Rumor: Rumors and Proposals Thread | Free Agent Frenzy "I'd Buy That For a Dollar!"

[Mr Positive]

Klefbom won't meet the requirements for exposing, as he won't have played enough games.

The requirements are for one or two years, so Klefs contract could still count. But the question is, are expansion requirements pro rated?

I believe we'd be allowed to re sign a player to meet the requirement as well. So that might be Russell. We could also trade for someone even the day before expansion so I wouldn't worry too much about it.

 

[BarDownBobo]

Klefbom won't meet the requirements for exposing, as he won't have played enough games.

If next season is shortened as well I’m kinda assuming they’re gonna modify the 40/70 numbers. I could see it being like 30-35 and 50-60, depending how many games they end up playing next season.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Russell really should be easy to get rid of. Which really makes me think Holland doesn't WANT to get rid of him. He must think that Russell can cover the third pairing, and also cover for injuries on the left or right side. There isn't really another explanation that I can think of.

That or it’s not as “easy” as everyone says. It’s a joke actually. I think some people here think Cap Friendly Armchair GM is actually how being a GM works.

And that said, we need Russell if Klefbom is out any appreciable length of time.

 

[CanmoreMike]

They are already at 54m for 13 players next season. You can add about 20 mil onto that for Hughes, Petterssen and Demko, which now puts them at 74m for 16 players. They will be pretty much capped out this season, and still have to factor in Petterssen and Hughes bonus money again which will probably lead to another 1.7m in bonus overage. This overage will pretty much cancel out any savings from a Eriksson buyout, so now your at 74m for 15 players. You still have to replace Edler, Pearson, Sutter and Benns spots on the roster as well next season.

I’ll bite - I forgot about rookie bonuses so yeah, that does throw a wrench into my thesis.

I’ve been watching hockey long enough (not saying you haven’t) to see teams back themselves into corners and suddenly walk away better than where they started.

We shall see. They may indeed be screwed for another 3 years after next.

 

[foshizzle]

Haven't heard this about players (I don't doubt it), but I know many people around the league disliked the Oilers because of how arrogant some of their people were. If nothing else, Holland has probably helped change that perception.

He did. The organization was not well liked. Stauffer, or Wilkins, briefly touched on it this week as well.

 

[McJadeddog]

The requirements are for one or two years, so Klefs contract could still count. But the question is, are expansion requirements pro rated?

I believe we'd be allowed to re sign a player to meet the requirement as well. So that might be Russell. We could also trade for someone even the day before expansion so I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Yeah 70 games over 2 years, but if Klefbom doesn't play this year, he didn't play enough this past year

 

[foshizzle]

Didn't he hurt Buchberger's feelings and shit went downhill for him? Because we all know OBC stick together

It was either him or Anderson. Either Hall joked about Anderson and Buchberger tattled or he joked about Buchberger and Buchberger tattled. But yes. Then the Oilers PR machine went into overdrive.

 

[CanmoreMike]

That or it’s not as “easy” as everyone says. It’s a joke actually. I think some people here think Cap Friendly Armchair GM is actually how being a GM works.

And that said, we need Russell if Klefbom is out any appreciable length of time.

Few things:

I am one who thinkA Cap Friendly GM is how the business works and feel it is quite confident I could be an NHL GM after messing around with some numbers.

And I agree, we are going to want to keep Russell if Klefbom is out any length of time - I think coaches and management want as little shuffle as possible. If Klefbom finishes the season strong and no question he’ll be ready for Day 1 I think Holland is much more bullish on possibly trading Russell.

Lastly, I strongly believe if it wasn’t for the Sekeras injury in the 2017 playoffs Russell wouldn’t have been re-upped.

Just my hunch.

 

[McJadeddog]

If next season is shortened as well I’m kinda assuming they’re gonna modify the 40/70 numbers. I could see it being like 30-35 and 50-60, depending how many games they end up playing next season.

Let's hope because klefbom might weirdly be the best to expose. Ideally we just sign/trade a cheap 3rd pairing guy beyond next year. I'm very interested why we haven't done that already

 

[foshizzle]

Unloading a long term deal at a high cap hit without taking any salary back is. But unloading a short term deal like Chiasson shouldn’t be.

That’s why I didn’t understand not buying out Neal.

 

[tabs]

Let's hope because klefbom might weirdly be the best to expose. Ideally we just sign/trade a cheap 3rd pairing guy beyond next year. I'm very interested why we haven't done that already

I believe there is a clause that if a player could have a career threatening injury that he cannot be exposed but also doesn’t have to be protected. If Klefbom misses the entire year, that clause could apply.

 

[AddyTheWrath]

With Hall citing Krueger as one of the reasons he signed in Buffalo, it makes me wonder if he’s the kind of guy to have a lot of nostalgia for his early career.

By all accounts, he seems to have been really heartbroken to leave and he did grow from a teenager to an adult with our team.

I honestly wouldn’t be surprised at all to see Hall re-sign with the Oilers next offseason. If anyone seems the type, it’s him.

 

[McJadeddog]

I believe there is a clause that if a player could have a career threatening injury that he cannot be exposed but also doesn’t have to be protected. If Klefbom misses the entire year, that clause could apply.

Sure, great I guess. But it still doesn't solve the problem that we HAVE to expose a D that meets the requirements. Right now we would have to expose one of nurse, bear, or Jones.

 

[AddyTheWrath]

Sure, great I guess. But it still doesn't since the problem that we HAVE to expose a D that meets the requirements. Right now we would have to expose one of nurse, bear, or Jones.

It’s much better if we don’t have to protect him. Finding a defenseman to expose is easy. Trade a bottom pick to a team for a 6th/7th defenseman about to become UFA and sign him to a buriable contract.

 

[Mr Positive]

That or it’s not as “easy” as everyone says. It’s a joke actually. I think some people here think Cap Friendly Armchair GM is actually how being a GM works.

And that said, we need Russell if Klefbom is out any appreciable length of time.

I disagree that we need Russell with Klefbom. If we could trade Russell we should, and sign someone as good or better for less cap.

However, who are we trading him to? I see on capfriendly that only Ottawa is under the cap floor. Russell has a NTC that would block Ottawa. Game over.

But whatever. It is what it is. Just like Neal and Chiasson, he's overpaid but he is still a good player. It would be nice to still be able to pluck another player on a one year deal during this crazy bargain time. Kahun, Anathasiou, etc.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Few things:

I am one who thinkA Cap Friendly GM is how the business works and feel it is quite confident I could be an NHL GM after messing around with some numbers.

And I agree, we are going to want to keep Russell if Klefbom is out any length of time - I think coaches and management want as little shuffle as possible. If Klefbom finishes the season strong and no question he’ll be ready for Day 1 I think Holland is much more bullish on possibly trading Russell.

Lastly, I strongly believe if it wasn’t for the Sekeras injury in the 2017 playoffs Russell wouldn’t have been re-upped.

Just my hunch.

The problem with Cap Friendly is there isn’t someone on to other side of the Trade button who says No, or owners telling you to be at the cap floor, or players whose marriage just broke up or a drug problem impacting their play that only as a GM you know about but they have a 20 team NTC.

 

[McJadeddog]

It’s much better if we don’t have to protect him. Finding a defenseman to expose is easy. Trade a bottom pick to a team for a 6th/7th defenseman about to become UFA and sign him to a buriable contract.

Yeah, that is exactly what we should be doing right now. Why haven't we done it?

 

[XXIV97]

By the way, Chris Johnston said on the Steve Dangle Podcast (available on YouTube & Spotify) that he believes Taylor Hall wants to go back to Edmonton.

He said it around the 29:00 minute mark.

Edit: After listening to it again, he said that he thinks he will go back to Edmonton one day. He said Edmonton just didn't have the cap space this season.

 

[AddyTheWrath]

Yeah, that is exactly what we should be doing right now. Why haven't we done it?

Probably lack of cap space or maybe we want to sign Bear first? We can do it any time before the draft so I’m not really worried. I doubt a professional sports organization would just forget or not know the expansion draft rules.

 

[McJadeddog]

Probably lack of cap space or maybe we want to sign Bear first? We can do it any time before the draft so I’m not really worried. I doubt a professional sports organization would just forget or not know the expansion draft rules.

Haha, you have SIGNIFICANTLY more faith in this organization than I do.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

I disagree that we need Russell with Klefbom. If we could trade Russell we should, and sign someone as good or better for less cap.

However, who are we trading him to? I see on capfriendly that only Ottawa is under the cap floor. Russell has a NTC that would block Ottawa. Game over.

But whatever. It is what it is. Just like Neal and Chiasson, he's overpaid but he is still a good player. It would be nice to still be able to pluck another player on a one year deal during this crazy bargain time. Kahun, Anathasiou, etc.

You just said why it’s difficult to trade Russell - “If we could trade Russell we should, and sign someone as good or better for less cap. ”.

Why would your rival GM trade for Russell when they could do the exact same thing?

Also I said we need Russell if Klefbom was not coming back. I didn’t think we were getting rid of Russell this off season anyway. Between the high cap hit, his NTC, and Covid enforced cap floors on other teams we would have to give up a valuable asset in addition that we have precious few of to give up, if even that were possible.

 

[BarDownBobo]

Let's hope because klefbom might weirdly be the best to expose. Ideally we just sign/trade a cheap 3rd pairing guy beyond next year. I'm very interested why we haven't done that already

It’ll be interesting to see how they handle it. I wonder if they might sign Lagesson to a 2 year deal and get him into enough games to fit that criteria. Might be the cheapest/easiest solution.

 

[AddyTheWrath]

Haha, you have SIGNIFICANTLY more faith in this organization than I do.

I might be more concerned if Lowe or MacTavish were still at the helm lol.

We’ll be fine. Even Chiarelli and his team dealt with the expansion draft fine back in 2017.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Probably lack of cap space or maybe we want to sign Bear first? We can do it any time before the draft so I’m not really worried. I doubt a professional sports organization would just forget or not know the expansion draft rules.

Remember when the Flames sent an offer sheet to Ryan O’Reilly and if Colorado wouldn’t have matched it Calgary would have lost O’Reilly because he had to clear waivers first? They literally didn’t know the rules.

 

[FunkyChicken]

Think there is still room to sign a couple of buriable contacts.

Some LD depth. Koekkoek, Hutton, Mueller, Del Zotto.
If you sign Koekkoek for $1M over 2 years, you can expose him at the expansion draft.

A couple of wingers with rebound or top 6 chances. Kahun (probably goes for more), C. Wilson, Galchenyuk, Sheary.
Someone that may fit with McDavid so that RNH can be placed on his rightful line.