 |
| Source: Winona Daily News |
The Wild, for their part, won't worry about the possibility of resigning Dubnyk until after the season. Potentially complicating that decision is the fact the Wild already have a combined $5.3 million committed to Darcy Kuemper and Niklas Backstrom for next season. Should Minnesota resign Dubnyk, the easy call (in theory) is to move on from the Backstrom, who is 13 years older than Kuemper and is in the midst of his third straight season with a sub .920 5v5 save %. Given goalies have been found to rapidly regress in their mid 30s, the 37-year old Backstrom's $3.4M cap hit is one that Minnesota should want to move on from, independent of whether they intend to resign Dubnyk or not.
Complicating things for Minnesota is that Backstrom has almost definitely become what Down Goes Brown calls a "negative value guy" - a player that, if Minnesota were to place on waivers tomorrow, would go unclaimed due to his current contract. Part of that is cap uncertainty - many hockey fans are well aware that Canadian dollar fluctuations and the NHLPA's unwillingness to escalate next year's Salary Cap at the expense of increasing escrow creates uncertainty in how much (if any) the cap will rise for the 2015-16 season. But most of that is because Backstrom's deal is in February 2015 is just a poor contract, one that is paying more for past performance than the future.
Wild fans that would love to test whether Backstrom is actually a negative value guy and waive him will be disappointed, as Backstrom's No Movement Clause prevents him from getting sent to Minnesota's AHL affiliate in Iowa like Josh Harding was earlier this season (though even if he were able to be waived, only $925K of Backstrom's $3.4M AAV would saved against the cap). Also complicating the situation is Backstrom's modified No Trade Clause; though it's uncertain how many teams he has the right to block a trade to, the player's happiness in Minnesota would likely make him unlikely to waive it for a team he really doesn't want to play for - with the odds being good that teams with the cap space and willingness to take on his full deal if Minnesota were to throw in a positive asset (e.g., Buffalo) are on Backstrom's NTC list.
Among the teams that Backstrom can be traded to, an opposing GM would demand Minnesota hold most, if not all, of the 50% cap hit ($1.7M) GMs are allowed to retain in trades under the current CBA. Veteran backup goalies with no trade protection generally don't fetch much of a return, such as Peter Budaj this past fall (for Eric Tangradi) and Ilya Bryzgalov last season (for a Minnesota 4th round pick). As Backstrom's Modified NTC gives him the some ability to control his own destiny if he's traded, the Budaj and Bryzgalov returns seem like a best case scenario for the Wild.
One last option the team could explore is buying out the remaining year of Backstrom's contract this summer. While CapGeek's closure in January keeps me from being able to link the buyout calculator math from that site, we can manually calculate the buyout as I did in a post a few weeks ago when talking about what Buffalo should do with Cody Hodgson. Those curious on the instructions for calculating a buyout should refer to this Blueshirt Banter post, but the penalty for buying out Backstrom can be calculated as such:
- Per Spotrac, Backstrom is due $4M in Year 3 (2015-16) of his 3-Year, $10.25M deal (AAV of $3.417M). The buyout amount is 2/3 of the remaining salary ($2.667M). That $2.667M buyout amount is spread evenly over the double the remaining length of the deal - i.e., the next two years, so $1.333M each for the 2015-16 and 2016-17 seasons.
- For 2015-16, the $1.333M buyout amount is subtracted from Backstrom's $4M salary to calculate a "cap savings" of $2.667M. The cap savings are then subtracted then out of the AAV that gives us a $750k cap penalty ($3.417M - $2.667M) for the 2015-16 season.
- For 2016-2017, the cap penalty is the $1.33M buyout amount.
Given the near zero value the Wild are likely to get back for Backstrom in a trade (even with holding salary), the cost of buying out Backstrom is potentially easier to stomach. Due to his contract being slightly backloaded, Backstrom's cap penalty is actually lower next season than the year that exceeds his original deal. But therein lies the issue with buying out Backstrom. Consider the players the Wild need to resign in the summer of 2015:
- UFAs: Kyle Brodziak, Keith Ballard, Nate Prosser, Ryan Carter, Stu Bickell
- RFAs: Mikael Granlund, Marco Scandella, Erik Haula
Though RFAs Granlund and Scandella are due for sizable raises from their sub respective $900K and $1.025M deals, both are in line for more modest raises than, say, Cody Hodgson in Buffalo. Additionally, all of Minnesota's UFAs should be affordable to resign and/or readily replaceable. As it is, Minnesota has just $56.6M tied up in 15 players for 2015-16 - including Backstrom. In fact, a Backstrom buyout saves Minnesota $2.667M in AAV for 2015-16, versus a trade saving Minnesota as little as $1.67M in addition to the asset the Wild likely have to give up to trade the salary. As a result, those extra buyout savings can be allocated to resign their upcoming FAs and/or another goaltender - say, Dubnyk - with higher upside than Backstrom.
Where the real issue potentially comes is the the 2016-17 season, when the $1.333M buyout charge will have to be added to a Wild cap that is projected to consist of the elevated Granlund and Scandella salaries, Dubnyk's (or another goalie's) cap hit, any 2015/2016 UFA signings, and four more important RFAs Minnesota will be in line to resign that summer: Jared Spurgeon, Matthew Dumba, Jason Zucker and Darcy Kuemper. In translation - buying out Backstrom may hurt the 2016-17 cap more than keeping or trading Backstrom at a reduced rate hurts the 2015-16 cap.
 |
| Source: USA Today |
Alternatively, the Wild could decide to keep Backstrom for next season, perhaps due to a mix of loyalty to the nine year Wild veteran and wishful thinking that Backstrom can regain his form as part of a platoon. Minnesota could then borrow a page from the 2013 Canucks' playbook and trade away the goaltender in waiting (24-year old Kuemper) for a good asset as opposed to trading away the veteran goaltender with a toxic contract (Backstrom) in a salary dump. This option is fairly appealing for the Wild if they have internally given up on Kuemper. As to whether they should trade Kuemper: though his .905 5v5 save % through 29 GP this season is concerning given the success Dubnyk has had behind the same Minnesota defense, the Wild do not have much in the goaltending pipeline beyond Kuemper, who still has the athleticism and upside to be a full-time starter in Minnesota. The Wild only have to look to Dubnyk to see that, with some work on his technique this summer, Kuemper's development can be brought back on track.
Of course, another scenario is Dubnyk's 11-2-1 run in Minnesota this past month is not only unsustainable, but the inevitable drop off in his play is so severe that the Wild decide to walk away from him altogether come June. But even in that case, the decision for the Wild next year should be what other goalie they should acquire over the summer to compete with Backstrom and/or Kuemper for the starter's job next season. Because whether it's Dubnyk or someone else, Mike Yeo and the Wild deserve better than going into next season with the horrid Kuemper / Backstrom tandem that nearly sunk the Wild's 2014-15 season before a rejuvenated Devan Dubnyk brought the team back from the brink.
No comments:
Post a Comment