salary cap and forsberg

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

stevethiessen
MVP
MVP
Posts: 232
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:37 am
Location: SK

salary cap and forsberg

Post by stevethiessen »

Just finished reading an espn.com article on the different options for Forsberg to be traded to and it got me wondering, and looking for some intelligent help.

I have a very, VERY elementary understanding of the cap, so could someone let me know what our chances even are of pulling something like this off at the deadline, or are we just kdding ourselves thinking of doing anything? If we shipped out Bulis, would that give us enough space for Foppa, or would we need to unload some more too?

And what would it take to get Forsberg? Buccigross mentions Bourdon in the article, but I'm loathe to give up on him so soon. How about Schnieder? We have Luongo for the next 4, and we can resign him after that as he'll still be young. Would Schnieder be enough though, or would we have to send more?

Thoughts?
User avatar
JamesOwnzSam11
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 3:02 am

Post by JamesOwnzSam11 »

Forsberg ain't coming to Vancouver.

This team is too chicken to take a high risk move.
"I think my biggest influence has been Messier."Watching him prepare for games and how seriously he still took everything at his age. A lot of the qualities that he had helped me get better."- Markus Naslund
User avatar
Cookie La Rue
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1991
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: 50° 10' North / 8° 34' East

Re: salary cap and forsberg

Post by Cookie La Rue »

stevethiessen wrote:I have a very, VERY elementary understanding of the cap, so could someone let me know what our chances even are of pulling something like this off at the deadline, or are we just kdding ourselves thinking of doing anything? If we shipped out Bulis, would that give us enough space for Foppa, or would we need to unload some more too?
As far as i know you pay only salary for the percentage of the remainder of the season which counts to the cap.

Deadline is on feb 27 i think, so you have just about one and a half months left in the regular season. In case of Forsberg it would be about 1,350,000 which the Canucks have to pay him and what counts against the cap (1.5 of 6 months regular season x Forsbergs annual salary of aprox. 5,400,000 (i don't know exactly if that's his salary)).

I guess just unloading Bulis wouldn't be enough because his salary unloaded would be calculated in the same way just for the remainder of the season.

I don't know exactly if i explained it right but i don't fear about any corrections. ;)
"Every dog has its day." - CC Hockey Pool Champion 2004 & 2013
cerios
CC Veteran
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:43 am

Post by cerios »

I think people need to get off the idea of forsberg coming here, its kind of a moronic notion. Forsberg is a shadow of his former self and any inspired opponent is going to end his season if not his career. It tends to be alot easier to avoid injury when every team is kicking your ass. And we are sure as hell not giving up a blue chip prospect for him.
Jelly
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1130
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 12:20 am

Post by Jelly »

Philly can take 50% of his salary so it could go down to about 675k. Although we'd have to offer more, but that way we would be able to fit it into the cap.

Also, wouldn't we just get fined if we go over the cap? So it's a moot point if Nonis feels any addition that's worth it, to make it to the cup, we pay more money.

The idea is that Forsberg with Naslund, have a histroy together, they can rip defenses apart.

Is it worth the chance? Maybe, if Philly doesn't ask too much.

Even if Forsberg doesn't go on fire and become his former self. Opponents would HAVE to defend him still. Because, Forsberg, is Forsberg. Would give more space to Naslund.
User avatar
Linden Is God
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 1:58 pm
Location: Timmins, Ontario

Post by Linden Is God »

I think getting a winger would be a better option.
GO CANUCKS GO !!!

:towel: :towel: :towel:
User avatar
nuxfanindallas
CC Veteran
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:47 am

Post by nuxfanindallas »

Jelly wrote:Philly can take 50% of his salary so it could go down to about 675k. Although we'd have to offer more, but that way we would be able to fit it into the cap.
That's actually not true. The only way that could happen is if they sent him to the minors (and he'd have to clear waivers on the way down, which he wouldn't do), and then he'd have to be recalled and the Canucks would pick him up then. The Flyers would not get any compensation either.
User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Post by tantalum »

The other way to look at it is to take what cap room the team has left and mutliply it by 4. If the players yearly or cap hit salary is less than that amount they can be added to the roster.

For example if the canucks have $2 mil in cap space remaining for the year they can add players that have a yearly salary totalling $8 mil.

Keep in mind that any player with a multi year contract is a dangerous pickup as even though a team may superficially have a payroll of over the cap (i.e. if you simply add up the players salaires) at this time of year they can not start the next year with a projected payroll over the cap.

Not knowing exaclty what the canucks have left after all the callups etc, i do think they have room for a Forsberg like salary. However, we are talking about one of the best big game and playoff performers of the modern age...he won't be coming cheap even if always injured.
User avatar
Canuck-One
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:49 am
Location: Living the Life

Post by Canuck-One »

I wouldn't give up anything of future value, such as Bourdon for Forsberg. While he may have been a great player and even now can command a lot of respect for his play, his best is behind him. So why mortgage our future for a longshot chance at the cup. The only way I can see us trading away the future is if we get a return that will still be here next year and fit under the cap.
User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly »

Forsberg has missed something like 82 games the last two years ... total dice roll in getting him and counting on him to be healthy and contributing. As well .... if in fact we did get him for the remainder of this year, he would in all likelihood be gone next year.

The Canucks have definitely made some improvements this year and I will be the first to admit they are doing way better than I ever anticipated or gave them credit for... however IMO they still aren't "contenders". I think someone said this already but I will repeat it .... with the Nucks current focus on defence, solid goaltending and the improved contributions from the Sedin's, this team is looking like it may have the blueprint foi a successful playoff team down the road ... we all know that the offensive route clearly did not work.

Back to the thread ... If they keep on this progression of improvement with some of their younger players (ie Bieksa), in a couple of years they may be in a position to add a player similar to a Forsberg who will make an immediate impact and contribution. But IMO now, Forsberg is just the wrong guy at the wrong time.

Grizz
User avatar
tuzzi44
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 429
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:39 am
Location: Medicine Hat, Alberta

Post by tuzzi44 »

Hey guys,
Im not sold on sending our prospects out for Forsberg. Jelly, you have the right thinking there... Naslund and Forsberg have a history together... but were talking waaaaaay back when. even naslund isnt the same player as he was then. and with the amount of games forsberg has missed due to injury, im not sure if its the best plan for our assets. Us taking a chance on him would be like Florida taking a chance on Bertuzzi... and we all know how that turned out. if were gonna trade guys like schnieder and bourdon, i want to know were gonna get a guy whos gonna be there for us on the ice and making a contribution, not be sittin in the press box. It was a good idea, and it would be a ballsy move... but i dont think it would work the way everyone would hope...
BELIEVE.

"we did a fucking great job"
Jonathan Toews
User avatar
Robert
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:02 am
Location: Burnaby

Post by Robert »

Jelly wrote: Also, wouldn't we just get fined if we go over the cap? So it's a moot point if Nonis feels any addition that's worth it, to make it to the cup, we pay more money.
No, there is no fine option, you have no choice but to stay under it. This is a hard cap, you cannot go over it.
User avatar
JonnyLaRue
AHL Prospect
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 11:42 am

Post by JonnyLaRue »

There is no reasonable way to make this work without giving up prospects. Even then we would have to unload cap space to pick Forsberg up. Who would we trade? Finally do we really want Forsberg? If we consider his injury history the answer to the last question should be no.
User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1442
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Post by DonCherry4PM »

Personally, I would love to have Forsberg. Even though the chemistry between he and Naslund isn't a sure thing as it has been so long, I think that it would be a surety that Naslund would be both rejuvinated and would start potting the points. I don't see how he couldn't were he to be put ona line with an allstar centre who (when he is healthy) is probably the best pure power forward in the league. I think the big question and the big risk is Forsberg's health. There is the rub.

In the view of risk v. reward there is the potential of trading off a good prospect or draft pick or both and in return getting a foward who on any given day may be put out to pasture for the rest of the season. Given the propensity of Forsberg's getting injured it would seem that the risk far outwieghs the reward unless we could land him for cheap - ie not Bourdon or another near sure thing prospect. I don't see the Flyers letting him go for cheap though so I can't say I see it as a viable option. Unless of course it were some kind of conditional trade - say low second round + prospect or another pick IF he were to stay healthy for the rest of the season and playoffs.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu
User avatar
Grizzly
MVP
MVP
Posts: 900
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am
Location: Dawson Creek

Post by Grizzly »

There are some rumblings around on some other websites that Pierre McGuire and Radio team 1040 has said that DN is talking to Philly about acquiring Forsberg for ....

.. a player and a 1st rounder. Forsberg would waive his no trade clause to play with Naslund.

Disclaimer: Please note this is by no means a solid source of info and I am not stating any facts I have heard or seen myself ... this is purely something I have stumbled across and thought I would throw it out there for everyone to add their 2 cents worth.

Grizz
Post Reply