The Salary Cap Solution

[Pro Canuck]

Since your reading comprehension is lacking, I'll quote this post for you again:

[elvis15]

If it was easy, everyone would do it. Seems the GMs all have their own way and some are more successful than others.

The long-term deals and different thoughts on building a team in the post-cap era are all unproven to a point and we can only wait and see what Gillis does and if it's successful.

[chicocanuck]

I don't care if a goalie has won a cup before or not. I only care if he won the cup in the same year that he finished high in the Vezina voting.

Gighere won the cup when he was a nobody. Now he is on the Vezina list. Doesn't mean he's worth it.

You are only worth it, if you can prove that you can win the same year you make the top 5 on a vezina vote and win the cup. THE SAME YEAR.

The truth is, once someone becomes "Vezina" good, they will be paid as such, and thsu they don't win the cup as much anymore. That's what I am trying to prove.

Players that do win the cup, of course afterwards they will be considered good. But right before they won the cup, when the vezina voters were voting, guess what they were not considered good. Keep in mind to make the playoffs is the top 16 teams... so if you are not in the top 10 in vezina goaltending that year, you were going into the playoffs as a heavy underdog goalie. The fact that you end up still winning, proves my theory on the cap, and the "playoff games" crunch.

And don't look for salary trends within the top 10 in the vezina. they all should make a lot of money.

My point is that those that aren't in the vezina, are probably not seen as good goalies, and thus make little money. The fact that these guys go on to win the cup shows that right now, the elite goalies are overpaid for what they mean to a team. I don't care how many posters of luongo there are, or how dependent we are on him to win. In fact we would be even more dependent on him if he was making $20 mil a year. He'd be even more of an MVP on our team. My point is he would be hurting us even more than he does now. HE HURTS US BY TAKING UP CAP SPACE.

[Tiranis]

Um.. you can get entry level guys to contribute .. you just trade Luongo for a pair of these entry level guys...say Steve Mason and someone else.... then use the $5 in cap space to sign Mike Camallari... I think your team would be amazing...

Problem solved. Yet we are stuck with Luongo eating up cap space, and his eliteness diminishing in the playoffs.

[diven73]

Although if you take any single best of 7 series, a goalies advantage statistical advantage is probably too small to merit his extra salary. That said to win the cup you need to win 4 series in a single year, and goalies are usually signed to longer term deals. I would suggest that over the course of a contract or over a career, having that elite level talent in goal, will give the team a greater shot at the cup.

I do agree about the talent gap with regards to goalies. Although they are the most critical position to playoff success, there isn't enough variability from the top starter to worst starter (much due to evolution in goalie equipment) to justify a wide difference in salary. Goalies should have the highest average salary, but top end salaries need to be reserved for forward position where there is the variability in terms of talent.

[Tiranis]

I do agree about the talent gap with regards to goalies. Although they are the most critical position to playoff success, there isn't enough variability from the top starter to worst starter to justify a wide difference in salary. Goalies should have the highest average salary, but top end salaries need to be reserved for forward position where there is the variability in terms of talent.

[Pro Canuck]

Your argument is becoming harder and harder to follow. Everything you wrote in your initial post led me to believe that you believe paying more for a goalie won't guarantee you playoff success due to what you call variance. Non-elite goalies are just as likely to step it up in the playoffs, as elite goalies. Am I correct so far?

But then you complicate your case by adding in this factor of goalies who have won the Vezina and the cup in the same year. If I understood correctly, you're saying that these goalies are less likely to win the cup again, therefore it doesn't make sense to use up cap space on these goalies. Is that right?

Luongo has not won a Vezina or a cup and is considered an elite goalie...and is paid as such. He hasn't won a cup yet, so by your standards, he doesn't fall into the category of Vezina winning cup goalies. Therefore, by your definition, you can't prove that he is less likely to win the cup. If anything, he still has just as much of a chance of lighting it up in the playoffs.

You haven't written anything that proves, statistically, that his "eliteness" will diminish in the playoffs. That's one of the factors you can't control, just as you can't control the likelihood of a non-elite goalie increasing your chances of winning the cup.

The truth is that you really can't guarantee that any goalie is more likely than the next to win a cup. The best you can do is choose the best - and unfortunately, that is usually measured by salary.

One more factor to consider is age/potential. Mason and "someone else" for Luongo sounds like a fair trade, but is not likely to happen because the Jackets value Mason as a future star who will provide them with more years of success. It's not that easy to just dump Luongo for a young, potentially elite goalie AND cap space. If it was, don't you think more GM's would do this?

[Pro Canuck]

Let's see... where did you go wrong? Hmm, for one all those guys were drafted. Ok, that's one right there. Moving on:

1) How do you know Steve Mason will perform once again? Goaltenders have one of the worst drop-off rates after their rookie season.

2) How do you know Columbus wants to trade it's supervaluable goaltender signed to a super-cheap contract? Why, why, why?

3) Why does Luongo (with NTC) want to play in Columbus? If you want to trade him to some other team for entry-level contract then why does that team want to do that deal? Players on entry-level deals are more valuable than anything else in the league. You get them by drafting well and developing your prospects. Not by trading for them. I urge you to find me one single deal that was done for a valuable entry-level contract player.

4) When it comes to entry-level contracts it's likely that even Ovechkin wouldn't get you Patrick Kane or Jonathan Toews.

5) Why does Mike Camallari sign in Vancouver? He decides that he doesn't want to play for his favourite team Toronto that's offering him more money? Or what?

Oh, wait. I forgot, you're a fantasy GM and you don't have to concern yourself with such trivial things. Or maybe I'm mistaken, and every single GM in the league is less intelligent and informed than you are. In that case, the question arises — why are you not the GM of some NHL team, given that you clearly possess the skills?

[Tiranis]

Answer: None of today's GM's were GM's when they were 21 years old. You have no idea if I will end up being a GM, or if that is my ultimate goal in life. P.S. You lose ambition in life if you automatically assume that people in positions higher than you are just "smarter" or "better". Why even try? That's a terrible defeatest attitude that you have.

[Pro Canuck]

Although if you take any single best of 7 series, a goalies advantage statistical advantage is probably too small to merit his extra salary. That said to win the cup you need to win 4 series in a single year, and goalies are usually signed to longer term deals. I would suggest that over the course of a contract or over a career, having that elite level talent in goal, will give the team a greater shot at the cup.

I do agree about the talent gap with regards to goalies. Although they are the most critical position to playoff success, there isn't enough variability from the top starter to worst starter to justify a wide difference in salary. Goalies should have the highest average salary, but top end salaries need to be reserved for forward position where there is the variability in terms of talent.

[Pro Canuck]

Let's see... where did you go wrong? Hmm, for one all those guys were drafted. Ok, that's one right there. Moving on:

1) How do you know Steve Mason will perform once again? Goaltenders have one of the worst drop-off rates after their rookie season.

2) How do you know Columbus wants to trade it's supervaluable goaltender signed to a super-cheap contract? Why, why, why?

3) Why does Luongo (with NTC) want to play in Columbus? If you want to trade him to some other team for entry-level contract then why does that team want to do that deal? Players on entry-level deals are more valuable than anything else in the league. You get them by drafting well and developing your prospects. Not by trading for them. I urge you to find me one single deal that was done for a valuable entry-level contract player.

4) When it comes to entry-level contracts it's likely that even Ovechkin wouldn't get you Patrick Kane or Jonathan Toews.

5) Why does Mike Cammalleri sign in Vancouver? He decides that he doesn't want to play for his favourite team Toronto that's offering him more money? Or what?

Oh, wait. I forgot, you're a fantasy GM and you don't have to concern yourself with such trivial things. Or maybe I'm mistaken, and every single GM in the league is less intelligent and informed than you are. In that case, the question arises — why are you not the GM of some NHL team, given that you clearly possess the skills?

[Rob_Zepp]

You could randomly pick 100 "Glory Days" posts out of a hat and at least 90 of them would be childish slams on Luongo.

[VanMAn]

I don't care if a goalie has won a cup before or not. I only care if he won the cup in the same year that he finished high in the Vezina voting.

Gighere won the cup when he was a nobody. Now he is on the Vezina list. Doesn't mean he's worth it.

You are only worth it, if you can prove that you can win the same year you make the top 5 on a vezina vote and win the cup. THE SAME YEAR.

The truth is, once someone becomes "Vezina" good, they will be paid as such, and thsu they don't win the cup as much anymore. That's what I am trying to prove.

Players that do win the cup, of course afterwards they will be considered good. But right before they won the cup, when the vezina voters were voting, guess what they were not considered good. Keep in mind to make the playoffs is the top 16 teams... so if you are not in the top 10 in vezina goaltending that year, you were going into the playoffs as a heavy underdog goalie. The fact that you end up still winning, proves my theory on the cap, and the "playoff games" crunch.

And don't look for salary trends within the top 10 in the vezina. they all should make a lot of money.

My point is that those that aren't in the vezina, are probably not seen as good goalies, and thus make little money. The fact that these guys go on to win the cup shows that right now, the elite goalies are overpaid for what they mean to a team. I don't care how many posters of luongo there are, or how dependent we are on him to win. In fact we would be even more dependent on him if he was making $20 mil a year. He'd be even more of an MVP on our team. My point is he would be hurting us even more than he does now. HE HURTS US BY TAKING UP CAP SPACE.

[chicocanuck]

I only said Vezina level!!! I want players who are not in the Vezina top 10. Obviously Luongo is Vezina contending... and he is paid like it. Obviously you don't just pay the Vezina WINNER the top money, GM's pay all the great ones good money.

You need to get some more logical analytical skills my friend and then you'll see where I am getting at.

THE LAW OF LARGE NUMBERS. His eliteness and every other elite goalie's eliteness will diminish RELATIVE to mediocre goalies the shorter the time horizen you are looking at. Hence 1 game vs. 4 games vs. 1000 games. Get it? On one single shot in a single game, it is hard for Luongo to "show his worth" compared to over 20,000 shots over 1000 games. Flukes don't happen over the long run and that is the LAW OF LARGE NUMBERS.

AGAIN I REITERATE. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LUONGO'S CLUTCH FACTOR. IT HAS ONLY TO DO WITH MATHEMATICS.

[Cause=Time]

20 goal scorers can find more than 2.5 per year on the open market.

[Masterfod]

Your argument is becoming harder and harder to follow. Everything you wrote in your initial post led me to believe that you believe paying more for a goalie won't guarantee you playoff success due to what you call variance. Non-elite goalies are just as likely to step it up in the playoffs, as elite goalies. Am I correct so far?

But then you complicate your case by adding in this factor of goalies who have won the Vezina and the cup in the same year. If I understood correctly, you're saying that these goalies are less likely to win the cup again, therefore it doesn't make sense to use up cap space on these goalies. Is that right?

[Pro Canuck]

I think you are misunderstanding him. Players who are voted for the Vezina are already being paid TOP DOLLAR. He is saying that a good, cheap goalie wins Cups, contradictory to the voting trends for the Vezina. Once the goalie wins the Cup however, they start getting paid more, and they take up more cap space. He isn't saying that the goalies themselves are less likely to win, he's saying the team is, because a larger amount of the cap is going towards the SAME goalie, and they therefore have less to spend on other players. His solution is to switch goalies once he becomes too expensive, in order to find another younger goalie with similar calibre and a drastically reduced price tag.

It doesn't matter whether he has won a Vezina or not. The fact is, every year he is in the top running for it, and therefore the public PERCEPTION is that he's an elite goaltender, and therefore deserves ELITE dollars. People will pay more for what they think is better. The idea is to get a goalie that the public doesn't think is elite, but still good enough to win (Before he won the cup, do you think people were willing to pay M.A. Fleury more than $4mil?). Because they don't think he's that good, less people will be willing to pay more for him, and you can get away with having him for a cheap salary. The ideal end result is to have a goalie with a slight decrease in skill, but a drastic decrease in price.

You are dead on. Read my Every Player is Worth the Same Value thread for supplemental support.

This is why I don't doubt Luongo is the best goalie in the world. Even in a one game situation, I would rather have Luongo. I want Luongo to start for Team Canada.

But in the NHL with Luongo at 6 million, he is not very good value at all. He is just fair. Aka in the cap world, Luongo is an average player in the league. End of Story.

He's not saying that. Say you have a $4mil goalie that wins 60% of games. Then you have a $7mil goalie that wins 75% of games. How many games does it take to win a playoff series? Approximately 57% (4/7) of them. Now, BY THEMSELVES, the $4mil goalie might win the series in 6-7 games, while the $7mil might do it in 5. They're both still capable of winning a series.

But now, you spend the $3mil to upgrade your defense or your forwards. Say you use that money to switch from a $1mil defenseman to a $4mil one. Now, on the off chance that one of the playoff games, your $4mil goalie decides to play like the other 40% of his games. Now you have a fallback; your improved defenseman can bail him out, and he's more likely to have a stellar game himself. But if your $7mil goalie has an off day, that's $7mil that's not contributing that night. What are the odds that a $4mil goalie and a $4mil defenseman both play like crap in the same game? I'm pretty sure it's less than 25% of the time.

A non-elite goalie DOES increase your chances of winning the cup, but not by himself. He indirectly does it because he takes up less of the cap, and therefore the extra money can be used to improve his team. That's a new dimension of the salary cap era; players are now being judged not only by how they play, but on how much their salary is a detriment to the team. The OP is saying that by getting a cheaper goalie, and by using the extra money to get better forwards (or conversely, by not getting a $7mil superstar forward, and getting several $3mil 20G scorers), you are actually increasing the team's OVERALL chance of winning.

No, the best you can do is choose the most economical. By choosing the best goalie, you are sacrificing some other aspect of your team. What good is a stellar goalie if your defense can't skate, or your forwards can't score? The "best" is no longer the best in terms of stats, the best is now which salary allows you to assemble the best overall team.

Mason and "someone else" for Luongo is not a fair trade. You are getting a goalie who probably wins 10% less games a year, but who gets paid $6mil less. This is why the Jackets will not make this trade. It has nothing to do with Luongo's skill. Unless that "someone else" is a $6mil forward (which more or less means about 30-40G a season), this is not a fair trade. A fair trade is not only determined by how much skill you are getting, but also by how much POTENTIAL skill you could get by the money you are saving.

PS: This is my first post here. If I'm way off base, please go easy on me.

/me puts on flame-resistant n00b suit.

[diven73]

Talking about pro sports and statistics on these boards is like talking about being a doctor with a janitor. Seriously.

Read: http://www.mc79hockey.com/?p=3141

[chicocanuck]

I think you are misunderstanding him. Players who are voted for the Vezina are already being paid TOP DOLLAR.

[Tiranis]

Are you calling me a janitor, relative to statistics. I do have a degree in mathematics buddy, doesn't exactly make me a statistician, but more like a dentist to your doctor analogy. I will concede my example is not backed up with data, but I was only presenting a supposition.

The article you posted seems to ignore how Luongo fairs relative to other goalies. His MM$/SPAR is ranked 22nd out of the 32 ranked, and 13 goalies have MM$/SPAR under $200k. What this article shows is that goalies in general are not paid relative to what they contribute towards winning. Goalies very clearly have the biggest impact out of any player on the team towards a win. However because they don't have the same crowd draw as elite forwards, they aren't paid accordingly.