Stars Acquire Lehtonen; Turco To Flyers Rumors Seem To Be Conjecture
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:06 PM EST
in Rumors
81 comments
The Dallas Stars have traded for goaltender Kari Lehtonen tonight, a move that has opened the flood gates on speculation about Marty Turco's future with the club. According to one report, the Flyers are talking with the Stars tonight about potentially acquiring the goaltender.
Here's Nick Kypreos of Rogers' Sportsnet via Twitter:
Dallas/Atlanta still waiting for trade call to complete Kari Lehtonen deal. Dallas/ Philly talks ongoing for Marty Turco.
It's not much, and it could mean that the Flyers are just making an inquiry about the soon-to-be-free-agent Turco. But with Bob McKenzie of TSN also mentioning on Twitter that there are only two teams that could be interested in Turco, one of them being the Flyers, I think it's okay for us to at least have a discussion about this.
First off, any deal for Turco means salary has to go back to the Stars. He has a whopping cap hit of 5.7 million and the Flyers flat out can't afford that without moving some major, major pieces. There are nuances in the rules when it comes to the the cap and prorated contracts, though. Regardless, it's tough to fit Turco in here without doing several things.
There are a ton of rumors out there regarding specific players, but none of them seem to hold any weight. All we have is the comment from McKenzie and the message from Kypreos to go from.
Speculate all you want in the comments, but don't get too excited or too depressed about a specific deal. It seems to be all conjecture at this point.
0 recs |
81 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Like I said in the Emery MRI thread, I’m not sure if the Flyers need to clear $5.7 million in cap space because of the prorated nature of how the cap is calculated.
Again, I’m not an authority, but Mario and I had a lengthy conversation about this when reading the rules for LTIR and neither of us came to a conclusion.
All I know is that the cap is calculated daily and the Flyers wouldn’t have Turco on their team the entire season.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Feb 9, 2010 11:15 PM EST reply actions
I don’t think you’re understanding what I’m saying:
An NHL team could get guys for cheap if it was actually under the cap. So if the team actually had $1m in unused cap space, they could take a $4m cap hit for the last 1/4 of the season.
However, the Flyers have never been under the salary cap this season because of Rathje. Hence, to get a $5.7m K on the team, they have to clear $5.7m in Ks.
Right, that’s how I understand it.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
An NHL team could get guys for cheap if it was actually under the cap. So if the team actually had $1m in unused cap space, they could take a $4m cap hit for the last 1/4 of the season.
This I get.
However, the Flyers have never been under the salary cap this season because of Rathje.
This is just semantics. The Flyers aren’t under the cap, but they’re allowed to go over. So it’s as if Rathje’s not even on the team, since what he would(does) count against the cap, the team is exempt from. So he doesn’t count against the cap in practical terms.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Feb 9, 2010 11:25 PM EST up reply actions
No, its not semantics.
You’re banking on actual cap space, which isn’t there.
It all goes back to the daily calculation. If the actual roster is entirely healthy, and less than the salary cap, the Rathje contract applies up to and over the salary cap, and the Flyers can never bank salary cap space in their daily calculation.
So for all 132 days of the season, the Flyers daily cap hit has been: $56.8m/192= $295,833.33
I think this page helps out a lot when trying to understand the logic.
http://capgeek.com/trade_machine.php?Team1=24&Team2=14&date=2010-02-09
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
the Rathje contract applies up to and over the salary cap
This is something I’m sure you’ve explained before, I’m sure I’ve read, and I’m sure I’ve nodded along saying “yeah, I get that”… except I don’t. I understand what you’re saying, but… shit.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Feb 9, 2010 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
It was a fanpost on how LTIR actually works.
LTIR money isn’t treated like injured reserve. The players cap hit still counts, but you can exceed the cap by the amount of contracts on LTIR.
The effect here is this:
Team Red has a cap hit of $50m. Player X has a $5m cap hit. Player X breaks his leg. The team calls up Player Y ($1m cap hit) from the AHL. Tomorrow, Team Red’s cap hit daily calculation is $51m/192days.
-
Team Blue has a cap hit of $56.8m. Player X has a $5m cap hit. Player X breaks his leg. The team calls up Player Y ($1m cap hit) from the AHL. Tomorrow, Team Blue’s cap hit daily calculation is $56.8m/192days.
-
Team Red could trade a draft pick for a $10.8m contract. Because they had $6.8m in cap space and they have $5m in LTIR cushion, but have used $1m of that cushion.
-
Team Blue could trade a draft pick for a $4m contract. Because they have no cap space and $5m in LTIR cushion, but have used $1m of that cushion.
Now, look at your theory on how daily cap calculations make a player cheaper.
Forget about the broken legs. Team Red has a $50m/192 daily cap hit. Team Blue has a $56.8/192 daily cap hit.
86 days into the season, Team Red used $25m of their cap space. Team Blue used $28.4m of their cap space.
Team Red has $31.8m in cap space left. Team Blue has only $28.4m remaining.
Because of Rathje, the Flyers are Team Blue.
Or I could just post the link, huh?
http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2009/12/16/1202707/how-ltir-effects-the-salary-cap
But any payer being traded the other way is pro-rated too, right? When it comes to trading players, the salary still has to match going in each direction to not effect either cap, I think. I could be wrong but that’s how I understand it.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
Can you rephrase that? It sounds like you may be talking NBA style salary cap there, but I think its purely a coincidental result of your word choice
I think I’m saying basically what you’re saying below.
Say they wanna trade Carter for Turco. If Carter has a pro-rated cap hit of 1.6 million and Turco has a pro-rated cap hit of 1.8 million, they have to trade away a player with a pro-rated cap hit of 0.2 million to keep things equal. That doesn’t mean they trade away a player with a 0.2 million contract (not that those exist anyway).
Basically, it doesn’t matter what the total contract and the cap hit over the season. It’s all relative.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:27 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, I think?
They don’t have to trade away the .2m cap hit. They could also waive someone, send someone to the AHL, etc. Whereas in the NBA, there is a restriction on trades that the salaries going one way have to be within 10% (I think thats the figure) of each other.
There is no such NHL restriction about the value in the trade itself.
Right. Yeah, we’re on the same page.
I was purely using that trade scenario as an example.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:34 PM EST up reply actions
This I actually understand. It’s what I always got hung up on and could never formulate.
Basically, the Flyers would only have to pay Turco $1.8m~ for the remainder of the season. But the team also only has to pay Richards $1.8m~ for the remainder of the season.
Percentage wise, Turco’s $1.8m daily calculation is roughly equal to Richards’, so all this conjecture about Turco’s cap hit being “only” $1.8m is moot since Richards’ “cap hit” (for the rest of the season, just like Turco’s) is “only” $1.8m.
Right?
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Feb 9, 2010 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
Wait, what sport is this again? Is this uh… What day is this?
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
What you’re saying here is what I was trying to describe by saying everyone has the same common denominator.
oh, okay. That phrasing just didn’t compute with me. Sorry
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Feb 9, 2010 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
I view this the same way I viewed Kovalchuk.
I was all for Carle/Coburn for Kovalchuk, then flipping him to LA for their young pieces.
If the Flyers are going to trade major cap hit players for Turco, purely to free themselves of that salary and improve in the future, I’m very excited by the trade.
If Holmgren thinks he’s doing this trade to improve the team this season (and tries to include draft picks and/or prospects in it), it’s a terrible trade.
Curious to know the recent success rate of West goalies coming to the East in the past few years. Also, Turco’s numbers against Eastern teams.
I know Toskala did not work out, but Vokoun seems to be doing well (although the Panthers aren’t).
That all said, I would hate this trade. As much as I think the team need some adjustment, I don’t want Turco.
2002, anyone?
Back then, we had trouble scoring. So Clarkie, in his infinite wisdom, went out and traded for Adam Oates, who would ostensibly pass the puck so well that it would sprinkle the Flyers’ sticks with pixie dust and let them score. Two goals in five playoff games later, we all know how THAT turned out.
This would be a similar move I think. “Hey, we can’t score… so let’s get a goaltender who’s better than what we have now, so that we wont need to score as much! Brilliant!”
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
The Adam Oates trade was actually an awesome deal for the Flyers. They gave away players/picks and none of them ever reached the NHL.
At the time it was a terrible move because everybody thought Ouellet was the next big thing in goal. In hindsight, it didn’t really make a difference either way.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
Right, but my point was that Clarke dealt with the problem all wrong. We need goals, so… let’s get a passer? The same would be true with a deal like this. We need goals, so let’s try to cut down on goals against.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
But what about Leino?!?!
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Feb 9, 2010 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
I was at the Oates first game as a Flyers, and everyone was so pissed because Ouellet was gone. I wonder how many of those people even remember him. And I believe Ouellet played a few games with Vancouver, but i could be wrong.
"NO HONOR"
Yeah, a few with the Caps too.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:38 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, and the LNAH, which sucks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligue_Nord-Am%C3%A9ricaine_de_Hockey
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:40 PM EST up reply actions
Ooof, that’s quite a downhill slide as he went down all those levels after the NHL. I lost track after he was in Trenton
by DragonGirl0583 on Feb 9, 2010 11:42 PM EST up reply actions
Some prospects that dont make an AHL team can play there. But if your over 25 and in the league then thats a bad sign.
"NO HONOR"
LNAH? It’s a glorified beer league, practically.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:46 PM EST up reply actions
To go from NHL to AHL to ECHL to LNAH, you’re going the wrong way
by DragonGirl0583 on Feb 9, 2010 11:46 PM EST up reply actions
This may be the first time I’ve ever wanted to believe something Eklund wrote, because he’s the one trying to say it isn’t going to happen.
Yes, but he’s also said such stellar things as “Kostitsyn brothers to Carolina in exchange for Ray Whitney.”
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
He tweets a lot of crap, besides the fact that he can’t say that his client would ever waive a NTC
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Feb 9, 2010 11:41 PM EST up reply actions
Which is why I figured it wasnt worth much, I just threw it up there
by DragonGirl0583 on Feb 9, 2010 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
Would anyone trade Hartnell and Coburn and let Marty walk after the season just to have the 5 mill in cap space next year? If Emery is as hurt as it seems, a good, semi reliable goalie for the playoffs would be nice. Plus it frees us from the hell we created. And its not like losing Hartnell is the end of the road, and we have two up-and-coming defensive prospects to replace Braydon.
"NO HONOR"
Absolutely not. Coburn is a very very valuable commodity. Hartnell is not a bad contract.
If the Flyers traded Hartnell and Coburn for Turco, they wouldn’t make the playoffs.
Now now.
I’m no Holmgren apologist, but he ain’t exactly Glen Sather, thank God.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Yeah, I don’t think the Flyers have a single bad contract on their roster.
They just have too many large contracts. Its a poorly proportioned roster.
The only problem is the NTCs. But all of these players are worth their cap hits and would be attractive to other teams.
So are NTC’s baragining chips for FAs? That is, 2 teams want said FA….both can match price. The team that gives the NTC wins the prize. Also are they a means for GM’s neogiate a price down so they maintain their cap or cap space for other guys? There are alot of NTCs on this team.
Yes, think about it. If you were Simon Gagne, would you waive a NTC to go to Atlanta for Kovalchuck? (Not saying deal is/ever was possible, just an example). HECKKKKKK no. You think Upshall wanted to go to PHX? I actually think in Hockey they are the biggest deal, and baseball too because there are just so many crappy markets to play for.
by You don't have to be sweet, to be good on Feb 10, 2010 10:06 AM EST up reply actions
Have you ever been to Phoenix?
I think Upshall was ecstatic to move there. It’s an awesome place to live.
I don’t know about your last statement, I think there’s more than enough crappy or troubled markets markets in the NBA and NFL too…. Perusing the lists, I think there’s probably differing opinions on the definition of a crappy market. One person may define a crappy market as one with no fan base, another person may define it as a team in such dire straits that they won’t be a contender at any point in the next 5 years. By one definition you have the Florida Marlins who have an incredibly empty stadium, yet they’re in the mix to make the playoffs every year. By the second definition you have the Maple Leafs who draw fans no matter how bad the on ice product is. I think that definition may even be different among the players themselves; most people want to play for a contender, but his last season here Pat Burrell said in interviews that he never wanted to play in a market with apathetic fans (I know he didn’t get his wish…). The number of crappy markets in each league would change depending on which definition you use, so which league has the most bad markets is a pretty close race.
by DragonGirl0583 on Feb 10, 2010 10:22 AM EST up reply actions
I forgot the third definition where you have a badly run organization, but I think my point might make sense anyway.
by DragonGirl0583 on Feb 10, 2010 10:24 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, but players in the NFL are rarely traded. They are big in the NBA too, but there are so few competitive teams that it usually involves such lateral moves.
As far as Phoneix is concerned, it may be a nice city…. But Upshall was really close with the guys in this team, and that team was not that good last year. Not to mention the ownership is a disaster, and they might be moving.
by You don't have to be sweet, to be good on Feb 10, 2010 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
But he was three months from being a free agent the Flyers weren’t going to be able to afford to resign anyway. He was going to get screwed as an RFA because they’d offer him his same contract for another year, and no one else would give up the draft picks to sign him.
With the trade, Upshall got a 20% raise and gets to live in Phoenix, where he was given the ice time to earn himself another raise this offseason.
I know its nice to pretend these guys are just buddies playing hockey, but really, if a competitor of whoever you worked for offered you a 20% raise and a move down the shore for the summer, would you stay at your current job because you have friends there?
You’re giving Upshall a lot of credit for actually being able to figure all this out.
Managing Editor - HockeyOutsiders.com
by HockeyOutsiders on Feb 10, 2010 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
Man it’d be great to have Marty Turco
5 years ago when he was in his prime. Could we get a goalie, when they’re still worth a shit. Carey Price comes to mind
TAKE THE FALL, ACT HURT, GET INDIGNANT
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Feb 10, 2010 12:39 AM EST reply actions
I think Turco still has it in him, but the situation at the Stars has him in a wind. Goalies are precious creatures and I’ve read some Turco interviews, he’s fairly wound up generally.
I think we should start looking at goalies playing well on bad teams as they are often underrated because of poor team numbers affecting their own. The Preds pair is def worth a look I reckon
We got Sean Burke!!
…Oh, thats what you meant.
by philiafan14364 on Feb 10, 2010 3:05 PM EST up reply actions
P/N
Positives:
Turco has a cool name.
Turco could be a very good goalie.
Cap free ups, yeah.
Negatives:
Turco hasn’t been playing well.
We might not keep him.
Losing role players (sounds hot) for a goalie.
We don’t really need a goalie.
I like Micheal Leighton.
Turco is awful, I would want no part of that.
Managing Editor - HockeyOutsiders.com
by HockeyOutsiders on Feb 10, 2010 10:35 AM EST reply actions
If this is a move to dump Hartnell and free up cap room for the future I’d be all for it. We aren’t going to win the cup this year.
by You don't have to be sweet, to be good on Feb 10, 2010 10:40 AM EST reply actions
The problem with dumping Hartnell is that the Flyers lose a net presence with skill. When he isnt taking dumb penalties he’s a good player to have. Right now I think Gagne is the guy to trade because he’s a scorer who cant score. Either way Turco is not coming hear because Dallas wants to shed salary moving forward not add it. acquiring any of the players the Flyers have with similar cap hits adds salary moving forward.
Exactly. Sure, Hartnell pulls a lot of dumb shit, but when he’s actually playing, he’s a huge part of the game. Wether its sitting infront of the net causing chaos, or his occasional ridiculous bursts of “get the puck into the zone”itude, Hartnell changes the game.
..Though, sadly, most of those changes result in a 5-4.
Its not hard at all to replace net presence, lots of guys are able to do that. What is hard though is that the Flyers have no cap to sign anybody. lets face it, JVR has too much skill to just be a “stand in front” player that we all hoped he’d be, which is a good thing. But there are lots of guys who can do what Knubs did, we just need to dump players like Hartnell or gagne to afford them.
"NO HONOR"
Hartnell is not playing up to snuff this season but he’s probably our best net prescence. He’s a good player and probably the best one to pair with Carter. I think his locker room prescence huge for this team. I would hate to see him leave. Plus Turco is not the answer unless wer’re trying to free up cap space for next year.
by SkookFlyerfan on Feb 10, 2010 12:05 PM EST up reply actions
For a lot of years, I thought Turco was one of the most overrated goalies because he flopped under pressure every time. He seems to have shaken that with the last couple of playoffs, with .952 and .922 SPs in 2007 and 2008, respectively. This, plus the fact that he’s still sitting at .911 SP for this season, makes it a gamble that may be worthwhile.
The biggest issue is that it’ll have to send forwards back towards the Stars, for a goalie who may not be around next year and could falter in the playoffs this year. Perhaps the best move would be to shake things up even more, moving Briere and Hartnell for Turco, Eriksson, and Lehtinen? That would spread out the scoring a bit more, get a goalie who may pan out as a long-term option, and send Dallas back some potential big goals. Probably not ideal for either team, but it’s perhaps better than a simple forward-for-goalie swap from the Flyers’ perspective.
...prayers for Haitian victims, world leaders, and God's future for this country...
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Broad Street Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Atlantic Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
New Jersey
|
82 | 48 | 27 | 7 | 103 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
82 | 47 | 28 | 7 | 101 |
|
Philadelphia
|
82 | 41 | 35 | 6 | 88 |
|
New York Rangers
|
82 | 38 | 33 | 11 | 87 |
|
New York Islanders
|
82 | 34 | 37 | 11 | 79 |
(updated 4.12.2010 at 9:21 AM EDT)
Flyers Schedule
Next 5 Games
|
@
Pittsburgh
|
Thu 10/07 | 7:00 PM EDT |
|
@
St. Louis
|
Sat 10/09 | 8:00 PM EDT |
|
Colorado
|
Mon 10/11 | 7:00 PM EDT |
|
Tampa Bay
|
Thu 10/14 | 7:00 PM EDT |
|
Pittsburgh
|
Sat 10/16 | 7:00 PM EDT |
Last 5 Games
|
Chicago
|
Wed 06/09 | OT - L 3 - 4 |
|
@
Chicago
|
Sun 06/06 | L 4 - 7 |
|
Chicago
|
Fri 06/04 | W 5 - 3 |
|
Chicago
|
Wed 06/02 | OT - W 4 - 3 |
|
@
Chicago
|
Mon 05/31 | L 1 - 2 |
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Trending Topics: Odd arbitration decisions; more NHLers Tweeting
- Ovechkin wins fifth Kharlamov Trophy, talks Talbot
- Puck Headlines: Witt hits waivers; Kovalchuk grievance details set
- Jersey Fouls: Sharks get creatively awful; hockey movie pass/fail
- White, Flames agree to one-year deal; Bruins sign Wheeler
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
