Nonis using depth to go shopping....

[bustaheims]

well, In addition to Penner's 4.25, they also get rif of Stoll's 3.6 and Mitchell's 3.5 and have no significant RFAs to sign... I think theyfs be fine as far as the Parise sweeps go.

They also have over $50M committed for next season, uncertainty over the cap with the new CBA (there is very real potential the ceiling will drop for next season) and other areas of the team I'm sure they'd like to upgrade.

 

[maplesyrup]

Why would the Kings want him though?

They could move Penner, if they wanted to move him that is, without taking on a risky contract like Lombardi.

They might not... I outlined a couple reasons albeit far-fetched. There might be some other Leaf assets they prefer for sure.   

 

[Tigger]

well, In addition to Penner's 4.25, they also get rif of Stoll's 3.6 and Mitchell's 3.5 and have no significant RFAs to sign... I think theyfs be fine as far as the Parise sweeps go.

They also have over $50M committed for next season, uncertainty over the cap with the new CBA (there is very real potential the ceiling will drop for next season) and other areas of the team I'm sure they'd like to upgrade.

I've been wondering about the possibility of a cap ceiling drop, wouldn't a general rollback become an issue in that case?

 

[maplesyrup]

Well, In addition to Penner's 4.25, they also get rid of Stoll's 3.6 and Mitchell's 3.5 and have no significant RFAs to sign... I think they'd be fine as far as the Parise sweeps go.

They also have over $50M committed for next season, uncertainty over the cap with the new CBA (there is very real potential the ceiling will drop for next season) and other areas of the team I'm sure they'd like to upgrade.

I don't think they're in horrible shape.  Even if the cap drops a bit, Parise is the type of guy you make room for if you need to.

Edit: and pardon the bad grammar in the previous post... I'll go back and fix...

 

[Kin]

well, In addition to Penner's 4.25, they also get rif of Stoll's 3.6 and Mitchell's 3.5 and have no significant RFAs to sign... I think theyfs be fine as far as the Parise sweeps go.

But those are two important parts of their team(their #3 defenseman and #1 PK'ing forward) they'd still have to replace. Add in what the new CBA might bring and that doesn't leave them as a team with a ton of wiggle room at all.

 

[bustaheims]

I've been wondering about the possibility of a cap ceiling drop, wouldn't a general rollback become an issue in that case?

That's something that would have to be agreed upon as part of the negotiations. It's a possibility, but, it's certainly not a guarantee.

 

[bustaheims]

I don't think they're in horrible shape.  Even if the cap drops a bit, Parise is the type of guy you make room for if you need to.

Edit: and pardon the bad grammar in the previous post... I'll go back and fix...

Sure, but, it becomes that much harder to make room for him when you replace a pending UFA with a player who will still be under contract.

 

[maplesyrup]

Well, in addition to Penner's 4.25, they also get rid of Stoll's 3.6 and Mitchell's 3.5 and have no significant RFAs to sign... I think they'd be fine as far as the Parise sweeps go.

But those are two important parts of their team(their #3 defenseman and #1 PK'ing forward) they'd still have to replace. Add in what the new CBA might bring and that doesn't leave them as a team with a ton of wiggle room at all.

They don't have to spend 7.1 mil. on a penalty killer and a second pairing defenceman.

 

[Tigger]

I've been wondering about the possibility of a cap ceiling drop, wouldn't a general rollback become an issue in that case?

That's something that would have to be agreed upon as part of the negotiations. It's a possibility, but, it's certainly not a guarantee.

For sure it would have to be bargained but if the ceiling were to drop as a result of bargaining then it seems to follow pretty naturally to me. No guarantee though, agreed.

 

[maplesyrup]

Another less talented and infinitely less popular guy I might take a look at is Ben Eager.

 

[Kin]

They don't have to spend 7.1 mil. on a penalty killer and a second pairing defenceman.

But you can't replace players like that on the cheap either without really hurting your team's depth. Even cutting that number in half, which would be scraping the bottom of the barrel, leaves them without much in the way to offer Parise.

 

[maplesyrup]

They don't have to spend 7.1 mil. on a penalty killer and a second pairing defenceman.

But you can't replace players like that on the cheap either without really hurting your team's depth. Even cutting that number in half, which would be scraping the bottom of the barrel, leaves them without much in the way to offer Parise.

Again, not a daunting task to work with what's left in my opinion.

 

[bustaheims]

Again, not a daunting task to work with what's left in my opinion.

Without making themselves a weaker team, it's a much more daunting task than you're giving it credit for. The $3.5M they'd owe Lombardi next season could be the difference to them being a bubble team with Parise because of the downgrades they've made in other areas or being a potential contender with Parise because they didn't have to make those downgrades.

 

[maplesyrup]

Again, not a daunting task to work with what's left in my opinion.

Without making themselves a weaker team, it's a much more daunting task than you're giving it credit for. The $3.5M they'd owe Lombardi next season could be the difference to them being a bubble team with Parise because of the downgrades they've made in other areas or being a potential contender with Parise because they didn't have to make those downgrades.

I don't think the downgrades you speak of would be all that big of a deal. Moreover, if I'm an owner hell bent for Parise, and my GM told me he couldn't do because he was a couple of million off the cap, I'd be telling him to go look for other work because I'd find a GM who could.

 

[Corn Flake]

I've been wondering about the possibility of a cap ceiling drop, wouldn't a general rollback become an issue in that case?

That's something that would have to be agreed upon as part of the negotiations. It's a possibility, but, it's certainly not a guarantee.

My guess is the floor drops, not the ceiling, and the overall revenue % share to the players drops with it.  The floor is killing the have not's and I think the bigger teams will be unhappy about a payroll cut yet again.


edit: my guess, meaning this is what I think the owners will be asking for. 

 

[Corn Flake]

That's why I suggested Lombardi... No offense to Lombardi but I'm not sure what his future is with this team... where does he fit?

Until Lombardi can show he's healthy, in shape and capable of contributing, there's no way the Kings would even consider him in a deal. They won't take on an extra year @ $3.5M to save the prorated portion of the $750K difference between them, even with Penner's struggles. Heck, even if Lombardi was healthy, I think the extra year on his deal might be prohibitive to LA. I don't think Lombardi is going to be a Leaf for very long, but, until he's healthy, he's going nowhere - and, even when he is, he's unlikely to return anything but a mid-round pick/mediocre prospect, or a smaller contract that also runs through the end of next season.

I could be wrong but I think the Kings might be eager enough to get rid of Penner to do that. Adding fuel to often busted machine in my noggin is that maybe there's a relationship there with Lombardi and (rumoured soon to be) new coach Darryl Sutter.  :-\

How do Sutters keep getting these NHL jobs. Everything they touch turns to pooh.

It does when they get into management roles.

Darryl coached the Sharks to some reasonable success, coached the Flames from a non-playoff team all the way to the finals.  He also had some success in Chicago before San Jose. 

He's a good coach, just not a good GM.

 

[Kin]

Again, not a daunting task to work with what's left in my opinion.

But the issue isn't whether or not it's a daunting task. It's whether or not that 3.5 million dollars is money they'd rather pay in the services of retaining/replacing Mitchell and Stoll, who are important members of the team, or if they'd rather spend it on Lombardi. What possible rationale is there for giving it to Lombardi?

 

[maplesyrup]

Again, not a daunting task to work with what's left in my opinion.

But the issue isn't whether or not it's a daunting task. It's whether or not that 3.5 million dollars is money they'd rather pay in the services of retaining/replacing Mitchell and Stoll, who are important members of the team, or if they'd rather spend it on Lombardi. What possible rationale is there for giving it to Lombardi?

Acquiring Lombardi (or another similar contract back) in a deal for Penner does not prevent the Kings from effectively replacing Stoll and Mitchell while at the same time, being in the conversation for Parise should they choose to be.... Don't be hung up on the Lombardi. I'm not.     

 

[Kin]

Acquiring Lombardi (or another similar contract back) in a deal for Penner does not prevent the Kings from effectively replacing Stoll and Mitchell while at the same time, being in the conversation for Parise should they choose to be.... Don't be hung up on the Lombardi. I'm not.   

I'm hung up on the idea that you think the Kings, who will count every cap dollar twice for next year, will take on dead weight contracts when they could just let Penner play out the string or deal him for a low round pick come the deadline.

We don't know what the cap is going to look like next year with the CBA so teams are going to be more cautious about taking on extra salary commitments beyond next year. For a team like the Kings, who have important pieces to re-sign/replace and would like to be in on Parise, that counts double. In order to get them to take on a Lombardi-like contract(and the Leafs don't really have any contracts that are similar to Lombardi) you'd have to offer an inducement that could make up for the loss of a Mitchell or a Stoll, at which point you're paying an absurd price for an underperforming Penner.

Mitchell and Stoll are good players in important roles. They don't grow on trees and they don't come at league minimum prices.

 

[maplesyrup]

I feel the same way about Mitchell and Stoll as you do but I guess that's where our opinion of the other players in question ends. Clearly I have a higher opinion of Lombardi than you do. As far as Penner goes, sure the Kings might look toward futures but again, I don't think they need to limit themselves to a futures type deal.