(Approaching the) Trade Deadline Thread

bsl394

New Member
May 17, 2022
402
Kane is really the only player I want. Some combo of Reilly, Smith, Greer, and a pick hopefully can get it done.

I am not savy on cap structures so I don't know if retaining any salary helps a trade but having Kane on the third line with Coyle and Hall essentially gives us 4 great lines with Freddie moving to the 4th with Nosek and Figgy.

I like our defense and how Monty mixes and matches given situational hockey.

Both U and Sway are both really good so I don't feel a LHD is a necessity.
My heart likes Kane but my head prefers another solid defenseman. Also, would Kane be willing to play on the 3rd line? I don't like breaking up the Czechia guys, and am curious as to whether someone of Kane's star power would be willing to play on the 3rd line.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
FWIW, most of the reporting on Kane has been Dallas, Vegas and Edmonton as the interested teams. Not sure if those teams also match up with where he is willing to go. The way the process has been, I’d imagine we’ll get clarity on what he wants to do this week (yes, no, and where).

He had a hat trick last night and has 5 goals in his last 2 games.

Edit: My money is on Vegas if he goes. This fits their MO to a T.
 
Last edited:

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
Even if he agrees and compensation could be worked out how does Kane and his 10M cap hit even when pro-rated fit in Boston?

Chychrun just makes a lot more sense if you are going big because the contract is much more reasonable and he is a great long term fit when you move on from Clifton next season.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
If Chicago retains half, which they almost certainly will do, then it’s $5 million. They would need to move Smith and Reilly to make it work, same as Chychrun.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Just to reset the cap situation as we go into the final week and a half. This is the Bruins current roster:

Marchand - Bergeron - DeBrusk
Zacha - Krejci - Pastrnak
Hall - Coyle - Smith
Greer - Frederic - Foligno

Grzelyck - McAvoy
Lindholm - Carlo
Forbort - Clifton
Zboril

Ullmark
Swayman

IR: Lettieri
LTIR: Nosek

Burried: Reilly ($1.875 million), Wagner ($225,000)

Cap Space as of 2/21: $1 million

That cap space is from Nosek's LTIR. He has been skating and is due back relatively soon. I also suspect they will call Lauko or Koppanen up today for the road trip since they don't currently have a spare forward and are headed to western Canada. If they do that, the cap space dwindles to ~$250,000 depending on who the call up is.

Nosek's injury is not season ending so they will need to make moves to fit him back in. His cap hit is $1.75 million. They will need to demote the extra player (assuming they call one up) and then clear about $750,000 to activate him.

In terms of moveable money, they have ~$6.5 million in dead/moveable cap charges on the roster. $1.137 million for Zboril, $3.1 million for Craig Smith, $1.875 in cap charge for Mike Reilly ($3 million total cap hit in the NHL), and the $225.000 for Wagner ($1.35 million NHL cap hit).

That's basically where they are today. Some of the names floated around are Chyrchun ($4.6 million), Gavrikov ($2.8 million), Barbashev ($2.25 million), Kane ($10 million). The Bruins are basically going to need to match salaries to make things work. They also would probably prefer to clear more out than they take in so they have room for end of year call ups and also pay the bonus charges for Krejci and Bergeron. It's going to be a tricky situation to navigate.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
247
@cshea
Maybe I missed it, but wondering why Stralman doesn't seem to be impacting the cap hit (I don't see him on Cap Friendly other than being listed in the minors)?
Wouldn't he be similar to Reilly/Wagner where he cleared waivers, or is there an exception for in-season and/or 35+ signings?
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
When you waive and demote a veteran, the max amount you can clear off your salary cap is $1.125 million. Stralman's salary is less than that ($1 million) so when he was waived and demoted they cleared his entire salary off the cap.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
247
When you waive and demote a veteran, the max amount you can clear off your salary cap is $1.125 million. Stralman's salary is less than that ($1 million) so when he was waived and demoted they cleared his entire salary off the cap.
Good to know, thanks.
I suspected there must have been some exemption and that Cap Friendly didn't just overlook it.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
More Gavrikove talk. Pagnotta reporting that it's near the finish line and that Boston and Columbus have the framework of a deal in place (1st and 3rd included) and the Bruins are shopping Craig Smith to try and facilitate it all. However, the understanding is CBJ isn't going to wait forever for the Bruins to clear the necessary salary and if another team comes in, they could move him elsewhere.

View: https://twitter.com/TheFourthPeriod/status/1628095665782882309?s=20
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,429
Just to confirm - In order for the Bruins to acquire (basically) anyone on the books for over $6-7M, their trade partner will need to retain salary?

I understand there's probably weird hurdles they can clear in order to make things work, but for all intents and purposes, their trade partner needs to be willing to eat some salary. Correct?
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,380
The part that scares me the most is they're going to take Grzelyck out of the lineup and not Forbort.
Grzelcyk will take care of that by inevitably getting hurt in the playoffs anyway.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Just to confirm - In order for the Bruins to acquire (basically) anyone on the books for over $6-7M, their trade partner will need to retain salary?

I understand there's probably weird hurdles they can clear in order to make things work, but for all intents and purposes, their trade partner needs to be willing to eat some salary. Correct?
I wouldn't say it like that. In any trade they make, no matter the cap hit they are acquiring, it is basically dollar for dollar since they don't have any room. I just figure they have between $6-7 million in cap hits right now they could use to try and move to facilitate other moves. They aren't going to touch the roster too much, but they have some options to match salary. Zboril and Smith off the NHL roster; Mike Reilly and Chris Wagner's burried money. I think some combo of those 4 will either go in the deal or to a 3rd party.

They can also lower the incoming cap hit by having the trading team retain and/or laundering the player through a 3rd party like Toronto did with O'Reilly (STL retained, MIN retained). That costs more in acquisition cost.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
I don't know too much about Gavrikov. I will say with regard to the player cards, Lindholm's was pretty ugly when we acquired him last year. I believe his projected WAR% was in the 30's and red all over. He's in the conversation for the Norris this year. The situation matters. Obviously Lindholm had a more established track record.

I think to get a true evaluation we probably need the microstats, but those aren't public (and I don't subscribe to JFresh's site).

Here's Lindholm's card from last year at the trade:
61431
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,429
I wouldn't say it like that. In any trade they make, no matter the cap hit they are acquiring, it is basically dollar for dollar since they don't have any room. I just figure they have between $6-7 million in cap hits right now they could use to try and move to facilitate other moves. They aren't going to touch the roster too much, but they have some options to match salary. Zboril and Smith off the NHL roster; Mike Reilly and Chris Wagner's burried money. I think some combo of those 4 will either go in the deal or to a 3rd party.

They can also lower the incoming cap hit by having the trading team retain and/or laundering the player through a 3rd party like Toronto did with O'Reilly (STL retained, MIN retained). That costs more in acquisition cost.
So, in the case of someone like Kane, this would have to be the route.
 
Dec 30, 2022
57
Trader Donnie hasn't made too many bad trades and I just can't see him shucking out a first and third (esp. in this draft) for Forbort 2.0. It makes no sense whatever. On top of that, rumors are that he doesn't want to negotiate and is intent on going to free agency this summer. I know this is perceived as our last and best shot at the Cup for awhile, but I just can't see Donnie making this move. Besides, are we really going to push #48 to the bench, injury and playoff history notwithstanding. I don't think Chuckie would be too happy about this. Why screw up team chemistry for a meatstick?
 
Last edited:

Rosey Ruzicka

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2013
457
I don't believe these reports about a deal in place for a 1st and 3rd. To me, it just seems like Columbus using the media to try to bait some team (not the Bruins) into an overpay.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
I don't believe these reports about a deal in place for a 1st and 3rd. To me, it just seems like Columbus using the media to try to bait some team (not the Bruins) into an overpay.
I think it's true, there's too much credible smoke from credible sources, but I think Columbus is getting antsy and the continued leaks are to get the Bruins to wrap it up.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
isn’t it just one source, with Matthew Porter refuting that source?
It has been more than 1 source. Friedman reported on HNIC on Saturday that the reason Columbus pulled Gavrikov from the lineup was specifically because of their discussions with Boston. He didn’t say a deal was done but strongly implied it was and said the Bruins needed another move to make the cap work. The Columbus Athletic reporter (Aaron Portzline) reported on Sunday that Jarmo (the GM) confirmed the Jackets have a deal for Gavrikov pending other moves but wouldn’t divulge details. Friedman reiterated his HNIC report on his own pod on Monday. Seravelli and Pagnotta both also have sung the same tune, it’s happening if the Bruins can move money.

Porter got a denial that a deal is done from the Bruins side, but confirmed they are talking to Columbus. To me, that’s basically a confirmation of everything else. The Bruins naturally aren’t going to confirm they have a deal until it actually is done.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
It could also be that Garikov is plan B or C for Boston. Don doesn't typically tip his hand at trade deadline, Hall notwithstanding where that was a pure leverage play. I do think this could be CBJ trying to drive up the cost. I'd be surprised if Don did give up a 1st+ for a pure rental luxury.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,466
Gallows Hill
If Columbus really wants the first from Boston, they should be willing to take on Smuth’s money themselves no? I think that might be the hang up.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
Gavrikov has massively regressed this year but it's important to note that he's playing insanely hard minutes. He's effective on the PK and much better 5v5 than Forbort. He's likely a much much better player here with Forbort's minutes/competition and potentially a difference maker. If they swap Gryz for him, though, the team is worse.

I still wouldn't pay two picks to upgrade the easiest 5v5 12 minutes, though.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,164
Cambridge, MA
If Columbus really wants the first from Boston, they should be willing to take on Smuth’s money themselves no? I think that might be the hang up.
Calling this version of him Smuth is quite a freudian slip

Really, really do not want Gavrikov at that price, and wish they'd forked that first over to get ROR
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
Is Gavrikov that much better than Schenn? Neither have great advanced metrics and Schenn actually has the better counting stats this year in fact he is having a career offensive year. If you can get Schenn for a 3rd and perhaps a C prospect and he doesn't require crazy cap moves vs. Gavrikov for a 1st/3rd and probably more picks/prospects to get cap compliant I don't see the extra cost worth it for Gavrikov especially since he is a pure rental and has said he will be testing FA.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,466
Gallows Hill
Calling this version of him Smuth is quite a freudian slip

Really, really do not want Gavrikov at that price, and wish they'd forked that first over to get ROR
Lol. That was completely unintentional. I was hurrying up trying to post before my game and I heard the Zamboni finishing up.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Calling this version of him Smuth is quite a freudian slip

Really, really do not want Gavrikov at that price, and wish they'd forked that first over to get ROR
I think in general, I'm still rather perplexed by the apparent chase after a LHD. It still feels like it's not a position of need, and the only explanation I can come up with is they dont' trust Grzelyck in the playoffs. I'm not sure that's the right call or not, we'll see how it all shakes out. If LHD is indeed what they want, I'd rather spend everything they've got for Chychrun then pay a lesser price for Gavrikov. I'm comfortable saying that Chyrchun is a needle mover. Gavrikov is better than Forbort for sure but is that upgrade worth the cost? And that's assuming that's how it shakes out and they don't play Gavrikov over Grzelyck instead of Forbort.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that you can never have enough 5x5 scoring. I think there's enough historical evidence from this group that I'm confortable in their overall ability to defend and surpress shots, chances and goals. You never really know when the finishing is going to go cold so I'd try to have as much of it as I can.
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
28,535
right here
my concern is that he'll make a move for the sake of making a move in a hedge against any "why didn't you make a move?" questions if they don't win a cup. I'm not sure any of the realistic targets (I exclude Chyrchun under this clause) out there are worth whatever marginal upgrades they would bring at the risk of changing/upsetting the room/chemistry.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,404
Not a single one of us saw the Lindholm move coming (and many bitched and groaned when it happened), so I wouldn't be too concerned about them making a dumb move. If they really wanted Gavrikov, it seems like it would have happened already. I could be wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if a trade doesn't go down until this time next week (I think the Lindholm trade was about 48-72 hours before the deadline). It's all bluster this far ahead of the deadline.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,466
Gallows Hill
Not a single one of us saw the Lindholm move coming (and many bitched and groaned when it happened), so I wouldn't be too concerned about them making a dumb move. If they really wanted Gavrikov, it seems like it would have happened already. I could be wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if a trade doesn't go down until this time next week (I think the Lindholm trade was about 48-72 hours before the deadline). It's all bluster this far ahead of the deadline.
I agree entirely. This front office is historically tighter than a duck’s ass when it comes to trade and free agency information. I believe that all of this Gavirkov for a 1st rounder + talk is coming from Columbus. If that package was really on the table from Boston, wouldn’t Columbus just take on Smith’s cap hit to make it happen?
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,404
I agree entirely. This front office is historically tighter than a duck’s ass when it comes to trade and free agency information. I believe that all of this Gavirkov for a 1st rounder + talk is coming from Columbus. If that package was really on the table from Boston, wouldn’t Columbus just take on Smith’s cap hit to make it happen?
Right, and I'd just add that a rumor of this kind not only benefits Columbus, but might also benefit the Bruins.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
I agree entirely. This front office is historically tighter than a duck’s ass when it comes to trade and free agency information. I believe that all of this Gavirkov for a 1st rounder + talk is coming from Columbus. If that package was really on the table from Boston, wouldn’t Columbus just take on Smith’s cap hit to make it happen?
I think the problem with Columbus taking Smith is his actual salary. Smith's cap hit is $3 million but his salary for the season is $4.3 million. That is probably an issue with moving him to the bad teams with cap space. The cap hit is fine but the acquiring team would be on the hook for the actual money too. Gavrikov's deal is structured simlarly, cap hit of $2.8 million with an actual salary of $4.2 million, but at the end of the day in a Smith-Gavrikov swap, excluding any other pieces, Columbus is adding payroll (even if the difference is the pro-rated $100,000 between the two contracts) for a player they have no use for. Maybe their front office is willing to do it to buy an asset but in a smaller market like Columbus, the actual budget might not allow for it.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
I think the problem with Columbus taking Smith is his actual salary. Smith's cap hit is $3 million but his salary for the season is $4.3 million. That is probably an issue with moving him to the bad teams with cap space. The cap hit is fine but the acquiring team would be on the hook for the actual money too. Gavrikov's deal is structured simlarly, cap hit of $2.8 million with an actual salary of $4.2 million, but at the end of the day in a Smith-Gavrikov swap, excluding any other pieces, Columbus is adding payroll (even if the difference is the pro-rated $100,000 between the two contracts) for a player they have no use for. Maybe their front office is willing to do it to buy an asset but in a smaller market like Columbus, the actual budget might not allow for it.
I think a lot of the "Jacobs is cheap" talk is overblown, but this is an example of where it's absolutely not. There is no excuse for a big market team like the Bruins to not be front loading every contract (and it's a complete joke they would be back loading deals), other than Jacobs being cheap. Unless there is a weird cap loophole I'm not aware of that makes it a good idea, I'm pretty sure there is not.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
12,280
Between here and everywhere.
I think a lot of the "Jacobs is cheap" talk is overblown, but this is an example of where it's absolutely not. There is no excuse for a big market team like the Bruins to not be front loading every contract (and it's a complete joke they would be back loading deals), other than Jacobs being cheap. Unless there is a weird cap loophole I'm not aware of that makes it a good idea, I'm pretty sure there is not.
There's a difference between being "cheap" and being smart financially. 1 million dollars today is worth more than 1 million dollars in 3-4 years. I don't consider not front loading contracts to be cheap.
 

Green (Tongued) Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 2, 2016
1,007
Hanover, PA

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
12,280
Between here and everywhere.
Not sure I understand. Although this would have been an amazing game "walk-off", the goal didn't count.
Right, and I said that (albeit in very small text below).

Even though the goal was waived off because it was .01 seconds too late, the dude knows how to score goals, and has a penchant for rising to the moment. There are few Bruins outside of Pasta and Marchand who would even come close to that kind of play with that time remaining.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
There's a difference between being "cheap" and being smart financially. 1 million dollars today is worth more than 1 million dollars in 3-4 years. I don't consider not front loading contracts to be cheap.
If you frontload a contract and trade a player before the end, you can essentially spend over the cap. If you do the opposite, you cannot actually spend to the cap. Just look at what Toronto does.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
12,280
Between here and everywhere.
If you frontload a contract and trade a player before the end, you can essentially spend over the cap. If you do the opposite, you cannot actually spend to the cap. Just at what Toronto does.
Is that true? The cap hit remains the same regardless, does it not? (I'm not a cap guy, the mysteries of the cap elude me)