The official "salary cap is staying put" thread

[glen a richter]

Since it seems like the cap isn't budging and Tarasenko is obviously getting a sizeable raise, how does the team find the money to make it happen?

Aside from the obvious get rid of Berglund and Ott if they can, don't re-sign Jackman or Leopold, does this do enough?

I've been thinking a lot about this... given the organizational depth at d (Schmaltz, Lindbohm, Vanelli, etc...) would they consider trading one of Pie, Bouw or Shattenkirk as a centerpiece of a deal to open up some money during the offseason, perhaps at the draft?

[not_a_wings_fan]

But who do you trade for and for what role? If you have a team that is stacked for "win now" you would be significantly selling off talent in the now for prospects if you are to actually get any cap relief.

I just don't see how that happens and works out for STL.

If you got ideas, I am all ears.

[glen a richter]

How much will Tarasenko and, for that matter, Allen cost? I just don't see where the cap space comes from without trading bodies. Amnesty buyouts on Ott and Berglund would help, if that's an option.

[cardsfan04]

Since it seems like the cap isn't budging and Tarasenko is obviously getting a sizeable raise, how does the team find the money to make it happen?

Aside from the obvious get rid of Berglund and Ott if they can, don't re-sign Jackman or Leopold, does this do enough?

I've been thinking a lot about this... given the organizational depth at d (Schmaltz, Lindbohm, Vanelli, etc...) would they consider trading one of Pie, Bouw or Shattenkirk as a centerpiece of a deal to open up some money during the offseason, perhaps at the draft?

Why does it seem like the cap isn't budging? I'm not disputing it. It's just not an observation I've made. Other signings around the league like Kane/Toews have made me think the GMs think the cap is going to really inflate before long.

I don't think the answer is trading our high end talent though. I mean, never say never. But, I don't think that's the way to go. I think that Army has probably considered this already and has a plan in place to keep at least most of our high end guys together. When he's signing players, I'm sure he's thinking about how they fit into future years with young players getting raises.

That said, if Tarasenko puts up 50 this year (not THAT far fetched, he's on pace for 49), maybe his value goes up enough to make things more difficult on Army than he planned on. Or not, I dunno. But, I doubt we trade our top guys to make room.

[cardsfan04]

How much will Tarasenko and, for that matter, Allen cost? I just don't see where the cap space comes from without trading bodies. Amnesty buyouts on Ott and Berglund would help, if that's an option.

If Tarasenko maintains this pace, he's going to cost a lot. Allen won't go up much I don't think. I could see his next contract being in the $2-3 mil AAV range. Lots of time before we get there, but I don't foresee him being super expensive very soon.

[WaukeeBlues]

First and foremost, I think it's a bit of a bad assumption to think Tarasenko is going to get top dollar. He's going to be in the exact same scenario as Ryan Johansen was last summer. Tarasenko had some flashes in last year's playoffs and assuming he keeps it up this year will have a big year. He's going to make some money, don't get me wrong, but it's going to be a bridge contract: 2-3 years of "prove it" and then Tarasenko will get his monster contract. Johansen got a three year deal of $3, $3 and $6 witha $4 hit average. That sounds about right. Maybe a bit more expensive but it's not going to be much.

I am so sick of Barret Jackman I can't even express it. He's awful. Slow, makes poor decisions passing. Unless he's agreeable to something like $750k next season I say can him. So that can free up $2.5 right there alone.

Ott has (unfortunately) a two year deal so he's not leaving unless we trade him. If we let Paajarvi and Lapierre walk after this season that'd be another $2.3

But to address your question: You do NOT trade Pietro, Shattenkirk or Bouwmeester. Absolutely not. You keep the core together and you figure out the rest. Those three guys are my only "must keeps" on defense. We can survive without any one or mutiple of the others.

I'm not worried. Army will figure it out. Always does. But I don't think we're going to be paying Tarasenko the BIG dollars. Not yet. Few seasons away.

[WaukeeBlues]

How much will Tarasenko and, for that matter, Allen cost? I just don't see where the cap space comes from without trading bodies. Amnesty buyouts on Ott and Berglund would help, if that's an option.

Amnesty buyouts are gone IIRC. Only allowed for up to two years after the lockout and had to be used on contracts made before the lockout. That's all just off the top of my head though.

[cardsfan04]

First and foremost, I think it's a bit of a bad assumption to think Tarasenko is going to get top dollar. He's going to be in the exact same scenario as Ryan Johansen was last summer. Tarasenko had some flashes in last year's playoffs and assuming he keeps it up this year will have a big year. He's going to make some money, don't get me wrong, but it's going to be a bridge contract: 2-3 years of "prove it" and then Tarasenko will get his monster contract. Johansen got a three year deal of $3, $3 and $6 witha $4 hit average. That sounds about right. Maybe a bit more expensive but it's not going to be much.

I am so sick of Barret Jackman I can't even express it. He's awful. Slow, makes poor decisions passing. Unless he's agreeable to something like $750k next season I say can him. So that can free up $2.5 right there alone.

Ott has (unfortunately) a two year deal so he's not leaving unless we trade him. If we let Paajarvi and Lapierre walk after this season that'd be another $2.3

But to address your question: You do NOT trade Pietro, Shattenkirk or Bouwmeester. Absolutely not. You keep the core together and you figure out the rest. Those three guys are my only "must keeps" on defense. We can survive without any one or mutiple of the others.

I'm not worried. Army will figure it out. Always does. But I don't think we're going to be paying Tarasenko the BIG dollars. Not yet. Few seasons away.

It'll be interesting to see what he gets. Johansen is a decent comparison I guess. If Tarasenko maintains anything close to this pace, I think he'll get a decent bit more, but if Johansen having 1 good season (33G/30A), an 80P season from Tarasenko probably doesn't double that salary.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

I don't see how Tank gets any less than $5 million per his next contract. He is an absolute stud. Even local media is saying the Blues haven't had a sniper like this since Brett Hull!

And now Hull looks like 2 or 3 Tarasenkos!

[glen a richter]

Since it seems like the cap isn't budging and Tarasenko is obviously getting a sizeable raise, how does the team find the money to make it happen?

Aside from the obvious get rid of Berglund and Ott if they can, don't re-sign Jackman or Leopold, does this do enough?

I've been thinking a lot about this... given the organizational depth at d (Schmaltz, Lindbohm, Vanelli, etc...) would they consider trading one of Pie, Bouw or Shattenkirk as a centerpiece of a deal to open up some money during the offseason, perhaps at the draft?

Why does it seem like the cap isn't budging? I'm not disputing it. It's just not an observation I've made. Other signings around the league like Kane/Toews have made me think the GMs think the cap is going to really inflate before long.

I don't think the answer is trading our high end talent though. I mean, never say never. But, I don't think that's the way to go. I think that Army has probably considered this already and has a plan in place to keep at least most of our high end guys together. When he's signing players, I'm sure he's thinking about how they fit into future years with young players getting raises.

That said, if Tarasenko puts up 50 this year (not THAT far fetched, he's on pace for 49), maybe his value goes up enough to make things more difficult on Army than he planned on. Or not, I dunno. But, I doubt we trade our top guys to make room.

I think it was advertised pretty well recently that, with the Canadian dollar performing weakly, the cap was probably staying put for the time being. I'm sure that in the future it'll go up, but for Tarasenko and Allen, the future is too far. They'll both earn and get raises after this season. At the moment I think the Blues have about 300K in cap space, thereabouts. Letting Jackman and Leopold walk frees up some money, but is it enough? I don't see any problem with trading one of the core 3 defense given what the team has in the system. If you want to retain your offensive threats in a time where the cap, at best, goes up minimally, you have to free up space somewhere. It's not likely to come from Berglund or Ott leaving. Who wants to trade for either of them when they have 3 points between them on the season? Both are proving to be generally worthless unless some team desperately needs to reach the cap floor.

Anyway, as far as Kane and Toews goes, the Blackhawks will soon grow to regret that when they can't retain any supporting cast around those two. At least with the Blues and the organizational depth, they can afford to trade someone without doing irrepairable damage to the team as a whole. There will come a point very soon where Fabbri, Barbashev, Rattie, Jaskin (more permanently), Schmaltz, Vanelli and Lindbohm are all on the team or considered viable alternatives to what we currently have. If the Hawks had to trade one of Kane or Toews to rectify a cap problem, they'd be in a bad place. If Army had to trade one of the defensemen in order to guarantee retention of Tarasenko, we wouldn't be sunk.

[dmiles2186]

I don't think Allen is going to go up all that much this year. Even if he gets 40% of the starts this year, that means he'll be around 45-50 career starts (including his 10-15 game stint a few years ago). I don't think that will launch him into the stratosphere in terms of salary. Sure, he's going to get a raise, but obviously, Tarasenko is the one we should be worried about. It's a bit of embarrassment of riches that Army is going to have to make some of these tough decisions. 6-7 years ago, we wanted a roster of the type of players we've got now. He's gotta make the tough call on what to do to get Senko here. But he proved with Schwartz that he can make a deal with an improving RFA.

Of course I'm on the train of getting rid of Berglund and Ott. Leopold can skeedaddle too. Question will be if anyone wants to take on the contracts of Berglund and Ott. That part of it makes me nervous.

[glen a richter]

I don't think Allen is going to go up all that much this year. Even if he gets 40% of the starts this year, that means he'll be around 45-50 career starts (including his 10-15 game stint a few years ago). I don't think that will launch him into the stratosphere in terms of salary. Sure, he's going to get a raise, but obviously, Tarasenko is the one we should be worried about. It's a bit of embarrassment of riches that Army is going to have to make some of these tough decisions. 6-7 years ago, we wanted a roster of the type of players we've got now. He's gotta make the tough call on what to do to get Senko here. But he proved with Schwartz that he can make a deal with an improving RFA.

Of course I'm on the train of getting rid of Berglund and Ott. Leopold can skeedaddle too. Question will be if anyone wants to take on the contracts of Berglund and Ott. That part of it makes me nervous.

This is just the problem though, if the cap were going to launch upward next season I wouldn't be so worried. But even if it goes up just barely, the tough decisions DO need to be made. Either that or Vova goes the way of Boat. I think the organizational depth at D is solid enough to sacrifice there for the sake of retaining a big scoring line. Others think it would be dumb to unload one of the big 3 D. What if a Shattenkirk centered package could net us the 1st or 2nd overall pick?

[dmiles2186]

This is just the problem though, if the cap were going to launch upward next season I wouldn't be so worried. But even if it goes up just barely, the tough decisions DO need to be made. Either that or Vova goes the way of Boat. I think the organizational depth at D is solid enough to sacrifice there for the sake of retaining a big scoring line. Others think it would be dumb to unload one of the big 3 D. What if a Shattenkirk centered package could net us the 1st or 2nd overall pick?

If we could get the 1st and 2nd overall pick for Shattenkirk? Sure. I don't think that's going to happen though. I'm not sure Shattenkirk has enough cache to net us a top 2 pick even with other pieces added. I could be wrong, of course.

Out of the big 3 on D, Shattenkirk is the one I'm okay parting with. He always starts hot offensively and tails off. Plus, he was pretty shaky in the playoffs last year.

[cardsfan04]

Since it seems like the cap isn't budging and Tarasenko is obviously getting a sizeable raise, how does the team find the money to make it happen?

Aside from the obvious get rid of Berglund and Ott if they can, don't re-sign Jackman or Leopold, does this do enough?

I've been thinking a lot about this... given the organizational depth at d (Schmaltz, Lindbohm, Vanelli, etc...) would they consider trading one of Pie, Bouw or Shattenkirk as a centerpiece of a deal to open up some money during the offseason, perhaps at the draft?

Why does it seem like the cap isn't budging? I'm not disputing it. It's just not an observation I've made. Other signings around the league like Kane/Toews have made me think the GMs think the cap is going to really inflate before long.

I don't think the answer is trading our high end talent though. I mean, never say never. But, I don't think that's the way to go. I think that Army has probably considered this already and has a plan in place to keep at least most of our high end guys together. When he's signing players, I'm sure he's thinking about how they fit into future years with young players getting raises.

That said, if Tarasenko puts up 50 this year (not THAT far fetched, he's on pace for 49), maybe his value goes up enough to make things more difficult on Army than he planned on. Or not, I dunno. But, I doubt we trade our top guys to make room.

I think it was advertised pretty well recently that, with the Canadian dollar performing weakly, the cap was probably staying put for the time being. I'm sure that in the future it'll go up, but for Tarasenko and Allen, the future is too far. They'll both earn and get raises after this season. At the moment I think the Blues have about 300K in cap space, thereabouts. Letting Jackman and Leopold walk frees up some money, but is it enough? I don't see any problem with trading one of the core 3 defense given what the team has in the system. If you want to retain your offensive threats in a time where the cap, at best, goes up minimally, you have to free up space somewhere. It's not likely to come from Berglund or Ott leaving. Who wants to trade for either of them when they have 3 points between them on the season? Both are proving to be generally worthless unless some team desperately needs to reach the cap floor.

Anyway, as far as Kane and Toews goes, the Blackhawks will soon grow to regret that when they can't retain any supporting cast around those two. At least with the Blues and the organizational depth, they can afford to trade someone without doing irrepairable damage to the team as a whole. There will come a point very soon where Fabbri, Barbashev, Rattie, Jaskin (more permanently), Schmaltz, Vanelli and Lindbohm are all on the team or considered viable alternatives to what we currently have. If the Hawks had to trade one of Kane or Toews to rectify a cap problem, they'd be in a bad place. If Army had to trade one of the defensemen in order to guarantee retention of Tarasenko, we wouldn't be sunk.

I hope that doesn't prove to be the case. In the offseason they were talking about it going up again to around $75-76 mil, because of the new Canadian media deal. I guess if the Canadian dollar is tanking, that could change it though. That would really suck.

I still think there's a reasonable chance that it doesn't come to trading our big pieces, but I'll say this. If Tarasenko keeps this up, I want him on the team more than anybody else.

[ViPeRx007]

Tarasenko is a guy you build a team around. Seriously. If you had to pick one guy on our team to keep, who else would you rather have? It's Tarasenko on offense, Pietrangelo on defense. Schwartz might be up there as well.

I know it's more complicated than it seems, but I think you almost have to start fielding offers for people like Backes, Oshie, Steen, as well as the obvious ones in Ott and Berglund and start converting the team over to Tarasenko and Schwartz as the new "go to" guys; it's pretty much already happening anyway. With Rattie, Fabbri, and Barbashev (hopefully they pan out) they're going to be coming in sooner rather than later. I'm afraid the window to win with the current group is really coming down to this season. How long can you keep going with the same guys if you don't win anyway? It sucks, because I really like the group we have, but this is the business side.

This is another reason why Ott and Berglund's signings didn't really make a whole lot of sense. It was really shortsighted of Army. I just have to have faith that he knows what he's doing and will make it work with Tarasenko. We've always talked about getting an elite scorer. He's as close as we've gotten since...umm...a long time ago. Again, I'd rather part with almost everyone else on the roster before him.

[F Keenan]

Tarasenko is a guy you build a team around. Seriously. If you had to pick one guy on our team to keep, who else would you rather have? It's Tarasenko on offense, Pietrangelo on defense. Schwartz might be up there as well.

I know it's more complicated than it seems, but I think you almost have to start fielding offers for people like Backes, Oshie, Steen, as well as the obvious ones in Ott and Berglund and start converting the team over to Tarasenko and Schwartz as the new "go to" guys; it's pretty much already happening anyway. With Rattie, Fabbri, and Barbashev (hopefully they pan out) they're going to be coming in sooner rather than later. I'm afraid the window to win with the current group is really coming down to this season. How long can you keep going with the same guys if you don't win anyway? It sucks, because I really like the group we have, but this is the business side.

This is another reason why Ott and Berglund's signings didn't really make a whole lot of sense. It was really shortsighted of Army. I just have to have faith that he knows what he's doing and will make it work with Tarasenko. We've always talked about getting an elite scorer. He's as close as we've gotten since...umm...a long time ago. Again, I'd rather part with almost everyone else on the roster before him.

Damn right this team's window is closing. They need to go deep in the playoffs to start to turn a profit.

[ecbm]

So the Blues may have to trade a core player, a top-pairing defenseman maybe, because of the self-inflicted wounds that are Ott's & Berglund's contracts. Is Army still a genius not to be questioned? Remember: this club has won exactly one division title and one playoff series with this coach/FO and that was with the team they inherited. Hitch and Army have absolutely no laurels to rest on here. The cup they won in Dallas 16 seasons ago means nothing to this Blues fan.

I just have to have faith that he knows what he's doing and will make it work with Tarasenko.

You don't have to have faith in him. To me this season is the make-or-break for Hitch & Army assuming the squad isn't waylaid by injuries & suspensions. The talent level is high, the payroll is high and this is fully their team. Bishop, Nikitin, Perron and Boat have been given away for a bag of pucks and $300K.

Oh, and the bridge contract thing-that can be a gamble, you know? OK, so Vova gets a 2 year deal at a price everyone can live with...but then he has 45 & 55 goals in those two seasons before becoming a UFA and can look Army in the face and say: Kane/Toews money or I test the market.

Bottom line: with $11.7M currently tied up in Berglund, Ott, Jackman (unless he's giving a huge hometown discount then the Quixotic quest to have him retire here needs to end) & Leopold if we have to give up a core player to re-up our own prospects then Army & Co. have some 'splainin to do if you ask me.

[cardsfan04]

So the Blues may have to trade a core player, a top-pairing defenseman maybe, because of the self-inflicted wounds that are Ott's & Berglund's contracts. Is Army still a genius not to be questioned? Remember: this club has won exactly one division title and one playoff series with this coach/FO and that was with the team they inherited. Hitch and Army have absolutely no laurels to rest on here. The cup they won in Dallas 16 seasons ago means nothing to this Blues fan.

I just have to have faith that he knows what he's doing and will make it work with Tarasenko.

You don't have to have faith in him. To me this season is the make-or-break for Hitch & Army assuming the squad isn't waylaid by injuries & suspensions. The talent level is high, the payroll is high and this is fully their team. Bishop, Nikitin, Perron and Boat have been given away for a bag of pucks and $300K.

Oh, and the bridge contract thing-that can be a gamble, you know? OK, so Vova gets a 2 year deal at a price everyone can live with...but then he has 45 & 55 goals in those two seasons before becoming a UFA and can look Army in the face and say: Kane/Toews money or I test the market.

Bottom line: with $11.7M currently tied up in Berglund, Ott, Jackman (unless he's giving a huge hometown discount then the Quixotic quest to have him retire here needs to end) & Leopold if we have to give up a core player to re-up our own prospects then Army & Co. have some 'splainin to do if you ask me.

I'd say we should wait to see how it plays out before criticizing him for it. If he backed himself into a corner by lack of foresight and it costs us a core guy, by all means criticize away. It will be well deserved at that point. But, we're not at that point right now. I doubt that we'll have to trade a core player for salary reasons because of the Ott and Berglund signings.

[glen a richter]

Just throwing this out there, and don't crucify me for it, but since we can probably count on the guys mentioned earlier (Fabbri, Barbashev, Lindbohm, Vanelli, Schmaltz, etc...) being on the team sooner than later and having to make room for them one way or the other, would Shattenkirk+Berglund+Jaskin be sufficient to get the #1 or #2? Of course there's a reason I'm not an NHL gm and I'm probably talking out my ass here, but ample money is saved to retain Tarasenko (and Allen)--in conjunction with also letting Jax and Leopold walk--and we net either McDavid or Eichel who both would look good in the note and step in right away. I'm afraid we're stuck with Ott, so trading him for anything short of a bad of dented pucks is probably out of the question. Could be an overpay if Jaskin ends up really good, but then again 1 and 2 in this years draft are both being compared to Crosby and, as much as we love to rag on him, admit it: we'd all love a guy like Crosby on the Blues.

[dmiles2186]

Hitch and Army have absolutely no laurels to rest on here. The cup they won in Dallas 16 seasons ago means nothing to this Blues fan.

Hitch and Army took a team that was a middling group competing for a 6-7-8 seed and turned them into a contender that is in the top 5-6 NHL teams every year. Not to mention we're having conversations about a giant, beautiful silver trophy. They elevated this team to that. You're not giving them enough credit for turning things around. The moment Hitch took over, this team went from basically a .500 team (7-8-0, if I recall) to the #2 seed in the West by year's end. They've been in the upper half of the conference ever since.

You are so critical of them both and that's fine. But if we can both of them, who is out there, better than them, waiting to replace them? That's the key question that people calling for jobs never ask. Coaches and GM's with Cups on their resume aren't usually just sitting around, they're usually employed.