Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
TSN: Niedermayer likely back; Ducks will trade a defenseman, Burke presser 6:30 PST
What do Ducks fans make of the rumor i am reading about Niedermayer returning to play out the rest of this season and then calling it a career after the season? (if this happens, does the 6m for next season come off?...not sure about that situation).
I could see the Ducks moving O'Donnell and someone else to make the room needed, trading Beauchemin would be a bad move if Niedermayer indeed wants to play out the rest of this season and then retire, if that happens and Beauchemin is traded, the ducks defense takes a pretty big hit.
In retrospect, signing Schnieder was a bad idea, espcially for the amount Burke signed him to.
His negative to me is only 1 more year under contract. Curious on Beauchemin... ...Can he come to a team like Washington and pair with Tom Poti and be a #1 guy?
In a word, no. Atleast i wouldn't want Beauch to be the no.1 d-man on my team. He's a good number 2, and an excellent 3 and is paid very modestly for the amount of minutes you get out of him.
Trading O'Donnell alone won't get the Ducks enough room to get Niedermayer back - they currently sit at $53,270,833 for 2008-09 including Niedermayer, $46,520,833 without. In other words, because of the "tagging" provision they need to dump just over $3 million in cap dollars allocated to next year to get Niedermayer back [the tagging provision says, "if you make a trade, you can't acquire the player coming back if adding him to your roster would put you over the current Upper Limit for the following year"].
The entire list of Ducks players with a cap hit of $3 million or more in 2008-09 [ignoring Scott Niedermayer]:
-- Pronger [$6,250,000; not going anywhere]
-- Giguere [$6,000,000; not going anywhere]
-- Schneider [$5,625,000; the cap hit is locked in for 2008-09. Could be on the move.]
-- Getzlaf [$5,325,000; not going anywhere]
-- Bertuzzi [$4,000,000; would Burke deal him?]
-- Kunitz [$3,725,000; may surprise some if he gets dealt]
-- McDonald [$3,333,333; may surprise some if he gets dealt]
That's it! Exactly seven (7) players. If Burke wants to keep all of them, then we get to Todd Marchant [$2,517,500] and a scrub, Rob Niedermayer [$2,000,000] and O'Donnell [$1,250,000 and locked in for '08-09] or Beauchemin [$1,650,000] and Pahlsson [$1,400,000]. Then there's the issue of who has $3 million in cap space; realistically there's only 14 teams that probably can do it without chancing ending up over the Upper Limit, only 9 of those can do it and leave themselves over $1 million in cap space, and few of those teams can do it without worrying about blowing a self-imposed budget.
If Burke makes space to get Niedermayer back and lands a solid prospect in this, then hand the "best GM in the league" title over to him. Instead, I see him having to deal at least a pick or two himself a la Philadelphia and Jeremy Roenick to get this done - because no one has to do him any favors; he's the one that needs all the help.
__________________
"You better get to livin', because dying's a pain in the ass." - Frank Sinatra
"Was hoping you were gone for good....." - mm6492
Last edited by Irish Blues: 12-05-2007 at 10:14 AM.
Trading O'Donnell alone won't get the Ducks enough room to get Niedermayer back - they currently sit at $53,270,833 for 2008-09 including Niedermayer, $46,520,833 without. In other words, because of the "tagging" provision they need to dump just over $3 million in cap dollars allocated to next year to get Niedermayer back [the tagging provision says, "if you make a trade, you can't acquire the player coming back if adding him to your roster would put you over the current Upper Limit for the following year"].
The entire list of Ducks players with a cap hit of $3 million or more in 2008-09 [ignoring Scott Niedermayer]:
-- Pronger [$6,250,000; not going anywhere]
-- Giguere [$6,000,000; not going anywhere]
-- Schneider [$5,625,000; the cap hit is locked in for 2008-09. Could be on the move.]
-- Getzlaf [$5,325,000; not going anywhere]
-- Bertuzzi [$4,000,000; would Burke deal him?]
-- McDonald [$3,333,333; may surprise some if he gets dealt]
That's it! Exactly six (6) players. If Burke wants to keep all of them, then we get to Todd Marchant [$2,517,500] and a scrub, Rob Niedermayer [$2,000,000] and O'Donnell [$1,250,000 and locked in for '08-09] or Beauchemin [$1,650,000] and Pahlsson [$1,400,000]. Then there's the issue of who has $3 million in cap space; realistically there's only 14 teams that probably can do it without chancing ending up over the Upper Limit, only 9 of those can do it and leave themselves over $1 million in cap space, and few of those teams can do it without worrying about blowing a self-imposed budget.
If Burke makes space to get Niedermayer back and lands a solid prospect in this, then hand the "best GM in the league" title over to him. Instead, I see him having to deal at least a pick or two himself a la Philadelphia and Jeremy Roenick to get this done - because no one has to do him any favors; he's the one that needs all the help.
If Burke makes space to get Niedermayer back and lands a solid prospect in this, then hand the "best GM in the league" title over to him. Instead, I see him having to deal at least a pick or two himself a la Philadelphia and Jeremy Roenick to get this done - because no one has to do him any favors; he's the one that needs all the help.
Which is why I said Schneider and Edmonton's 1st for Matt Jones and a 3rd, hell, make it one of their lower 2nds.
The Coyotes can take on Schneider's salary and if they need to clear space under a self-imposed cap can trade Morris and/or Boynton. Jones is a solid enough young 4, 5 or 6 d-man that can continue to grow and play minutes for the Ducks cheap for several years.
[the tagging provision says, "if you make a trade, you can't acquire the player coming back if adding him to your roster would put you over the current Upper Limit for the following year"].
Does that apply because Burke isn't trading for Nieds? He's just coming back from a suspension.
Ignoring self imposed budgets, I think it's something like this:
Phoenix
Washington
Columbus
St. Louis
Chicago
Florida
Nashville
Carolina
Atlanta
LA
Detroit (-maybe-. I think they have about 5.5 free)
Islanders
Pittsburgh (doubtful - I know they have cap room, but I think they'd prefer to get some of the young guys resigned first)
San Jose
Of those, I can't see them dealing with LA or Phoenix, and even though they did trade with Columbus earlier this year I think they'd try to avoid sending this kind of package into the conference if at all possible.
I'd guess that Carolina or the Island might be possibilities, maybe even Washington (that first rounder this year's gonna be good...) but god only knows if they'd pick up the phone.
Trading O'Donnell alone won't get the Ducks enough room to get Niedermayer back - they currently sit at $53,270,833 for 2008-09 including Niedermayer, $46,520,833 without. In other words, because of the "tagging" provision they need to dump just over $3 million in cap dollars allocated to next year to get Niedermayer back [the tagging provision says, "if you make a trade, you can't acquire the player coming back if adding him to your roster would put you over the current Upper Limit for the following year"].
The entire list of Ducks players with a cap hit of $3 million or more in 2008-09 [ignoring Scott Niedermayer]:
-- Pronger [$6,250,000; not going anywhere]
-- Giguere [$6,000,000; not going anywhere]
-- Schneider [$5,625,000; the cap hit is locked in for 2008-09. Could be on the move.]
-- Getzlaf [$5,325,000; not going anywhere]
-- Bertuzzi [$4,000,000; would Burke deal him?]
-- McDonald [$3,333,333; may surprise some if he gets dealt]
That's it! Exactly six (6) players. If Burke wants to keep all of them, then we get to Todd Marchant [$2,517,500] and a scrub, Rob Niedermayer [$2,000,000] and O'Donnell [$1,250,000 and locked in for '08-09] or Beauchemin [$1,650,000] and Pahlsson [$1,400,000]. Then there's the issue of who has $3 million in cap space; realistically there's only 14 teams that probably can do it without chancing ending up over the Upper Limit, only 9 of those can do it and leave themselves over $1 million in cap space, and few of those teams can do it without worrying about blowing a self-imposed budget.
If Burke makes space to get Niedermayer back and lands a solid prospect in this, then hand the "best GM in the league" title over to him. Instead, I see him having to deal at least a pick or two himself a la Philadelphia and Jeremy Roenick to get this done - because no one has to do him any favors; he's the one that needs all the help.
Burke could deal a guy with multiple years left for an impending UFA to get out of the bind. The key is next year, not this year.
Somebody suggested a McDonald for Morrison deal with the Canucks, which might work for Burke if he added to McDonald.
People here are so stuckin fantasy-hockey-land that they can't get their head around the fact that Burke would be dealing from a position of extreme weakness here. Every GM in the league knows what Burke's situation is and won't be looking to do him any favors.
In retrospect, signing Schnieder was a bad idea, espcially for the amount Burke signed him to.
IMO the worse signing was the Getzlaf one.
Obviously not the signing itself but the timing of it. If Burke does a handshake deal but doesn't put pen to paper until later in the season then he has all sorts of time to make a deal because there is no problem with next years cap.
Further to that, obviously Getzlaf wants to stay in Anaheim and left money on the table to do so, so Burke could have taken it a step further and waited till the day after the Ducks finished their season before signing him. By that point Neidermeyer may effectively retire altogether as rumoured and Burke loses no one.
Seems to me that Burke outsmarted himself in locking up Getzlaf when he did.
In other words, because of the "tagging" provision they need to dump just over $3 million in cap dollars allocated to next year to get Niedermayer back [the tagging provision says, "if you make a trade, you can't acquire the player coming back if adding him to your roster would put you over the current Upper Limit for the following year"].
See this is where it's murky. Yes, the Ducks couldn't trade for/claim from waivers/sign Niedermayer. But they already have him. I don't see how tagging should prevent him from coming back. If anything, tagging should have prevented the Getzlaf extension, because that was an extension. Although maybe the suspension meant Niedermayer's salary wasn't tagged at the time.
In essence someone needs to make a ruling on whether Niedermayer is being "acquired" in some fashion, in which case that move would be prevented by the CBA, or if he was already on the team, in which case like kdb said earlier the only restrictions would be on future moves involving multi-year deals. Like a CBA "supreme court."
In essence someone needs to make a ruling on whether Niedermayer is being "acquired" in some fashion, in which case that move would be prevented by the CBA, or if he was already on the team, in which case like kdb said earlier the only restrictions would be on future moves involving multi-year deals. Like a CBA "supreme court."
They have someone. It's called "the NHL Commissioner."
to bad the rest of the teams in the league couldn't ban together and make a pact not to trade with burke, its fun watching the ducks do so bad. make him waive some more talent if they want scotty back so bad.
but seriously, ill take beauchamin on the sharks, it probably wont be him that gets moved though.
They have someone. It's called "the NHL Commissioner."
I'd think that it should be some kind of 3rd party, since Bettman represented one side negotiating the CBA. In this case it doesn't matter, but what if he's ruling on something that the NHLPA wouldn't like?
I'm curious what's your opinion on whether the tagging rule should apply to Niedermayer or not? I'm of the opinion that the CBA is only using tagging in reference to acquiring another player, whereas Niedermayer is a player who they already have. The fact that the team has had to keep his cap space open for a possible return seems a sign that he should be counted as a current member of the team.
Although I guess the important part is how a suspended player is treated. And since I don't know anything about suspensions I'm not really decided on whether tagging should be applied.
Anaheim would be putting themselves in a dangerous position trading Beauchemin over Schneider. Beauchemin is one of the best bangs for you buck in this league in terms of defenseman and Schneider is increasingly injury prone.
I'd think that it should be some kind of 3rd party, since Bettman represented one side negotiating the CBA. In this case it doesn't matter, but what if he's ruling on something that the NHLPA wouldn't like?
If the NHLPA doesn't like it, then it's up to the System Arbitrator [the person the NHLPA and NHL jointly agreed upon to resolve disputes between the two].
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobo23
I'm curious what's your opinion on whether the tagging rule should apply to Niedermayer or not? I'm of the opinion that the CBA is only using tagging in reference to acquiring another player, whereas Niedermayer is a player who they already have. The fact that the team has had to keep his cap space open for a possible return seems a sign that he should be counted as a current member of the team.
Although I guess the important part is how a suspended player is treated. And since I don't know anything about suspensions I'm not really decided on whether tagging should be applied.
I don't have all the notes on how this is interpreted, but from what I know the Tagging Rule is designed to keep teams from loading up on players signed beyond the current year and going way over the Upper Limit for this year, then having months to pick and choose who they're going to keep. While someone will say, "yeah - but the Upper Limit is going to be higher next year" it's not an absolute guarantee - and again, the intent is to keep teams from hoarding players and then having extra time to decide who they're going to keep.
Admittedly, it's an area that I haven't scrubbed for detail, it's a section that's difficult reading in and of itself, and it's an area I have hardly any outside notes on; short of knowing the league's interpretation of this, anyone's comment on how this is to be applied is largely a guess - though given McKenzie's article, I think what I mentioned above is probably close to how it's being applied right now. Personally, I'm of the opinion that Getzlaf's extension shouldn't have been allowed under the Tagging Rule ... but again, I'm interested in finding out exactly how the league is interpreting the rule.
