Confirmed with Link: [TBL/NSH] Lightning trade Ryan McDonagh for D Philippe Myers and F Grant Mismash

[DarrylshutzSydor]

Now let’s see if he pays palat a big pay day

Whats the going rate for a 45 point per year top six winger.....

 

[Stammertime91]

Whats the going rate for a 45 point per year top six winger.....

Several years ago it was almost 1 million x 10 points. Maybe a little more if they performed well in the playoffs. I would say right now for every contract on par with that, you can find one not meeting expectation. I'm talking regular season here, mainly.

So, essentially Killorn is what you're looking for. If we keep Killorn I feel we still need a top 6 winger but we don't have the money available sadly.

 

[DarrylshutzSydor]

Several years ago it was almost 1 million x 10 points. Maybe a little more if they performed well in the playoffs. I would say right now for every contract on par with that, you can find one not meeting expectation. I'm talking regular season here, mainly.

So, essentially Killorn is what you're looking for. If we keep Killorn I feel we still need a top 6 winger but we don't have the money available sadly.

I expect to see him shopped and traded......

 

[BoltzManConstant]

Good. Regardless of all the "business is business" stuff, this didn't sit well with me. No matter how much we want to move contracts, I really don't think it sets a good precedent to start messing with NMCs that were negotiated in good faith. Guys like coming to TB because we have a reputation for treating players fairly. I really don't want to see that change.

NTC. An NMC would've mooted the waiver threat.

 

[Todd1a]

Whats the going rate for a 45 point per year top six winger.....

9.5 avv per year now lol

 

[Todd1a]

NTC. An NMC would've mooted the waiver threat.

A lot of people get that confused yes mcdonagh could have got a NMC at a lower cap AAV rate but he chose more more money and took the NTC. Let’s say mcdonagh got 5.5 avv for 7 years with a NMC then he would still be here.

 

[CupsOverCash]

Wonder if they thought there could be a possibility of the team being somewhat a shit show with how banged up and amount of hockey they played over last 3 years. Mcd will be harder to trade after next year and killorns contract is up. It was probably the right move although I hate it because he was so great for us in the 2 cup runs. Probably time to turn the page and focus on the future as it can still be great with right moves.

 

[Antiramie]

Any chance that McD wanted a change of scenery after winning multiple Cups and might have been the driving force of his trade?

 

[PJ817]

Any chance that McD wanted a change of scenery after winning multiple Cups and might have been the driving force of his trade?

No. He said he was crushed and his head was spinning; his family is settled here, they just remodeled their house, oldest is about to start kindergarten

 

[Sky04]

"I think it took a couple days to realize what to do," Hankinson said. "Do you fight it and figure out a way to stay? Which he wanted to do. But, realistically, it didn't happen. And it's not always by the player's choice. The good news is that Ryan is motivated and in a great spot right now. It wasn't his choice. But given the circumstances, we found a good spot."

Yeah I think the waiver threat was definitely there.

 

[The Macho King]

Yeah I think the waiver threat was definitely there.

Can i give my hot take?

(I don't really give a shit)

There's a reason it's an NTC and not a NMC - he didn't negotiate for it. If it wasn't a hard cap world or the cap hadn't been flat for three seasons, he'd still be here I'm sure - but it is and that contract is not getting any prettier. He played at about the value of the contract this year - which is great - but that is probably the last year where that happens.

JBB made a tough call, but it was the right call.

 

[Rschmitz]

A lot of people get that confused yes mcdonagh could have got a NMC at a lower cap AAV rate but he chose more more money and took the NTC. Let’s say mcdonagh got 5.5 avv for 7 years with a NMC then he would still be here.

You’re assuming that a NMC was even on the table. The front office in the past has been criticized for handing out too many of them, they may have simply decided they couldn’t do any more regardless of a reasonable AAV discount.

I am fine with the transaction, part of the business. Still shitty though, to force out a good player who wanted to stay is never an enjoyable thing to see

 

[Major4Boarding]

I don’t know if this take will help out here but for those feeling for McD, think about the way Eric Brewer’s exit went. That’s even if some of you recall

That one was a painful business process

 

[Stammertime91]

I don’t know if this take will help out here but for those feeling for McD, think about the way Eric Brewer’s exit went. That’s even if some of you recall

That one was a painful business process

Refresh my mind because I dont.

 

[Point21]

I don’t know if this take will help out here but for those feeling for McD, think about the way Eric Brewer’s exit went. That’s even if some of you recall

That one was a painful business process

Brewer was ok in his time here. i remember Brewer didnt ask to be traded and Yzerman approached him to see if he would waive. definitely doesnt compare to McDonagh in the grand scheme of things. Brewer was a pending UFA making just under 4m and we essentially got back what we paid for him even after 3+ years

 

[Major4Boarding]

Refresh my mind because I dont.

Sure. I’m lacking on exact details at the moment but basic recollection is we traded a long shot (legacy) prospect for him, Brock Beukeboom… Signed him to a four-year deal for what was a kind of head-scratching dollar amount, had a modified NTC

Club got roughly two seasons of “decent” play out of him (from a play-to-contract value), third season was below average. Couple of trade options nixed, healthy scratched a lot, finally traded to Anaheim early that final season of his contract.

For the record I always felt he was extremely underwhelming and nowhere near the player I was expecting when he was with the Oilers and the Blues the entire time he was here

The same season he’s traded from the Ducks to the Leafs for a mid round pick I believe

What I mean by what I said above is, they went in on a guy that they were not getting (and were not going to get fair value on the contract that they signed him to), tried to move him, wasn’t willing, broke his will by healthy scratching him, and they finally settled on a team out of conference.

To me, other than Vinik first taking control of this club and made it clear he was not going to keep VL4’s contract, the Brewer situation is about the hardest of hardball I’ve seen this club do to somebody.

So basically it’s a long winded example of I don’t think McD was shit on as bad as it’s being speculated that he was.

 

[BoltzManConstant]

You’re assuming that a NMC was even on the table. The front office in the past has been criticized for handing out too many of them, they may have simply decided they couldn’t do any more regardless of a reasonable AAV discount.

I am fine with the transaction, part of the business. Still shitty though, to force out a good player who wanted to stay is never an enjoyable thing to see

Everything is always on the table. There certainly exists a number low enough that management would accept the restrictions of the NMC in order to get that AAV discount.

Separately, you're wrong about the f.o. being criticized for NMCs. It was all the NTCs they got flak for, not the NMCs. At the time McD signed, we only had one NMC out there - Stamkos. Kuch and Vasy hadn't yet signed their NMC deals, and even Heddy only had an NTC. What everyone complained about was the NTCs to Miller, Johnson, Killorn, Palat, etc(?). And the complainers are/were silly -- if the player's gonna give us a hometown or tax-based discount then he's going to want some level of control over where he ends up. It only makes sense to give it to him.

Last, you're implying that Yzerman decided to bow to the criticism and change what sort of clauses he was handing out when he signed McD. That's just not how Steve Yzerman works.

 

[Rschmitz]

Everything is always on the table. There certainly exists a number low enough that management would accept the restrictions of the NMC in order to get that AAV discount.

Separately, you're wrong about the f.o. being criticized for NMCs. It was all the NTCs they got flak for, not the NMCs. At the time McD signed, we only had one NMC out there - Stamkos. Kuch and Vasy hadn't yet signed their NMC deals, and even Heddy only had an NTC. What everyone complained about was the NTCs to Miller, Johnson, Killorn, Palat, etc(?). And the complainers are/were silly -- if the player's gonna give us a hometown or tax-based discount then he's going to want some level of control over where he ends up. It only makes sense to give it to him.

Last, you're implying that Yzerman decided to bow to the criticism and change what sort of clauses he was handing out when he signed McD. That's just not how Steve Yzerman works.

Which is why I said realistically. Obviously if McDonagh wanted to play for league minimum he would be here, kind of a ridiculous argument you are putting forward.

You're hair splitting over NTC vs NMC, and it makes my point. The issue is how much these contracts impede the GM's from making moves, and obviously the decision was made that McDonagh is an important enough piece to deserve a NTC but not a NMC.

I said people were criticizing management for handing out NMC's, because they were. No where did I say Yzerman stopped giving NMC's because of criticism or that he was wrong for giving them out.

So to summarize, I think it's highly likely that a NMC was never on the table for McDonagh, who the team identified as an important piece but not a core piece.

 

[Byrddog]

Being from the Nashville area and following them as wel. All the bolts did was move salary out neither of these guys amount to much. If the plan is to move Killer as well Myers’s is not nearly the caliber. The Predators will be benefit from this trade. I have not posted since game two of the finals and as beat up and injured as the team was Colorado was the better team. Going into another season I’m even more concerned about scoring than last offseason where I was trashed for thinking the Bolts would struggle but they did. Not sure what the answer can be but trading Killorns goals off is going to hurt.

 

[BoltzManConstant]

Which is why I said realistically. Obviously if McDonagh wanted to play for league minimum he would be here, kind of a ridiculous argument you are putting forward.

You're hair splitting over NTC vs NMC, and it makes my point. The issue is how much these contracts impede the GM's from making moves, and obviously the decision was made that McDonagh is an important enough piece to deserve a NTC but not a NMC.

I said people were criticizing management for handing out NMC's, because they were. No where did I say Yzerman stopped giving NMC's because of criticism or that he was wrong for giving them out.

So to summarize, I think it's highly likely that a NMC was never on the table for McDonagh, who the team identified as an important piece but not a core piece.

1. You didn't say "realistically". You said it may not have been on the table, which is just wrong.

2. The whole line of discussion that you were pushing back against was that McD didn't want to give up the cash necessary to move up from a no-trade to no-movement. So no, pointing out your error and confusion between the two isn't hair-splitting, it's the whole point.

You can't argue that we gave him an NTC rather than an NMC because people were bitching about NMCs -- when in fact the bitching was about NTCs... the exact thing we ended up giving him.

3. And to reiterate, since you seem dead set on being wrong here: People weren't bitching about NMC's, they were bitching about NTCs. We had given out exactly one NMC, to Stamkos. It was the NTCs we had given out 'like candy', as the whiners liked to put it.

4. "No where did I say Yzerman stopped giving NMC's because of criticism".

Then what the hell does this sentence mean:
"The front office in the past has been criticized for handing out too many of them, they may have simply decided they couldn’t do any more regardless of a reasonable AAV discount"

Just two non-sequiturs joined by a comma?

5. "The decision was made that McDonagh is an important enough piece to deserve a NTC but not a NMC". No, you again misunderstand how negotiations work. The team doesn't hold all the power, deciding who gets what. We didn't give Stamkos an NMC as some reward for value to team, we gave it because he negotiated it and we preferred that to other alternatives.

Let me frame your argument to illustrate it's absurdity: This same thinking would conclude that 'Point is not important enough to deserve even an NTC', because he got no clause whatsoever. You really think that's how it works?

6. To summarize: Again you're wrong to say an NMC was never on the table. Everything is always on the table. And your support for that contention is both factually wrong and logically broken.

If Point had wanted an NTC, he would have one. If McD had wanted an NMC, he would have one, and he'd be a Bolt right now. What their cap hits would look like in order to secure those clauses, I have no idea.

 

[Rschmitz]

1. You didn't say "realistically". You said it may not have been on the table, which is just wrong.

2. The whole line of discussion that you were pushing back against was that McD didn't want to give up the cash necessary to move up from a no-trade to no-movement. So no, pointing out your error and confusion between the two isn't hair-splitting, it's the whole point.

You can't argue that we gave him an NTC rather than an NMC because people were bitching about NMCs -- when in fact the bitching was about NTCs... the exact thing we ended up giving him.

3. And to reiterate, since you seem dead set on being wrong here: People weren't bitching about NMC's, they were bitching about NTCs. We had given out exactly one NMC, to Stamkos. It was the NTCs we had given out 'like candy', as the whiners liked to put it.

4. "No where did I say Yzerman stopped giving NMC's because of criticism".

Then what the hell does this sentence mean:
"The front office in the past has been criticized for handing out too many of them, they may have simply decided they couldn’t do any more regardless of a reasonable AAV discount"

Just two non-sequiturs joined by a comma?

5. "The decision was made that McDonagh is an important enough piece to deserve a NTC but not a NMC". No, you again misunderstand how negotiations work. The team doesn't hold all the power, deciding who gets what. We didn't give Stamkos an NMC as some reward for value to team, we gave it because he negotiated it and we preferred that to other alternatives.

Let me frame your argument to illustrate it's absurdity: This same thinking would conclude that 'Point is not important enough to deserve even an NTC', because he got no clause whatsoever. You really think that's how it works?

6. To summarize: Again you're wrong to say an NMC was never on the table. Everything is always on the table. And your support for that contention is both factually wrong and logically broken.

If Point had wanted an NTC, he would have one. If McD had wanted an NMC, he would have one, and he'd be a Bolt right now. What their cap hits would look like in order to secure those clauses, I have no idea.

Yikes, moving on…

 

[Stammertime91]

Lol what in the great Gatsby novel is that

 

[BoltzManConstant]

Yikes, moving on…

Preferable to tripling down on a bad post, so good call I guess.

 

[Rschmitz]

Preferable to tripling down on a bad post, so good call I guess.

I don’t engage in the back and forth diatribe that you are looking for, if you want to take that as a W go for it.

Hyperanalyzing each other’s posts is not what I am here for

 

[BoltzManConstant]

I don’t engage in the back and forth diatribe that you are looking for, if you want to take that as a W go for it.

Hyperanalyzing each other’s posts is not what I am here for

The W would be you understanding that an NMC is always on the table and McD would've had one if he wanted one. Just like Point could've had an NTC if he wanted one. They'd just need to make it worth the team's while.