[brooks] "I expect Lundqvist to be bought out,"

To be clear, a Hank buyout does absolutely nothing to help the cap.

 

I get why they are doing this, to free themselves of an ugly situation they created, but it's certainly not the route I would have went.

 

Backups are easy to find, trade Geo and have Hank backup Shesty.

 

That's my opinion, I have no interest in litigating it in this thread. It's a dead issue, if they're buying him out.

I agree here. Rather keep Hank and trade Georgiev. At some point, Georgiev is also going to want a nice pay raise. Move him over the summer and get some picks for him, and Hank comes off the books the following season.

I don’t think any team will hire him to be anything more than a backup at this point. Not sure that would a rejuvenation. Players typically play until no one wants them anymore. Not sure if any team wants a 38 year old backup

Could start for: Calgary, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Colorado, Columbus, Detroit, Edmonton, LA, Minnesota?, Ottawa, San Jose, Washington?

Could start for: Calgary, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Colorado, Columbus, Detroit, Edmonton, LA, Minnesota?, Ottawa, San Jose, Washington?

A 38 year old hasbeen? I think you are overrating his abilities.

It makes zero sense to buy out any of Lundqvist, Staal, or Smith unless it is a full amnesty buyout.

Really don’t see how it makes much sense to buyout any player in the last year of a deal as all 3 of the above are.

Makes little sense given that they are still in a rebuild or at best transitioning out of one into playoff contender.

With Hank it would save them $3 million this next season, cost $5.5 in dead cap, and then cost them another $1.5 in dead cap in 21-22.

I’d rather have a veteran backup for a season anyway if that’s what it comes down to. While I’d like Georgiev as the long-term backup, finding another guy to be number 2 behind Shesty in a year or so isn’t a major roster challenge.

It makes zero sense to buy out any of Lundqvist, Staal, or Smith unless it is a full amnesty buyout.

Really don’t see how it makes much sense to buyout any player in the last year of a deal as all 3 of the above are.

Makes little sense given that they are still in a rebuild or at best transitioning out of one into playoff contender.

 

With Hank it would save them $3 million this next season, cost $5.5 in dead cap, and then cost them another $1.5 in dead cap in 21-22.

I’d rather have a veteran backup for a season anyway if that’s what it comes down to. While I’d like Georgiev as the long-term backup, finding another guy to be number 2 behind Shesty in a year or so isn’t a major roster challenge.

I do not agree. Staal buyout saves 2M next season with a 1M dead caphit in 21. That 2M might be the difference between affording a quality LD now or having to trot Staal back out there. In this scenario, a 1M dead caphit in 21 is an extremely small and negligible price to pay to make a fairly significant upgrade to the roster for next year. In fact, not performing a buyout in such a situation makes no sense to me. Potentially wasting a year of a bunch of our core in order to save 1M is penny wise and pound foolish.

I do not agree. Staal buyout saves 2M next season with a 1M dead caphit in 21. That 2M might be the difference between affording a quality LD now or having to trot Staal back out there. In this scenario, a 1M dead caphit in 21 is an extremely small and negligible price to pay to make a fairly significant upgrade to the roster for next year. In fact, not performing a buyout in such a situation makes no sense to me. Potentially wasting a year of a bunch of our core in order to save 1M is penny wise and pound foolish.

Except that they already have $7.5 million in dead cap next season.

While I do see your point, it just don’t see how they can afford more dead cap even with some savings associated.

Dead Cap w/Lundqvist buyout- $13 million for $3 million in savings.

Dead Cap w/Staal buyout- $11 million+ for $2.1 million in savings.

Dead Cap w/Smith buyout- $10 million+ for $1.5 million in savings.

I just don’t believe they’d want to do that.

Is the savings worth the dead cap on top of $7.5 million next year already in the books.

Except that they already have $7.5 million in dead cap next season.

Moot point. Water under the bridge. Buying out Staal still frees up 2M of space this year at the expense of 1M in space the next year. Doesn't matter now if they have no dead space or 20M in dead space this year.

Sometimes it's wise to take a small loan against future cap if the expected return on investment makes it worth it, especially when we may not see an increase in cap this season due to the shortened season.

Moot point. Water under the bridge. Buying out Staal still frees up 2M of space this year at the expense of 1M in space the next year. Doesn't matter now if they have no dead space or 20M in dead space this year.

 

Sometimes it's wise to take a small loan against future cap if the expected return on investment makes it worth it, especially when we may not see an increase in cap this season due to the shortened season.

Not moot in the numbers we are talking about.

Not to mention the fact that they need to get away from buyouts.

Bad organizational practice to use their money that way.

Except that they already have $7.5 million in dead cap next season.

While I do see your point, it just don’t see how they can afford more dead cap even with some savings associated.

 

Dead Cap w/Lundqvist buyout- $13 million for $3 million in savings.

Dead Cap w/Staal buyout- $11 million+ for $2.1 million in savings.

Dead Cap w/Smith buyout- $10 million+ for $1.5 million in savings.

 

I just don’t believe they’d want to do that.

Is the savings worth the dead cap on top of $7.5 million next year already in the books.

This. They shouldn't buyout anyone, they are buying their way out of a PR mess that they created.

Not moot in the numbers we are talking about.

Not to mention the fact that they need to get away from buyouts.

Bad organizational practice to use their money that way.

So you disagree that buying out Staal frees up 2M against the cap to use for something else? I can show you it does.

They have 195 LHD prospects 1-2 years away from being NHL players. If they go out and sign or trade for a LHD, it better come with firing a majority of their scouts, and members of their upper management.

Yeah, they wouldn't make a trade AND hold onto all of their average LD prospects, save for maybe Miller who is likely several years away.

So you disagree that buying out Staal frees up 2M against the cap to use for something else? I can show you it does.

I’m well aware of the fact that they’d save $2.133 million by buying Staal out. I’m well aware that the savings could be utilized elsewhere.

I’ve clearly acknowledged that.

I’m not anywhere near ignorant of the savings.

I just don’t see it as being worth it.

They have some space as is. We don’t know who they’re going to keep in terms of their FA’s.

They can make a trade for an LD.

Or they can bring up a young guy, which if the pattern they’ve been in holds, they likely will.

Also, I don’t see them doing it with Staal or Hank. I don’t believe they’d do either of their 2 longest tenured players that way.

They’re out from under both of them fully in 15 months. Organization still values having them on the roster with all these young guys.

I could certainly be wrong but I don’t see it.

Except that they already have $7.5 million in dead cap next season.

While I do see your point, it just don’t see how they can afford more dead cap even with some savings associated.

 

Dead Cap w/Lundqvist buyout- $13 million for $3 million in savings.

Dead Cap w/Staal buyout- $11 million+ for $2.1 million in savings.

Dead Cap w/Smith buyout- $10 million+ for $1.5 million in savings.

 

I just don’t believe they’d want to do that.

Is the savings worth the dead cap on top of $7.5 million next year already in the books.

The 'dead cap' doesn't matter. Its already there. There is currently X amount of cap room to fill Y amount of roster spots. Another buyout increases the X amount of cap room regardless of ending total of 'dead cap'.

Yeah, they wouldn't make a trade AND hold onto all of their average LD prospects, save for maybe Miller who is likely several years away.

DeAngelo? Fox?

If they are trading for another 3rd pairing guy, I'd rather see Hajek or Rykov... or even Staal, than another lateral move, at best.

I’m well aware of the fact that they’d save $2.133 million by buying Staal out. I’m well aware that the savings could be utilized elsewhere.

I’ve clearly acknowledged that.

I’m not anywhere near ignorant of the savings.

 

I just don’t see it as being worth it.

They have some space as is. We don’t know who they’re going to keep in terms of their FA’s.

They can make a trade for an LD.

Or they can bring up a young guy, which if the pattern they’ve been in holds, they likely will.

TL;DR version of this post: Dead cap doesn't matter

DeAngelo? Fox?

 

If they are trading for another 3rd pairing guy, I'd rather see Hajek or Rykov... or even Staal, than another lateral move, at best.

Yea no trades. UFA. I'm looking for the lefty version of Trouba and right now after that ADA thread I have my eye on Brodin in 2021. Will be 27 years old and looking for a bigger role somewhere after being stuck behind Suter.

TL;DR version of this post: Dead cap doesn't matter

Sure it does.

It’s money you can’t spend.

If it doesn’t matter than why are we talking about freeing up cap space, which is a direct result of them having $6 million in dead cap this next season due to the Shattenkirk buyout.

It’s not lost on me that whether or not the player is on the roster, they’re spending the money anyway and they’d get some savings in a buyout.

But the organization still feels these guys have value. If you buy them out, you pay the money but don’t have the player. As said they still seemingly want the player. So I’m saying that makes me think they won’t.

Long story short, I believe they think it’s a better course to have the player(s) and pay them for the next 15 months and then be free and clear vs buyout(s) and some savings and dead cap.

I totally get the mechanics. I see the merit of a buyout.

Just don’t see the Rangers doing it.

Staal and Hank have given blood to the organization. I think they don’t want to do them ugly.

Sure it does.

 

It’s money you can’t spend.

 

If it doesn’t matter than why are we talking about freeing up cap space, which is a direct result of them having $6 million in dead cap this next season due to the Shattenkirk buyout.

 

It’s not lost on me that whether or not the player is on the roster, they’re spending the money anyway and they’d get some savings in a buyout.

 

But the organization still feels these guys have value. So I’m saying that makes me think they won’t.

If Hank and Smith are scratched then you have $12.85 million that you can't spend sitting in the press box.

If Hank and Smith are bought out then you have $8.3 million that you can't spend as 'dead space'.

Looks like the dead space option gives you about $4.5 million more to work with.

Yea no trades. UFA. I'm looking for the lefty version of Trouba and right now after that ADA thread I have my eye on Brodin in 2021. Will be 27 years old and looking for a bigger role somewhere after being stuck behind Suter.

Then it would make even less sense to buyout guys this offseason.

If Hank and Smith are scratched then you have $12.85 million that you can't spend sitting in the press box.

 

If Hank and Smith are bought out then you have $8.3 million that you can't spend as 'dead space'.

 

Looks like the dead space option gives you about $4.5 million more to work with.

That's if the replacement is worse than them. Then, even with a replacement, you have to take Lundqvist buyout + replacement cap hit = cost of replacement

You HAVE to settle for 4th line SMith, 3rd pairing Staal, and backup Lundqvist for 1 more season or you are just kicking to can. Someday, when the team is competitive, it will be a huge issue.

That's if the replacement is worse than them. Then, even with a replacement, you have to take Lundqvist buyout + replacement cap hit = cost of replacement

 

You HAVE to settle for 4th line SMith, 3rd pairing Staal, and backup Lundqvist for 1 more season or you are just kicking to can. Someday, when the team is competitive, it will be a huge issue.

Yes, this is my point LOL.

The money you "save" buying out these guys at this point goes to their replacements. Might as well ride out one more year with them.