Ghostsof1915 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 Natural attrition: Dorsett, Edler, and MDZ are off the books next year. Gagner will be on his last year next year (if he even stays until then). Younger guys start taking spots. Woo, Juolevi, and Hughes on Defence. Even Rathbone depending when he finishes college could enter the picture. Not to mention next years draft. I'm sure there's going to be 1-2 defencemen somewhere down the line. Forwards can be traded even if the return isn't great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martybyrd Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 3 hours ago, iceman64 said: I find it that a scary thought in a way, think of brock, elias, quinn etc and the salary cap opposed to where it'll be after another season and after plus demko and virtanen if he breaks out finally. It's great to have those names in the line-up but how many can we afford to have? All we can hope for is that cap to go up a fair chunk but the cap cost us the stanley cup already once and i'll be livid if it does it again... We have less "Stars" than any team in the entire league....and this is your concern ??? 1 of the 3 is signed at an incredibly team friendly long term 5m/yr contract and another just signed his ELC... When doing a forum search for dumbest post...I hope this one pops up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 well... the only way to do it would be to Gillis it. Get the players to take a reduced salary in order to win. That is a huge ask however, and I'm not sure that the business environment supports that anymore - but maybe... certainly more care is going to have to be made with any new FA contracts (imho SOME of the existing FA contracts given out are either unnecessary or just poorly negotiated, as a lot of us agree - and some of us don't agree, with the thought that the timing doesn't require saving any money as we have room and there are hockey reasons for it. Not trying to stir that up again, but just pointing out there is a difference of opinion on this point. In any case, what we can ALL agree on is that future FA contracts NEED to be different than the ones signed so far by this current management regime). So if you can limit the players to 7 million - which is a huge ask - it is certainly possible. Even if you limit them to 8m. Boeser, EP, Hughes, and Hughes brother Jack when we win the lottery, that would be our max: 4. And of course only 1 of the 4 has even shown they are potentially in that grouping - so a bit early to think about really. The question really is: How good of a deal can we get for these players? And is the Salary Cap going to keep going up? Or maybe teams just have a shorter window - and winning a cup is really about peaking at the right time: Peak performance for dollar spent. So your players have to be good enough when they are earning less than they should.... And then when you eventually pay them what they are worth you can't win anymore - its a tight window - it is fun if you like to think about the game that way, but if you just want to see good hockey it is a terrible distraction. /peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolboarder Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 1 hour ago, Baggins said: Good luck selling that to the NHLPA. You're talking about losing another season there. They won't go for something like that because it hinders players ablility to cash in on free agency. Oh, the stars will get their money and the free spenders will get their cup runs, but it's the above average to good players that will get hurt by your free agency penalty. The bulk of the NHLPA. That idea is a lengthy strike waiting to happen. I get that many hate the idea of non-hockey markets having teams. But if you want a decent national TV contract you have to have a national sport to tlevise. National TV revenue is shared by all teams. So the higher that revenue the stronger all teams become. It won't happen over night though. But as an example of the long term effect look no further than Matthews. The kid likely never picks up a hockey stick if not going to a Coyotes game as a kid. And he's not the only Arizona kid to become a hockey fan. The drawback to the southern expansion plan is it will take a generation to actually see the results. Hooking kids on a sport is what creates long term rabid fans. Generally adults that weren't hooked on a sport as kids tend more towards being the fairweather fans. Ratio or something like that could be negotiated but still teams can get something back or some kind of revenue for the poorer team other than the gate/TV money. Maybe my idea is setting a bit too high of a tax/penalty. With free market, players can demand for more and hold out for more without concern or constraint to the cap and cave in by signing for less because not enough room of a cap. With the cap, the bulk of NHLPA members with lots to give are not on the team, not even with other team and most of them are either on PTO and I noticed that teams would rather concentrate on their own drafted players developed and given opportunities and in fact, most of NHLPA members are squeezed out of NHL and not willing to accept for less salary. This doesn't help for a quality game when veterans are good enough than their rookies. Teams are more than willingly to give McDavid more money than what the Oilers signed him and might be willing to pay hefty taxes and with that money, more money for players in their coffin came from a high revenue teams to meet the minimum demands or increase the minimum salary to one million dollars and I will bet you that poorer teams would not want to give the league minimum to their rookies that high and allow for rookie salary cap that can be buried in the minor if they aren't ready. If they are promoted to the NHL, the NHL teams must pay their rookies on a higher league minimum wage than if they would be with rookie salary cap in the minors. With the cap system, the teams that are rich in revenue still keep their revenue and their profit is still higher than the teams on the revenue sharing program and the poorer team still not making any profits from that minimum floor cap. With free market/free agent tax, teams can still share their revenues to the poor team and allow for poor teams to find players that are still good enough to play in the league. With that system, teams would be then able to buy their way for a quality roster for the Cup and allow for NHL to make money that way. Even if I was not a fan of Red Wings or Avs, I still watched them because they produced quality hockey in the playoffs. I want to watch a quality hockey game than majority of teams without a quality line-up playing in Stanley Cup playoffs with shoddy 3rd/4th liner with many mistakes and not watching the game at all. It will help the TV rating to go up because of star power in the Stanley Cup Final. This would allow for league to collect more revenues from TV in the future. Right now, with the way the quality of the league overall, I wouldn't watch hockey in the Stanley Cup playoffs/final unless my own team make it. if its were 90's and free market and quality of the line-up, I would watch knowing that the best team and best players would be able to win it all. I felt that the poorer teams that are in revenue sharing program doesn't really deserve to have that type of money as well as they do not really develop or doing anything to improve quality and improve their roster at all and could go decade without seeing any result. They are just exploiting the cap system. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 1 hour ago, Baggins said: If Boeser signs a mximum term deal it will a north of a 8m cap hit. Your talking max term for his entire prime. I'd say $6-7m on a 4 or maybe 5 year deal at longest. These guys, and their agents, know what their long term value can be. Look no further than what Kane and Toews signed for and the cap limit was lower at the time. Toews signed at 26 and will be 34 when his contract ends with a $10.5m cap hit signing 4 years ago. There's no way Boesers agent recommends he signs to a $6-7m cap hit throughout his prime. Kane and Toews are not his comparables. Young RFAs in his point range are in the $6-7 million area. Pastrnak, Ehlers, Barkov would be who you look at. At the top end including the cap inflation you would put him at $7.1 million. If he scores 40 plus goals, all bets are off... but that is a tall order and assuming it will happen (or worse.. paying him like it will happen) is a recipe for disappointment. He had a crazy shooting percentage last season and opposition will be keying in on him. A reasonable bet is around 30 goals and 65-70 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 33 minutes ago, Provost said: Kane and Toews are not his comparables. Young RFAs in his point range are in the $6-7 million area. Pastrnak, Ehlers, Barkov would be who you look at. At the top end including the cap inflation you would put him at $7.1 million. If he scores 40 plus goals, all bets are off... but that is a tall order and assuming it will happen (or worse.. paying him like it will happen) is a recipe for disappointment. He had a crazy shooting percentage last season and opposition will be keying in on him. A reasonable bet is around 30 goals and 65-70 points. Kane and Toews were both rfa's when they signed their current deals. Just older rfa's. Which is why I'm saying Boeser won't sign max term at what you're suggesting that would take him through his entire prime. Both he and his agent know what the third contract will pay. That's when he'll go after max term taking him into his 30's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 Is Aquilini investing into the Space Force? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YummyCakeFace Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 What’s the relevancy? They’ve proven they’ll spend to the cap over and over again. May as well pay for a good team rather than what it’s been the last 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 4 hours ago, MJDDawg said: Benning should think about trading one of them before they become too expensive. Our best players should always be on ELCs, to save money. Once their entry level ends, get em outta here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris12345 Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 4 hours ago, Provost said: It is amazing how we find ridiculous things to worry about. 1. It is not likely that all our prospects turn into “stars” that will require huge cap hits. 2. It would be a nice problem to have. 3. It isn’t hard to unload young stars for big returns, so if we were lucky enough to have a surplus, we could simply move one for younger ELC players and picks that would continue to feed the pipeline of cheap contracts to offset higher salaries. Yea no kidding....what happens if I win the lottery and everyone knows I'm rich? If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. How about we worry about that when we have a star. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeanSeanBean Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 5 hours ago, BananaMash said: The Dallas Stars are worth about $515,000,000 so, I can't afford even one Star. At 17 I bought my high school sweet heart a star. Bugger only cost me like 37 bucks. Little did I know that with the housing market here, that will likely be the closest I'll ever get to owning land... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PunjabiCanucks Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 I worry about that myself, but with Edler/ Sutter gone we will be better cap wise. In 5 years we may have to worry, but when that time comes the cap will be up more. In regards to no cap it will just create super teams and make for an unfair league. Do you really want the same thing to happen as in the NBA where its the same 2 teams every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 5 hours ago, IBatch said: I’m getting tired of the cap for a variety of reasons but mostly because the hockey could be so much better. The fan base and income should dictate salaries, not a draconian fascist regime which the NHL is becoming. It’s all about supporting markets that have or are failing like ARI, CAR and even Miami. Put teams where they will flourish like Quebec (will easily dupiclate WNPs success), Seattle etc. To answer the OP id rather we don’t get stuck with a 9-11 million dollar star, and are able to have quite a few in the 6-8 million range (second contract as that’s a cores biggest window) and it looks like we might have most of what we can afford already in the system, Horvat 6, Boeser 7.5 , Hughes 7.5, OJ 5, Demko 5, and Pettersson 8.5. Consider how bad Ottawa would be if Melnyk wasn't forced to spend to the minimum. The Sens are barely good enough to play in the AHL as it is and you're advocating allowing that piece of **** to further destroy the franchise? How do you propose ensuring a good fanbase can endure a bad owner who doesn't give a damn about winning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 1 hour ago, King Heffy said: Consider how bad Ottawa would be if Melnyk wasn't forced to spend to the minimum. The Sens are barely good enough to play in the AHL as it is and you're advocating allowing that piece of **** to further destroy the franchise? How do you propose ensuring a good fanbase can endure a bad owner who doesn't give a damn about winning? Wow. Just wow. So if Stone and Duchene and Chabot and Anderson take their team further than ours what does that make our Team? Check your facts too, it’s not like Melnyk doesn’t want to win a cup, and hasn’t spent more money than other teams, and has handed out some pretty nice contracts in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 1 hour ago, PunjabiCanucks said: I worry about that myself, but with Edler/ Sutter gone we will be better cap wise. In 5 years we may have to worry, but when that time comes the cap will be up more. In regards to no cap it will just create super teams and make for an unfair league. Do you really want the same thing to happen as in the NBA where its the same 2 teams every year. It hasn’t been a handful of teams since original expansion, MTL lost its grip on the cup long ago and only one team ever bought a cup (although NYR tried unsuccessfully many times). In other words decades of pre-cap proved that the teams that spent the most didn’t win all that much. Salary sharing changed everything, and the games evolved (or devolved) to what it is today, TB is the closest we will ever get to see a team collect so much skill under the cap, and they wouldn’t be able to do that if it wasn’t for no jock tax and lower salaries. EDM sent two entire forward lines, two goalies and two defenseman to one all star game...and those MTL teams from the seventies and NYI were loaded too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 1 hour ago, IBatch said: Wow. Just wow. So if Stone and Duchene and Chabot and Anderson take their team further than ours what does that make our Team? Check your facts too, it’s not like Melnyk doesn’t want to win a cup, and hasn’t spent more money than other teams, and has handed out some pretty nice contracts in the past. Precisely because there is a cap floor. You think those players would still be there if that cheap piece of garbage wasn't required to spend to that level? Melnyk is an absolute bum and has shown no interest in icing a competitive team. Salary cap is there to protect fans from bad owners like Melnyk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DS4quality Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 I think it really depends on the car recapture from Luongo, and whatever happens with CBA negotiations I am really rooting for him to either A play out his contract, or comeback to us as a backup to mentor Thiessen or someone so we avoid the large penalty. Should he retire in 2021, that's 8.5 million gone in salary, and knowing our luck that's when he'll retire. I assume the cap will be somewhere around 78-80 million that season, so that's a lot of our cap space. That could really mess with us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaramel MacKhiato Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 All we will have is money pretty quick. By the time all this happens, Eriksson, Roussel, Beagle, Gagner, and Edler will be off the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salacious Crumb Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 This topic gave me this feels... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 why are you even worried.. you are literally assuming 1st rounder on this team will turn into a McDavid and command 10mil a year... the only player that even remotely have a chance at that atm is Boeser.. and hopefully Pettersen down the line.. will Hughes turn into a Norris winning 10mil a year defensemen? i'd would love him to.. but realistically? probably not? Juolevi? he's probably more likely to end up as a top 4 pairing than a top 1-2 defensemen.. and Demko doesn't look like he's gonna be the next matt murray.. so why are we even worried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.