKernan Show Ep. 348 – Doug Armstrong - insidestl.com

8:37 mark Doug joins - league coming back, random chatter, etc.
19:55 - Pietrangelo talk picks up

Take aways - Doug and Alex have been together since the beginning for the both of them. "He's our captain... I know he wants to be here I know we want to keep him here", "We are going to do everything we can to get Alex under contract and keep him here, and I know that's what he wants, its just a timing issue now". Doug talks about summer signings, getting creative with Alex, then extends into the future, the "window", and core group of players, some names named.

Enjoy.

Just to add to this...

Tim McKernan via Twitter
@tmckernan - May 13, 2020
Just spoke with #STLBlues GM Doug Armstrong for an extended conversation on The @TimMcKernanShow

Armstrong on the NHL returning to the ice: "I’m fairly confident. I know the commissioner and the NHLPA are working on a formula that will allow us to crown a champion.”

Armstrong on 2020 playoffs: “Right now, there’s a lot of talk about a 24 team playoff. That’s the latest one. They’ve come to the realization that they probably can’t get all 31 teams to finish their regular season. If that 24 team playoff doesn’t work out then you can go to 16"

Armstrong on how a 24 team playoff system would impact the #STLBlues sitting at the #1 seed in the Western Conference: “Do the top eight teams get a bye and do the other 16 play for eight spots? And then you get down to your 16. But then there’s the concern that those eight teams will have played three to five games and your team hasn’t played in five to six months, and is that fair to you? There are a lot of things going on behind the scenes, and I know they’re working on that.”

Armstrong on the #NHL's idea of teams playing in "pod cities: “The quickest way to get back is to get into pod cities. I don’t want to say sequester everyone, but get everyone under one roof. And then let it play out from there. Whether it’s two or four cities, I think that’s something that they’re debating now. Can you do it in two cities? Do you need four cities? I’m not 100% that it has to be in division. I think it can be in conference.”

Armstrong on Alex Pietrangelo: "When we left our GM meetings in March, we were still playing hockey there was an indication that the salary cap would be—if 81.5 is the upper limit now, they were talking 84to 88—so we had an idea of our flexibility. Obviously, with the pandemic and the NHL system, it’s 50-50 revenues with the players for the cap. So, we have to make an adjustment. But, I know from the St. Louis Blues’ perspective, we're going do everything we can to get Alex Pietrangelo under contract and keep him here. And I know that’s what he wants. It's just a timing issue now. We signed Scandella. That doesn't really affect that. He's a left shot player who replaced Bouwmeester. We're going to have to get creative. And Alex wants to be a part of this, and we want him to be part of it. So, our job is when we find out all the details (on the cap), we get to work and make sure that he retires a Blue."

 

[Mike Liut]

I’m not really sure how salary caps work, but can’t they sign him to a contract that starts a lower, like maybe 6 mill, then goes to like 10 mill? 6,6,7,7,8,9,10,10 to help with the early year? That averages roughly 8 mill

 

[ort]

No, the cap hit is an average of your salary through its duration.

10, 10, 10, 10, 5, 5, 5, 5 would be a 7.5 million cap hit for all 8 years.

 

[Mike Liut]

No, the cap hit is an average of your salary through its duration.

10, 10, 10, 10, 5, 5, 5, 5 would be a 7.5 million cap hit for all 8 years.

So there’s no front or back loading to help with certain years when you are tight against the cap?

 

[bluesXwinXtheXcup]

Faulk part of the core is one thing that stood out to me.

 

[simon IC]

In very comfortable Pietro will re-sign. There is no smoke to the effect that he wants to explore the open market. If there were, we’d have gotten that sense from at least one side.

As for the ‘core’ players, it’s interesting that Faulk was included. I don’t think any omissions here are significant, since it’s such an informal setting it is easy to forget someone. But it makes the priority to re-sign Schwartz look higher and makes it look like there is a plan for Faulk to integrate better. 3 RHD in the core is very interesting.

It is rare that I really disagree with Armstrong's vision of the team's direction. Three RD in the core does not make any sense to me, nor does investing that much salary in them. But, he's an NHL GM and I'm just a guy on a message board, so what do I know.

 

[bluesXwinXtheXcup]

It is rare that I really disagree with Armstrong's vision of the team's direction. Three RD in the core does not make any sense to me, nor does investing that much salary in them. But, he's an NHL GM and I'm just a guy on a message board, so what do I know.

No way we have Pietrangelo, Parayko and Faulk next season. Impossible to have/want that much money on the right side. Something has to give and that something is Pietrangelo IMO.

 

[Brockon]

So there’s no front or back loading to help with certain years when you are tight against the cap?

You can front load or back load a contract to help with cash flow for a franchise - typically richer franchises will front load their stars contracts, paying them most of their salary in a signing bonus due July 1st (Matthews, Marner and Tavares all get/got a 15M dollar check on July 1st for the first 2 years of their deal). This makes moving contracts easier as performance declines.

When the cash is paid to a player doesn't affect the cap hit, which is the average of all dollars paid divided by the years the contract covers - which is why the term AAV (Average Annual Value) is used interchangeably with the term cap hit.

There are rules regarding how a team can structure a contract, so that the lowest year's salary cannot be less than half of the top year's salary, among others. But, all this does is incentivize cap floor teams or teams on internal budgets to acquire these front loaded contracts in their twilight years, to acquire assets. Arizona did this for years, Ottawa does it to a lesser extent (rumours paint Melnyk as not wanting to pay to hit the cap floor). Last year Ottawa's cap hit was 74.3M, its salaries owed were 66M and it started the year with ~15M in LTIR players in Gaborik, McArthur and Callahan (these salaries are paid by insurance) - so Ottawa iced a team with a cap hit of 74.3M at the cost of 51M out of pocket.

Edit : Capfriendly.com does an amazing job showing the contract break down for individual players, and also displays the team cap situation in a reasonably easy to read format. This aspect of the league fascinates me, though I'm far from an expert on the rules.

 

[BlueDream]

With a flat cap next year, I can’t see a legitimate place that Petro could go. I guess the Avs have room, but they’ll have tough decisions down the road.

The Avs are gonna be loaded with D now. They don’t have room and will likely have to trade a guy like Zadorov to fit their young guys.

 

[simon IC]

With a flat cap next year, I can’t see a legitimate place that Petro could go. I guess the Avs have room, but they’ll have tough decisions down the road.

Boston or Florida could do it. SC contender or nice weather and low taxes.
(EDIT ... if you consider Florida weather "nice". Personally, I would hate it, but many love it).

 

[bluesXwinXtheXcup]

The Avs are gonna be loaded with D now. They don’t have room and will likely have to trade a guy like Zadorov to fit their young guys.

Pity there isn't a "dislike" button...

 

[Blueston]

Boston or Florida could do it. SC contender or nice weather and low taxes.
(EDIT ... if you consider Florida weather "nice". Personally, I would hate it, but many love it).

Weather is much nicer there during traditional hockey months than during baseball months.

 

[Brian39]

With a flat cap next year, I can’t see a legitimate place that Petro could go. I guess the Avs have room, but they’ll have tough decisions down the road.

Assuming a flat cap, 14 of the 30 other NHL teams currently have $15M+ in cap space for next season. A lot of them owe very few raises next year and there are a chunk of good team in the mix:

Detroit: $34M to fill 12 roster spots
Buffalo: $33M to fill 13 roster spots
Florida: $20M to fill 10 roster spots
Montreal: $18M to fill 7 roster spots
Ottawa: $39M to fill 14 roster spots
Boston: $18M to fill 5 roster spots
New Jersey: $25M to fill 13 roster spots
Calgary: $16M to fill 9 roster spots
Los Angeles: $20M to fill 7 roster spots
Vancouver: $17M to fill 8 roster spots
Colorado: $22.5M to fill 9 roster spots
Dallas: $19.5M to fill 8 roster spots
Minnesota: $16M to fill 6 roster spots
Winnipeg: $16M to fill 10 roster spots (almost all of them are RFAs with no arb rights or depth fills)

Other potential suitors with $10M+ in space and enough cap flexibility to make a Petro contract work with marginal pain to their roster:

Columbus: $10M to fill a couple roster spots (exact number is murky considering which injury fill ins they view as NHL players next year)
NY Rangers: $13M to fill 7 roster spots
NY Islanders: $10M to fill 3 roster spots
Edmonton: $10M to fill 7 roster spots (they would likely have to make a move to make everything work, but of the 7 open spots, Athanasiou is the only guy due real money)
Anaheim: $12.5M to fill 5 roster spots (assuming Kesler is LTIRetired)

That's two thirds of the league that has the space for Petro or could create the space easier than we can. Petro might be the top UFA on the market this year. He is without question top 3. A flat cap probably impacts the final number for Petro, but it doesn't decimate the market. The $4.5M jump after Vegas expansion brought in a huge new revenue stream is the only time in the last 5 years that the cap has gone up by $2.5M or more. We heard $84M-$88M estimates less than 2 weeks before the pandemic hit, but most people assumed we would be on the low end of that scale (remember when the NHL predicted that this year's cap would be $83M?). There was absolutely no reason for teams to be assuming a cap higher than $84M when they were doing long term budget analysis last year and there were only 10 days between the optimism of an $84M-$88M number before canceling games and looking at the harsh reality of decreased revenue. There were only 2 contracts given out with $1M+ AAVs between the announcement of that estimate and the league shutdown. It isn't like GMs committed a bunch of money to guys based on a larger-than-expected cap projection. Realistically, a flat cap will mean a salary cap that is $2M or maybe $3M less than what GMs were budgeting for. That will impact the market, but it doesn't knock many teams out of the running for top tier UFAs.

A flat cap will hurt Petro's final value just like it will hurt all UFA's final value, but it isn't going to be a nightmare scenario where half the league is screwed against the cap.

 

[Mike Liut]

Assuming a flat cap, 14 of the 30 other NHL teams currently have $15M+ in cap space for next season. A lot of them owe very few raises next year and there are a chunk of good team in the mix:

Detroit: $34M to fill 12 roster spots
Buffalo: $33M to fill 13 roster spots
Florida: $20M to fill 10 roster spots
Montreal: $18M to fill 7 roster spots
Ottawa: $39M to fill 14 roster spots
Boston: $18M to fill 5 roster spots
New Jersey: $25M to fill 13 roster spots
Calgary: $16M to fill 9 roster spots
Los Angeles: $20M to fill 7 roster spots
Vancouver: $17M to fill 8 roster spots
Colorado: $22.5M to fill 9 roster spots
Dallas: $19.5M to fill 8 roster spots
Minnesota: $16M to fill 6 roster spots
Winnipeg: $16M to fill 10 roster spots (almost all of them are RFAs with no arb rights or depth fills)

Other potential suitors with $10M+ in space and enough cap flexibility to make a Petro contract work with marginal pain to their roster:

Columbus: $10M to fill a couple roster spots (exact number is murky considering which injury fill ins they view as NHL players next year)
NY Rangers: $13M to fill 7 roster spots
NY Islanders: $10M to fill 3 roster spots
Edmonton: $10M to fill 7 roster spots (they would likely have to make a move to make everything work, but of the 7 open spots, Athanasiou is the only guy due real money)
Anaheim: $12.5M to fill 5 roster spots (assuming Kesler is LTIRetired)

That's two thirds of the league that has the space for Petro or could create the space easier than we can. Petro might be the top UFA on the market this year. He is without question top 3. A flat cap probably impacts the final number for Petro, but it doesn't decimate the market. The $4.5M jump after Vegas expansion brought in a huge new revenue stream is the only time in the last 5 years that the cap has gone up by $2.5M or more. We heard $84M-$88M estimates less than 2 weeks before the pandemic hit, but most people assumed we would be on the low end of that scale (remember when the NHL predicted that this year's cap would be $83M?). There was absolutely no reason for teams to be assuming a cap higher than $84M when they were doing long term budget analysis last year and there were only 10 days between the optimism of an $84M-$88M number before canceling games and looking at the harsh reality of decreased revenue. There were only 2 contracts given out with $1M+ AAVs between the announcement of that estimate and the league shutdown. It isn't like GMs committed a bunch of money to guys based on a larger-than-expected cap projection. Realistically, a flat cap will mean a salary cap that is $2M or maybe $3M less than what GMs were budgeting for. That will impact the market, but it doesn't knock many teams out of the running for top tier UFAs.

A flat cap will hurt Petro's final value just like it will hurt all UFA's final value, but it isn't going to be a nightmare scenario where half the league is screwed against the cap.

that’s why I used legitimate. Do you think Petro would go to a non playoff team for more money? I don’t see it. Didn’t Backes tell Petro to not chase more money and stay where you are happy?

 

[Blueston]

Assuming a flat cap, 14 of the 30 other NHL teams currently have $15M+ in cap space for next season. A lot of them owe very few raises next year and there are a chunk of good team in the mix:

Detroit: $34M to fill 12 roster spots
Buffalo: $33M to fill 13 roster spots
Florida: $20M to fill 10 roster spots
Montreal: $18M to fill 7 roster spots
Ottawa: $39M to fill 14 roster spots
Boston: $18M to fill 5 roster spots
New Jersey: $25M to fill 13 roster spots
Calgary: $16M to fill 9 roster spots
Los Angeles: $20M to fill 7 roster spots
Vancouver: $17M to fill 8 roster spots
Colorado: $22.5M to fill 9 roster spots
Dallas: $19.5M to fill 8 roster spots
Minnesota: $16M to fill 6 roster spots
Winnipeg: $16M to fill 10 roster spots (almost all of them are RFAs with no arb rights or depth fills)

Other potential suitors with $10M+ in space and enough cap flexibility to make a Petro contract work with marginal pain to their roster:

Columbus: $10M to fill a couple roster spots (exact number is murky considering which injury fill ins they view as NHL players next year)
NY Rangers: $13M to fill 7 roster spots
NY Islanders: $10M to fill 3 roster spots
Edmonton: $10M to fill 7 roster spots (they would likely have to make a move to make everything work, but of the 7 open spots, Athanasiou is the only guy due real money)
Anaheim: $12.5M to fill 5 roster spots (assuming Kesler is LTIRetired)

That's two thirds of the league that has the space for Petro or could create the space easier than we can. Petro might be the top UFA on the market this year. He is without question top 3. A flat cap probably impacts the final number for Petro, but it doesn't decimate the market. The $4.5M jump after Vegas expansion brought in a huge new revenue stream is the only time in the last 5 years that the cap has gone up by $2.5M or more. We heard $84M-$88M estimates less than 2 weeks before the pandemic hit, but most people assumed we would be on the low end of that scale (remember when the NHL predicted that this year's cap would be $83M?). There was absolutely no reason for teams to be assuming a cap higher than $84M when they were doing long term budget analysis last year and there were only 10 days between the optimism of an $84M-$88M number before canceling games and looking at the harsh reality of decreased revenue. There were only 2 contracts given out with $1M+ AAVs between the announcement of that estimate and the league shutdown. It isn't like GMs committed a bunch of money to guys based on a larger-than-expected cap projection. Realistically, a flat cap will mean a salary cap that is $2M or maybe $3M less than what GMs were budgeting for. That will impact the market, but it doesn't knock many teams out of the running for top tier UFAs.

A flat cap will hurt Petro's final value just like it will hurt all UFA's final value, but it isn't going to be a nightmare scenario where half the league is screwed against the cap.

Of these teams, Florida or Dallas seem most likely to me if he leaves.

 

[Supersonic]

Habs fan coming in peace. As a Niagara guy pretty cool to see two local players who I used to watch (Petey and Dunn) both having so much success in the NHL for you guys. Don’t hate me but I wouldn’t be mad if either became a Hab one day

 

[Brian39]

that’s why I used legitimate. Do you think Petro would go to a non playoff team for more money? I don’t see it. Didn’t Backes tell Petro to not chase more money and stay where you are happy?

I have no idea whether Petro would go to a non-playoff team for more money. Neither do you. Didn't Backes tell Petro that a while ago? If Petro took that advice as gospel and wasn't willing to consider leaving, we'd have an extension by now. Petro wouldn't be the first and wouldn't be the last pro athlete to win a championship and then voluntarily leave the organization where he did it.

Do I think he would go to a non-playoff team over a couple million over the life of the contract? My gut says no. $5M? $10M? $15M? The bigger that number gets, the more likely he would be willing to do it. All it takes is one market to heave absurd money at a player if he is open to going there under the right circumstances. That's how Tavares got $11M from the Leafs. San Jose wasn't his destination of choice, but their ridiculous offer forced Toronto to get into the ballpark. Tavares reportedly left $14M on the table to go to his preferred destination, but it still meant that Toronto had to offer $11M a year to land him.

7 of the teams I listed are currently sitting in playoff position and 2 of them are top 5 in the NHL. 5 more of those teams are within 3 points or less of a playoff spot. Those are all "legitimate" options in a league where there is so much year to year variance among the teams who make the playoffs. And there are a couple other genuine contenders that I didn't list but could make it work with a flat cap:

The Pens have $13M to fill 7 roster spots. They have a potential need at RD with Schultz hitting UFA. Going after Petro would force a couple tough decisions with arbitration eligible RFAs, but the addition of Petro would give them a better blueline than they have ever had in the Crosby era and they are squarely in "win-now" mode.

The Caps have $10.5M to fill 7 roster spots. If they think Samsonov is ready to start next year (and he looks ready now), then basically all of the roster slots are going to ELC/cheap vets. If they signed Petro, they would just be left filling forward spots 12-14, D 6 and 7 and a backup (likely Copley). If they want a Carlson-Petro 1-2 punch on the right side, they can do it.

Realistically, there are only a handful of playoff teams that couldn't make it work fairly easily: Tampa, Toronto, Philly, and Vegas. Add Carolina since they probably could make it work but already have an abundance of D. Plenty of "legitimate" options regardless of how you want to define that.

Edit: I'm not saying I think Petro is gone. I think an extension gets done. All things equal, I think he would prefer to stay here. On the flip side, I believe Army when he says that he the goal is for PEtro to retire here. My point is that there will absolutely be a market for him if he explores UFA and he will almost certainly get a couple hail mary offers from bad teams, substantial interest from bubble teams and will probably get a couple serious offers from genuinely good teams. The cap being a couple mil less than everyone thought isn't going to change that reality and we are still going to have to make a serious offer to be in the ballpark of those.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Florida is tough because the only reason they have a ton of space is because Dadonov and Hoffman are up. They already have a bunch of money tied up in their D core, and if they don't bring back Dadonov and Hoffman or similar type players with their money, then their offense takes a big hit.

A lot of the other teams have plenty of RFAs to sign, so when you really break it down, there aren't many teams with that much realistic space for Petro. Problem is we have 0 flexibility and need to shed space to make a deal work.

 

[Brian39]

Of these teams, Florida or Dallas seem most likely to me if he leaves.

I think Boston makes a competitive offer if Krug walks.

I think Edmonton would have a better chance than some would like to believe. Larsson and Russel are both RD and will be UFA in the summer of 2021. Larsson has no trade protection and Russell has to submit a list of 15 teams he would accept a trade to. If they landed Petro, they could flip one of them for a futures asset or cheap middle 6 forward to help with their depth. They should be a clear playoff team if you replace Russell with Petro next year and they have enough cap flexibility from 2021-2025 that you can really sell the ability to build a great core around McDavid, Drai, and Petro.

This one is less likely, but I could see the Devils doing what the Rangers did last summer with Panarin. They have three 1st rounders this year and zero cap concerns for the next couple years. Subban and Schneider both come off the books before they owe their current young talent raises (Hughes, Zacha, Butcher and Blackwood if he is truly the guy). They could offer Petro $12M AAV by 7 years, still be able acquire a couple other good veterans this summer, and not have that AAV hurt them for the first 4 years of the contract. I'm not sure Petro wants to be a part of a rebuild, but that would be a hell of a lot more than anyone else is offering and they would be a bubble team or better in year 1.

 

[Brian39]

Florida is tough because the only reason they have a ton of space is because Dadonov and Hoffman are up. They already have a bunch of money tied up in their D core, and if they don't bring back Dadonov and Hoffman or similar type players with their money, then their offense takes a big hit.

A lot of the other teams have plenty of RFAs to sign, so when you really break it down, there aren't many teams with that much realistic space for Petro. Problem is we have 0 flexibility and need to shed space to make a deal work.

I think we have to accept that there are plenty of teams out there who would be willing to do similar roster tweaking if they land Petro.

D men like Petro don't become available to sign in the NHL. Who was the last D man of Petro's caliber to hit UFA? I'm not exaggerating when I say that if he gets to UFA, Petro will be the best D man to hit UFA under the existing CBA. Teams just don't get opportunities to sign top 20 NHL D men unless they develop them from a raw player or give up a massive trade package to acquire as a finished product. I can't recall the last time teams had the chance to acquire a top 20 D man for nothing but money. As a whole, I think we are vastly underestimating what teams will do to make the cap work if they ave a chance to plug arguably the most difficult hole in the league.

There isn't a team out there who is going to pass on making an offer to Petro based on concerns about signing their own middle 6 RFA forwards or bottom 4 RFA D. We're talking about downgrading a good middle 6 forward to a rookie and top-end backup to a rookie in order to make the cap work. Other teams would absolutely be willing to do the same. The only teams out on Petro are the ones who already have the cap space tied up next year or have elite RFAs due big raises. That list is short.