Chicago Cup Run Showcases Talent for Fire Sale

I am working on a full response, but I need to know something before I can finish it.
Schenn, in the capgeek, shows a cap hit of 3.140 million, with a bonus of 2.115. As you told me, bonus goes to bonus cushion, above salary cap, so does that mean the 3.140 is inclusive of the 2.115 bonus? Is the actual cap hit the difference of 1.025?

Not sure if Campbell’s buyout is actually worth the gain. Your capgeek after liquidation makes for a very thin blue line, and favors the forwards. As you said yourself, only 6 defensemen to begin with, 4 of which are ELC quality players. Honestly, it does not seem rational that they would deplete themselves to that degree while still holding so many alternatives among the forwards. And, 7,206 dollars in cap space is clearly untenable. There would have to be at least one other loss of player to give space for bonus cushion, etc.
Campbell only gives a benefit of $4,761,875 in buyout, subtracting buyout from salary. Seabrook is more tradable, for one, so you get something back in picks and prospects, and also I think a journeyman/entry level guy can more competently replace a defensive d-man like Seabrook than a player like Campbell. Plus, Seabrook goes RFA after 2010-2011, and he will command a significant raise, so now is when his trade value is best. So, if you lose Seabrook, the difference in cap space cleared is $1,261,875 less compared to Campbell, but a stay-at-home defenseman is more likely to be efficient at the minimum salary than would a puck-mover and skater like Campbell, so you wouldn’t eviscerate your defense corps while sparing the forwards from same.
Sopel goes UFA after 2010-2011. He is playing well, really well. I never saw his feet moving, or him passing so well, when he was with the Kings. I remember him as being slow and indecisive, thought he was 37 years old back then and slowing down. Now, he looks like a really good player. He will be 34 when he hits free agency; at $2,333,333 a year I think many teams would be glad to have him. He could well be traded, again for organizational depth players, picks and prospects, saving 2.333 outright, or saving 1.333, let’s say, if you trade him for a 1 million dollar 23 year old d-man from somewhere. I really do think a lot of teams would like him, and they would be getting a solid veteran playing in his “contract year”, too.
So now you have cleared the same cap space defensively, if you trade Sopel for a non-roster player, but kept an irreplaceable Campbell and lost a more closely replaceable Seabrook.
Bolland going, yes, probably, but he is doing an awesome job so far defensively (and also has three playoff goals) against first the Sedins and now Thornton. But teams are stupid and don’t value good checking, just like the Norris goes to the D-man that scores more. I would take Bolland in a heartbeat, signed at 3.375 mill thru 2013-2014 he would be excellent at either Checking center #2 or Scoring center #2. Also, Handzus goes UFA after 2010-2011, and with Handzus at 4 mill Bolland insures us having at least one checking center regardless of whether Handzus remains.
Of course you knew all along where this was going; now we need to clear cap space among the forwards. The Hawks simply would not put themselves into only 6 d-men for the season, so they need to clear out another forward to make space. That is why I think they would let go of another 3-4 million guy.
You listed Ladd, I agree, for sure.
I disagree with Burish, who goes UFA this summer. From .7 mill, maybe he gets 1.2 mill tops, probably 1 mill. I would be interested to hear your opinion on what he would command… But he is competent and effective, worth a million to many teams, and not expensive enough to yield any significant space if either lost or kept.
Madden has to go, I agree, he is UFA this summer, older, and the money just isn’t there at 2.8 mill.
Huet, agreed, buy him out, it seems (from my understanding) to be cheaper than if he got picked up on waivers.
So the remaining 3-4 million guys left are: Sharp signed at 3.9 thru 2011-2012 then he is UFA, Versteeg signed at 3.083 million thru 2011-2012 then he is RFA, and Byfuglien signed at 3 mill thru 2010-2011 then he is RFA.
There is no way Byfuglien re-signs at 3 mill, so losing him now simultaneously solves a later problem, too, and probably saves the most cap space in total after all three players go thru new contracts.
I would be least likely to trade Versteeg, if I were Chicago, because he is youngest, I have him for two years locked up, and his upside is clearly very high and yet to be determined. Truly versatile, scoring touch, speed, and is part of the best playoff shutdown line stopping Sedins and Thornton in just his second year in the league, after being a finalist for the Calder in his first year. He is a keeper, that is why I want him so bad, and since the Hawks were stupid enough to put themselves in this situation maybe they will be stupid enough to lose Versteeg, too.
Sharp is another versatile guy; point on PP, good on face-offs, excellent on penalty kill with short-handed threats extraordinaire, scores 20-25, had a 36 goals season once, checks responsibly, and is fast fast fast. He might be the most likely to be traded among these three, since he gets the most money at 3.9 mill and has seemed to reach his potential. I would be happy with him instead of Justin Williams, for example, because even though Williams has flair and quickness, he is just plain injury-prone, inconsistent and not as good defensively as Sharp, and is also nowhere nearly as versatile. Close to same money, better player less likely to be hurt.
As you can see, I am still hoping!! Come on Mr. Lombardi, those guys need to make some moves, please don’t make the fans watch another summer go by when the good players go elsewhere… The Kings have assets, the Kings are deep in prospects; use just a few of them to go to teams that need to clear cap space, and don’t make us wait for three years for 3 or 4 prospects to eventually yield one quality player with the upside to match what these available players already display consistently.

I want to be very careful here, because your tone borders on adverserial in some places and I don’t want that.
“You don’t believe me, Quisp lays it out for you.”
I did not disbelieve you, we were talking about a slight difference in emphasis on player roles, and relative worth for those roles.
“…it’s a fallacy that you can design a team that is guaranteed to win the Stanley Cup.”
I agree. I did not advocate a ‘Yankees" style spree, or say that my plan would guarantee a cup. Again, I was just trying to keep the team less top-heavy so the Kings could have four lines. Instead of the big sniper signing for 6-7 million, my post signed a defenseman for 4-4.5 million (Hamhuis, now other people like Volchenkov which is okay too) and create a speed line by trading money-for-money even-up to make that line a reality.
“you’re working on a false assumption: i.e., that the Kings have to roll the dice and win it all now”
I want to make a leap from Clune, Ivanans, Halpern to Boogard, Schenn, Moller. I want to go from O’Donnell and Jones, to Hamhuis and Drewiske.
I want to go from Williams and Frolov to Versteeg and Koivu.
I don’t hink that is rolling the dice, I think it is making calculated player changes to give the team a more diversified look. I am going to do up the capgeek long-term, I already know it would work the coming year with 1.1 mill leftover.
If you don’t like the particular players I named, I would be fine with other players that have the same traits for the same money, but the two I named are potentially available, at least. The Kings are great at cycle and down low offense, but team speed is not great. I seek to remedy that and diversify the attack, not take on unstainable contracts to roll the dice and guarantee a win this season.