HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Washington Capitals
Notices

Free Agency IV (The Mattieuw Purrettu Super Sized Edition)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-20-2012, 11:32 AM
  #976
californiacapsfan
Registered Voter
 
californiacapsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berzerkeley, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brs03 View Post
But the salary cap's not there to ensure the fair distribution of talent. If it were, there'd be *significantly* stronger revenue sharing and/or a lower/nonexistent floor.

If you want a cap system that does work to distribute talent evenly, then pool all revenues and distribute them evenly (I know this will never happen). Other than localized issues like taxes and quality of life that would put everyone on a level playing field. Anything less is just half-measures at best because the have-nots really can't even afford to spend to the floor. Until you address that issue worrying about how the top talent is distributed is putting the cart before the horse, I think.

If a team is willing to take the hit later and is willing to put themself in a position where they have to retool because they've got aging guys with a bigger hit than they warrant (due to getting them cheaper early), I have no problem with that. They got a benefit earlier by being able to load up and, presumably, have better success early. They took a hit later by having to retool and, presumably, have less success later. Trading bad years for good years, if that's what they want to do, I can totally live with. Of course the really good GMs will try to keep consistently good by managing these deals more carefully, perhaps staggering them a bit.
This is not entirely true. Parity was a key goal for the league during the last CBA negotiations. I think the ability of teams to be competitive on the ice and in the FA market is something they at least claim to care a lot about. I suspect that the league will be looking to put a stop to these kind of shenanigans.

Mirtle tweeted about wanting to see a term limit. I don't know if I agree with that. I think, if a team and a player want to get married, they should be able to, but I don't believe they should be able to structure the deal in such a way as to circumvent the cap. Should be an interesting rest of the summer. I just hope there's hockey in a few months.

californiacapsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 11:38 AM
  #977
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by californiacapsfan View Post
This is not entirely true. Parity was a key goal for the league during the last CBA negotiations. I think the ability of teams to be competitive on the ice and in the FA market is something they at least claim to care a lot about. I suspect that the league will be looking to put a stop to these kind of shenanigans.

Mirtle tweeted about wanting to see a term limit. I don't know if I agree with that. I think, if a team and a player want to get married, they should be able to, but I don't believe they should be able to structure the deal in such a way as to circumvent the cap. Should be an interesting rest of the summer. I just hope there's hockey in a few months.
I think parity being a goal is a claim that's put in place to make fans of small market teams feel good about themselves. I think it's a totally empty one as long as the revenue gap continues to be as large as it is without being addressed somehow (and if they really do up revenue sharing this time through that'll help, probably significantly). You'll never have parity as long as you've got teams losing money while spending the bare minimum.

Agreed on term limits. Maybe put extra measures in place for retirement issues (when the cap hit applies and when not etc.) and adjust the limits for frontloading/backloading in conjunction with that, but if both sides want to commit heavily to each other might as well let them.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 11:42 AM
  #978
Ridley Simon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brs03 View Post
I think players are only going to keep player longer and longer as time goes on, so making it to 40 will become less and less of a barrier (and at that point it's rarely about the money).

That said, I think it shouldn't be very difficult to change the rules to put penalties in place on those kinds of deals that get triggered if the player retires. If that's the issue with those kinds of deals it can likely be addressed. I can't see parity as the issue with those types of deals because true parity isn't possible while the financial landscape of is so varied.
How? it'll be as arbitrary as Shanaban's punishment decisions. That simply wont work and will reek of favouritism anytime a Flyer, Rangers, Penguins team gets the benefits of that.

That will never happen, so it needs to be addressed up front, not "when the guy retires at 38 in their first year of 1m salary, and at year 11 of the contract".

Hell, any contract over 5 years in length should count towards the cap even if a player retires. If the player HAS to retire for medical reasons, then the team can lobby the league for a bogey. And "old age" is not a medical reason

Ridley Simon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 11:47 AM
  #979
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridley Simon View Post
How? it'll be as arbitrary as Shanaban's punishment decisions. That simply wont work and will reek of favouritism anytime a Flyer, Rangers, Penguins team gets the benefits of that.

That will never happen, so it needs to be addressed up front, not "when the guy retires at 38 in their first year of 1m salary, and at year 11 of the contract".

Hell, any contract over 5 years in length should count towards the cap even if a player retires. If the player HAS to retire for medical reasons, then the team can lobby the league for a bogey. And "old age" is not a medical reason
That's actually what I was thinking. Put a rule in place that "any contract over x years will count y% toward the cap if the player retires," for example. Maybe make an exemption for the final year of the deal or something like that. Maybe only make it to deals that take a player past 35 (since that's a cutoff everyone's familiar with), and maybe work out some sort of health exemption (although if the nature of LTIR doesn't change that wouldn't really be needed, because the guy's not going to want to retire and give up whatever he's owed).

Make the rules very clear from the get-go, so you know as soon as the deal is signed what to expect in the out years. Don't leave it up to the league or an arbitrator to decide. Let the team and player find a deal that they like, and let them take the risk in how they want to structure it.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 11:56 AM
  #980
californiacapsfan
Registered Voter
 
californiacapsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berzerkeley, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brs03 View Post
I think parity being a goal is a claim that's put in place to make fans of small market teams feel good about themselves. I think it's a totally empty one as long as the revenue gap continues to be as large as it is without being addressed somehow (and if they really do up revenue sharing this time through that'll help, probably significantly). You'll never have parity as long as you've got teams losing money while spending the bare minimum.

Agreed on term limits. Maybe put extra measures in place for retirement issues (when the cap hit applies and when not etc.) and adjust the limits for frontloading/backloading in conjunction with that, but if both sides want to commit heavily to each other might as well let them.
You may well be right. Maybe I'm just wishing that the NYRs and Flyers of the league would get a bit of a smack-down. On the other hand, Minny won the Parise and Suter sweeps, so clearly not all small market teams are struggling to compete. As I said, interesting few months ahead.

californiacapsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 11:59 AM
  #981
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by californiacapsfan View Post
You may well be right. Maybe I'm just wishing that the NYRs and Flyers of the league would get a bit of a smack-down. On the other hand, Minny won the Parise and Suter sweeps, so clearly not all small market teams are struggling to compete. As I said, interesting few months ahead.
All things considered, I don't know that MIN *should* be considered a small market team (the sellout streak, the whole "state of hockey" thing, etc.) But yes, that's encouraging.

I'd like to see the Flyers and Rags screwed too, but sometimes they're their own worst enemies so I still have fun with it as things are now.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 12:09 PM
  #982
californiacapsfan
Registered Voter
 
californiacapsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berzerkeley, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brs03 View Post
sometimes they're their own worst enemies so I still have fun with it as things are now.
This is very true. I would be not at all surprised if the Weber thing blows up in Holmgren's face one way or the other. I actually think he's the best cautionary tale WRT wanting GMGM to make a big splash. I'm no McPhee fan, but I see how Holmgren has largely screwed his team with the Pronger trade and signing (I know they got an SCF out of it, but...), the Carter/Richards trades, etc... He's always doing something big and flashy but he's rarely successful and often ends up looking a fool. Sather too, though he's skilled at unloading his mistakes on others, see: Gomez, Scott.

californiacapsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 12:10 PM
  #983
Stewie G
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,110
vCash: 500
Probably not the best idea, but maybe a starting point would be to use the method for calculating compensation for offer sheets. If you take the average of the X number of highest years or a percentage of that number. It's not a very well developed idea, but someone smart than me might be able to make something like that work.

Stewie G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 12:17 PM
  #984
ChibiPooky
Moderator
Caps/Avs/Bills fan
 
ChibiPooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Fairfax, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,037
vCash: 50
What about having it work like a buyout? Half the cap hit over twice the years unplayed or whatever.

ChibiPooky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 12:20 PM
  #985
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChibiPooky View Post
What about having it work like a buyout? Half the cap hit over twice the years unplayed or whatever.
Ooh, that'd be cool. That'd make you think twice about putting in multiple dummy years, because each one would add two years of a dead cap hit.

I'd toy with the idea of actually making it more than 100% of the player's cap hit as well, but only on the really big contracts where it's rather blatant.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 12:40 PM
  #986
ChibiPooky
Moderator
Caps/Avs/Bills fan
 
ChibiPooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Fairfax, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,037
vCash: 50
Other option I was thinking about is just to redefine 35+ to mean any contract that includes a season after the player turns 35. Again, leaves the team stuck with the cap hit.

ChibiPooky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 01:06 PM
  #987
californiacapsfan
Registered Voter
 
californiacapsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berzerkeley, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChibiPooky View Post
Other option I was thinking about is just to redefine 35+ to mean any contract that includes a season after the player turns 35. Again, leaves the team stuck with the cap hit.
This really makes sense - a simple change with a meaningful impact.

californiacapsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2012, 01:09 PM
  #988
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChibiPooky View Post
Other option I was thinking about is just to redefine 35+ to mean any contract that includes a season after the player turns 35. Again, leaves the team stuck with the cap hit.
I think the PA would knock it down unless you put in some kind of exception for reasonably short contracts. That would really damage the value of guys in their early/mid 30s looking for multi-year deals.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2012, 10:36 AM
  #989
BiPolar Caps
Emotionally Wounded!
 
BiPolar Caps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ref9 View Post
Which will happen first. Semin signs or the Joe Paterno statue is removed?
Well that's been answered.

BiPolar Caps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2012, 10:52 AM
  #990
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 39,816
vCash: 500
possible that semin doesnt sign til doan does

txpd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2012, 09:01 PM
  #991
Ridley Simon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,159
vCash: 500
Aucoin to the Leafs. Fun fun fun

Ridley Simon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2012, 10:39 PM
  #992
duffy9748
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by californiacapsfan View Post
This is very true. I would be not at all surprised if the Weber thing blows up in Holmgren's face one way or the other. I actually think he's the best cautionary tale WRT wanting GMGM to make a big splash. I'm no McPhee fan, but I see how Holmgren has largely screwed his team with the Pronger trade and signing (I know they got an SCF out of it, but...), the Carter/Richards trades, etc... He's always doing something big and flashy but he's rarely successful and often ends up looking a fool. Sather too, though he's skilled at unloading his mistakes on others, see: Gomez, Scott.
You think Holmgren screwed himself with the Richards/Carter deals? I think he did an amazing job. It gave Giroux a chance to grow and freed up all this money to make a Weber signing even possible. Not even taking those into account, he still got great return for them. I for one think Couturier will be a better player than Carter alone and they also got Voracek. Richards is a great player and is tough for anyone to trade but they got a younger version of him in Schenn who had a great playoff run and Simmonds who scored 28 goals this past season. If they sign Weber, there isn't a core in the league I'd take over theirs.

Giroux(23)
Couturier(19)
B. Schenn(21)
Voracek(22)
Simmonds(22)
Read(25)
Weber(26)
Coburn(26)
L. Schenn(22)

duffy9748 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2012, 12:12 AM
  #993
Mystlyfe
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 11,999
vCash: 500
Giroux could have "grown" as a 1C even with Richards and Carter still around. See Kopitar in Los Angeles (or even Giroux the season before).

While Schenn and Couturier certainly have very high potential, they have miles and miles to go before they're anywhere close to Richards or Carter. For all the praise Couturier gets as a defensive center, Richards and Carter were hardly slouches in that respect (Carter is very underrated defensively and Richards is a perennial top 10 Selke candidate). And with Richards and Carter inked for 10+ more seasons, it actually cost the Flyers years of team control of their core centers.

Pronger going to LTIR is the only reason they have the cash to go after Weber. The Richards trade was essentially salary neutral once you factor in Schenn's bonuses, and the cash freed up in the Carter deal was eaten up by Bryzgalov's contract (not to mention Voracek is still unsigned and is due for a raise). If they get Weber and Pronger is healthy this upcoming year, the Flyers will be significantly over the cap (even if they can unload Meszaros). Hell, depending on what happens with the CBA, they could very well be over the cap anyway.

And that core isn't going to be able to stay together for long unless the gut the supporting cast. Timonen and Hartnell are coming off the books next year, which will help them survive the raise that Voracek is getting this year and Simmonds will get next year. But the year after that will see Giroux, Couturier, and B. Schenn all hit RFA at the same time and well as Read becoming a UFA. Holmgren better work his ass off to get them signed before any other enterprising GM makes them an offer sheet after Holmgren's antics this year (Poile payback)? Even if he can avoid that, Giroux is going to command at least $7M almost regardless of what happens the next two seasons, while Brayden and Sean could pull in significant paychecks if they perform yet still a few million even if they're slow in developing.

Mystlyfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2012, 12:46 AM
  #994
SimplySensational
Heard of Hough
 
SimplySensational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: VA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,439
vCash: 888
Weber will continue the **** show in the playoffs.

SimplySensational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2012, 01:43 AM
  #995
californiacapsfan
Registered Voter
 
californiacapsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berzerkeley, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
Giroux could have "grown" as a 1C even with Richards and Carter still around. See Kopitar in Los Angeles (or even Giroux the season before).

While Schenn and Couturier certainly have very high potential, they have miles and miles to go before they're anywhere close to Richards or Carter. For all the praise Couturier gets as a defensive center, Richards and Carter were hardly slouches in that respect (Carter is very underrated defensively and Richards is a perennial top 10 Selke candidate). And with Richards and Carter inked for 10+ more seasons, it actually cost the Flyers years of team control of their core centers.

Pronger going to LTIR is the only reason they have the cash to go after Weber. The Richards trade was essentially salary neutral once you factor in Schenn's bonuses, and the cash freed up in the Carter deal was eaten up by Bryzgalov's contract (not to mention Voracek is still unsigned and is due for a raise). If they get Weber and Pronger is healthy this upcoming year, the Flyers will be significantly over the cap (even if they can unload Meszaros). Hell, depending on what happens with the CBA, they could very well be over the cap anyway.

And that core isn't going to be able to stay together for long unless the gut the supporting cast. Timonen and Hartnell are coming off the books next year, which will help them survive the raise that Voracek is getting this year and Simmonds will get next year. But the year after that will see Giroux, Couturier, and B. Schenn all hit RFA at the same time and well as Read becoming a UFA. Holmgren better work his ass off to get them signed before any other enterprising GM makes them an offer sheet after Holmgren's antics this year (Poile payback)? Even if he can avoid that, Giroux is going to command at least $7M almost regardless of what happens the next two seasons, while Brayden and Sean could pull in significant paychecks if they perform yet still a few million even if they're slow in developing.
I wasn't going to even bother, so thx.

Jeeze! I even forgot Bryz. So many big moves with no return.

californiacapsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2012, 05:55 AM
  #996
fedfed
Moderator
@FedFedRMNB
 
fedfed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow City
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
I don't see where to post it, so I'll post it here
Are Caps going to sign Sergei Kostenko? I believe he's not eligible to play in the CHL and it's been said in Russian media (Sports Daily) that he will play in North America (report came in right before the DevCamp). Can Bears sign him to an AHL-only deal with Caps keeping his NHL rights?

fedfed 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 02:30 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.