[Trade] Andersson (50% retained) to Vegas for 27 1st, cond 28 2nd, Whitecloud, Wiebe

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Isnt there a 10% limit they can go over the cap? Maybe after the Eichel deal which already put them over the cap they could not afford another $8-9M deal?

Hasn’t the 10% rule existed since the cap came into the league?

The Andersson deal would be way less impactful than the Eichel one was when signed.

They are, without LTIR, 12M over the cap. Before and Andersson deal kicks in, they will drop $14-15M in salary with expiring contracts.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

A team can go over a max of 10% in the offseason. Pretty sure the Ras deal puts them higher than that.

Its not the offseason

The fact is they COULD sign him now. It would pressure them into other moves in may/june though so they might not want to but that is a different convo.

I bet if he was lighting it up they would be more inclined

[ForeverFlameFan]

It might be a blessing in disguise that the LTIR playoff rule was made. If it wasn't, Vegas would've abused it again to keep themselves afloat. I know they're not showing it well right now, but in previous years they were able to acquire players for pennies on the dollar and stash Stone/Pietrangelo on the IR.

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The Andersson deal would be way less impactful than the Eichel one was when signed.

The Eichel contract added $3.5 million, Rasmus Andersson's contract will be less impactful than that? Show your work with this claim.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Its not wrong. Its called the NHL tagging rule but it has been updated in the last MOU so its technically not called that anymore.

But it's irrelevant to the announcement of a future contract, no?

The rule has no relevance to a hypothetical cap overage, only an actual one on day one. You could sign contracts today exceeding next season's cap by double and it's not an issue. You just have to be compliant within that rule by the start.

And as stated above, they will shed $15M with expiring contracts (including the present Rasmus deal) before an extension comes into effect.

[BigThief]

This could be hilariously embarrassing.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by BigThief

The Eichel contract added $3.5 million, Rasmus Andersson's contract will be less impactful than that? Show your work with this claim.

Eichel's contract was for $12.5 and came when all their existing contracts (except Rasmus' current one which is more than offset by Whitecloud's being gone) were in place, plus the LTIRs that didn't exist at the time (Karlsson and Hart). So it was a bigger impact on the hypothetical 2026-27 cap.

When Rasmus extends, he only replaces his current deal, plus Whitecloud's $2.75. How much do you think he's going to be given in Vegas?

[Vox]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

But it's irrelevant to the announcement of a future contract, no?

The rule has no relevance to a hypothetical cap overage, only an actual one on day one. You could sign contracts today exceeding next season's cap by double and it's not an issue. You just have to be compliant within that rule by the start.

And as stated above, they will shed $15M with expiring contracts (including the present Rasmus deal) before an extension comes into effect.

I believe the most you can be over in the summer is 10% prior to the season commencing, so it seems logical that you can't be over by more than 10% earlier than that either. They have cap to sign some contracts, but need some cap management to sign all the contracts they require. Seems to me there's going to be some juggling required.

[dino7c]

I almost want him to sign now to prove you guys wrong...they could do it. They probably dont because its a dumb move right now. They are better off waiting for multiple reasons. 10% rule is legit "IN THE OFFSEASON" for the upcoming year.

They could sign him today and the league would approve the contract...they would have work to do in May/June

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by BigThief

This could be hilariously embarrassing.

It will be if you explain why they somehow now can't announce a planned extension until their cap is squared away, when they did it previously.

[Eric Vail]

Since trade deadline, here are some Vegas stats:
Player...games...points...+/-
Eichel...9..........5...........-5
Stone...6..........2...........-4
Hertl.....9.........1............-5

Aren't these the leaders? I suspect they need to take some responsibility for the losses.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vox

I believe the most you can be over in the summer is 10% prior to the season commencing, so it seems logical that you can't be over by more than 10% earlier than that either. They have cap to sign some contracts, but need some cap management to sign all the contracts they require. Seems to me there's going to be some juggling required.

But they won't be over UNTIL the summer. July 1 in fact. So, they can announce and do their juggling by then.

Again, they announced Eichel last October. And as soon as the LTIR comes off they will soon be non-cap compliant until it goes on again when the season starts - even without Anderson extending. By more than 10% I think, since they are $12M over right now.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Eric Vail

Since trade deadline, here are some Vegas stats:
Player...games...points...+/-
Eichel...9..........5...........-5
Stone...6..........2...........-4
Hertl.....9.........1............-5

Aren't these the leaders? I suspect they need to take some responsibility for the losses.

Their goaltending is all sub .900 as well.

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Eichel's contract was for $12.5 and came when all their existing contracts (except Rasmus' current one which is more than offset by Whitecloud's being gone) were in place, plus the LTIRs that didn't exist at the time (Karlsson and Hart). So it was a bigger impact on the hypothetical 2026-27 cap.

Eichel was already making ten million, they're adding $3.5 million, not the entire $13.5

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by BigThief

Eichel was already making ten million, they're adding $3.5 million, not the entire $13.5

Not the point. His 13.5 is what impacts the cap next season.

Neither of which has anything to do with a supposed capo reason for announcing an extension before the contract kicks in.

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It will be if you explain why they somehow now can't announce a planned extension until their cap is squared away, when they did it previously.

I'm not the one who waved away proven trusted analysis as BS because I didn't like it. I really don't know, which is what you should have said.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by BigThief

I'm not the one who waved away proven trusted analysis as BS because I didn't like it. I really don't know, which is what you should have said.

It's not BS because I don't like it. I wouldn't care a bit if it was accurate. But it doesn't seem like it is since it's not been a reason at any previous time ever.

Go ahead - explain why a team can't announce an extension because it would (if nothing else changes) put them over the cap next October.

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Not the point. His 13.5 is what impacts the cap next season.

-Vegas Removes Ten Million to next years cap
-Vegas Adds 13.5 Million to next years cap
-Net add 3.5 million

You're in the weeds lost again.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by dino7c

All I did was report a fact their home announcers were talking about. Their coach wasnt happy with his play (amoung others) and split him and Hanifin starting Ras on the third pair. Coach liked how he responded I guess and gave him more ice. That doesnt mean what I said before was wrong. There are multiple Vegas based articles questioning his play and I didnt write even one of them lol.

They regret the trade so far...like Boston supposedly offered him 8x9M. Does anyone think he gets even close now? Or has his stock gone down?

But no its totally me being a hater

I'm not calling you (or anyone) a hater, just presenting the argument that the change to the Knights' lineup went beyond the addition of Andersson, and that Whitecloud might have been a better player than they (or many of us) thought prior to the trade.

[Roof-Daddy]

Whitecloud seems like he may have under rated not only on the ice a bit, but maybe as a guy in the room too?

Kind of like Andrew Ference was when the Flames traded him for Brad Stuart.