If Smid is healthy but can't return to form and remains a 3.5m 6/7 Dman, I highly doubt BT is just going to sit around and let him and Engelland be the reason he can't sign an important piece that he wants to sign. There are options, you don't have to wait until a semi-bad contract expires to get rid of it. I suspect if Smid becomes an anchor, he would be bought out before BT let his salary dictate the moves he's going to make. $1.16m against the cap for 4 years isn't ideal but it is an option. Same with Engelland/Raymond... these guys aren't going to be the reason we don't sign Hudler or Russell, they're just not. Good managers find creative ways to fix minor problems (and they are minor problems), they don't just lay down and let them play out in such a way that they hurt the organization.
BT really only needs to create roughly 3m-4m in cap space to sign both players as they already make $6.6m combined. Realistically, the most they would sign for would be 6m for Hudler and 4.5m for Russell but I really think they will be had for less when it's all said and done. I see Hudler at $5m-5.5m and Russell at around 4m, it really is going to come down to how much both players want to be here rather than what Smid and Engelland make. I could see the argument if both players were on ELCs but they already make a decent chuck of coin, giving them each an extra $1.25m-1.5m is not going to be a problem if that's what BT wants to do. The term both players will want will likely be the major sticking point in negotiations I would think, especially with Hudler.
|