Quick Links

Capitals potential trade deadline targets: The case for and against Wayne Simmonds

Capitals potential trade deadline targets: The case for and against Wayne Simmonds

The Washington Capitals are the defending Stanley Cup Champions and are all-in on going for the repeat. Does that mean we could see a trade before the trade deadline?

With the NHL trade deadline rapidly approaching on Feb. 25, there are a number of players believed to be available. But who makes sense for the Caps?

This week, we will be exploring a possible trade deadline target from Monday through Friday and look into why they do and do not make sense for Washington to pursue.

Today’s target: Forward Wayne Simmonds, 30, Philadelphia Flyers

Why it makes sense

The Flyers have won nine of their last 10 games, but Simmonds will likely still be on the move before the trade deadline as they remain longshots to reach the postseason, Simmonds is on the final year of his contract, and he is too valuable a player for the team to let walk away for nothing.

The Caps have the talent to play a number of different styles, but at their core, they are a physical team. The Tampa Bay Lightning were a much more talented team, but Washington beat both them and Vegas up in the playoffs. That would make Simmonds, a physical winger, an ideal fit for Washington.

Simmonds’ cap hit is $3.975 million and the Caps have virtually no cap space. For a top-6 player like Simmonds, a trade would almost certainly have to include Andre Burakovsky, who is one of their biggest trade assets. With his $3 million off the books, it shouldn’t be too hard to convince Philadelphia to retain the rest of Simmonds’ salary as part of the deal. That’s always an easier pill for teams to swallow for players on the final year of their contract — as is trading within the division.

Simmonds is a tough guy to play against, is a strong skater and always gets in front of the net, something this Capitals team definitely does not do enough. He can win the physical battles in the high-danger areas in front of the net and along the boards.

Simmonds could play on the second line and bump T.J. Oshie down to the third, but more likely, he would probably replace Burakovsky on the third. Adding a top-6 player is a heck of a way for a team to add some depth before the playoffs.

Why it doesn’t make sense

Simmonds has a modified no-trade clause and can submit a 12-team no-trade list. He would have to agree to the trade first, or there’s nothing to talk about.

If you don’t include the lockout-shortened 2012-13 season, Simmonds is on pace for his worst statistical season since 2010-11 when he was playing for the Los Angeles Kings. His production has decreased steadily over the past three seasons and, given his physical style of play, there’s a reasonable case to be made that he is on the decline. Considering his struggles this season, he would most likely be targeted for a third-line role in Washington. But Philadelphia doesn’t care how the Caps will use him, they will sell Simmonds as a top-6 player, which means the asking price is going to be high.

Washington has a better, younger version of Simmonds already on the roster in Tom Wilson. Does it make sense to pay a king’s ransom for an older version who's not as good?

Plus, while Philadelphia remains unlikely to reach the playoffs, it is still a possibility. For a non-playoff team, trading a player on an expiring contract within the division doesn’t mean anything, as he will move on to another team the next season. So long as the Flyers remain in contention to reach the postseason, they most likely would prefer seeing Simmonds shipped off to another division, if not another conference.


The asking price here will be too large for a trade to make sense for Washington, especially given Simmonds’ steady decline in production in both the regular season and the playoffs. I just don’t see this one as a realistic option unless the market completely dries up.


Quick Links

Why a flat NHL salary cap is bad news for the Capitals

Why a flat NHL salary cap is bad news for the Capitals

When it comes to free agency and projecting which pending free agents a team may try to re-sign, there is a fair amount of guesswork involved. For most of the year, we don't actually know perhaps the most crucial piece of information: the salary cap. The salary cap is not set until after a season is over so while we have projections of what the cap may be, we don't actually know. The one assumption that pretty much everyone makes when projecting the cap is that it will go up. Business is good for professional sports, the value of teams continues to rise as does hockey-related revenue...and then the coronavirus pandemic happened.

The revenue the league stands to lose due to the pause to the season, the cancellation of the remainder of the regular season and a postseason without any fan attendance brought the NHL and NHL Players' Association together to negotiate how to navigate the difficult financial times ahead. As a result, an agreement was reached Monday on a memorandum of understanding for the collective bargaining agreement. As part of the negotiations, both sides reportedly agreed to a flat salary cap for the next two seasons meaning the current ceiling of $81.5 million will remain the ceiling.

That's bad news for the Capitals.

But why? If the Caps can afford to fit their team under the $81.5 million salary cap now, why is it such an issue that the cap will remain at $81.5 million next season?

As I mentioned above, everyone operates under the assumption that the salary cap will continue to rise, including general managers. That's not optimism or poor planning. Really it takes something catastrophic to halt that rise, like a lockout/strike know, like a global pandemic. The point is, every team when projecting out its rosters for next year and beyond, did so with the assumption that the salary cap would rise. Now that it's not, that affects the projections for every team.


For the Caps, yes, they were able to fit their roster under the $81.5 million cap for this season, but just barely. For much of the season, the team carried only six defensemen, the bare minimum, on the roster. That means if a player got sick or injured the day of the game, the team would have essentially had to play a full game with only five defensemen. It took a lot of cap gymnastics for general manager Brian MacLellan to fit his roster under the cap and it was something that was constantly tweaked all year. Will he be able to do it again next year? Not with the current roster.

The biggest issue for Washington is a number of long-term deals that will now come back to bite them. The Caps have for several years now been a "cap team," meaning they have spent right up to the salary cap ceiling. This is typical for teams looking to compete for the Stanley Cup. If you feel you are a legitimate contender, you try to make every dollar count towards building a championship roster. Without much room under the cap to work with, however, MacLellan had to offer free agents something else in order to entice players to sign. As a result, the team has given out several deals to players of four years or more. The benefit to this is, not only can you continue bidding on free agents without much money to spend, but even if a player does not live up to his cap hit, that cap hit gets lower every year in terms of percentage with a rising salary cap.

In 2017, T.J. Oshie was a free agent. The Caps did not have the money under the cap to re-sign him so instead offered him an eight-year deal. There is no question Oshie left money on the table in terms of a yearly salary, but he got more years. Will he be worth a $5.75 million cap hit when he's 38 and on the last year of his contract? Probably not by today's standards when his cap hit alone takes a little over 7-percent of the team's cap space. With a rising cap, however, that percentage would have gone down each year. Now it won't, at least not as much as MacLellan had anticipated.

For a team that has pushed right up against the cap ceiling the last few years, one of the few sources of relief it could find was the yearly increase to the cap. Now it won't have that for the next two years.


Washington has 11 players with at least three years on their current contracts after the 2019-20 season. Those are players whose cap hits by percentage will remain exactly the same next season. With a salary cap of $81.5 million, the Caps have 11 forwards, four defensemen and one goalie under contract with a little less than $10.4 million of cap space remaining.  That's $10.4 million to use on at least two forwards, three defensemen and a goalie. That's not a lot.

There are also restricted free agents like Jonas Siegenthaler and Travis Boyd with cap hits of $714,166 and $800,000, respectively. Both players will be due raises. It's hard to imagine the team walking away from Siegenthaler, but even if they wanted to with Boyd, they would still have to replace him with another player who costs money. Plus, Ilya Kovalchuk, Radko Gudas, Brenden Dillon and, most importantly, Braden Holtby will be unrestricted free agents.

Free agency was going to be difficult for Washington to manage yet again in 2020 regardless of how much the cap was going to rise. Now with a flat cap, the team's practice of handing out long-term contracts is really going to come back to bite them and force some difficult decisions. The team has very little money to pay players more than what they're making now. Does this ensure the end of Holtby's time in Washington? Does the team wait on a long-term extension for Ovechkin to get a better idea of where the salary cap may be in a few years? Can the team afford to keep any of its UFAs? Does the team leave Oshie exposed to Seattle in the expansion draft?

At this point, these are all questions MacLellan now has to consider.

Stay connected to the Capitals with the MyTeams app. Click here to download for comprehensive coverage of your teams.


Quick Links

NHL Players' Association Executive Board approves return-to-ice plan as league takes one step closer to return

NHL Players' Association Executive Board approves return-to-ice plan as league takes one step closer to return

The NHL took another step toward a return to the ice late on Tuesday night when the Executive Board of the NHL Players’ Association approved the tentative agreement between the league and its union. 

There are still two steps to go. The NHLPA Executive Board now opens up the memorandum of understanding to its full membership. Every player will have a vote. The NHL Board of Governors also must approve the MOU. 

If that happens? We will have hockey soon – barring the coronavirus pandemic wrecking things as it has for months. 

Players will report to their team facilities by July 13 for training camps as the league attempts to execute its return-to-play plan. Twenty-four teams will travel to the two hub cities, Toronto and Edmonton, on July 26 for round-robin games, qualifying playoff games and the full 16-team Stanley Cup playoffs. 

There is no set date for when owners must approve the memorandum, but players are expected to be finished their vote by next Monday in time for training camps.


The Capitals are set to play the Bruins, Flyers and Lightning in a round-robin tournament for seeding in the Eastern Conference. The defending champion Blues, Oilers, Avalanche and Golden Knights will do the same in the Western Conference. 

The 16 other teams that will continue play have a best-of-five preliminary round to whittle the Stanley Cup field to its usual 16 teams playing best-of-seven series. 
The agreement also extends the current Collective Bargaining Agreement until at least 2026, buying labor peace the NHL has rarely found with its players. It also opens the door to Winter Olympics participation in Beijing (2022) and Milan (2026). 

Now, we wait for the next two crucial votes and hockey will be in sight. 


Stay connected to the Capitals with the MyTeams app. Click here to download for comprehensive coverage of your teams.