HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

How to Spend $56.5 million

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-05-2008, 04:30 PM
  #26
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrodo Baggins View Post
I like the concept of this but only if you are looking in very general terms. ei.

Forwards - x dollars
Defense - x dollars
goalies - x dollars

I think that too many variables come into play when you are looking at it line by line.
There is an argument that I think makes sense that has the top 6 forwards in one pile (primary objective offence) and the bottom 8 in another with the defence divided into a top 4 and bottom 3 based upon expectations.

I guess all I was trying to do was frame the discussion about how much guys can make and what expectations are if they are making that much.

If I had to do this I would have a big chart on the wall and colour coding for my outperformers and underperformers based upon an average salary and slot given to each guy. And I would be using it to explain to Kevin that he cannot overpay Glencross because all those other guys on the chart slotted to play bottom 6 minutes are already overpaid so there is no more bottom 6 overpays available to the team as it now stands.

theoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 04:33 PM
  #27
Heavy Fuel
 
Heavy Fuel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Canuckistan
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marchantfan View Post
Great discussion and analysis in this thread. It almost doesn't belong on HFBoards

FWIW, the Red Wings model essentially views goaltenders as spare parts. I guess the idea is that you spend on quality defense and forward depth and buy average goaltending on the cheap. Personally, especially given the short-term success of guys like Garon, Legace, Mason, Ellis, etc., I think that a rotating door of 2-year 1.5M contracts for keepers isn't a terrible strategy if you have the nuts in the other positions.
I am interested in this topic myself, so glad to see it. I do disagree with the Wings going for "spare parts" goaltenders being a model to follow for everyone. The Wings have been the domininant team for the last decade, and with better goaltending would likely have a few more Cups to brag about. When the Oilers and other lower seeds knocked them out early, the Wings had the second best goaltending.

I don't think you can make a hard & fast rule about the salary structure, because it doesn't account for some of the intangibles. With Edmonton being a place that has experienced difficulties acquiring players, it has had to pay a premium for their "home boys". If the team doesn't have bona-fide superstars, maybe they need to beef up their other units and go with more of a regular line rotation.

If you can contain or limit the other team's scoring, can your souped up bottom six tip the balance on the scoresheet? With a mobile defense & good goaltending, I think you can compete with the top heavy teams, and win. Without the elite talent level here in Edmonton, maybe a more balanced line-up is the only realistic option.

The big failure with that line-up is in crucial situations when the best of the opposition gets heavy minutes. In short term situations, a talent rich top end can end up shredding your lesser lines in times of double shifting. Over a regular season, though, I think a balanced system would get you a good playoff position.

Heavy Fuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 04:44 PM
  #28
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
I wouldn't worry too much about having to give the kid line new deals. Gagner and Cogliano are both under contract until the 10/11 season. At that time, Torres and Pisani's contracts are up, Souray's NMC will have expired, and Staios will be on the last year of his contract. Staios and Moreau will be off the books when Nilsson is due for another deal, as will Stoll assuming he gets no more than 3 years on this next contract (which I don't think he will).

Plus, that's 2 and 3 years from now. Lots of movement can happen in the roster over that time, and there's no telling where the cap will be either.
Agreed. Hopefully over that time salary grid can start to line up closer to our actuals as this team has more success and players want to come here or stay here more than in the past.

theoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 05:33 PM
  #29
Scrodo Baggins
Registered User
 
Scrodo Baggins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E-Town
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,078
vCash: 500
I would be interested to see if there is some sort of 'magic ratio' that shows the 'perfect balance' between expenditures on forwards : defense : goaltending.

Maybe compare the Stanley cup winning teams or the President's trophy winning teams and contrast them to the last placed teams over the last 10 years.

Damn!! Now i have to look into this!!!!

Scrodo Baggins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 06:06 PM
  #30
Petro Points
Registered User
 
Petro Points's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,343
vCash: 885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrodo Baggins View Post
I like the concept of this but only if you are looking in very general terms. ei.

Forwards - x dollars
Defense - x dollars
goalies - x dollars

I think that too many variables come into play when you are looking at it line by line.

!!
i would take another step back and not look at positions at all ...

IMO you need 2-3 star players to win the championship.
Thats

2 x stars @ 7M = 14M

5 x good players @ 4M = 20M

6 x role players @ 2M = 12M

9 x fillers\4th liners\pb\backup goalies\entry level @ 1M = 9M

22 players @ 55M

Problem with EDM is that we are paying our good players 5.6M instead of 4M and role players 2.7M \ 2.4M \ 2.5M (pisani,staios,stoll,torres) instead of 2M. This is stopping us from getting the 2 star players that we need in order to be anywhere close to the cup.


Last edited by Petro Points: 06-05-2008 at 06:14 PM.
Petro Points is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 10:49 PM
  #31
Oilerdiehard
Registered User
 
Oilerdiehard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
Easy. Torres, Stoll, and Pisani becomes your 2nd line.

Torres - Stoll - Pisani (7.5M)
I think you may be off on your total. I am not sure what Stoll will re-sign for but I am assuming it will be for at least what he made last year. Which would bring it in at about 8M.

I am a fan of all 3 players. But let's just say we tried to death in recent years to make a 2nd line of Torres and Stoll. Stoll the year before his injury was putting up numbers but Torres has been floundering in that role for quite some time. Neither Stoll or Raffi can pass worth a damn. So having them together on a scoring line is a tried and true poor idea IMO. Unless you are saying that is basically our 3rd line even though for money purposes it is really our 2nd line in the grid?

Unless I am mistaken this still has to put a 2 million dollar man in Moreau on your 4th so it still keeps the original grid out of whack. Unless you have another 4th smaller contract in the top 6 to replace Moreau with as well?

One would almost think if you were really sticking to the grid one of the 2 million dollar men (Torres, Stoll, Pisani, Moreau) has to go for a cheaper (by half or more) replacement.


Last edited by Oilerdiehard: 06-05-2008 at 10:59 PM.
Oilerdiehard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 12:05 AM
  #32
misfit
Moderator
 
misfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of...everything
Posts: 15,577
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilerdiehard View Post
I think you may be off on your total. I am not sure what Stoll will re-sign for but I am assuming it will be for at least what he made last year. Which would bring it in at about 8M.
Pisani makes 2.5M and Torres makes 2.25M, that leaves 2.75M for Stoll. Obviously I don't know what he'll sign for, but 2.75M doesn't seem unreasonable, and stil 550K more than he made last year.

Quote:
I am a fan of all 3 players. But let's just say we tried to death in recent years to make a 2nd line of Torres and Stoll. Stoll the year before his injury was putting up numbers but Torres has been floundering in that role for quite some time. Neither Stoll or Raffi can pass worth a damn. So having them together on a scoring line is a tried and true poor idea IMO. Unless you are saying that is basically our 3rd line even though for money purposes it is really our 2nd line in the grid?
Torres-Stoll-Pisani was our best line last year before Pisani's illness and Stoll's concussion. Torres and Pisani were also 2/3 of one of our most effective lines during the playoffs. Torres also lead our team is ES scoring last year, and had a ****** start before getting hurt this year. He hasn't been anywhere near as bad as everyone on this board has been going on about for the past 7-8 months.

As for the grid, it doesn't screw up anything. While the kids are still affordable, the Torres-Stoll-Pisani line gets paid as the 2nd line (they'll likely have the 2nd most ES minutes anyway), and when the kids need to be given new contracts, they'll be the new 2nd line, and the STP line either gets moved, walk as free agents, sign for less, or one or two of them stay, and the others are replaced with cheaper players (likely Brodziak moves up the depth chart). Lots can happen in the time it takes for Gagner, Cogliano, and Nilsson's contracts to run out.

Quote:
Unless I am mistaken this still has to put a 2 million dollar man in Moreau on your 4th so it still keeps the original grid out of whack. Unless you have another 4th smaller contract in the top 6 to replace Moreau with as well?
Theoil's template had 4M allocated for the 4th line and PB. What difference does it make if one of those players makes half of it? Storts and Brodziak are only making 500K, and Reasoner (assuming he's the PB guy) probably won't make more than 1M.

__________________
If you are offended by this post, it's probably because you're ugly.
misfit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 01:13 AM
  #33
Oilerdiehard
Registered User
 
Oilerdiehard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,458
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
Pisani makes 2.5M and Torres makes 2.25M, that leaves 2.75M for Stoll. Obviously I don't know what he'll sign for, but 2.75M doesn't seem unreasonable, and stil 550K more than he made last year.



Torres-Stoll-Pisani was our best line last year before Pisani's illness and Stoll's concussion. Torres and Pisani were also 2/3 of one of our most effective lines during the playoffs. Torres also lead our team is ES scoring last year, and had a ****** start before getting hurt this year. He hasn't been anywhere near as bad as everyone on this board has been going on about for the past 7-8 months.

As for the grid, it doesn't screw up anything. While the kids are still affordable, the Torres-Stoll-Pisani line gets paid as the 2nd line (they'll likely have the 2nd most ES minutes anyway), and when the kids need to be given new contracts, they'll be the new 2nd line, and the STP line either gets moved, walk as free agents, sign for less, or one or two of them stay, and the others are replaced with cheaper players (likely Brodziak moves up the depth chart). Lots can happen in the time it takes for Gagner, Cogliano, and Nilsson's contracts to run out.



Theoil's template had 4M allocated for the 4th line and PB. What difference does it make if one of those players makes half of it? Storts and Brodziak are only making 500K, and Reasoner (assuming he's the PB guy) probably won't make more than 1M.
Brain fart on my part on the first part and you are correct.

I think you mean 2 seasons ago with Torres. His season the year prior was not that horrible production wise (though how fantastic is 34 points while playing in the top 6?). I think some including myself get caught up in the fact that we all expect him to be a goal scorer for us like he was in the past. To them anything much under 25 goals is poor for him. I have been expecting a minimum of 20+ myself and even made the bold statement last Summer he would be around 25 goals again and was obviously disappointed with his what was it 12 or 13 goal pace? My confidence in his offense abilities is dwindling but that is a bit off topic.

As for the ES scoring the year before it was solid and he did lead the team. Though you have to admit as a whole our team was pretty atrocious at ES and if Hemsky had been healthy I think it is safe to say he probably would have passed Torres. Even Stoll who gets pummeled on here for being horrible at ES was not that far behind despite playing 31 less games.

It may also be worth mentioning that among players that played 40 games or more. Torres logged the 4th most ES ice time on team among all forwards with three of his competitors in the top 5 for most ES points being three guys not always noted for ES production such as Hemsky, Lupul and Sykora. Hemsky & Sykora had nearly as many ES points as Torres and as mentioned Hemmer may have passed him by if he was healthy. So in a way the only real contender he surpassed was Horcoff who obviously had a poor year production wise at ES.

How did Torres make out that year on the PP while soaking up almost 2 minutes per game on the man advantage? All of 1 point. Though he did show improvement this past season on the PP. He had 2 points in only 30+ games while eating up close to 3 minutes of PP time per game. I am getting off topic again but the moral of the story is MacT needs to keep Torres off the power play.

As for not messing up the grid. You could look at it that way (and to be honest my view is closer to yours but for discussion purposes I am playing devil's advocate here) but this whole discussion seemed to be sparked by comments from the Oil brass. Which were saying a 4th liner (ie - Glencross) making 1+ million on the 4th line is going to throw things out of whack. So by default if that is a hard and fast statement then having a 4th liner making 2 million (Moreau) should really throw it out of whack.


Last edited by Oilerdiehard: 06-06-2008 at 05:34 PM.
Oilerdiehard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 06:21 AM
  #34
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil View Post
The Red Wings got a lot of offence from Lidstrom and Rafalski this year too. They combined for 125 points on a team that scored 250 goals. And the Red Wings made their choice. $13.6 tied up in those two players who help lower the need for an elite goalie and also pump up the offence.

Another thing to add in here. If you look at the Wings and their 250 goals and where they came from compared to a 'normal' distribution.

If you assume that 250 GF and a plus 40 for the team will make you a top 8 team in this league then what does every position have to give you for the money you are paying.

Top 3 players average 25 goals = 75 goals
Second 3 avg. 20 goals = 60
3rd 3 avg. 15 goals = 45
4th 3 avg 10 goals =30

That gives you 210 and lets say your PB guys give you another 10 between them so you have 220 of the goals you need to be a top team.

That means your dmen only have to average 5 goals each and so if Gilbert gets 10 then Greene doesn't need to score.

1st pairing = 16 goals
2nd pairing = 10 goals
3rd pairing = 4 goals

You have your 'normal' distribution.

But they also need to be plus players.

If you are to be a top 8 team you need to be about +40 minimum or .5 goals for better per game than goals against.

Assuming that your PP and PK are a sawoff against other teams (I don't know how to do this otherwise) then the 5 guys on the ice for the extra 40 goals all get a plus for a total of +200 across the team.

There is a lot of talk on this board all the time about the 2nd line soft minutes having to outscore while the #1 line has to hold its own but on a top 8 team I think everybody has to be a little better than the guy they play opposite of.

So maybe those 200 PLUS points look something like this.

Top 3 = +66 or +22 each
2nd 3 = +33 or +11 each
3rd 3 = +15 or +5 each
4th 3 = +9 or +3 each

Top pairing = 50 or +25 each
2nd pairing = 26 or +13 each
3rd pairing = 0 or even each

This gives you the 200 + points divided by the five guys on the ice for each goal so that the team has a 40 goal surplus at the end of the season.

So in this hypothetical model you will have a top 8 team scoring 250 goals for and 210 goals against.

A top 3 forward will average $5.33 mil per year and score 25 goals with a plus/minus of +22 and so forth.

As your team moves forward and at the end of every year you then take your actual player and compare him to the model knowing that the +/- is a team stat to see if you have an over performer or underperformer in that position mentally adding on extras like leadership, grit etc. and subtracting soft or pain in the ass.

And this, I think, is how a team goes about spending their money.
I started a thread on NHL salaries. I will be posting some data on goal scoring vs
salary for forwards. If you factor in your salary distribution then it turns out that
your numbers for goals are remarkably similar to what actually happens in an NHL season.

What is interesting to me is that you claim that your top linee forwards would average $5.33 M and 25 goals. Around here their seems to be a feeling that 25 goals does not even merit $4M never mind $5.3. You may be happy to know that last year forwards earning between $5-5.5M averaged 24.16 goals.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 06:40 AM
  #35
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilerfan17 View Post
The whole point of spending more on defense is to get good players playing all throughout the defense. Having guys who would normally be 1B pairing guys playing second pairing and guys who would normally be second pairing playing third pairing is a huge advantage, but it is expensive. That's why the salaries in each pairing is well above average, because, well, the players are well above average.
I don't have a problem with this. None of these formulas are written in stone. What they serve to do is to show us that if you put more money in one area it has to come out of another. While this might seem like common sense, too often in the
discussions that take place about individuals this is ignored.

Personally I would be very happy to keep the current defence, even though they are
expensive. But then you cannot expect to keep Stoll, Torres, Pisani, and Moreau, throw $1.8M to Glencross and go after Hossa. (I am not saying that you proposed this be done but there are those that would.) Moreover, the fact that the Oilers are looking at a number of their defencemen being on the first couple of years of long term contracts means that their numbers will be skewed to the high side. If you discount the long term deals from their midpoint it gives you a better idea of the actual present value. In this case the Oilers number is actually closer to the
model the theoil suggested.

The Glencross debate highlights this thread very well. There are many that think that the Oilers are being cheap denying Glencross the extra $3-5K he is asking for. In fact, given his expected role on the team the discussion in this thread suggest a max of about $1.2M no matter which of the suggested models one uses.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 05:00 PM
  #36
Finger Post
Registered User
 
Finger Post's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil View Post
One of the more interesting comments from the Oiler’s front office this past week or so referred to their ‘salary grid’.
Not. A. Good. Sign.

I like your post because I probably have sketched a similar sort of template 10 times. Now, I consider such things fun but too close to a waste of time. There are unlimited numbers of ways of putting together a winning team. What you (should) spend totally depends upon what you have and what the market value is for players. Pegging idealizations does not help in this consideration.

Finger Post is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 05:13 PM
  #37
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
What is interesting to me is that you claim that your top linee forwards would average $5.33 M and 25 goals. Around here their seems to be a feeling that 25 goals does not even merit $4M never mind $5.3. You may be happy to know that last year forwards earning between $5-5.5M averaged 24.16 goals.
I've been reading your thread and almost posted my ramblings in there but didn't want to hijack what you were doing.

As for my lucky guessing? Well, it ain't rocket science is it. In this respect pretty much every business is the same. You have 'x' amount to spend and it needs to accomplish 'y'. Then you go shopping.

theoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 05:16 PM
  #38
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finger Post View Post
Pegging idealizations does not help in this consideration.
You 'peg idealization' or create a template so that you can have easy access to refer to as you chart your own course. That is all they are ever for. If you don't do something like this, however, you end up paying a 4th line winger 1.8 mil before realizing that you can now not afford a 2nd line centre.

theoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-07-2008, 05:22 AM
  #39
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil View Post
I've been reading your thread and almost posted my ramblings in there but didn't want to hijack what you were doing.

As for my lucky guessing? Well, it ain't rocket science is it. In this respect pretty much every business is the same. You have 'x' amount to spend and it needs to accomplish 'y'. Then you go shopping.
I would have been happy had you posted in the other thread. The discussion here would have fit very well. I am posting the info so the few of us who are interested in this stuff will have some basic stats to look at.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-07-2008, 02:03 PM
  #40
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
I would have been happy had you posted in the other thread. The discussion here would have fit very well. I am posting the info so the few of us who are interested in this stuff will have some basic stats to look at.
I am happy to have a mod merge the threads if they can at this point.

theoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:27 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.