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

[BrooksBurner]

24 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

There is absolutely no way that Trouba makes it through waivers. Zero chance. He'd be claimed within the first 5 teams.

 

21 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

Trouba gets placed on waivers, some bottom feeder with cap space and young players is claiming him

 

I don't really agree that that is a foregone conclusion. I don't think Trouba is worth anything in a trade now. A heavily retained Trouba might be worth something, but that something is probably worth less to the Rangers than not taking on dead retained cap for 2 seasons. I think Trouba would have been waived already to free up the full cap hit if it were that easy.

[Phil]

6 minutes ago, Pete said:

https://nypost.com/2024/07/01/sports/wifes-hospital-residency-among-factors-keeping-jacob-trouba-with-rangers/#:~:text=There is no guarantee that Jacob Trouba would accept a trade even to a club on his approved list if that means leaving his wife and nine-month-old (as of training camp) behind.

 

--

 

Found it. What's that mean, "not accept a trade". That's bullshit. 

 

Yeah, I have no idea how to read that. I guess the positive way to read this is that he won't leave his wife behind, which is admirable, but logistically, that means not reporting. You're right. Ugly.

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, deejaid said:

Really though, what is the point of waiving Trouba now?   There is nothing left on the free agent market worthwhile to spend some of that $8M on.  Maybe Tarasenko but is he really worth $4M-$5M?  
 

Then you need to spend a couple of million to bring in a right side, third line D-man to replace Trouba.  Who is left in free agency to fill that hole?  Flyer on John Klingberg, hoping his hip surgery went as well as Kane’s?  Who else?

 

Trouba actually played pretty well this year until his ankle injury, but he shouldn’t have been on the ice in the playoffs with that injury.

There are only two players who could have helped the Rangers in free agency, Kane and arvidson. 

 

Any player who signed for term or big money would not have helped us, and that's literally everybody else who signed on day one. 

 

Anybody who's signing on day two like Atkinson... How much are they really moving the needle? More than Riley Smith? I don't think so. 

[BrooksBurner]

1 minute ago, deejaid said:

Really though, what is the point of waiving Trouba now?   There is nothing left on the free agent market worthwhile to spend some of that $8M on.  Maybe Tarasenko but is he really worth $4M-$5M?  
 

Then you need to spend a couple of million to bring in a right side, third line D-man to replace Trouba.  Who is left in free agency to fill that hole?  Flyer on John Klingberg, hoping his hip surgery went as well as Kane’s?  Who else?

 

Trouba actually played pretty well this year until his ankle injury, but he shouldn’t have been on the ice in the playoffs with that injury.

 

It's probably more about freeing up the cap for next summer, or sooner if a trade for a high cap player falls into Drury's lap. He would get flexibility. On top of that, it seems like Drury and Laviolette would prefer a different leadership voice in the locker room. I do not think Drury is dumping both Goodrow and Trouba without some serious conversation and feedback from Laviolette. 

[LindG1000]

5 minutes ago, siddious said:

If Drury does this I will be impressed. After Goodrow this would take a lot of balls.

 

I don't think so at all.  I think it's business as it should have happened. I also think that the Post has publicly and likely permanently damaged the relationship.

 

It's perfectly fine for Trouba to be offered two or three options that he's pre-emptively approved. It's fine to agree that a fresh start is necessary for the player and the club. How he gets there is another question.

 

If I'm Trouba, my NTC would have been highly strategic. Any team that could afford him as a cap dump, any team that would screw over his family. It'd be Anaheim, Buffalo, Calgary, Detroit, CBJ, SJ, LA, Seattle, Montreal, Boston, Winnipeg, St Louis, Ottawa, Utah, Vancouver. Let cap space and rivalry eat at the rest.

 

That leaves 16 teams. Five of those teams are over the cap. another 7 or so couldn't maneuver enough money to get him without a significant sacrifice, and the rest are Carolina, NJ, Pittsburgh, and Dallas. He has, ostensibly, a full NTC like that.

 

 

[LindG1000]

5 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

 

I don't really agree that that is a foregone conclusion. I don't think Trouba is worth anything in a trade now. A heavily retained Trouba might be worth something, but that something is probably worth less to the Rangers than not taking on dead retained cap for 2 seasons. I think Trouba would have been waived already to free up the full cap hit if it were that easy.

 

Early indicators were considerable interest in him as a positive-value asset.

 

I mean, you don't think Anaheim claims him immediately?  Bringing in that kind of leadership and culture guy for just two years while they build up and develop their army of young players? Easy flip at one of the two deadlines because they have retained salary spots? They're under the cap and get a $2m bonus versus actual dollars spent on Trouba? 

 

Don't you think SJ claims him for similar reasons (except the retained salary slot)? 

 

Heck, Columbus, same reasons? Their #5 right now is Jack Johnson, and their #6 is almost assuredly a rookie they care about. Ditto Calgary. 

 

He doesn't get through waivers. I guarantee it. 

 

[RichieNextel305]

10 minutes ago, Pete said:

There are only two players who could have helped the Rangers in free agency, Kane and arvidson. 

 

Any player who signed for term or big money would not have helped us, and that's literally everybody else who signed on day one. 

 

Anybody who's signing on day two like Atkinson... How much are they really moving the needle? More than Riley Smith? I don't think so. 

Yep I agree here.

 

Though I will say that if we ever freed the money up, signing Tarasenko makes us better. We would still need a cheaper replacement for Trouba, but the defensemen left on the UFA market aren’t all that appealing.

[RichieNextel305]

Hypothetically, because I get confused here too. But hypothetically, if the Rangers were to place Trouba on waivers and he went unclaimed, would they be able to stash his contract in Hartford like Redden? It’s all confusing with how that works.

[Pete]

1 minute ago, RichieNextel305 said:

Hypothetically, because I get confused here too. But hypothetically, if the Rangers were to place Trouba on waivers and he went unclaimed, would they be able to stash his contract in Hartford like Redden? It’s all confusing with how that works.

He stays on the cap for 6 million plus dollars, Even when in the AHL. 

Edited Wednesday at 05:12 PM by Pete

[Ozzy]

...and that's dead cap, too...if I'm not mistaken.  We'd need to replace him with someone.  That's even more tug on the cap.  No thanks on sending him to the AHL!

[BrooksBurner]

15 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I don't think so at all.  I think it's business as it should have happened. I also think that the Post has publicly and likely permanently damaged the relationship.

 

It's perfectly fine for Trouba to be offered two or three options that he's pre-emptively approved. It's fine to agree that a fresh start is necessary for the player and the club. How he gets there is another question.

 

If I'm Trouba, my NTC would have been highly strategic. Any team that could afford him as a cap dump, any team that would screw over his family. It'd be Anaheim, Buffalo, Calgary, Detroit, CBJ, SJ, LA, Seattle, Montreal, Boston, Winnipeg, St Louis, Ottawa, Utah, Vancouver. Let cap space and rivalry eat at the rest.

 

That leaves 16 teams. Five of those teams are over the cap. another 7 or so couldn't maneuver enough money to get him without a significant sacrifice, and the rest are Carolina, NJ, Pittsburgh, and Dallas. He has, ostensibly, a full NTC like that.

 

 

This is where you lose me. This is pointless if he can be waived and would be claimed by anybody that easily. All he’d be doing is blocking the Rangers from potentially getting anything back in a trade, which is a bit of a “screw you” and has nothing to do with his family. It makes zero sense to play hard ball to that degree with respect to a trade unless Trouba and his agent know the waiver thing is unlikely to happen.

[Phil]

25 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

Hypothetically, because I get confused here too. But hypothetically, if the Rangers were to place Trouba on waivers and he went unclaimed, would they be able to stash his contract in Hartford like Redden? It’s all confusing with how that works.

 

No, not in the way Redden's was. The NHL closed that loophole a while ago. The relief is league minimum salary (775K this year) + 375K. If they waive Trouba and demote him, it means carrying a dead cap charge of $6.85 million ($8M AAV minus $1.15M in relief).

[RichieNextel305]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

 

No, not in the way Redden's was. The NHL closed that loophole a while ago. The relief is league minimum salary (775K this year) + 375K. If they waive Trouba and demote him, it means carrying a dead cap charge of $6.85 million ($8M AAV minus $1.15M in relief).

Gotcha.

[LindG1000]

56 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

This is where you lose me. This is pointless if he can be waived and would be claimed by anybody that easily. All he’d be doing is blocking the Rangers from potentially getting anything back in a trade, which is a bit of a “screw you” and has nothing to do with his family. It makes zero sense to play hard ball to that degree with respect to a trade unless Trouba and his agent know the waiver thing is unlikely to happen.

 

The waiver thing is unlikely to happen because the league and the Rangers still view him as having positive value. You're alone in the negative value assessment. 

 

I do not know why he hasn't been waived yet, and there's two clear answers to me. Answer 1 is simple - the Rangers believe he has a positive value. Answer 2, they don't want to risk fraying other relationships by Goodrowing him.

[Pete]

8 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

The waiver thing is unlikely to happen because the league and the Rangers still view him as having positive value. You're alone in the negative value assessment. 

 

I do not know why he hasn't been waived yet, and there's two clear answers to me. Answer 1 is simple - the Rangers believe he has a positive value. Answer 2, they don't want to risk fraying other relationships by Goodrowing him.

There's another thing, it's out there now that he is not going to report (thanks Larry!), so even if he's waived there's a great chance nobody's going to claim him because they don't want to deal with his refusal to report. 

 

So there's really no point at all in waving him at this point.

[Pete]

2 hours ago, siddious said:

1) Never on the table doesnt mean it wasnt being discussed. My point still stands why do this before his list is in.

 

2/3) Yes agreed this makes him untradeable essentially.

 

Now we wait and see how big of a dick Drury wants to be here.

I guess he thought he could pull the trigger quicker if he had something negotiated to Trouba's home team, I don't think anybody plans for this stuff to get leaked which is where all the drama came from. 

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

Here's some details from Vince on the whole Trouba thing. I tried to pull out the really pertinent stuff:

 

"I don't know for sure that any of that happened ... but I do believe his agent worked really hard what his client wanted, which was to stay."

Thanks. I just listened to it as well. This seems like a lot of speculation. "This definitely... Could have... Been a thing that happened".

 

 

[BrooksBurner]

58 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

The waiver thing is unlikely to happen because the league and the Rangers still view him as having positive value. You're alone in the negative value assessment. 

 

I do not know why he hasn't been waived yet, and there's two clear answers to me. Answer 1 is simple - the Rangers believe he has a positive value. Answer 2, they don't want to risk fraying other relationships by Goodrowing him.

Positive value was with the caveat of retention. It’s pretty common knowledge that Trouba is significantly overpaid. There’s no way anyone can proclaim with certainty or even assume a high likelihood that a team will spend a full $12 million in real salary dollars on him off waivers.

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

Thanks. I just listened to it as well. This seems like a lot of speculation. "This definitely... Could have... Been a thing that happened".

 

 

Yup. Classic Vince. He's Friedman squared.

[JHS]

Trouba is now all but worthless- as both a player and now a trade piece.  This is seriously one of the most absurd situations in Ranger history.  The guy does not want to leave his wife( respectable for sure) but this is a business.  By his staying this team will not be able to sign some of the key pieces they need— for a third pair defensemen making 8 mil.  What a joke.

 

The best option by far is to take the enormous loss and trade him for essentially anything you can get and offer to retain something in that will allow even any chance for opening up some money for the huge off season they have next year.

[RichieNextel305]

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.

[Rangers1994]

32 minutes ago, JHS said:

Trouba is now all but worthless- as both a player and now a trade piece.  This is seriously one of the most absurd situations in Ranger history.  The guy does not want to leave his wife( respectable for sure) but this is a business.  By his staying this team will not be able to sign some of the key pieces they need— for a third pair defensemen making 8 mil.  What a joke.

 

The best option by far is to take the enormous loss and trade him for essentially anything you can get and offer to retain something in that will allow even any chance for opening up some money for the huge off season they have next year.

 

That part I agree. There are wives and kids who don't see their husnads who serve in the military for 2-3 years not knowing if and when they'll ever come home.  And Jake Trouba is getting paid $8 million per year to play the game that he's supposed to love.  If he wants to stay,take a goddamn pay cut. 

 

Trouba's biggest assets now are his intangibles. Thus, I'm inclined to give him1 more season.  But if a good trade comes along, Drury should at least listen....

[RangersIn7]

52 minutes 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.

Yeah… they’re going to go away on a level.

 

That shit should be reserved for only the most talented, important player… really only homegrown stars.

 

Nowadays, everyone wants that.

 

It’s kind of ridiculous. 
 

 

[RangersIn7]

43 minutes ago, Rangers1994 said:

 

That part I agree. There are wives and kids who don't see their husnads who serve in the military for 2-3 years not knowing if and when they'll ever come home.  And Jake Trouba is getting paid $8 million per year to play the game that he's supposed to love.  If he wants to stay,take a goddamn pay cut. 

 

Trouba's biggest assets now are his intangibles. Thus, I'm inclined to give him1 more season.  But if a good trade comes along, Drury should at least listen....

You keep bringing up this “pay cut” thing like it’s an actual possibility.

 

It isn’t.

 

Pay cuts. 
Restructuring.

Renegotiation.

 

That doesn’t exist in the NHL.

It simply isn’t allowed.

 

Pound your fist on the table all you want.

It can’t happen.

 

It has zero possibility.

 

 

 

[Pete]

13 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

You keep bringing up this “pay cut” thing like it’s an actual possibility.

 

It isn’t.

 

Pay cuts. 
Restructuring.

Renegotiation.

 

That doesn’t exist in the NHL.

It simply isn’t allowed.

 

Pound your fist on the table all you want.

It can’t happen.

 

It has zero possibility.

 

 

 

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.