Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
OBXer

Trades, Player moves and Free Agency

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

Could be, but that 1 year bridge deal could well be of Fleury's choosing.  Rather than commit to a cheap multi-year deal he might have opted to bet on himself with a 1 year show-me  deal, especially since losing his waiver exemption means that he'll be with the Canes full time this year. .

I guess could have been Fleury's proposal or mutual. The team holds most of the cards here though. It's not like Fleury is going to benefit from a hold out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, remkin said:

OK, after all this time, I still don't fully understand how this works. Can't McKeown, Carrick and Bishop start in the AHL without clearing? Do they have to be promoted? Or is it that if they play in the NHL they can't be sent back down without clearing? Guys in the AHL don't count against the cap.

This is an educated guess, but I believe that the Canes have to assign any of them to the Checkers out of training camp should they fail to make the Carolina roster.  I think that pretty much relegates Bean to Charlotte for the year unless he gets an emergency call up.  I think McKeown is too good as a potential 3rd line defender to just give away, and I don't see them giving away Fleury either.  Carrick has been pretty good too.  And then there is Forsling.  What to do?  Although TVR has been very good for the Canes, you only have to look at de Haan to understand that has its limits.  Trading his $2M (or is it $2.5M) contract will kill 2 birds with 1 stone (cap and roster issues).

Edited by beboplar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, remkin said:

OK, after all this time, I still don't fully understand how this works. Can't McKeown, Carrick and Bishop start in the AHL without clearing? Do they have to be promoted? Or is it that if they play in the NHL they can't be sent back down without clearing? Guys in the AHL don't count against the cap.

And to continue my quest to be sure I'm getting all of this, I quote myself.

 

CapFriendly has our projected Cap Space at $4.595M. But, they have Bishop, Gibbons and Necas on the NHL squad. Also, we won't be carrying 3 goalies at the NHL level, so Forsberg's salary will end up in the AHL unless we lose him or make a move. If I'm right, then Bishop/Gibbons $1.4 million is available, giving us $5.9 million to sign McGinn and Williams. The trick is what would Williams take, and what might McGinn get in arbitration? But if Williams signs another $4.5 million, that would leave $1.4 million for McGinn. I would think we could get him in for that?

 

OK, what am I missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, remkin said:

I guess could have been Fleury's proposal or mutual. The team holds most of the cards here though. It's not like Fleury is going to benefit from a hold out.

 

Given the cap squeeze we're looking at this season if Willy comes back, I wonder if the difference between $850k for Fleury this year and whatever he would have needed for a multi year contract might have been desirable to the committee.as well?   We'll have to re-sign several players next year, but Marleau's $6.25 hit does go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LakeLivin said:

 

Given the cap squeeze we're looking at this season if Willy comes back, I wonder if the difference between $850k for Fleury this year and whatever he would have needed for a multi year contract might have been desirable to the committee.as well?   We'll have to re-sign several players next year, but Marleau's $6.25 hit does go away.

Yes. I was thinking that too. We are in a pinch this year. If Fleury was good with the show me deal at a lower number, then it might help the pinch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LakeLivin said:

 

Given the cap squeeze we're looking at this season if Willy comes back, I wonder if the difference between $850k for Fleury this year and whatever he would have needed for a multi year contract might have been desirable to the committee.as well?   We'll have to re-sign several players next year, but Marleau's $6.25 hit does go away.

I have to admit when they made the Toronto trade to take on Marleau's cap hit in exchange for a 1st rounder, it seemed shrewd.  Who knew the Canes would come a cap team?  Toronto's pick may end up being in the 25-30 range, so I may have to rethink my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple years ago Top and I went round and round about waivers coming out of camp, lol.  As I recall, we never found anything in writing that was definitive (everything was open to some interpretation), but my take is similar to Bebo's.  Given that the intent of the waiver clause is to "protect" good players from being hidden in the minors by deep teams, I'd bet that everyone is subject to waivers out of camp.  

 

If Williams decides to play I could see him taking a big discount in order to keep the roster as strong as possible (with perhaps a wink-wink agreement regarding a role with the team after he retires).  If we didn't have to worry about losing players to waivers (McKeown, Wallmark, Forsling?, maybe Bishop?) I could see the team possibly squeezing all of the players we want to sign under the cap.  But it still comes down to too many players we can't protect for too few spots.

 

 

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KJUNKANE said:

Okay gocanes, like OBXer was asking I guess, does this include JWilly's present salary or not? And if it doesn't, and we anticipate that he will require what, $4mil to sign, would that then exceed the Cap? Course, in the short term, I believe I'm correct to say that we can operate over cap until the season start, correct? And if that's correct than there's still space to maneuver, right? In other words, a trade could then put us back into compliance?

 

One additional question, how many contracts are we carrying now and are we close there?

 

I recently saw that we had 33 contracts (now add the very recent ones). I believe you can have 50. In fact I think we are near the bottom of the NHL in terms of contracts so no worries there IF I’m correct.

 

You can be 10% over the cap until a specific date closer to the start of the season. Sorry I don’t know the deadline.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, beboplar said:

I have to admit when they made the Toronto trade to take on Marleau's cap hit in exchange for a 1st rounder, it seemed shrewd.  Who knew the Canes would come a cap team?  Toronto's pick may end up being in the 25-30 range, so I may have to rethink my opinion.

 

Sans trades, cap space is going to be really tight but I see a bigger issue being too many players we want to protect for too few spots.

 

1 hour ago, beboplar said:

JW has no present salary as he is an unsigned FA.  I really would like to see the Canes sign him, which combined with the unsigned RFAs and 2 in arbitration, put them over the cap.  Reimer, TVR, and possibly McGinn if he is awarded too much are trade candidates.

 

I'd think Reimer would be the primary trade candidate if we could find any takers. Wasn't he basically a trade of contract dumps between the Canes and Panthers?  I'd be surprised to see McGinn get a huge contract and he seems like he epitomizes the Canes ethos, so I'd be surprised if he isn't on the team next year.  TVR is a proven commodity and relatively cheap, but still a third pair d-man in the final year of his contract.  Would the Canes dare make the transition from TVR to  McKeown based on what he's shown in the AHL so far and before he's been field tested in the NHL?  That would entail some risk, but what's that Gretzky quote about skating not to where the puck is but where it's going to be?  I really have no clue as to what the Committee will do, but it should be interesting.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kyrule said:

 

I recently saw that we had 33 contracts (now add the very recent ones). I believe you can have 50. In fact I think we are near the bottom of the NHL in terms of contracts so no worries there IF I’m correct.

 

You can be 10% over the cap until a specific date closer to the start of the season. Sorry I don’t know the deadline.

 

Yeah, you're spot on as to the number of contracts.  The problem isn't total contracts (remember a couple of years ago when we were up against the limit?) but only 23 roster spots and more non-waiver exempt players we'd like to keep than that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KJUNKANE said:

Okay gocanes, like OBXer was asking I guess, does this include JWilly's present salary or not? And if it doesn't, and we anticipate that he will require what, $4mil to sign, would that then exceed the Cap? Course, in the short term, I believe I'm correct to say that we can operate over cap until the season start, correct? And if that's correct than there's still space to maneuver, right? In other words, a trade could then put us back into compliance?

 

One additional question, how many contracts are we carrying now and are we close there?

Our best option is to sign him a 1 million salary with 3 million worth of performance bonuses.  The performance bonuses can be deferred to the 2020-21 cap (which may take the place of Marleau’s cap hit to some degree).

 

signing him, McGinn, and Maenalenan would give us about 3 million of cap space which allows for a decent deadline acquisition or space to absorb some of the performance bonuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the contracts go, we have 36 contracts. We still have 4 RFAs and Williams out there. We will need to save a couple of spots for our 2 1st rounders, Cotton and Martin potentially after the NCAA season is up, and a couple of other AHL veterans. That would put us at about 47 contracts. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LakeLivin said:

A couple years ago Top and I went round and round about waivers coming out of camp, lol.  As I recall, we never found anything in writing that was definitive (everything was open to some interpretation), but my take is similar to Bebo's.  Given that the intent of the waiver clause is to "protect" good players from being hidden in the minors by deep teams, I'd bet that everyone is subject to waivers out of camp.  

 

If Williams decides to play I could see him taking a big discount in order to keep the roster as strong as possible (with perhaps a wink-wink agreement regarding a role with the team after he retires).  If we didn't have to worry about losing players to waivers (McKeown, Wallmark, Forsling?, maybe Bishop?) I could see the team possibly squeezing all of the players we want to sign under the cap.  But it still comes down to too many players we can't protect for too few spots.

 

 

As long as they are not on the NHL roster when teams must meet cap restrictions, midnight October 1st, then they don’t have to pass through waivers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

Would the Canes dare make the transition from TVR to  McKeown based on what he's shown in the AHL so far and before he's been field tested in the NHL?  That would entail some risk, but what's that Gretzky quote about skating not to where the puck is but where it's going to be?

Lake,

There is also the possibility that TVR is the risk we are taking. If we are still trying to move Faulk, I know it's a big if, then TVR could be slotted for the 2nd pairing. 

Personally I am not worried about Fleury or McKeown on the third pairing, but who covers if the top 4 get hurt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DevildogKodi said:

Lake,

There is also the possibility that TVR is the risk we are taking. If we are still trying to move Faulk, I know it's a big if, then TVR could be slotted for the 2nd pairing. 

Personally I am not worried about Fleury or McKeown on the third pairing, but who covers if the top 4 get hurt?

 

That's a good question. And if we're still considering moving Faulk, I'm sure TVR isn't under consideration.  Just for the record, I wasn't proposing we deal TVR, just highlighting the issues the Committee is likely considering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DW is busy today...........

Canes Re-Sign Gustav Forsling to One-Year Deal


 

Quote

 

"Gustav is a skilled, young defenseman," said Waddell. "He has shown promise throughout his time in the NHL and we expect him to continue to develop."


 

The deal will pay Forsling $874,125 at the NHL level and $70,000 at the AHL level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

That's a good question. And if we're still considering moving Faulk, I'm sure TVR isn't under consideration.  Just for the record, I wasn't proposing we deal TVR, just highlighting the issues the Committee is likely considering.

I agree, there is every reason to believe the committee is still looking at moving D. We are still heavily loaded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

As long as they are not on the NHL roster when teams must meet cap restrictions, midnight October 1st, then they don’t have to pass through waivers.

 

That would make life a lot easier.  Sign McKeown (best example), assign him to Charlotte, and no need to worry about losing him unless he gets a non-injury related call up.  But I've searched high and low for confirmation that that's the rule (given that it seems to run counter to it's purpose) and haven't been able to find anything specific.  I don't suppose you can point me to anything? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

That would make life a lot easier.  Sign McKeown (best example), assign him to Charlotte, and no need to worry about losing him unless he gets a non-injury related call up.  But I've searched high and low for confirmation that that's the rule (given that it seems to run counter to it's purpose) and haven't been able to find anything specific.  I don't suppose you can point me to anything? 

 

waivers drive me crazy with exemptions but I think a player not on the big club roster 12 days before the start of the season can be assigned to the AHL without waivers. after that I guess the waiver period starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

That would make life a lot easier.  Sign McKeown (best example), assign him to Charlotte, and no need to worry about losing him unless he gets a non-injury related call up.  But I've searched high and low for confirmation that that's the rule (given that it seems to run counter to it's purpose) and haven't been able to find anything specific.  I don't suppose you can point me to anything? 

Waiver rules

 

Well I learned something today, that I was right about the date but not the time frame.  Waivers starts 12 days before the season starts, midnight of October 1st turns over into the 2nd which is the official start of the season.  Waivers will start on the 20th of September.  All players can go through camp and play in the 1st three pre-season games.  After the 3rd game they must be sent down or have to go through waivers to be sent to Charlotte.

 

We could manage with emergency call ups of Mck and/or Forsling.  that would only work if we only carry 6 defenders or we now need an 8th defender.   We carried 6 for most of the season except for travel.  Fluery or Bean traveling but not playing.  I would like to see us roll with 7 because Rod doesnt use a guy that hasnt practiced with the team.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

I would like to see us roll with 7

 

Since Bean is waiver exempt I expect him to be the extra Dman since he can be shuffled between Charlotte and Raleigh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, OBXer said:

 

Since Bean is waiver exempt I expect him to be the extra Dman since he can be shuffled between Charlotte and Raleigh

While true, my hope is that we have 7 permanent defenders on the roster.  Not necessarily shuffling Bean back and forth when we need a 7th to travel.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LakeLivin said:

 

Sans trades, cap space is going to be really tight but I see a bigger issue being too many players we want to protect for too few spots.

 

 

I'd think Reimer would be the primary trade candidate if we could find any takers. Wasn't he basically a trade of contract dumps between the Canes and Panthers?  I'd be surprised to see McGinn get a huge contract and he seems like he epitomizes the Canes ethos, so I'd be surprised if he isn't on the team next year.  TVR is a proven commodity and relatively cheap, but still a third pair d-man in the final year of his contract.  Would the Canes dare make the transition from TVR to  McKeown based on what he's shown in the AHL so far and before he's been field tested in the NHL?  That would entail some risk, but what's that Gretzky quote about skating not to where the puck is but where it's going to be?  I really have no clue as to what the Committee will do, but it should be interesting.

 

McKeown has been a leader in the Plus/Minus category wherever he has played.  In 2017-2018, he was +34 for Charlotte.  In the same year, he played 10 games for the Canes, and was +3, with 3 assists.  In 2018-2019, he was +30 for Charlotte, not getting a call up (reminds me of Andrew Poturalski).  If you want to talk about a good value, bringing him up to play in place of TVR, how much fall off will there be versus a couple of million dollars of savings.

Isn't McGinn asking for something like $3.2M, and the Canes are offering $1.7M?  They gave Martinook $2M, so it should end up looking something like that.  Under normal circumstances, that sounds like a figure they could live with, but having to sign several RFAs, and wanting to bring back JW, something has to give.  For those who suggest JW who offer a discount in order to better the team, forget that.  It is a grind, and they are looking for JW to lead this team.  His salary needs to be in the $4-5M range, so again, something has to give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

Waiver rules

 

Well I learned something today, that I was right about the date but not the time frame.  Waivers starts 12 days before the season starts, midnight of October 1st turns over into the 2nd which is the official start of the season.  Waivers will start on the 20th of September.  All players can go through camp and play in the 1st three pre-season games.  After the 3rd game they must be sent down or have to go through waivers to be sent to Charlotte.

 

We could manage with emergency call ups of Mck and/or Forsling.  that would only work if we only carry 6 defenders or we now need an 8th defender.   We carried 6 for most of the season except for travel.  Fluery or Bean traveling but not playing.  I would like to see us roll with 7 because Rod doesnt use a guy that hasnt practiced with the team.  

 

So if that's the case, Canes would need to "send down" anyone they want to avoid exposing to waivers before the 3rd preseason game on Sept. 21   Basically telling them they really don't have an opportunity to compete for an opening night roster spot.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beboplar said:

McKeown has been a leader in the Plus/Minus category wherever he has played.  In 2017-2018, he was +34 for Charlotte.  In the same year, he played 10 games for the Canes, and was +3, with 3 assists.  In 2018-2019, he was +30 for Charlotte, not getting a call up (reminds me of Andrew Poturalski).  If you want to talk about a good value, bringing him up to play in place of TVR, how much fall off will there be versus a couple of million dollars of savings.

Isn't McGinn asking for something like $3.2M, and the Canes are offering $1.7M?  They gave Martinook $2M, so it should end up looking something like that.  Under normal circumstances, that sounds like a figure they could live with, but having to sign several RFAs, and wanting to bring back JW, something has to give.  For those who suggest JW who offer a discount in order to better the team, forget that.  It is a grind, and they are looking for JW to lead this team.  His salary needs to be in the $4-5M range, so again, something has to give.

 

Yeah, I see McKeown as too valuable to lose without a decent return. And  I'm not suggesting trying to strong arm Willy into a discount.  But I wouldn't be surprised if he was part of a decision to take a discount if it meant making the team better.  I suspect he's been an informal member of the Committee, and is looking at the team structure as part of his decision to play or not. If his decision is to come back, I could see him preferring, say $3.5m for himself plus McGinn to taking $4.5m if it meant losing McGinn.  If he comes back it won't be for the money, it will be for a chance to take the team one step further. Just an example, and again, it would need to be his call.

 

But if he does come back, yeah, something probably needs to give, it's just a matter of how much.  Ned or Forsberg in place of Reimer as backup could go a long way, but of course comes with it's own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...