Sign in to follow this  
Bert Diesel

The Great Salary Cap Conundrum

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Thank you for posting this. Too many on this board jump to hysteria because of cap hits while not looking to the contracts also expiring

 

I'm not worried about the cap, because as it stands now there are players that teams would actually trade for on the roster. And not only that, there is now potential to unload at TDLs for picks

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People - including a fair amount of those tyring to 'help' us understand the salary cap....

 

Keep whiffing on the fact that the 5.88 million cap space the Canucks currently have - includes 14 forwards - and a roster maximum of 23 players.

 

So someone is getting waived and/or assigned - gaining a million of their present cap space.  They have closer to 7 million with which to sign Boeser.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's summertime; this is much ado about nothing.

JB has put together an exciting line up for the coming season and Brock will be part of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stawns said:

There's zero need for Barrie and his $8-9m contract.

 

I also don't know a single knowledgeable hockey person that thinks Beagle is overpaid, or that Sutter should be a salary dump.  JB has a clear plan of contract succession that allows him to keep the team intact for an extended period........his UFA work is mostly done, imo, and he has a pipeline of youth that should be able to keep the team competitive and cap friendly for a long time.

 

 

Really, Beagle isn't overpaid? I wouldn't have had a problem with Beagle at 2 million for 3 years but 3x4 is an egregious contract. I wish I had your optimism about Canucks management but show me another 4th line center in the league that has this type of contract. Barrie would be a very nice piece and saying their is no need for him is strange. I might have a problem with him getting paid more than 8$ x 5 but he would fit very nicely on the team. He fits probably the biggest need on the team, an offensively gifted right shot defenseman; they don't grow on trees. If you can add one of these guys and surrender nothing but cap space then, your winning the asset management game.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shazzam said:

It's not like we won't have the option to move out contracts. Miller has no restrictions on his contract. Pearson had a great end to his season and if he continues close to that pace, at his salary, teams will come knocking. Adding Barrie would mean letting Tanev go which is already 4.5 mill. Replace Stetcher with someone half his salary. 

 

We have flexibility, plenty of it.

I would rather keep Stecher, who is criminally underrated because of his size, than lose him because of inept salary cap management. This is my point. Although the situation isn't as bad as it could be, we will have to lose good players in order to add high end talent. Not ideal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I try not to get too high or too low on our cap situation. I’m confident that Petey/Hughes/Boeser love playing here and might take a pay cut but I’m not banking on it. They will still wanna get paid big if they put up numbers in the next couple years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wanless said:

Thank you for posting this. Too many on this board jump to hysteria because of cap hits while not looking to the contracts also expiring

 

I'm not worried about the cap, because as it stands now there are players that teams would actually trade for on the roster. And not only that, there is now potential to unload at TDLs for picks

 Got this from Forbes

"The current U.S. television deal with NBC pays an average of $187 million a season—the network agreed to pay $2 billion over ten years but handed the league $200 million up front—and is likely to increase more than twofold when the current deal expires after the 2020-21 season. True, regular season viewership was down last season, but ratings were up for the more valuable postseason. A number like $400 million a year is quite possible"

 

So a lot of this does hinge on the new CBA I think but I highly doubt we will see a drop or a less than estimated cap again but a steady push up so if the wind blows in our direct ion as just a steady rise then we should be ok.. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bert Diesel said:

I would rather keep Stecher, who is criminally underrated because of his size, than lose him because of inept salary cap management. This is my point. Although the situation isn't as bad as it could be, we will have to lose good players in order to add high end talent. Not ideal. 

That is the salary cap world. You want to add a 8 mill defenseman willy nilly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, stawns said:

There's zero need for Barrie and his $8-9m contract.

We could use Tyson Barrie! Don't kid yourself.

 

We just cannot afford what his, as you quoted, $8 to $9 million dollar salary.  I think it will be $7.5 mill.  

 

@Bert Diesel's  point is that while we are paying, i'll use the term premium, contracts for, and ii'll use the terms solid, or useful players like Sutter or Beagle?  We cannot afford to go to market for a approaching premium UFA like Tyson Barrie. Fundamentally he is saying we should not have propped up last years team with mid level contracts.

 

Bert is arguing Beagle or Sutter are not worth their contracts.  I personally do not agree, do not disagree. My observation is there are a LOT contracts like that in the NHL. Show me a good team that does not have any?  Are there bargains?  Sure. But usually found in committing a retread money puck signing to a roster spot. Gets lucky with a Euro signing, who does not end up in the minors. Edmonton found one in Chiasson last year.  But did he make Edmonton a better team? No. He was just a slightly better than average warm body. This year he makes more than Schaller. OK, maybe they win on that one. More than Jake, more than Leivo, more than Motte.  I'd take any of those three.  Calgary is paying Frolik what we are paying Sutter. Pitt is paying Brandon Tanev what we are paying Beagle. These contracts are not what kills a team. Every team off the floor has players like these, cost of business IMO.

 

You can argue Sutter's contracts is bad because he's always injured.  Same with Tanev.  But every team has injuries.  They are otherwise usefil, not perfect players.

 

We are paying Lou's recapture penalty, $3 mill. We are paying Spooners buyout, the end result of giving Gagner 3 years, $1 mill. We have a $6 mill cap hit on Eriksson. That is $10 mill for about $2.5 mill, if we're being generous, in production.  The worst of which was Gagner, everybody knew he was a slack ass. Eriksson's a disaster, but one many teams were, and are making. He was fit, fast, coming off a 30 goal campaign.  One could argue, you should not invest that, for 6 years in a 31 year old athlete.  We paid Miller $6 mill. But only for 3 years. Had we done the same with Eriksson, we would have traded him for a 3rd round pick last deadline. And Luongo's contract was $65 million bucks, which should never have been made because he really did not want to be here. But also because it should never have been made! These are the killers!

 

Had we no ''awful'' deals, we would still have flexibility to add a Barrie.  By the end of this year, I would still be surprised if there was not a way to move Eriksson's contract. He will not be owed barely any money after next years $ 3mill bonus. $5 mill cash for the last two years.  And have a cap hit of $6 mill for a salary cap floor team.     

 

And look, it should surprise no one. Not Bert, not CDC.  Last year we spent $10 mill on Beagle, Roussel, Schaller. This year we spent $15 mill plus a first on Miller, Myers & Ferland. And poof, suddenly we're competitive! But wont have $10 mill for a premium free agent.  NYR's, San Jose & Vegas spent bigger.  And they have to dump cap now.  If we wanted to spend more, there would be takers for Roussel, Pearson, Baertschi.  They are good to very good mid level players. The point , we cannot go big every year UFA!

 

Drop Tanev, and trade Baertschi, give his roster spot to Hogland on an ELC next year? Tanev, Schaller & Leivo ar UFA next summer, $8 mill!

 

So you may very well see Barrie next year! Even without shedding Eriksson...

 

 

The only really interesting move for next summer?  Will we re-sign Markstrom for $5.5 or $6.5 mill?   Or will Demko take over. 

 

If Demko is ready, we could be very dangerous!   

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, ButterBean said:

I try not to get too high or too low on our cap situation. I’m confident that Petey/Hughes/Boeser love playing here and might take a pay cut but I’m not banking on it. They will still wanna get paid big if they put up numbers in the next couple years. 

I'm going to guess they aren't taking pay cuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OPs statements 

18 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Our cap space is fine.  I’ve analyzed CapFriendly extensively over the last few weeks and I don’t see us having any cap issues at all over the next few years unless we do something stupid in free agency.  We have big contracts coming off the books each year and we have lots of guys who will be on ELC’s.  

 

Also, the expansion draft will put millions of dollars into the owner’s pockets as well as the new TV deal, so the cap will most likely go up extensively over the next 2-3 years which will put us in even better shape.  

 

Also, you forgot about two of our best young prospects in Tryamkin and Madden.  I can see them both in the starting lineup in 2 years.  

The cap structure isn’t bad, but it’s not great either - which leads me to quote a recent GM who said if you aren’t having salary cap issues your not as a GM trying hard enough.  We will be fine this year and the year after that, it’s the third season from now things could get hairy.

 

Yes we have a lot of guys going off the books, but we also have to replace most of them, and re-up Hughes and EP among others.  Podz will help that, but we also will be relying heavily on our prospects to be make the show and replace a few players too.   Only that year could be hairy, we might have to rely quite a bit on our B level prospects and OJ to step in...will be interesting for sure.  After that year we are in the clear.  

 

As an aside the expansion money goes directly into the owners pockets and isn’t shared with the players, however adding a team will help continue to stimulate the cap in other ways.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shazzam said:

That is the salary cap world. You want to add a 8 mill defenseman willy nilly?

Yes. Yes I do. That's what cap room can give you if it isn't tied up in bottom six players. I'm not saying it's a great idea to add Barrie on some terrible contract but it would be nice to have the option of signing someone like him while our core players are still being underpaid on their entry level deals. It could still happened but it looks like it might be hard to move some of these salaries out. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, stawns said:

There's zero need for Barrie and his $8-9m contract.

 

I also don't know a single knowledgeable hockey person that thinks Beagle is overpaid, or that Sutter should be a salary dump.  JB has a clear plan of contract succession that allows him to keep the team intact for an extended period........his UFA work is mostly done, imo, and he has a pipeline of youth that should be able to keep the team competitive and cap friendly for a long time.

 

 

I don't think you looked very hard

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see the conundrum.  

 

Our defense is barely more expensive than our defense from last year.  

 

We have young ELC players taking over the team.  After Boeser, our next two players to get big deals will be EP40 and Hughes.  As those 2 guys ELC's expire a number of contracts for aging vets expire giving the team a great deal of flexibility.  

 

The pipeline is good.  We have young prospects  with really good upside.  These guys will come in and take over those positions being vacated by the aging vets, not all, but a good number.  

 

Paying a good young player a ELC rate to replace Sutter for example, saves the team 3m in cap space.  

 

We are an attractive destination for FA's.  Myers signed a club friendly deal with only a 9% raise and is not expansion protected.  Benn signed a club friendly deal, Edler signed a club friendly deal.  That doesn't happen if we have to attract FA's.  

 

We have great young players and a great city.  The team is on an up swing. People want to play here.  

 

JB is still at the helm and Brackett is still here.  In other words, we will still be very good at the draft table.  

 

Management has improved a great deal since JB came here.  Yes there were mistakes.  One thing I have noticed, JB learns from his mistakes.  

 

One thing needs to happen, Eriksson needs to be gone.  This mistake needs to be addressed prior to starting this season.  Both sides need a fresh start.  

 

If Edmonton can trade Lucic, to calgary of all places, then JB can find a new home for Eriksson.  

  • Hydration 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

I dont see the conundrum.  

 

Our defense is barely more expensive than our defense from last year.  

 

We have young ELC players taking over the team.  After Boeser, our next two players to get big deals will be EP40 and Hughes.  As those 2 guys ELC's expire a number of contracts for aging vets expire giving the team a great deal of flexibility.  

 

The pipeline is good.  We have young prospects  with really good upside.  These guys will come in and take over those positions being vacated by the aging vets, not all, but a good number.  

 

Paying a good young player a ELC rate to replace Sutter for example, saves the team 3m in cap space.  

 

We are an attractive destination for FA's.  Myers signed a club friendly deal with only a 9% raise and is not expansion protected.  Benn signed a club friendly deal, Edler signed a club friendly deal.  That doesn't happen if we have to attract FA's.  

 

We have great young players and a great city.  The team is on an up swing. People want to play here.  

 

JB is still at the helm and Brackett is still here.  In other words, we will still be very good at the draft table.  

 

Management has improved a great deal since JB came here.  Yes there were mistakes.  One thing I have noticed, JB learns from his mistakes.  

 

One thing needs to happen, Eriksson needs to be gone.  This mistake needs to be addressed prior to starting this season.  Both sides need a fresh start.  

 

If Edmonton can trade Lucic, to calgary of all places, then JB can find a new home for Eriksson.  

While I agree an LE trade would be best for all involved, it's pretty clear JB isn't wanting to bring back a bad contract in trade.......what's the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

I don't think you looked very hard

I think you missed the qualifier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I think you missed the qualifier.

Much closer than you my friend.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Much closer than you my friend.

The real question is, who do they consider a knowledgeable hockey person.  They’ve written off almost every media member, who’s left. Not even good old rick Dhaliwal was safe from them. 

 

 

ps. This is what he had to say on the signing

 

”There were over 10 teams involved on Beagle and Roussel, with the #Canucks low in the standings, they had to overpay in term and money.  These were 2 players they really wanted, it is the way free agency works.”

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

The real question is, who do they consider a knowledgeable hockey person.  They’ve written off almost every media member, who’s left. Not even good old rick Dhaliwal was safe from them. 

 

 

ps. This is what he had to say on the signing

 

”There were over 10 teams involved on Beagle and Roussel, with the #Canucks low in the standings, they had to overpay in term and money.  These were 2 players they really wanted, it is the way free agency works.”

Ironic appeal to the 'authority' of a twitter personality.

 

While whiffing on a key underlying claim there - that over 10 teams were pursuing Beagle - I suppose the 'authority' of NHL GMs wouldn't qualify them as 'experts' or knowledgeable hockey people though.    They clearly set and determined market value - but the true experts are your twitter favorites lol.

 

The assumption that overpayment depends on "being low in the standings' is an incredibly weak way to determine a player's value relative to their contract - when there are so many other actual hockey - ie on-ice - ways to determing that - and ironically, by that (weak) standard the 'low standing' Canucks 'should have' had to 'overpay' for all of Myers, Ferland and Benn....

 

Roussel

31 pts in 65 games

38.5% ozone starts

 

What an 'overpayment' lol - because, because - wait for it - 'low in the standings.'

 

Beagle

56.2% faceoffs

18.5% ozone starts

2nd to Sutter in forward pk ice time/game.

102 hits in 57 games.

'Foundational' - to a Stanley cup championship in Washington.

 

Outstanding 'bottom six' forwards - are criminally under-rated among noobs on these boards - among NHL GMs = not so much - as over 10 of them were in the running for both these players.

 

I'm thankful to both of them for coming to Vancouver - would re-sign either of them to those terms all over again, in a heartbeat.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.