-
Posts
11,729 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Provost
-
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
I didn’t include it because it was just a bunch of assumptions and wishes and didn’t actually explain anything rational, not actual math about how the roster is built and under the cap. Earlier in the thread I clearly laid out player by player each year how the cap adds up, so I don’t need to rehash it yet again. You just spewed random words. Also, if you think we “will be just fine” if you take away Edler and Tanev who play the hardest minutes on the team and are both tied for 3rd in blocked shots in the league, and replace them with two rookies in your top 4, then there is no explaining reality to you. -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Well most of what you are saying is nonsense. You don’t get to pretend the players we have under contract don’t exist and just built a roster from the players you like. That is entirely the point of the thread. Those players on dead cap need to go away to get to the roster you want. Unfortunately they don’t come off at the right time for us to re-sign who we need to in order to keep icing a good roster. I laid it out clearly enough in the thread that anyone who can follow math should be able to follow. -
[Proposal] Eriksson + Madden to NJD
Provost replied to AriGold2.0's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Hoglander > Madden So, you should still get torched for that. ... and this is coming from a person who has been leading the “trade futures to help our cap issues” for several months. I would literally trade any prospect, or package of prospects other than Hoglander and Podkolzin. They are higher end and fit the timeline when we are going to need to replace expensive veterans for cheap ELCs in the top 6. -
[Proposal] Brock Boeser for Timo Meier?
Provost replied to CaptainLinden16's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Well it depends on how you define the word “problem”. If he gets taken off that top line and replaced by a cheaper player, and it keeps producing at the same or better rate without him... that is a problem for Boeser, not a problem for the team. It shows he is more of a product of who he is playing with than a driver of play. He is still getting prime 1st unit PP time and that unit isn’t producing very well right now at all. All players go through slumps, and this is probably just Boeser’s time for his. I am not at all worried long term, and I think as soon as we lose a game or two we will see him replace Eriksson on the 2nd line. Unlike Petterson and Hughes, you can imagine a deal for Boeser which improves our team both in the short and long term, so it is worth spitballing about on a forum specifically made for doing that. -
[Proposal] Brock Boeser for Timo Meier?
Provost replied to CaptainLinden16's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Maybe the + from us has to be Eriksson! -
[Proposal] Brock Boeser for Timo Meier?
Provost replied to CaptainLinden16's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
If only there was a way to not be forced to read through the posts you aren’t interested in. -
[Proposal] Brock Boeser for Timo Meier?
Provost replied to CaptainLinden16's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
The only trade I make for Boeser is for a young top 4 D under club control. Boeser+ for Dumba is absolutely a deal I would do. We need to balance our organizational depth going forward. We don’t have a lot of top 4 D prospects, and we have a fairly solid pipeline of forwards coming up in the next few years. If Virtanen’s performance isn’t a mirage, then it is easier to consider moving Boeser for an upgrade somewhere else. -
[Proposal] Eriksson + Madden to NJD
Provost replied to AriGold2.0's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
The worry with him is that he quickly gets buried on our depth chart. Assuming he has to play in the top 9, and isn’t a fit on the 4th line, and assuming he is going to have to play wing for us as he isn’t likely to push our existing top 3 centres out.... He is currently behind guys like MacEwan and Lind, and probably behind guys like Bailey and Jasek. In the next two years when we can expect Madden to turn pro, we also have Hoglander and Podkolzin coming into the system. What are the odds he is ahead of any or enough of those players to take one of the few available roster spots? We also will have two more drafts happening before then, where we will also be picking more players. -
I will lean on a hockey specific site as having a more sophisticated model than a generic sports site. There seems to be no way that our chances could be that high at all with so many games left to play and such a small gap between us and a non-playoff spot. The Moneypuck site does a lot of stuff in the background like comparing how competitively tough schedules are for the teams going forward. It is easy to have a slightly higher chance of winning the division when having a slightly lower winning %. Even something as simple as looking at home and away records, it can mean a couple more or less expected wins if you have more or less road games remaining. here is a little text on their model. http://moneypuck.com/about.htm
-
Totally agree, we can wait to anoint him as having “arrived” until we see a long sample size, while at the same time enjoying his success and hoping for the best. He has now had a stretch of 25 games which represent the best hockey of his entire career. That followed the first 25 games of the season where he showed little progression from his previous years. He has also made a couple of remarkable passes recently that he has literally never shown even a flash of being able to do in all of his time in the NHL. That is a good sign. If he can keep up his production and get a 20+ goal, 40-50 point season... that is a big deal for him and the team.
-
I don’t know how refined the calculations are behind this. Does it just count what all the teams are on pace for? Does it consider the respective records of opponents and the likely winners game by game? Does it consider road vs home records and calculate that into remaining schedules? Does it consider that the bulk of in division games are left to be played to there are guaranteed points there that “someone has to get” as well as those effectively being 4 point games. I like it in terms of probability. We currently have a 75.9% chance of making the playoffs and. 24.4% chance of winning the division. http://moneypuck.com/predictions.htm I take those odds any day for this point in the season, while at the same time have been a Canucks fan long enough to always have worry about things falling apart until we have it mathematically locked up.
-
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Very good point... but it is more entertaining than playing Candy Crush while I am on the toilet -
[Proposal] Eriksson + Madden to NJD
Provost replied to AriGold2.0's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Madden would be the 2nd lightest player in the entire league, Quinn Hughes has 20 pounds on him. Really small guys "can" make it, but most of them don't even in this smaller faster league. Playing well in college doesn't earn you a straight line into being an NHL regular, even a list of previous Hobey Baker winners and finalists shows a bunch of guys who mostly ended up as AHL and European league players. Guys coming in are still an exception rather than the rule. -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
You are most welcome. I do my best to tailor my lessons to the level of the student, glad that one was appropriately targeted. -
[Proposal] Eriksson + Madden to NJD
Provost replied to AriGold2.0's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Basically any return is good if all it takes to unload Eriksson is Madden who is still a longshot to make the NHL and doesn't have any foreseeable spot to slot into on our roster. -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Thanks for posting a picture illustrating you trying to do basic math. So a recap of your recent free lessons by me: 1. Cap hit is not the same as the actual dollars spent (don't feel bad, that can be confusing) 2. Signing players costs money and cap hit It must be so great for you to have someone as patient and kind as me to continue to teach you this stuff. I hope you can manage to make use of your newfound knowledge to make the world a better place. -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Aside from you just ignoring that fact you have been shown to be completely wrong repeatedly on this thread... and you just pretend it didn't happen and move on to another incorrect argument. Are you not able to do math? Go back in the thread and it goes over this and the required/possible re-signings, it goes over what you posted, and not just by me. 8 players signed with 40 million in cap space.... sounds nice, unless you actually spend more than five seconds thinking about it and realize you need to sign 15 players with that money, including 3 top 6 forwards, three top 4 d, and two goalies... as well as almost the entire bottom half of your forward group. 40 million - 5 million for Markstrom - 5 million for Tanev or comparable top 4 D - 3.5 million to re-sign Virtanen - 10 million for Petterson - 8 million for Hughes - 6 million for Edler or a comparable top 4 D. Give or take a couple million more or less for those signings total... you can argue the exact amounts of each contract, but even imagining the wettest dream hometown discounts, it doesn't give nearly enough leeway to resolve a fraction of the below issue. That leaves you with $2.5 million cap space left with only 14 players signed, and needing to sign 9 more players for a full roster. Give or take a couple million this is what it would cost just to re-sign some of your own players, and nothing towards improving the roster or filling other holes. It is also letting go useful players like Pearson, Stecher, and Leivo who are currently good value contracts outperforming their cap hits. Assume a $2 million increase each year in the cap, and the $4 million in pushed ELC bonuses into that year from 2020-21 that we can't afford to pay in that year... and they negate each other, so you get no relief from that at all. $2 million raises in the cap are also quite possibly not going to happen, coming out of the BOG meetings in December, the GMs sounded pretty bleak and are assuming a relatively flat cap. The players are going to be hit with huge escrow this year due to the fact most teams are above the midpoint in spending, so are unlikely to vote for an artificial escalator which will just take more money out of their pockets. If we replace Tanev and Edler with cheap players like Juolevi and Rafferty, you free up just enough money to almost sign those 9 players to contracts as long as they all average a million dollars each. Of course, replacing Tanev and Edler with two guys who have zero NHL experience and expect them to be in your top 4 is almost certainly going to make you significantly worse. Having half your roster not being able to earn more than a million dollars is also literally the definition of having no depth. So, the original point was that, unless we move out some dead cap space, we are going to lose most of our depth and be worse on paper for the next two years. We have prospects coming, but not enough to fill all the holes coming... and you can only reasonably filter in 2-3 rookies a year tops if you have even the faintest hopes for success, not 6 rookies a year (even if we had enough ready, which we don't). It all leads to the need to either move out dead/inefficient cap space... or just live with getting worse by losing all the depth we managed to build up to make up for that dead cap space... and hope that miraculously a team that is spending almost nothing on defence and has literally half their roster at close to league minimum can compete for the playoffs. What a great plan to waste at least two years of our star player's short careers. -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
... well you could actually read and include the rest of that definition which explains how signing bonuses and cap hits work, and not the real dollars. If you aren’t able to understand and appreciate basic stuff like the difference between actual dollars and cap hits, maybe brush up on it before calling people out on being wrong. -
It is deeply amusing to me that you spent hours arguing the opposite just yesterday and the day before, and insisted there were no cap concerns at all, and we could sign everyone we needed to.... without having to trade those players. Now we are going to lose the best starting goalie in the league (by adjusted advanced stats), or lose one of our top D men.... and have to trade those players..
-
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Haha, you were proven wrong for the infinite time and then resort to personal attacks as always when the facts completely disagree with your imagined and simplistic version of reality. Didn't even have the guts to tag me directly. One of your sad old tricks by editing out my name but using my quote so I don’t get notified that you quoted me. So the synopsis of this and effectively the same formula for every interaction you insist on having with me: Provost: We have a real cap crunch coming in the next two seasons that is going to cost us depth unless we make some moves, the sooner the better. Here are some independently verified facts to back up my assertion. Oldnews: No we don’t, here are some objectively wrong facts that are easily disproven. Provost: Actually here are the easily proven correct numbers and facts that illustrate the concern going forward. Oldnews: Oh ya, well you and your insistence on objective reality are dumb, so I am going to stick my fingers in my ears and make loud sounds so I don’t have to listen to you. Oldnews: Now I am really mad and frustrated, so I am going to spend hours looking up and reading reams of months old unrelated posts of yours and put ‘confused emojis’ on them to show you how mad and obsessed I am. Don’t worry, I know it is really tough for you, but most of the rest of us can think about more than one thing at the same time. I, for example, can enjoy our success; think about moves for the looming trade deadline that can keep helping us in the right direction for this season and beyond; and I can also chew gum while doing those things. -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Well to start, according to Capfriendly, buying out Eriksson’s last year still hits us with a $4 million cap hit for that year and a $1 million cap hit for the year after. For a grand total savings of $1 million in cap hit, that is what they mean when they say his contract is virtually buyout proof in the way it is structured with bonuses. Secondly, all of those contracts you mention add up to a little over $18 million. Petterson and Hughes are probably going to cost about that much just themselves. Then we have to fill those other roster spots again. What we are facing is having to replace all that veteran depth with players who earn close to league minimum. Even doing that, we STILL have those same roster spots + Petterson & Hughes cost us more than they do now. Roughly right now those 6 roster spots cost us: Petterson (925k) + Hughes (915k)+ Edler (6m) + Pearson (3.75m)+ Sutter (4.38m)+ Benn (2m) About $18 million in total cap. In 2021-22 those same 6 roster spots cost us: Petterson ($10m) + Hughes ($8m)+Top 4D ($1m)+Top 6F ($1m) + Bottom 6F ($1m) + 3rd pairing D ($1m) about $22 million. ... and that is replacing valuable High performing pieces like Edler and Pearson with bottom end players and/or rookies. Literally the definition of having no depth. Try to find a top 4D to replace Edler but only spend $1 million on it. Also, unless we unload cap now, we are probably looking at around $4 million of ELC bonuses pushed from the 2020-21 season into the 2021-22 season. So add that to the already extra $4 million to cover those 6 above roster spots... Making us $8 million in the hole WHILE already having decimated our depth. All of that equals a very ugly cap situation. Also moving Sutter and Baertschi before the 2021-22 season means between now and then... as per my continually repeated point and the one you either intentionally ignored or didn’t comprehend, the cap needs to be moved out now to have a trickle down effect and avoid pushed ELC bonuses for the next two seasons. Move Eriksson or Sutter+Beartschi now and you can save pushing the $1.7-3.7 million in ELC bonuses into 2020-21. Wait until the offseason, or next trade deadline, and you have to pay to move out a lot more to avoid the $4 million or so in ELC bonuses from next season pushing into 2021-22 when we are paying full ticket for Petterson and Hughes and absolutely can’t afford to pay them. ... but ya, nothing to see here. Even MacKenzie on a radio hit today talked about our cap issues over the next couple seasons and pushed ELC bonuses. Of course, as per you the media are all terrible and you know better. Edit: ... and that is following this season when we have to pay significant raises for Markstrom and Virtanen, and pay the $1.7-3.7 million in pushed ELC bonuses.... costing us being able to re-sign Tanev and/or Stecher and Leivo and replacing them with cheap players like Juolevi, Rafferty, and MacEwan. -
[Signing] Penguins re-sign Marcus Pettersson
Provost replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
I was hoping when we were talking about trades with the Penguins that this guy would be coming our way. He would have been a really nice steady piece playing on the 2nd pairing behind Hughes on the left side. It is a decent contract where they are paying him as a 2nd pairing guy, and he is eating up almost 20 minutes a night and has never been a negative +/- in his entire career. Not the kind of contract you often regret. -
When I saw the title on the main page it showed " Loui Eriksson has been"... I was hoping the rest of that was "placed on waivers", but I am an overly optimistic guy.
-
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
Provost replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Ya, we are on the same page. If you look a the thing that most Cup winning teams have in common (in the cap era), they have core pieces locked up long term and then start winning when those contracts start being relatively cheap compared with their production. They aren't paying current market rates for their stars, so can fill out the rest of the roster with decent players. I think for us there is no question that we should lock up Petterson and Hughes to max term contracts as soon as we are allowed in July. The cap is going to go up with the new TV deal (though maybe not as much as folks speculate because at the same time the players want to get rid of escrow), and contracts are likely to be a lot more expensive in 2-3 years. There isn't any real downside risk to it, if Petterson and Hughes didn't pan out for some reason, we aren't winning for many years regardless.