Cap Crunch-Worst Case Scenario?

Obviously we'd all like to see Schneider moved for minimal salary coming back, a pick (any pick at this point) would be optimal. However, every day that goes by puts Burke into a worse negotiating spot, and I think there is a chance (at this point, a very small chance) that we lose Pronger prior to the season starting.

I have to think that Getzlaf and Perry are untouchable. Kunitz makes enough to get the Ducks under the cap, but then there is no room for Teemu. Giguere is unlikely to move, there seems to be lots of decent goalies around at the moment. Niedermayer would probably just retire if he got traded. That leaves one person who makes enough to get the Ducks under the cap and leave room for Selanne.

And, if push comes to shove, losing Pronger might not be the end of the world this year. Next year is going to be a bit of a rebuild around the twins, and I think if I had to choose between having Pronger this year or having Selanne/Schneider I'd take the latter every time. We need the scoring help more than the defence.

Obviously we'd all like to see Schneider moved for minimal salary coming back, a pick (any pick at this point) would be optimal. However, every day that goes by puts Burke into a worse negotiating spot, and I think there is a chance (at this point, a very small chance) that we lose Pronger prior to the season starting.

I have to think that Getzlaf and Perry are untouchable. Kunitz makes enough to get the Ducks under the cap, but then there is no room for Teemu. Giguere is unlikely to move, there seems to be lots of decent goalies around at the moment. Niedermayer would probably just retire if he got traded. That leaves one person who makes enough to get the Ducks under the cap and leave room for Selanne.

And, if push comes to shove, losing Pronger might not be the end of the world this year. Next year is going to be a bit of a rebuild around the twins, and I think if I had to choose between having Pronger this year or having Selanne/Schneider I'd take the latter every time. We need the scoring help more than the defence.

Schneider will be traded, there's no doubt about. He certainly won't be retained in favor of trading Pronger. That just doesn't make sense at all. Someone will take Schneider because there are a number of teams who need him. If Sundin announced is intentions long ago or actually signed that huge contract he was offered Schneider would have been a Hab two months ago.

But if Burke felt that moving Schneider could prove to be impossible he wouldn't have signed Morrison and Montador. He would have simply sat on his bad cap situation and tough it out. But no matter what you hold onto Pronger. Moving him does nothing positive for your team if you want to compete.

I'm not saying it's likely at this point. Hence the title of my post which includes "Worst Case Scenario"...

at yesterdays' media availability, Lombardi has said he is real popular with the teams over the cap. Everyone wants to dump a contract on him and he is insisting on getting an asset with it.

For the Kings to dump Schneider, they will have to add a 2nd round pick. That might not get it done. The last thing ombardi wants to see is a successful Ducks team. There just isn't anyone looking for a 5 million dollar dman right now.

Will Selane wait till Christmas?

I can envision 2 "worst case" scenarios if no one will trade for Schneider. 1) Pronger gets traded as the OP suggests(assets are returned) 2) He gets waived (like Bryzgalov). I guess a 3rd option is they make Niedermayer retire, but that's unlikely. I seriously doubt any assets would have to be given to make a team eat Schneider's contract. Marchant maybe, but not Schneider.

Which one would people prefer? Moving Pronger really kills our D after the season, but we do get assets. Waiving Schneider means no assets, but obviously weakens our team much less.

I'd much prefer just waiving Schneider. We got him for nothing, so it doesn't matter if we don't get anything back. And the team is that much stronger with Pronger compared to Schneider. And it's good to have at least 1 defenseman under contract for next season.


What's dangerous about the Kings is that Lombardi seems pretty hesitant to pay much to address his needs. Just look at last season, where Bryzgalov would have helped quite a bit (but not as much as a competent defensive defenseman). Lombardi didn't offer up anything, which he even admitted might have been a mistake. Schneider is a great fit as he wouldn't have to move, and the Kings admittedly are seeking a veteran defenseman so the kids aren't overwhelmed. Well the problem is that right now, the Kings are up there on waiver priority. We may end up like with Bryzgalov where Schneider has to be moved come day 1 of the season, but the only team interested (Phoenix in that case) isn't offering anything because they know they can get him on waivers.

The only with waiving Schneider is the self imposed cap we may or may not have if no one picks him up.

I actually don't think trading Pronger would be the end of the world, assuming Morrison and Selanne pan out together. Our D is obviously going to look pretty different next year anyways. Of course, if Pronger is interested in signing an extension for a reasonable sum, then the decision would get even more complicated.

I still think Schneider will get traded, but I'm keeping an eye on the calender...

if you waive a player over 35 when he signs his contract, his salary still counts against the cap. You can't bury 35+ year olds in the minors to hide his cap hit.

The worst capn crunch scenario is the crunch berries losing their power at the exact moment that the soggies attack. The odds against that are staggering, however. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

if you waive a player over 35 when he signs his contract, his salary still counts against the cap. You can't bury 35+ year olds in the minors to hide his cap hit.

I forgot about that.

So if Schneider needs to be waived, it had better be done a couple of days before the season starts just in case he doesn't get claimed. Unlikely, probably, but at that point a Pronger trade would be inevitable, I think.

I'm not talking about putting Schneider in the minors. There's no way they do that, they don't have the money. That's a big-budget team strategy, we're a mid-level team. And besides, as has been mentioned, burying him in the minors doesn't help the cap. I meant waive him so someone claims him.

BTW, waivers doesn't necessarily have anything to do with moving someone to the AHL. You can waive someone to put them into the minors, to buy them out, or even just for the hell of it. As long as we don't send him to the AHL, we don't have to worry about recall waivers. Although they may do so anyways if no one bites.

But that's all academic. Schneider is a useful player with a market value contract, so I doubt Schneider clears waivers.

If Lombardi wants Schneider he'll acquire him before camp starts. Someone will acquire him, there's too many teams that are interested. If Burke actually feared that he wouldn't be able to trade Schneider then he wouldn't have signed Morrison and Montador. He wouldn't have put himself in this situation if he thought he couldn't get out of it. Waiting for waivers is just too risky an option.

But trading Pronger is not an option, worst-case or otherwise. You don't trade one of the premiere players in the league to get under the cap. You trade someone else. Kunitz gets traded before Pronger. We have a good shot at the Cup and that's because of Pronger, Niedermayer and Giguere as the core of this team.

But trading Pronger is not an option, worst-case or otherwise. You don't trade one of the premiere players in the league to get under the cap. You trade someone else. Kunitz gets traded before Pronger. We have a good shot at the Cup and that's because of Pronger, Niedermayer and Giguere as the core of this team.

Trading Kunitz gets you under the cap, but Selanne isn't playing for league minimum...

Another fantastic worst case scenario:

Schneider not traded;
Not enough to sign Selanne;
Scott retires since Teemu is gone;
Rob quits because of Scott and Injuries;
Burke makes another stupid trade for "character" players. :laugh:

---------

But relax, Burke has suitors for Schneids; Scott is staying; Teemu will return.
RC is not going to let Prongs go.

By the way, Lombardi is the one under pressure to fill cap space.
It's is no surprise that they could use Schneider with the punks.

The Ducks are fine. Good to be the talk of the NHL in the off season. :nod:

If Lombardi wants Schneider he'll acquire him before camp starts. Someone will acquire him, there's too many teams that are interested. If Burke actually feared that he wouldn't be able to trade Schneider then he wouldn't have signed Morrison and Montador. He wouldn't have put himself in this situation if he thought he couldn't get out of it. Waiting for waivers is just too risky an option.

But trading Pronger is not an option, worst-case or otherwise. You don't trade one of the premiere players in the league to get under the cap. You trade someone else. Kunitz gets traded before Pronger. We have a good shot at the Cup and that's because of Pronger, Niedermayer and Giguere as the core of this team.
Here's the problem. Burke couldn't have anticipated that Sundin would hold up everything like this. And that all these teams will be willing to wait and not move on to plan B. Even Lombardi has admitted that he saw some difficulty when trading Visnovsky (and somehow he saw effects with Boyle?) because of Sundin. So while he may have not been worried about moving Schneider at the time, the situation has changed.

And besides. We've seen that Burke hasn't handled contingency situations well before, with the signing of both Schneider and Bertuzzi while Teemu and Scotty were both uncommitted. If he'd signed Bertuzzi to a 1 year deal, or for less, or just not signed Bertuzzi and gone with a cheaper backup plan (or even signed Schneider to a 1 year deal and avoiding this altogether), then we'd still have McDonald and we wouldn't be in this crunch.

Here's the problem. Burke couldn't have anticipated that Sundin would hold up everything like this. And that all these teams will be willing to wait and not move on to plan B. Even Lombardi has admitted that he saw some difficulty when trading Visnovsky (and somehow he saw effects with Boyle?) because of Sundin. So while he may have not been worried about moving Schneider at the time, the situation has changed.

And besides. We've seen that Burke hasn't handled contingency situations well before, with the signing of both Schneider and Bertuzzi while Teemu and Scotty were both uncommitted. If he'd signed Bertuzzi to a 1 year deal, or for less, or just not signed Bertuzzi and gone with a cheaper backup plan (or even signed Schneider to a 1 year deal and avoiding this altogether), then we'd still have McDonald and we wouldn't be in this crunch.

Sure he could. When Sundin didn't take that huge deal from Vancouver I think it became pretty evident that he wasn't going to sign for a while. Brian Burke of all people should know full well the mindset of Sundin considering he had two players do the exact same thing last year. Plus he knows only one team if any is going to sign Sundin so one way or another someone will acquire Schneider. The guy basically said he's not going to play for a while and I think Toronto is the only team that will hold out for him. My guess is by this time next week Schneider will be playing in Canada.

Trading Kunitz gets you under the cap, but Selanne isn't playing for league minimum...

Well he's probably gonna have to regardless of who is traded. Schneider and Marchant are the only ones that can be moved that keeps us from downgrading in talent providing Teemu comes back. But moving your best d-man, whom is one of the best in the league, whom is the only d-man signed beyond this year is stupid.

But moving your best d-man, whom is one of the best in the league, whom is the only d-man signed beyond this year is stupid.

Not stupid, necessarily, but not ideal.

Again, read the title of the thread...

Not stupid, necessarily, but not ideal.

Again, read the title of the thread...

I know but what I'm trying to say is it's not even an option. The worst case scenario, realistically, is Schneider isn't moved and has to be placed on waivers. Trading Pronger isn't part of any scenario. Because it's stupid to trade one of the best players in the league when there are others to trade.

I know but what I'm trying to say is it's not even an option. The worst case scenario, realistically, is Schneider isn't moved and has to be placed on waivers. Trading Pronger isn't part of any scenario. Because it's stupid to trade one of the best players in the league when there are others to trade.

You're making the unwarranted assumption that NHL general managers are going to jump all over each other to take a salary dump from Anaheim.

If Schneider is up on waivers and no one grabs him, that means someone is going to end up with Pronger. Because if it gets to that point, Burke is going to have approximately zero bargaining power.

Again, probably not likely, but it's definitely not impossible. At that point, the choice isn't Pronger or Schneider, it's Pronger or Selanne and Schneider. Considering our scoring woes, I'd take the second option on that one...

You're making the unwarranted assumption that NHL general managers are going to jump all over each other to take a salary dump from Anaheim.

If Schneider is up on waivers and no one grabs him, that means someone is going to end up with Pronger. Because if it gets to that point, Burke is going to have approximately zero bargaining power.

Again, probably not likely, but it's definitely not impossible. At that point, the choice isn't Pronger or Schneider, it's Pronger or Selanne and Schneider. Considering our scoring woes, I'd take the second option on that one...

Just because Burke needs to "dump" Schneider's salary doesn't mean GM's don't really need his services. The whole Sundin thing has held up this trade but rest assured one of those teams will finally acquire him. I mean Gillis can't go into training camp without Sundin OR Schneider. He won't have to pay a lot for him but he will. It doesn't matter how much bargaining power Burke has, we simply need to get rid of Schneider. The return is a moot point.

But regardless, Chris Pronger is not an option to be traded. Scott Niedermayer is traded before Chris Pronger. Prongs is our only d-man signed after next year, our captain, one of the top d-men in the league and a bargain with his salary. He's not an option. If Schneider can't be traded and remarkably clears waivers then Marchant and Rob Niedermayer get traded. Or Jonas Hiller. Or SOMEONE else. Not Pronger. You keep your very best players if you want to win.

One would think that since 4 or 5 teams are in need of an offensive D-man that Burke would have been able to pull the trigger on Schneider by now.

Reading some of the above blogs it may be that the teams are treating this as a buyer's market and they may be asking for us to throw in picks.

I keep hoping each day that we are able to move him and that we have signed Teemu.

Whats the penatly if Burke so **** it were keeping everyone?

if you waive a player over 35 when he signs his contract, his salary still counts against the cap. You can't bury 35+ year olds in the minors to hide his cap hit.

The Rangers did it with Darius Kasparaitis near the end of training camp last year when he was 3 weeks shy of being 36.

Brian Burke has complained all along about this current CBA for this very reason.

i am pretty sure that kasparistis signed a 6 year deal when he was 30. Even though he was over 35 when the rangers put him on waivers (to russia), he signed the contract when he was 30.n The age at signing is important, not the age of the player being put on waivers to clear his salary cap hit.

In Schneider's case, he was over 35 when he signed the 2 year deal.

i am pretty sure that kasparistis signed a 6 year deal when he was 30. Even though he was over 35 when the rangers put him on waivers (to russia), he signed the contract when he was 30.n The age at signing is important, not the age of the player being put on waivers to clear his salary cap hit.

In Schneider's case, he was over 35 when he signed the 2 year deal.
Can you give a reference for your claim?

In other words, where is that in the CBA?

Can you give a reference for your claim?

In other words, where is that in the CBA?
I don't know the exact section, but look in the article 50 where they talk about how the cap number is calculated. It should say something to the effect of "all guys who signed to a multiple-year contract while over 35 count on the cap regardless of if they're on the roster or not after the 1st year."

Schneider is an "over 35" player, so he would count even if we put him in the AHL. The rule is also why NJ had to give away the pick in the Malakhov case. Otherwise they could have just buried him in the minors or put him on IR.

I don't know the exact section, but look in the article 50 where they talk about how the cap number is calculated. It should say something to the effect of "all guys who signed to a multiple-year contract while over 35 count on the cap regardless of if they're on the roster or not after the 1st year."

Schneider is an "over 35" player, so he would count even if we put him in the AHL. The rule is also why NJ had to give away the pick in the Malakhov case. Otherwise they could have just buried him in the minors or put him on IR.

Found it: Section 50.5 (d) (i) (B) (5)

Thanks... I stand corrected.

If Schneider were sent to the minors, the first $100,000 would not count against the cap ... so he'd "only" count $5,525,000 against the cap. Still, it doesn't solve the problem.