I sort of see it like the ROR deal, where Stillman was fine paying the bonuses. I know this would be different, but if Army goes to Stillman and says this is the only way to get a potential #1 guy for the next core, I don't think Stillman will stand in the way.
There's a time and place for us to be making those moves. this is not the time or the place. We are not in a position to be spending 6 Mil on a player Like Zadorov when we are still years away from being a contender and by the time we are knocking on that door he will be on a heavy decline.
I'd much rather get a defender who knows how to play Defense and who can clear the crease a la Bouwmeester over those two guys easily. Both of them indeed bring some grit, but they arent great at actual defense, which is our biggest issue. Wrong hill to die on in my opinion.
I think your expectations are just too high for where the team is right now. Doubt we see any big free agent signings this offseason, maybe some cheap vets to compete with/help shelter younger guys. Also doubt we see any BIG trades, but you never know. Best move right now may be to just continue to draft/develop, and keep the powder dry.
So because the D is soft, we need to overspend on a middling guy who'd become another not quite good enough guy on the left side?
I can't imagine the CBA would allow the bonus to be paid early in order to beat NTC clause kicking in. Seems like union would go bonkers.
I dont have a desire for either player. I'd rather have one of the kids play and maybe a Perron on a 1 year deal.
Toughness is not the be all end of of defense. Not to mention our problems on defense are driven by not having a legitimate number 1 and using players in roles they are not suited for. Swapping out an overpaid Torey Krug for an overpaid Zadorov does nothing to address the root cause of our issues.
I'd take a flyer on Kotkaniemi at his full cap hit depending on what the sweetener is. He has not lived up to the current contract he signed and is a negative value asset so I would not take him for free. However, he is only 23 years old and would be a huge steal if he ever lives up to his draft pedigree. He doesn't turn 26 until July 6, 2026. The Blues could have two years to evaluate him, increase his trade value if he plays well, decide to keep him for the contract duration if he pans out, or buy him out at a relatively low cost. Again, depending on the sweetener, a Kotkaniemi trade is a move that a saavy GM/front office rebuilding on the fly should be making, IMO.
That's an option too. But now you are competing with 31 other teams to sign him and there is no added benefit of getting additional trade compensation from Carolina, whether it be a 1st round pick or one of their A/B level prospects. That's why I'd prefer trading for him at his full cap hit. All of the benefits with opportunity to escape if it blows up in your face. A very reasonable buyout if executed before July 1, 2026 with less than 1M owed spread out over 12, 10 or 8 years depending on when executed and less than 1M in cap charges per year.
Why would we want to bring on someone to buy them out? Carolina ain’t likely to give anything truly significant to move him. If we like him at his number, then he couid be acquired for little if anything, but we should only do that if we believe in the player.
@WeWentBlues isn't really suggesting that we bring him on to buy them out. He's saying that we would be betting on thr player to improve to his original potential in our organization. The buyout discussion is about having an out if that bet fails. We could give him a multi-year audition to see if he can become worth the money. If he does, then suddenly we added a nice piece long-term. If he doesn't, the buyout terms are still favorable after 2 years.
The CBA is vague/silent on the issue. Like a lot of contract stuff, we never get to see the actual language used. This is the type of issue that legally could be determined by a contract using the word "by" vs the word "on."
