Pacc, Stone, EK..U See a Trend Here?

[Nuxfanabroad]

First let's establish parameters here: let's say in cases where teams acquire players who make(or immediately get signed to) 7 mill $ contracts(AAV), or higher. In terms of hit, this would constitute the star-superstar realm(particularly with MacKinnon making less). Many points:

 

1- Are these deals disappearing? Have GM's(& owners) decided the risk ain't worth it?

2- Is team composition changing? Having a player take up 8-12% of team spending limit, just trickles down weakness into your depth lines.

3- Blues & Bruins in last final seems to highlight this trending reality.

4- Did NJ BADDDly time things. Subban is a 9,000,000 $ lump, & the market for Hall might become a roadside kiosk. Dallas another textbook case study, for Xmas spending-exuberance.

5- Has the 4-6 mill/with term, heavy hitter, just gained influence in a new paradigm? If so, JB acquiring Miller might be cited as a GM textbook-masterpiece(with hindsight)

6- As for contracts, the Hogtown Leaves will probably be a neg lesson, for decades forward. UFAs can poison a well, just as quickly!

 

Posters, pls reference recent deals(perhaps past few seasons). Who has actually WON taking on big expenditures? Off the top of my noggin, would say ROR/StLoo is the obvious candidate, & last Dec(2018), apparently their GM was days from hosting a bloodybig yard sale(clearing house). They almost trashed the winning blueprint, emphasizing not to waver too quickly from a chosen route.

 

I feel there's a big lesson in all this, & believe JB(& co) are intimately aware. We're well positioned to change course, if need be.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Nuxfanabroad

[Xbox]

Stone is a fantastic player. Why mention him in this?

[Nuxfanabroad]

11 minutes ago, Xbox said:

Stone is a fantastic player. Why mention him in this?

Because it could be argued that acquiring a number of cheaper assets(vs one expensive, key piece) is a better team building strategy.

 

Any recent trades may be cited as refuting/proving the observation. It's mostly about conversation/observation, not an Absolute(! By Gawd!) conclusion.

[Chickenspear]

7 minutes ago, Xbox said:

Stone is a fantastic player. Why mention him in this?

I think you misunderstood the OP. Not about those players' performance, more of a depth effect. He's asking when has it actually paid off where a team acquires a star player (in this definition, $7+ mil) and wins the cup.

[Baer.]

Latest example I can think of is when Penguins traded for Kessel on July 1 2015, then proceeded to win the cup for the 15-16 and 16-17 seasons.

 

$8M in cap.

[Nuxfanabroad]

30 minutes ago, Baer. said:

Latest example I can think of is when Penguins traded for Kessel on July 1 2015, then proceeded to win the cup for the 15-16 and 16-17 seasons.

 

$8M in cap.

Ahh yes..thanks, good example. As we unpack this a bit, we see a player who US(league) dirty insiders might nominate for the freeken'Nobel.

 

First in a brutal(US-tilted, for Broon-goons), horrendous deal, he goes to the Fleas for(what became) TWO lotto picks! :^0

 

THEN he's sent to another key US market, to help win Cups. A team once nearly bankrupt, with two expensive(at that time) stars, needing cap. For the privilege, TO retains 15 % AAV for this questionable character, who had obliterated their (decade back), blundering Burkey-rebuild.

 

It's amazing how Cdn teams get shafted in the riggeddeckleague. Wonder if Burkey got a 10 mill donation (numbered Swiss acct) for that atrocious, knee-jerk deal? Lawyer educated in the Boston region, wasn't he? So glad the Aquas PUNTed his ample @$$ out the door!(realizing BB did all he could to get them back!)

Edited December 9, 2019 by Nuxfanabroad
15, not 20%

[Baer.]

51 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Ahh yes..thanks, good example. As we unpack this a bit, we see a player who US(league) dirty insiders might nominate for the freeken'Nobel.

 

First in a brutal(US-tilted, for Broon-goons), horrendous deal, he goes to the Fleas for(what became) TWO lotto picks! :^0

 

THEN he's sent to another key US market, to help win Cups. A team once nearly bankrupt, with two expensive(at that time) stars, needing cap. For the privilege, TO retains 15 % AAV for this questionable character, who had obliterated their (decade back), blundering Burkey-rebuild.

 

It's amazing how Cdn teams get shafted in the riggeddeckleague. Wonder if Burkey got a 10 mill donation (numbered Swiss acct) for that atrocious, knee-jerk deal? Lawyer educated in the Boston region, wasn't he? So glad the Aquas PUNTed his ample @$$ out the door!(realizing BB did all he could to get them back!)

Wonder if playing with Crosby had anything to do with it.

 

Most successful passenger of this decade 

 

Edit: personally I think this is a bad example considering Pittsburgh had been dominant for years prior to Kessel arriving, and already made back to back Cup finals appearances in 08/09. Crosby and Malkin did all the work, we know that. Taking on beaucoup bucks usually doesn't work out since true cup winning teams build from within.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Baer.

[Ghostsof1915]

Hughes and Petey are going to get some very sweet paycheques when their ELC's end. 

The trick is managing the cap. 

 

[D-Money]

2 hours ago, Baer. said:

Latest example I can think of is when Penguins traded for Kessel on July 1 2015, then proceeded to win the cup for the 15-16 and 16-17 seasons.

 

$8M in cap.

Toronto retained $1.5M.

[GoodCanadianKideh]

2 hours ago, Baer. said:

Latest example I can think of is when Penguins traded for Kessel on July 1 2015, then proceeded to win the cup for the 15-16 and 16-17 seasons.

 

$8M in cap.

It has been a while and my memory is a little foggy, but I think L.A. did something similar when they traded for Jeff Carter and Mike Richards.  They went on to win a couple of cups with those two on their team.  
 

I don’t think they were $7 million dollar contracts, but I think they were near the top of the league in salary at the time (7ish years ago). 

[10pavelbure96]

Hossa went to 3 finals in a row before winning the cup with the hawks in 2010. And he was being handsomely paid I believe.

 

Another poster mentioned Carter and Richards with the kings. You're right though OP, big splashes are overrated and seldomly work out.

[Baer.]

41 minutes ago, GoodCanadianKideh said:

It has been a while and my memory is a little foggy, but I think L.A. did something similar when they traded for Jeff Carter and Mike Richards.  They went on to win a couple of cups with those two on their team.  
 

I don’t think they were $7 million dollar contracts, but I think they were near the top of the league in salary at the time (7ish years ago). 

Richards was 5.75 and Carter was 5

 

Carter then re-signed for 5.27

 

7 mil is the new 5.75

 

That's a better example.

 

38 minutes ago, 10pavelbure96 said:

Hossa went to 3 finals in a row before winning the cup with the hawks in 2010. And he was being handsomely paid I believe.

 

Another poster mentioned Carter and Richards with the kings. You're right though OP, big splashes are overrated and seldomly work out.

5.275M, pretty good example even though Chicago was pretty stacked at the time anyways. He put them over the top.

[D-Money]

This thread doesn’t really make sense. Blues had 2 players making $7.5M per (Tarasenko & O’Reilly), and another making $6.5M (Parayko). Washington the year before has players making $9.538 (OV), $7.8 (Kuz), $6.7M (Backstrom), and $6.1M (Holtby). And Pittsburgh had Malkin ($9.5M), Crosby ($8.7), Letang ($7.25), and Kessel ($6.5M)...and that was with a significantly lower overall cap, so their support players were paid less than most other teams’.

 

What really matters in the playoffs is that you have great players who play at their best, everyone stays relatively healthy, and you get some lucky breaks. How you’re paying everyone has varied greatly.

[IBatch]

Boston and St Louis will both end up paying guys a lot of dough eventually.   So far they dodged a bullet in what they are getting as far as value goes for their guys.  Pastrnak in particular.    Tarasenko also fell under the 8-12% of overall cap when he was signed - it's just been a few years to make it more palatable.   Alex P is up... 

 

Don't think there is a magic formula for it other then a team (so far at least) maximizes its spending while their core guys are in their second deals for the most part.   As far as McKinnon goes it was fair value for what he'd achieved up until then, same with Pastrnak - it's also part of the reason why teams need to consider long term deals for the RFAs.  Bridge deals for stars can often back-fire - see Subban and Price.  If COL and Boston did bridges with those two .... they'd be in a heap of cap trouble right now or next season.  What TO has done is a total mess - should have hired someone else.  

 

On the flip side Benn is one of th worst contracts in hockey too right now (albeit his UGA deal).   Back to the no magic formula.   The only thing that bugs me is even though it's a cap world and there is too much discrepancies between teams like Vegas, Florida, TB and Dallas  buying power compared to teams on the opposite side of the tax spectrum.   But I can live with it considering none of those teams have won a cup under the cap either (ok maybe TB but I'm too lazy to check - think it might have been either the last team to win before it or the first one after the roll-backs).  

 

One thing i will say is both top heavy and well balanced caps have won - and no team has yet to win it without star power of some sort.  ROR-Tarasenko aren't chopped liver (and who knows maybe they wouldn't have made it past Vegas if the refs didn't screw them) .. WSH, PIT, CHI, LA, Boston etc...the only similarities were that CHI and LA won with guys mostly on their second deals.

[IBatch]

5 hours ago, Baer. said:

Richards was 5.75 and Carter was 5

 

Carter then re-signed for 5.27

 

7 mil is the new 5.75

 

That's a better example.

 

5.275M, pretty good example even though Chicago was pretty stacked at the time anyways. He put them over the top.

And that would also be close to 10% of the cap the year we went to the final...maybe things are the same as it ever was.  Crosbys money deal was also about the same percentage as McDavids 12.5 was when they both signed it - again same as it ever was.

[peaches5]

10 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

First let's establish parameters here: let's say in cases where teams acquire players who make(or immediately get signed to) 7 mill $ contracts(AAV), or higher. In terms of hit, this would constitute the star-superstar realm(particularly with MacKinnon making less). Many points:

 

1- Are these deals disappearing? Have GM's(& owners) decided the risk ain't worth it?

2- Is team composition changing? Having a player take up 8-12% of team spending limit, just trickles down weakness into your depth lines.

3- Blues & Bruins in last final seems to highlight this trending reality.

4- Did NJ BADDDly time things. Subban is a 9,000,000 $ lump, & the market for Hall might become a roadside kiosk. Dallas another textbook case study, for Xmas spending-exuberance.

5- Has the 4-6 mill/with term, heavy hitter, just gained influence in a new paradigm? If so, JB acquiring Miller might be cited as a GM textbook-masterpiece(with hindsight)

6- As for contracts, the Hogtown Leaves will probably be a neg lesson, for decades forward. UFAs can poison a well, just as quickly!

 

Posters, pls reference recent deals(perhaps past few seasons). Who has actually WON taking on big expenditures? Off the top of my noggin, would say ROR/StLoo is the obvious candidate, & last Dec(2018), apparently their GM was days from hosting a bloodybig yard sale(clearing house). They almost trashed the winning blueprint, emphasizing not to waver too quickly from a chosen route.

 

I feel there's a big lesson in all this, & believe JB(& co) are intimately aware. We're well positioned to change course, if need be.

Vegas got screwed over last year or they would have gone on a deep run into the playoffs, again. 

[Elias Pettersson]

The key to long term success is drafting.  You can't just sign a bunch of UFA's every year to maximum contracts and expect to be a contender for many years.  Eventually you will have cap issues and will have little to no depth.  Detroit was the best example of this where their drafting was top notch for over a decade and they won several cups as a result and made the playoffs 25 years in a row.

 

That looks to be Benning's plan for the most part.  Sure we've signed some UFA's where we have overpaid but for the most part our core are the guys we drafted.  Of course you eventually have to pay them if they turn out to be stars, so every team at some point will have cap issues.  But the key is to draft well so you have good secondary players at cheap contracts that can offset the high end guys getting paid the big bucks so you have enough depth to compete in the playoffs.

 

Looking at the Canucks we do have a few contracts that are higher than they should be for middle end depth players but we have several core players still on ELC's so it all balances out.  The key for Benning is to make sure that once Petey and Hughes get paid those expensive contracts for the middle end guys are off the books and those players are replaced with players we drafted who will be on cheap contracts. 

[Nuxfanabroad]

15 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Hughes and Petey are going to get some very sweet paycheques when their ELC's end. 

The trick is managing the cap. 

 

 

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

The key to long term success is drafting.  You can't just sign a bunch of UFA's every year to maximum contracts and expect to be a contender for many years.  Eventually you will have cap issues and will have little to no depth.  Detroit was the best example of this where their drafting was top notch for over a decade and they won several cups as a result and made the playoffs 25 years in a row.

 

That looks to be Benning's plan for the most part.  Sure we've signed some UFA's where we have overpaid but for the most part our core are the guys we drafted.  Of course you eventually have to pay them if they turn out to be stars, so every team at some point will have cap issues.  But the key is to draft well so you have good secondary players at cheap contracts that can offset the high end guys getting paid the big bucks so you have enough depth to compete in the playoffs.

 

Looking at the Canucks we do have a few contracts that are higher than they should be for middle end depth players but we have several core players still on ELC's so it all balances out.  The key for Benning is to make sure that once Petey and Hughes get paid those expensive contracts for the middle end guys are off the books and those players are replaced with players we drafted who will be on cheap contracts. 

Agree with you, gentlemen. It seems the draft batting % is taking on greater importance every yr. To have dancing, hard hitting, ELC/cheaper bridge top performers constantly shuffled into the deck is manna from Heaven. As you point out EP, as comparatively well paid vets age out, depth in top youth, makes for a low cost, seamless transition. These kids will have nicely ripened on a strong, high branch.

 

& when the word gets out?.. Presumably top talent youth(with great character) want to play with others of such standards, you'd have to think? When incoming talent sees the quality/depth of such a team, might they take a little less $ to stick around? 300-500k savings on many players, can make for some high quality 3rd & 4th lines(as there's more cap to round out a roster).

 

& should JB have to trade excess, drafted talent? This is likely another way stronger orgs maintain these 20, 30 yr PO-runs. Their traded excess almost always lands nice returns. Their drafting rep makes their assets quite attractive with GM peers.

[Nuxfanabroad]

This theory gains credence with the Shero firing. Subban acquisition..& maybe even Hall sale?

 

Also Stone & Pacc couldn't keep Gallant from the Humpty Dumpster-Fall.

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

This theory gains credence with the Shero firing. Subban acquisition..& maybe even Hall sale?

 

Also Stone & Pacc couldn't keep Gallant from the Humpty Dumpster-Fall.

Overpaid old guys are almost always bad news now in the cap era.  Look at Minnesota too.  We have LE.  These guys, more often than not, hurt their teams.