Speculation: Tampa Bay's upcoming cap crunch

[seanlinden]

It’s not going to come anywhere near that. As I’ve already pointed (no pun intended) out we can afford to pay Point $7-8M with relatively little trouble. We’ll ask him to take a cheaper bridge, but if he says he wants that five-year deal we’ll give it to him and be done with it. He doesn’t seem like the type to play hardball with us and we aren’t going to be stupid enough to play hardball with him. Unless he decides to be completely unreasonable (which would be out of character for him) we’re not going to get anywhere close to a Nylander situation here.

I guess it comes down to your assessment of "relatively little trouble".

Callahan at 50% retained is certainly an easy trade, but I'd say that he's worth more than $2.9m to the Bolts.

Assuming an $83.5m cap, they've got 15 players signed and about $10m to work with and 8 roster spots to fill. That ignores the possibility of Point, Sergachev, and the other ELCs picking up a few performance bonuses and shrinking that.

Let's say point takes $7m. That leaves $3m to fill 7 spots, which obviously isn't possible. Even if you subtract Callahan at say, $4m, you're left with $7m to fill 8 roster spots, plus the 4 players Tampa already has making less than $1m. Without subtracting at least one of the $4-5m guys, it would mean that Tampa would have 12 players on it's roster (half the team on any given night) making less than $1m.

From a defensive standpoint, it would likely mean that all of Coburn, Girardi, and Stralman are gone.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

Why does Point sign a bridge if he can get paid a lot elsewhere?

 

[FerrisRox]

Everybody talks about the Jets and Leafs cap crunch, THIS is the team with the cap crunch

The big difference is Tampa can move out a lot of money without even touching their core or weakening their team.

The decisions they have to make are not complicated and they aren't punching holes in their lineup by shedding salary.

 

[PAZ]

If Point signs a bridge deal, he'll still be lookin at $6-7 mil for a 3-4 year contract.

The Lightning got Kucherov to sign a fair deal afterward the bridge, but I think it's playing with fire if the expectation is that every player will do the same. Add onto the fact that this summer there will be a load of talented RFAs getting huge deals (Rantanen, Laine, Boeser, etc.), I think it's better just to bite the bullet and sign him to a $8-10 mil AAV contract.

Definitely think the Lightning's cap crunch is overblown though. The only bad contract they have is Callahan and they have a bunch of very nice complimentary pieces where at the end of the day, can be replaced internally with the best scouting/developmental team in the league if they need to trade the players away.

What will be interesting down the line is seeing if teams will be willing to pay full price for the players on the block, knowing they have to be traded. Similar to Chicago's glory days, they usually lost the trades in value because they needed to shed space.

 

[sharks9]

Why do people think Callahan will be so easy to move? He had 18 points last year and is on pace for 17 this year. Teams won't be taking on a 5.8 million contract for a 20-point scorer unless Tampa is adding something pretty significant.

 

[AndreRoy]

I guess it comes down to your assessment of "relatively little trouble".

Callahan at 50% retained is certainly an easy trade, but I'd say that he's worth more than $2.9m to the Bolts.

Assuming an $83.5m cap, they've got 15 players signed and about $10m to work with and 8 roster spots to fill. That ignores the possibility of Point, Sergachev, and the other ELCs picking up a few performance bonuses and shrinking that.

Let's say point takes $7m. That leaves $3m to fill 7 spots, which obviously isn't possible. Even if you subtract Callahan at say, $4m, you're left with $7m to fill 8 roster spots, plus the 4 players Tampa already has making less than $1m. Without subtracting at least one of the $4-5m guys, it would mean that Tampa would have 12 players on it's roster (half the team on any given night) making less than $1m.

I’m assuming Miller will be traded for futures in the summer. He’s been a decent complementary piece and an upgrade on Namestnikov but he’s been dropped out of our top six and has a history of disappearing in the playoffs; we’ll hardly notice his absence. You’re also assuming we’ll go with a 23-man roster: Martel has played a grand total of one game this season and we spent the previous year and a good portion of this one with only 13 forwards on the roster so it’s no problem for us to do so again if necessary.

So after Point’s signing at $7M and Miller’s trade that gives us around $8M to fill 7-8 spots before we even think about doing anything with Callahan. And most of those spots are one our fourth line, bottom pairing, and 13th forward/7th defenseman where salaries at or below $1M are commonplace. Plus we’ve got a long list of guys who have performed well above the level normally expected of ELC players so judging them by the salary they make isn’t indicative of the team we’re actually icing.

So like I said, Point at $7M isn’t a problem for us.

 

[A1LeafNation]

I’m assuming Miller will be traded for futures in the summer. He’s been a decent complementary piece and an upgrade on Namestnikov but he’s been dropped out of our top six and has a history of disappearing in the playoffs; we’ll hardly notice his absence. You’re also assuming we’ll go with a 23-man roster: Martel has played a grand total of one game this season and we spent the previous year and a good portion of this one with only 13 forwards on the roster so it’s no problem for us to do so again if necessary.

So after Point’s signing at $7M and Miller’s trade that gives us around $8M to fill 7-8 spots before we even think about doing anything with Callahan. And most of those spots are one our fourth line, bottom pairing, and 13th forward/7th defenseman where salaries at or below $1M are commonplace. Plus we’ve got a long list of guys who have performed well above the level normally expected of ELC players so judging them by the salary they make isn’t indicative of the team we’re actually icing.

So like I said, Point at $7M isn’t a problem for us.

Lol "Miller is shit....but we can trade him."

 

[AndreRoy]

Why do people think Callahan will be so easy to move? He had 18 points last year and is on pace for 17 this year. Teams won't be taking on a 5.8 million contract for a 20-point scorer unless Tampa is adding something pretty significant.

He only has a year left and we almost certainly won’t need to clear his entire contract. At 50% retention he’ll cost $2.9M and his defensive, PK, and leadership abilities make him a bargain at that price even with his minimal offensive contributions.

 

[PAZ]

Lol "Miller is ****....but we can trade him."

I mean.. it's the truth.

He's a streaky, complimentary player on a very deep roster. At the same time, he still pots 50 points a season and brings a physical presence.

 

[AndreRoy]

Lol "Miller is ****....but we can trade him."

Never said he’s shit, only that we’re so loaded at the wing that we won’t miss him. He’d be a top six player on most teams and a top liner on some; we had him on our fourth line earlier in the season. Having that sort of depth is a nice position to be in.

 

[seanlinden]

I’m assuming Miller will be traded for futures in the summer. He’s been a decent complementary piece and an upgrade on Namestnikov but he’s been dropped out of our top six and has a history of disappearing in the playoffs; we’ll hardly notice his absence. You’re also assuming we’ll go with a 23-man roster: Martel has played a grand total of one game this season and we spent the previous year and a good portion of this one with only 13 forwards on the roster so it’s no problem for us to do so again if necessary.

So after Point’s signing at $7M and Miller’s trade that gives us around $8M to fill 7-8 spots before we even think about doing anything with Callahan. And most of those spots are one our fourth line, bottom pairing, and 13th forward/7th defenseman where salaries at or below $1M are commonplace. Plus we’ve got a long list of guys who have performed well above the level normally expected of ELC players so judging them by the salary they make isn’t indicative of the team we’re actually icing.

So like I said, Point at $7M isn’t a problem for us.

Practically speaking, most teams leave space for a 23 man roster, even if they don't use it every day, simply to cover for short term injuries, or call up a player if somebody is playing poorly.

Assume Miller out for futures, they'll have $8m for 8 spots.

The $73m they have committed already includes 4 players at under $1m (Cirelli, Joseph, Sergachev, Cernak). $1m generally gets you an ELC and/or a project. 12 players (and at least 9 on the lineup card at any point in time) is a lot of youth / projects for a cup competitive team....

This would especially hold true on the blueline, where for years the Bolts have relied on a strong group of veterans (Hedman, Carle, Garrison, McDonagh, Coburn, Girardi, Stralman) and now you'd be looking at Hedman, McDonagh, Sergachev, Koekkoek, and some more young guys -- maybe the off chance that they can get a veteran at $1.5m or something like that.

 

[ccman68]

Why would Gourde sign for 5 mil when Evander Kane and JVR are signing for 7?
Why would Mcdonagh sign for 6.75 when OEL is signing for 8?
And next year: Why would Point sign for 7 when Draisaitl is making 8.5?

Just shut up and accept the fact that players want to play for good teams and are willing to take a bit of a pay cut to do it.

Here is a question you can answer for yourself: Would you rather make 100k a year at your dreamjob or 140k working a job you absolutely hate? Obviously some people would take the money but some people actually want to enjoy their life.

 

[AndreRoy]

Practically speaking, most teams leave space for a 23 man roster, even if they don't use it every day, simply to cover for short term injuries, or call up a player if somebody is playing poorly.

Assume Miller out for futures, they'll have $8m for 8 spots.

The $73m they have committed already includes 4 players at under $1m (Cirelli, Joseph, Sergachev, Cernak). $1m generally gets you an ELC and/or a project. 12 players (and at least 9 on the roster at any point in time) is a lot of youth / projects for a cup competitive team....

This would especially hold true on the blueline, where for years the Bolts have relied on a strong group of veterans (Hedman, Carle, Garrison, McDonagh, Coburn, Stralman) and now you'd be looking at Hedman, McDonagh, Sergachev, Koekkoek, and some more young guys -- maybe the off chance that they can get a veteran at $1.5m or something like that.

First of all some of that “strong group of veterans” were absolute dumpster fires for a good portion of their tenure. We were ecstatic when Carle was bought out, we were happy to see Garrison go, and while he’s since turned things around we weren’t at all happy with Coburn for most of last season. So a veteran who’s fallen off the proverbial cliff isn’t necessarily better than a talented young player still on his ELC.

And again, you’re still making the mistake of judging players by how much they make and not by how they perform on the ice. Point is still on his ELC - is he a risk for us to be putting out there night after night in every situation and against the toughest matchups? The four players you named (Cirelli, Joseph, Sergachev, and Cernak) are all playing well despite their youth, as is Adam Erne. Paquette is a seasoned veteran at this point and he’s only making $1M as well. Remember, we’ve already got all these cheap players playing for us and we’re the top team in the league; most of them were playing for us last season as well when we went to the ECF. So clearly they aren’t hurting us any.

So where’s the risk, really? It lies almost entirely with our defense. But with Stralman’s injury we’ve already got Cernak playing in our top four and asking him and Sergachev to partner effectively with the likes of Hedman and McDonagh next season isn’t exactly a tall order. So now we’re just talking about our bottom pairing and seventh defenseman. And yes, we’d ideally like to bring in a cheap veteran to avoid having two young and (in Koekkoek’s case, relatively) inexperienced guys playing together. But in this scenario we haven’t even looked at trading Callahan yet - boom, there’s the money for a veteran on a one-year deal.

So I maintain that Point at $7M isn’t a problem for us. Yes, we’d be playing a lot of guys on their ELCs, but the vast majority of them are already in our lineup and the ones we’d be adding would be in minor roles. And we’ve spent the last few drafts preparing for just this scenario by focusing on selecting players with high hockey IQs and strong two-way games - in other words, just the sort of player who is likely to be effective in a supporting role early in his career. This is all part of the plan that Yzerman and company have been putting into place over the last several years.

 

[seanlinden]

First of all some of that “strong group of veterans” were absolute dumpster fires for a good portion of their tenure. We were ecstatic when Carle was bought out, we were happy to see Garrison go, and while he’s since turned things around we weren’t at all happy with Coburn for most of last season. So a veteran who’s fallen off the proverbial cliff isn’t necessarily better than a talented young player still on his ELC.

And again, you’re still making the mistake of judging players by how much they make and not by how they perform on the ice. Point is still on his ELC - is he a risk for us to be putting out there night after night in every situation and against the toughest matchups? The four players you named (Cirelli, Joseph, Sergachev, and Cernak) are all playing well despite their youth, as is Adam Erne. Paquette is a seasoned veteran at this point and he’s only making $1M as well. Remember, we’ve already got all these cheap players playing for us and we’re the top team in the league; most of them were playing for us last season as well when we went to the ECF. So clearly they aren’t hurting us any.

So where’s the risk, really? It lies almost entirely with our defense. But with Stralman’s injury we’ve already got Cernak playing in our top four and asking him and Sergachev to partner effectively with the likes of Hedman and McDonagh next season isn’t exactly a tall order. So now we’re just talking about our bottom pairing and seventh defenseman. And yes, we’d ideally like to bring in a cheap veteran to avoid having two young and (in Koekkoek’s case, relatively) inexperienced guys playing together. But in this scenario we haven’t even looked at trading Callahan yet - boom, there’s the money for a veteran on a one-year deal.

So I maintain that Point at $7M isn’t a problem for us. Yes, we’d be playing a lot of guys on their ELCs, but the vast majority of them are already in our lineup and the ones we’d be adding would be in minor roles.

Paquette, Erne, will be in line for raises next year or gone.

It's not a matter of simply judging players by their contracts, but rather, realizing that when you're spending $1m or less on a player, most of the time you're getting a gamble. Almost every team leaves 4-6 spots on their roster for these types of players, where usually 1 or 2 are guys towards the end of their ELC, that you're pretty sure of... in Tampa's case, Point and Sergachev would be those 2 guys.

Relying on 12 spots to be filled leaves a pretty shallow team, that isn't able to insulate the few young players as much, and also leaves them pretty shallow for injuries.

Is it a doom & gloom situation for Tampa? no, they'll probably have a pretty good team next year regardless because of the core that's in place... but we'd be foolish to think that they can just go and sign Point to a $7m contract, without making some reasonably sized changes to their forward group.

 

[AndreRoy]

Paquette, Erne, will be in line for raises next year or gone.

It's not a matter of simply judging players by their contracts, but rather, realizing that when you're spending $1m or less on a player, most of the time you're getting a gamble. Almost every team leaves 4-6 spots on their roster for these types of players, where usually 1 or 2 are guys towards the end of their ELC, that you're pretty sure of... relying on 12 spots to be filled leaves a pretty shallow team, that would be unlikely to handle injuries very well.

Again, you’re still focusing on the amount of players on cheap deals and how many of them are on our roster. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER. Yet again, the vast majority of those players are ALREADY on our roster and are playing well, with the proof being our current status atop the league and our trip to the ECF last season. So clearly those guys aren’t a gamble. But adding a couple more next season is suddenly going to sink us simply because the total number of cheap players will exceed some threshold that you have set in your mind? How about you focus on the actual players and not how much they make? Who specifically are you so worried about sinking us? Because it sounds like you simply can’t comprehend the idea that we’ve done a masterful job of scouting and have seen one player after another excel early in his career.

 

[seanlinden]

Again, you’re still focusing on the amount of players on cheap deals and how many of them are on our roster. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER. Yet again, the vast majority of those players are ALREADY on our roster and are playing well, with the proof being our current status atop the league and our trip to the ECF last season. So clearly those guys aren’t a gamble. But adding a couple more next season is suddenly going to sink us simply because the total number of cheap players will exceed some threshold that you have set in your mind? How about you focus on the actual players and not how much they make? Who specifically are you so worried about sinking us? Because it sounds like you simply can’t comprehend the idea that we’ve done a masterful job of scouting and have seen one player after another excel early in his career.

YES IT DOES.

Those players are already on your roster playing well, surrounded by veterans and experienced, reasonably high end players. If they sign Point to a $7m contract, and don't move out at least 2 of thier $4-5m guys, they won't have the support system that has allowed the Bolts to continuously pump out and develop young talent in the NHL.

 

[2020 Cup Champions]

Why does Point sign a bridge if he can get paid a lot elsewhere?

He signs a bridge if he doesn't get an offer sheet because he doesn't have arbitration rights. His other alternative is holding out like Nylander, which potentially means leaving money on the table.

 

[AndreRoy]

Let’s just throw together a possible 2019 roster here. The actual roster may vary but this should be enough to get the idea:

Palat-Stamkos-Gourde
Johnson-Point-Kucherov
Killorn-Cirelli-Joseph
Erne-Paquette-Stephens
Conacher
Martel

Hedman-Cernak
McDonagh-Sergachev
(veteran)-Foote or Koekkoek-(veteran)
Koekkoek/Foote/Masin/???

What about this roster looks so substantially inferior to what we’ve been icing lately? Stralman’s been out so his absence here doesn’t make a difference; until recently Palat was out as well so his addition nullifies the loss of Miller. Is this lineup really that much worse than the one that’s been dominating the league (with our backup goalie, no less?)

The only part that stands out as a real potential issue is the bottom pairing, but how many teams have a bottom pairing that they’re perfectly comfortable with anyway? An injury to our blueline would certainly give us problems and multiple injuries would really stretch us thin, but again that can be said about a most teams and our defense still compares favorably to the Pittsburgh defenses that won multiple Cups in recent years.

 

[AndreRoy]

YES IT DOES.

Those players are already on your roster playing well, surrounded by veterans and experienced, reasonably high end players. If they sign Point to a $7m contract, and don't move out at least 2 of thier $4-5m guys, they won't have the support system that has allowed the Bolts to continuously pump out and develop young talent in the NHL.

And we’ve already established that if we sign Point at $7M we’re moving out Miller and Callahan - that’s your two $4-5M guys right there. Yet you somehow think that’s going to sink our team when we’re currently dominating the league with far more crucial players out with injuries. You have yet to point to a single actual spot where our lineup will be suspect or a single player whose performance you consider a risk, instead mindlessly repeating your mantra that “you can’t win with young/cheap players”, completely ignoring the fact that we’re currently doing just that. Unless you want to start discussing actual players rather than your provably false assertation that a team can’t win with a lot of ELC players on it, I don’t see any point in attempting to have a rational discussion with you.

 

[AndreRoy]

seanlinden: You can’t win with 12 players on your roster making $1M or less.

me: We seem to be doing a damn good job of it with 11 at the moment.

 

[JoVel]

Why does Point sign a bridge if he can get paid a lot elsewhere?

Kucherov could've had too, still signed the bridge. So did everyone else on this team.

 

[steveat]

Would you guys be open to trading Point and or Sergachev?

Isles really need a 2c and a dman.

Nelson, Mayfield for Point and Callahan?

Or Nelson, Mayfield and one of AHO/VandeSompel for Point and Callahan

OR Nelson, Mayfield, Wotherspoon, Bellows (or Golyshev) for Point and Sergachev

OR Nelson, Mayfield, Eberle, Beauvellier for Point and Sergachev

I included Nelson and Mayfield in all the trades because there has to be a centre and a dman going the other way and Mayfield is a steal with his contract and upside.

 

[Leonardo87]

Why do people think Callahan will be so easy to move? He had 18 points last year and is on pace for 17 this year. Teams won't be taking on a 5.8 million contract for a 20-point scorer unless Tampa is adding something pretty significant.

Watch some games. He is on a 4th line with not as much ice time. It’s not just about the point which some people on HF boards think points are the only way to measure the value of a player. It’s unreal.

Another team with a bigger role, and PP time he would put up 30 to 40 points.

Also if you actually read the posts, Tampa is talking about retaining salary. Because Callahan at a 3 to 3.5 million cap hat for what he still brings is well worth it. He just is not getting the role in Tampa because of their depth.

 

[Vitto79]

They will let Stralman and Girardi walk and give Sergachev a d young prospect D more time

Callahan to NYR . Make the 2nd in the McD trade a guaranteed 1st plus an additional 2nd . Rangers get both their top 2 picks in next years draft

 

[Leonardo87]

They will let Stralman and Girardi walk and give Sergachev a d young prospect D more time

Callahan to NYR . Make the 2nd in the McD trade a guaranteed 1st plus an additional 2nd . Rangers get both their top 2 picks in next years draft

That’s too much for a player who still has value. Could see more like..

Make that 2nd a guaranteed 1st, Tampa retains 50% in salary, and the Rangers send back like a 6th round.