Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Stain
Yeah, but one of the biggest reasons for buying a player out is to get the reduced cap hit in the remaining years of that player's contract.
Calgary might not get a better window to win than the next three seasons for a long time. They have a top ten winger on a sweetheart contract and a Norris Trophy D-man.
Both of those things are unlikely to be around after the next 3 seasons.
If I was the GM in Calgary it would be a huge priority to clear out cap hits that aren't helping, but Treliving traded a poor contract for one that is even harder to move out.
I just don't get it.
Also I don't think Lucic is looking like any kind of contributor now, and hasn't for a couple of seasons.
You did a stats breakdown on Neal halfway through last year that looked at Neal's shot, and scoring chance metrics over his last three seasons. He had some fall off in Calgary, but it appeared he was still getting most of the chances he did the two seasons prior.
If you did one for Lucic I wonder how big of a drop off you would find in that three year span? The results might be terrifying.
|
Right but the mistake of taking up cap space in the window was made when they signed Neal, not the trade.
The trade is about getting rid of a mistake and hopefully finding a better fit both in the room and on the ice.
So don't disagree with you on the window and the shame that they stuck a $5M+ zit in in it, but that happened the year before.
If Neal scores for Edmonton and ends up a positive contribution (he wasn't in Vegas or Calgary) then it's a good move for the Oilers for sure. If he's a negative player and his offence dries up AND Lucic can be a 50/50 player that provides a physical element, it's a pretty even swap and could even fall to Calgary.