Brooks The Jacob Trouba Fiasco: Buyout? Trade? Nope, He's Probably Returning Afterall

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

Just now, Pete said:

Feels Like this would have ended better if they just bought him out and told him if he wants to play here he can play for the league minimum, basically turns him into a 5M defenseman. Still not great, but better than 8 million. 

 

Don't follow?

[Rangers1994]

Just now, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

 

Don't follow?

 

Buy out Trouba first.  And then immediately re-sign him for much less money.

[Pete]

5 minutes ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

 

Don't follow?

If they bought him out, it's 4 million against the cap over the next two years (and then there's additional after that but whatever), then they could have resigned him for 785K or whatever the league minimum is, so in reality with his buyout plus his salary he's about 5 million against the cap. 

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

If they bought him out, it's 4 million against the cap over the next two years (and then there's additional after that but whatever), then they could have resigned him for 785K or whatever the league minimum is, so in reality with his buyout plus his salary he's about 5 million against the cap. 

 

You can't resign someone that you buy out for 12 months; it's one of those loopholes in the CBA that prevents teams from being able to "renegotiate" contracts.

[Pete]

1 minute ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

 

You can't resign someone that you buy out for 12 months; it's one of those loopholes in the CBA that prevents teams from being able to "renegotiate" contracts.

That refers to compliance buyouts, not regular buyouts. Calgary did it with Michael Stone. 

[Pete]

2 hours ago, RichieNextel305 said:

I think this situation may set a precedent for teams when it comes to them being more hardline when it comes to giving out these NMC’s.

I have never been a fan of trade protection. @Phil and I would debate it extensively (ironically, I was the one saying "it's a business, that's what the money is for, you don't get to make millions AND pick your desired location). I think they limit trades in an already hard-to-trade-in league with the cap. Teams are forced to give out contracts with the max years AND the trade protection, and are getting bent over.

 

I think any player who wants one should have to "buy" it from the team, which would need to be collectively bargained. For example, you want a limited NTC, take 10% off your AAV and sign for that amount. For a FULL NMC, that will cost you 25%. If you don't need protection, you get the full amount.

 

For example, Trouba signed for $8M, for his full NMC he'd have to sacrifice $2M and sign for $6M. He probably is easier to justify (barely) at $6M right now as your 3rd pair D where $8M is just untenable.

 

It would really show you who wants to play on YOUR team, and who just wants the bag.

 

Either that, or something more fun and out-of-the-box, like every incoming GM gets to buy out 1 contract from the previous GM, and that buyout doesn't count against the cap just the owners wallet. That would add some drama.

[RangersIn7]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

Feels Like this would have ended better if they just bought him out and told him if he wants to play here he can play for the league minimum, basically turns him into a 5M defenseman. Still not great, but better than 8 million. 

He’s nose blind.

Hes declined.

Its obvious. 

Look… if you’re 35 and in decline and not making a lot of money… ok. Be a great locker room guy. Be a leader. But you make an incidental salary. Not a 10% of the budget salary.
 

But you can’t make $8 million bucks a year based on your intangibles and leadership.

Its less a problem cause there’s only 2 years left and he actually has value in the league.

 

In any other profession… if you make too much and you’re not pulling your weight… you go away. Or they give you a desk job. Or whatever. 
 

I don’t blame Drury… and I think you see what he thinks and what he’s doing.

He inherited what he inherited.

He saw a 3-4 year window with this core.., and then he’d have to transition to and build around other things. That’s what he’s doing

Hes not pissing away draft picks

Hes trying to build a quality and consistent culture in Hartford.

Hartford can actually be counted on to give you guys that can play. 
He won’t commit to huge dollar, long-term contracts to aging players or questionable players that might not age well.

He wants to cut dead weight.

He wants to keep flexibility.

Im not even convinced that he’ll make the huge dollar commitment to Igor.

Cause if he does, it’ll cost him those things.

 

Id be ok if he traded Igor, BTW. 
 

At this point, I’m starting to shift to the next group and run, rather than this one.

And I think this group has something left.

But the next group will be better I think. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rangers1994]

11 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

He’s nose blind.

Hes declined.

Its obvious. 

Look… if you’re 35 and in decline and not making a lot of money… ok. Be a great locker room guy. Be a leader. But you make an incidental salary. Not a 10% of the budget salary.
 

But you can’t make $8 million bucks a year based on your intangibles and leadership.

Its less a problem cause there’s only 2 years left and he actually has value in the league.

 

In any other profession… if you make too much and you’re not pulling your weight… you go away. Or they give you a desk job. Or whatever. 
 

I don’t blame Drury… and I think you see what he thinks and what he’s doing.

He inherited what he inherited.

He saw a 3-4 year window with this core.., and then he’d have to transition to and build around other things. That’s what he’s doing

Hes not pissing away draft picks

Hes trying to build a quality and consistent culture in Hartford.

Hartford can actually be counted on to give you guys that can play. 
He won’t commit to huge dollar, long-term contracts to aging players or questionable players that might not age well.

He wants to cut dead weight.

He wants to keep flexibility.

Im not even convinced that he’ll make the huge dollar commitment to Igor.

Cause if he does, it’ll cost him those things.

 

Id be ok if he traded Igor, BTW. 
 

At this point, I’m starting to shift to the next group and run, rather than this one.

And I think this group has something left.

But the next group will be better I think. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If Drury doesn't re-sign Shesterkin by training camp,  he should trade him.

[BrooksBurner]

42 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

He’s nose blind.

Hes declined.

Its obvious. 

Look… if you’re 35 and in decline and not making a lot of money… ok. Be a great locker room guy. Be a leader. But you make an incidental salary. Not a 10% of the budget salary.
 

But you can’t make $8 million bucks a year based on your intangibles and leadership.

Its less a problem cause there’s only 2 years left and he actually has value in the league.

 

In any other profession… if you make too much and you’re not pulling your weight… you go away. Or they give you a desk job. Or whatever. 
 

I don’t blame Drury… and I think you see what he thinks and what he’s doing.

He inherited what he inherited.

He saw a 3-4 year window with this core.., and then he’d have to transition to and build around other things. That’s what he’s doing

Hes not pissing away draft picks

Hes trying to build a quality and consistent culture in Hartford.

Hartford can actually be counted on to give you guys that can play. 
He won’t commit to huge dollar, long-term contracts to aging players or questionable players that might not age well.

He wants to cut dead weight.

He wants to keep flexibility.

Im not even convinced that he’ll make the huge dollar commitment to Igor.

Cause if he does, it’ll cost him those things.

 

Id be ok if he traded Igor, BTW. 
 

At this point, I’m starting to shift to the next group and run, rather than this one.

And I think this group has something left.

But the next group will be better I think. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes he is. Just not the 1st rounders, which is good.

[Pete]

48 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

He’s nose blind.

Hes declined.

Its obvious. 

Look… if you’re 35 and in decline and not making a lot of money… ok. Be a great locker room guy. Be a leader. But you make an incidental salary. Not a 10% of the budget salary.
 

But you can’t make $8 million bucks a year based on your intangibles and leadership.

Its less a problem cause there’s only 2 years left and he actually has value in the league.

 

In any other profession… if you make too much and you’re not pulling your weight… you go away. Or they give you a desk job. Or whatever. 
 

I don’t blame Drury… and I think you see what he thinks and what he’s doing.

He inherited what he inherited.

He saw a 3-4 year window with this core.., and then he’d have to transition to and build around other things. That’s what he’s doing

Hes not pissing away draft picks

Hes trying to build a quality and consistent culture in Hartford.

Hartford can actually be counted on to give you guys that can play. 
He won’t commit to huge dollar, long-term contracts to aging players or questionable players that might not age well.

He wants to cut dead weight.

He wants to keep flexibility.

Im not even convinced that he’ll make the huge dollar commitment to Igor.

Cause if he does, it’ll cost him those things.

 

Id be ok if he traded Igor, BTW. 
 

At this point, I’m starting to shift to the next group and run, rather than this one.

And I think this group has something left.

But the next group will be better I think. 

 

Part of being a fan is understanding turnover. 

 

You always get excited for what's coming. You hope they'll be better, but who can say?

 

Doesn't mean you chuck what you have, it doesn't make the next thing get here quicker. 

 

Takes your cracks with what you have, don't jeopardize what's coming, and then take your cracks with them. 

[Sod16]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

I think any player who wants one should have to "buy" it from the team, which would need to be collectively bargained. For example, you want a limited NTC, take 10% off your AAV and sign for that amount. For a FULL NMC, that will cost you 25%. If you don't need protection, you get the full amount.

 

I think this already happens in negotiations.  Salary and NTCs are moveable negotiable parts.  If Trouba really wanted full protection for the whole seven years, he could have offered to take a $7m AVV in return for it it.  Etc.  Unfortuntately, I doubt we'll ever get any restriction on these clauses, as they are coveted by the union.

 

If Drury did not put out feelers to the Sharks etc. on waiving Trouba before he did so with Goodrow, he made a big mistake.  I think the Sharks could swallow Wenneberg at $5m AVV and salary for two years, I think they might have taken Trouba at $8m AVV $6m salary for two years.

 

I'm afraid now that the market for Trouba may be nixed due to the perception that he will be an unhappy camper if he is traded or waived anywhere.

Edited July 4 by Sod16

[Pete]

8 hours ago, Sod16 said:

I think this already happens in negotiations.  Salary and NTCs are moveable negotiable parts.  If Trouba really wanted full protection for the whole seven years, he could have offered to take a $7m AVV in return for it it.  Etc.  Unfortuntately, I doubt we'll ever get any restriction on these clauses, as they are coveted by the union.

 

If Drury did not put out feelers to the Sharks etc. on waiving Trouba before he did so with Goodrow, he made a big mistake.  I think the Sharks could swallow Wenneberg at $5m AVV and salary for two years, I think they might have taken Trouba at $8m AVV $6m salary for two years.

 

I'm afraid now that the market for Trouba may be nixed due to the perception that he will be an unhappy camper if he is traded or waived anywhere.

Look, we're not in the room where it happens, but...

 

It doesn't seem like players are lowering their AAV for trade protection. Trouba got $8m for 6 years of full NMC...does that mean if he didn't want protection he'd have gotten $9m? I don't think it's happening quite that way.

 

We also don't know who Drury contacted about either player. I find it hard to believe any team was taking $8M straight off the books anyway. That's just my feeling.

 

And you're right, no one is going to want him now because they know his family situation and that he's a guy who plays hardball, and he's not a good enough player to deal with the headache of hardball. 

[Sod16]

On 7/3/2024 at 2:34 PM, Pete said:

There's another thing, it's out there now that he is not going to report (thanks Larry!)

I doubt he'd not report and give up $6m a year, but the probability that he would be a difficult malcontent is probably enough to blow up the waiver possibility for getting rid of him.

[siddious]

37 minutes ago, Sod16 said:

I doubt he'd not report and give up $6m a year, but the probability that he would be a difficult malcontent is probably enough to blow up the waiver possibility for getting rid of him.

8mil*

[Br4d]

9 minutes ago, siddious said:

8mil*

 

Does he have to give back prorated bonus for the season if he does not report?

[siddious]

44 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

Does he have to give back prorated bonus for the season if he does not report?

Oh sorry I dunno I’m still

amazed we pay him that much per season sorry 

[Rangers1994]

2 ways that Trouba can repair the damage -

 

1) Take a pay cut.

2) WIN ON THE ICE!

Edited July 7 by Rangers1994

[Pete]

1 minute ago, Rangers1994 said:

2 ways that Trouba can repair the damage -

 

1) Take a pay cut.

2) WIN ON THE ICE!

What method would you suggest using to cut his pay?

[Rangers1994]

Just now, Pete said:

What method would you suggest using to cut his pay?

 

The fact that if he wants to be part of a championship team,he will take a pay cut to make room for players who could fill in some holes -- defense, physicality, goaltending with out without Shesterkin.

[Br4d]

4 minutes ago, Rangers1994 said:

2 ways that Trouba can repair the damage -

 

1) Take a pay cut.

2) WIN ON THE ICE!

 

The damage is not repairable.  It is not based on any current conflict between Trouba and the Rangers.

 

It's based on $8M cap hit for a 3rd pair defenseman when other more key assets need to be re-signed.

 

This is ultimately why the situation is likely to simmer for a bit longer and then abruptly come to conclusion as the pressure on the Rangers to sign/extend various players mounts.

[Br4d]

5 minutes ago, Rangers1994 said:

 

The fact that if he wants to be part of a championship team,he will take a pay cut to make room for players who could fill in some holes -- defense, physicality, goaltending with out without Shesterkin.

 

Trouba cannot take a pay cut to his current contract.  The CBA does not allow players or teams to cut pay except via a buyout of the contract.

[Rangers1994]

3 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

The damage is not repairable.  It is not based on any current conflict between Trouba and the Rangers.

 

It's based on $8M cap hit for a 3rd pair defenseman when other more key assets need to be re-signed.

 

This is ultimately why the situation is likely to simmer for a bit longer and then abruptly come to conclusion as the pressure on the Rangers to sign/extend various players mounts.

 

Actually, it is a conflict between Jake Trouba and the Rangers.  When he blamed his performance on his injury, he inadvertently made Drury and Laviolette look like idiots. The only he could make up for that portion is by helping the team win in the ice. Win, and everything else falls into place.

 

Assuming that neither party can repair the damage, the situation can't linger into he season. If Drury waives, trades, or buys out Trouba, then he should do it before training camp.

[Pete]

25 minutes ago, Rangers1994 said:

 

The fact that if he wants to be part of a championship team,he will take a pay cut to make room for players who could fill in some holes -- defense, physicality, goaltending with out without Shesterkin.

How do they cut his pay?

[Pete]

14 minutes ago, Rangers1994 said:

 

Actually, it is a conflict between Jake Trouba and the Rangers.  When he blamed his performance on his injury, he inadvertently made Drury and Laviolette look like idiots. The only he could make up for that portion is by helping the team win in the ice. Win, and everything else falls into place.

 

Assuming that neither party can repair the damage, the situation can't linger into he season. If Drury waives, trades, or buys out Trouba, then he should do it before training camp.

He never blamed his injury for his performance. 

[Rangers1994]

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

He never blamed his injury for his performance. 

 

He did a few weeks ago.