Proposal: Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread: Eberle Speculation

[Crude]

Best situation for us i think is vegas selects jarnkrok and a dman like petrovic, pysyk, dumba, brodin, vatenen and we deal for jarkrok and a dman using ebs plus picks and prospects. Then sign a short term vet rw.

Maroon mcdavid Nuge
Lucic drai williams
Caguila Jarnkrok kass/slep
Khaira letestu kass/ slep

Klef lars
Sek dumba
Nurse benning
Gryba

Everyone keeps dreaming that Vegas will take Jarnkrok and then flip him - why would an expansion team be eager to trade the perfect 3C who is signed for the next half decade at $2M..?

 

[Aerchon]

Neither of those guys won the Art Ross (and probably Hart) trophy in their sophomore season either. I'm expecting he and his agent are looking somewhere in the 12 million per year range for 8 years.

I hear stuff like this and think it's nothing but noise to get people riled up.

If McDavid signs a contract for the 12.125/8years aka 97 total... Absolute worst case scenario and shows he has no interest in winning a cup and is relying on the cap to rise through the roof just for the Oilers to field a half decent team in 2026.

Getting close to double the current highest paid RFA and almost 2 mill more than the current highest paid players (which are considered terrible contracts)... The guy has less than 2 NHL seasons under his belt, no cups, 9 points in 13 playoffs games. Generational Hart Ross winner or no that would cripple the team.

 

[Soundwave]

Yeah agreed.

Look Connor, you're going to get paid whatever you want. Blank cheque. Katz is never going to trade his golden ticket and you will keep that shiny, new arena full for a decade and plenty of jerseys sold and all that. This is not an issue of ownership trying to "trick" him into a lesser deal. He can have whatever the hell he wants and the Oilers will accept.

It's about Stanley Cups. Do you want one or several? That to me really is what it boils down to, but if his attitude is one of just getting paid top dollar, then he doesn't have the mentality to win multiple Cups in the first place anyway as far as I see it.

That said, I think winning is very important to Connor and he will compromise.

 

[oilers89]

Everyone keeps dreaming that Vegas will take Jarnkrok an then flip him - why would an expansion team be eager to trade the perfect 3C who is signed for the next half decade at $2M..?

100% dreaming your right. I dknt think they would but im going off of him being a great addition for our team. We dont know whomelse they will be tabking so maybe getting a scoring winger (ebs) plus in th deal would entice them. Along with us receiving a dman also

 

[s7ark]

No cap escalator puts the Hawks behind the 8 ball badly. Seabrook can choose his destination and he pretty much has to be the one to go.

To Edm
Seabrook with 1.8M retained

To Chicago
Fayne with 1.8 retained

Chicago saves 3.25 off the cap this season. The Oilers get a vet top 4 RD for afar more palatable 5.075

 

[Soundwave]

No cap escalator puts the Hawks behind the 8 ball badly. Seabrook can choose his destination and he pretty much has to be the one to go.

To Edm
Seabrook with 1.8M retained

To Chicago
Fayne with 1.8 retained

Chicago saves 3.25 off the cap this season and next. The Oilers get a vet top 4 RD for afar more palatable 5.075

... and then we get stuck with that contract for the next 6 years. I get it's tempting because it looks nice for 1 or 2 years, but it could be a massive headache after that. This guy is turning 32 years old.

 

[s7ark]

... and then we get stuck with that contract for the next 6 years.

He did have 39P this season. For a 5M D that is a deal. If he goes rapidly down hill after 3 or 4 years(and not all D do, btw), so what? We deal with it then. We need to improve now. while McDavid isn't making 10M+

Bad contracts are a part of the game. UFAs and seasoned vets have to be overpaid to stay or they go to a place that will pay them.

You either live with bad contracts and deal with them when forced to, or you lose to teams that will live with bad contracts. I don't regret Lucic's deal for a second because of that fact.

 

[Soundwave]

He did have 39P this season. For a 5M D that is a deal. If he goes rapidly down hill after 3 or 4 years(and not all D do, btw), so what? We deal with it then. We need to improve now. while McDavid isn't making 10M+

"We deal with it then" means what exactly? That magically options will appear to "deal with it then"?

Who says he doesn't go rapidly downhill after 1 or 2 years?

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

It doesn't make sense for us because effectively we lose one of Maroon/Eberle/RNH to Vegas on top of Nurse, which Dumba doesn't cover.

We don't live in a bubble where you can only make one trade, you can make 2 trades, where pulling the trigger on one is dependent on pulling the trigger on the other.

You don't rebuild by acquiring 32 year old defenseman on the decline with 7 years left at 7M per.

Seabrooks contract is one of the most toxic grenades of a contract in the NHL and you want them to downgrade from a prime-aged Tanev to pick it up. What possible asset could they get to make that worth it?

My thought on them potentially acquiring Seabrook is I think they value leadership very heavily and despite the contract being all kinds of gross, they think having a "winner" with leadership could help steer the team in the right direction and think the leadership quality will offset the overpayment by the positive effect he has on the players around him. To me that is rubbish, but I think that is the mindset Van is approaching potentially acquiring Seabrook with.

 

[s7ark]

"We deal with it then" means what exactly? That magically options will appear to "deal with it then"?

Who says he doesn't go rapidly downhill after 1 or 2 years?

Typical cap dump stuff. Retain cap hit and offer up an enticement piece if needed. Like what Chicago is going to have to do now.

Who says he doesn't go down hill until 38-39 like many other top pairing D? Seabrook is still a good D. The Oilers are a much better team with Seabrook instead of Fayne for the next few years at least.

 

[belair]

You don't rebuild by acquiring 32 year old defenseman on the decline with 7 years left at 7M per.

Seabrooks contract is one of the most toxic grenades of a contract in the NHL and you want them to downgrade from a prime-aged Tanev to pick it up. What possible asset could they get to make that worth it?

Seabrook today is a top pairing bloody defenseman. Down the road his contract doesn't matter if you plan for it. Who's on their payroll they need to worry about not being able to sign. Why does that contract matter to them?

Seabrook replaces Tanev, Tanev traded for quality, quality rounds out the roster, team gets competitive.

What does Vancouver gain by standing pat?

 

[soothsayer]

The ownership of the Canucks will not rebuild. Period. That's one of the reasons Seabrook to Vancouver makes some sense.

 

[Stud Muffin]

If the NHL can make enough Revenue to raise the cap than imo its time to just get rid of it. Possibly going from 73m - 80m+ within 2 years would be a huge gain for the PA don't know why they wouldn't use it and, negotiate there escrow better during the lockout, which is a given at this point.

 

[Fourier]

Seabrook today is a top pairing bloody defenseman. Down the road his contract doesn't matter if you plan for it. Who's on their payroll they need to worry about not being able to sign. Why does that contract matter to them?

Seabrook replaces Tanev, Tanev traded for quality, quality rounds out the roster, team gets competitive.

What does Vancouver gain by standing pat?

One complicating matter with Seabrook is that his deal is buyout proof because of the large signing bonuses. If he keeps his NMC it is a little tricky to shed any of this deal.

 

[Fourier]

If the NHL can make enough Revenue to raise the cap than imo its time to just get rid of it. Possibly going from 73m - 80m+ within 2 years would be a huge gain for the PA don't know why they wouldn't use it and, negotiate there escrow better during the lockout, which is a given at this point.

Whether the cap is at $73M without the escalator or at $77M with it the players still get the same amount of money. Not using the escrow simply changes who gets what. In the past, not using the escalator would have cost quite a few older players their jobs. But this year Vegas mitigates a fair bit of that concern.

 

[Stud Muffin]

Whether the cap is at $73M without the escalator or at $77M with it the players still get the same amount of money. Not using the escrow simply changes who gets what. In the past, not using the escalator would have cost quite a few older players their jobs. But this year Vegas mitigates a fair bit of that concern.

How do the players make the same? Collectively if the each teams players make 77m it's still more then 73

 

[Jet Walters]

The ownership of the Canucks will not rebuild. Period. That's one of the reasons Seabrook to Vancouver makes some sense.

Yeah their fan base couldn't stomach a scorched earth rebuild. They are stuck in purgatory for a while and the lotto balls haven't fallen their way either, which I have gathered is all the Oilers fault from reading their boards.

 

[Jet Walters]

How do the players make the same? Collectively if the each teams players make 77m it's still more then 73

But they lose more off their pay check to the Tax(Bett)Man

 

[Fourier]

How do the players make the same? Collectively if the each teams players make 77m it's still more then 73

The players get 50% of the combined HRR for the season regardless of the cap ceiling. They pay escrow because with so many teams spending near the ceiling the players on paper salaries sum to more than revenues. In reality, the cap is simply a projection of what expected revenue might be. Moreover, it is actually the midpoint that is the actual projection.

 

[ujju2]

Everyone keeps dreaming that Vegas will take Jarnkrok and then flip him - why would an expansion team be eager to trade the perfect 3C who is signed for the next half decade at $2M..?

Because there isn't going to be any high end offensive talent available to them through the Expansion Draft.

 

[Stud Muffin]

The players get 50% of the combined HRR for the season regardless of the cap ceiling. They pay escrow because with so many teams spending near the ceiling the players on paper salaries sum to more than revenues. In reality, the cap is simply a projection of what expected revenue might be. Moreover, it is actually the midpoint that is the actual projection.

Don't the players always pay the same percent into escrow? It turns out to more dollars put into escrow, but at the same time it's more that they get put in there pockets.

 

[Jumptheshark]

No cap escalator puts the Hawks behind the 8 ball badly. Seabrook can choose his destination and he pretty much has to be the one to go.

To Edm
Seabrook with 1.8M retained

To Chicago
Fayne with 1.8 retained

Chicago saves 3.25 off the cap this season. The Oilers get a vet top 4 RD for afar more palatable 5.075

Still a bad deal for the hawks. Seabrook is a d-man who can play 20 to 25 minutes a game.

My guess he goes to Vancouber for a prospect and a 2nd

 

[Jet Walters]

For Seabrook at 5M I'd actually give up decent pieces. He'll be a top 4 defenseman for at least four more years. The biggest benefit would be our younger guys learning from him.

 

[Mr Positive]

If the NHL can make enough Revenue to raise the cap than imo its time to just get rid of it. Possibly going from 73m - 80m+ within 2 years would be a huge gain for the PA don't know why they wouldn't use it and, negotiate there escrow better during the lockout, which is a given at this point.

an increase in cap is just an illusion as long as the escrow is in place. The system always makes a 50/50 split in revenue, so all that new spending just gets taken out of escrow later, and that number has been growing. I have to wonder if players with older deals have just about had it.

As for negotiating escrow, I don't see the owners and Bettman moving off of the principle of a 50/50 split. The cap was supposed to go up and down to reflect the economics of the league, but the NHLPA has abused that system by always using the escalator in all the bad years. Why would the owners feel sympathy for them in that? This strategy seems to be only good at bailing out teams with cap problems, but it's all but guaranteeing we lose another season to a lockout once the CBA runs out, as the players assaulted the most from escrow become that disgruntled about it, and every year there are more of them.

Imo the new CBA has to take a bigger proportion of escrow from newer contracts than it does now, and maybe the league should go to a system where players get paid in a percentage of the cap instead of a hard amount, just so escrow is fairer. There should also be more disincentive to use a cap escalator.

 

[Jumptheshark]

For Seabrook at 5M I'd actually give up decent pieces. He'll be a top 4 defenseman for at least four more years. The biggest benefit would be our younger guys learning from him.

Yep. People are acting like he is a liability or something.

He has a NMC so he carries the hammer for his future and I can see a team like Vancouver taking his contract without blinking and it brings him home.

24 hours after the cup is raised I think we will see his traded. Some are saying the leafs are looking at him--but due to the length of his contract it would fall into the area where several of their kids will be looking for huge contracts.

Wild card for Seabrook is him in Calgary