HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Out of Town Thread part XLVI All talk from around the league here

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-27-2012, 11:21 AM
  #76
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 20,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs 4 Life View Post
You must be another one with a clue like your buddy Carey Price. Oh and since it's cool. lol
I'm not sure I understand what you mean...I guess your trusty ol' calculator is only good for calculating cap hits...not for making sense.

417 is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 11:22 AM
  #77
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 34,128
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Of course cap space matters, just like pro player evaluation matters, just like amateur player evaluation matters, just like drafting matters, etc.

It's just with the cap being so high...it matters way less then it did before. Everyone who breaks out their calculators after any signing just makes me laugh...look at the Flyers, they're always spending near the cap, hell, no team spent more in player salaries last year than the Flyers...yet here they were ready to offer a single player a 14yr 110M deal.

Because of the cap floor, most teams are spending roughly the same on salaries...managing a salary cap is like a puzzle, some teams are better at it then others. But this idea that the salary cap can somehow handcuff teams, is a complete myth, if a team wants a certain player and that player wants to play for that team, it can happen.

For years all i've heard were terms like 'salary cap hell'...but I haven't seen one single team actually be in 'salary cap hell'.

For example, this idea that the Carolina Hurricanes were somehow able to sign Alexander Semin because they moved Tomas Kaberle last year is absolutely ludicrous. Makes no sense at all
They don't spend to the cap like some other team so yes every penny counts for teams like that

And Chicago wasn't in cap hell after winning the Cup?

Habs 4 Life is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 11:30 AM
  #78
Theosis
#freegalchenyuk
 
Theosis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DDO, Montreal
Country: Greece
Posts: 10,771
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Wasn't sure where to ask this but HabsProspects directed me to the board..

The flyers each summer have a sale with authentic jerseys of players who are no longer with the team and they are about 10 bucks each.. Do the canadiens do that? Would love to get a canadiens jersey
Not that I know of... If they do, then I would love to know as well... I'd have a lot more jerseys if that was the case, haha.

Theosis is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 11:30 AM
  #79
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 20,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs 4 Life View Post
They don't spend to the cap like some other team so yes every penny counts for teams like that

And Chicago wasn't in cap hell after winning the Cup?
The Carolina Hurricanes spent within the allowed limits of the cap just like all other 29 NHL teams last year....I don't get what you're saying?

Chicago? Cap hell?

Looks like they still have the nucleaus of their team, Jonathan Toews, Marian Hossa, Patrick Kane, Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Patrick Sharp...they're all still blackhawks.

So you're telling me they were in 'cap hell' because they had to trade Dustin Byfuglien and Andrew Ladd? lol...Oh God, must be the first time in history a team has to move some players after winning a Cup lol

Give me a break...

The Chicago Blackhawks are still a very healthy franchise today...if they're going through salary cap hell, then I would hope the same for the Habs

417 is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 11:31 AM
  #80
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,237
vCash: 500
Damn, a canadiens home jersey is one of the non flyers ones I want

Krishna is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 12:34 PM
  #81
McSorleyStick
GIJON !
 
McSorleyStick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 221B Baker Street
Posts: 17,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theosis View Post
Not that I know of... If they do, then I would love to know as well... I'd have a lot more jerseys if that was the case, haha.
They do it

McSorleyStick is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 01:41 PM
  #82
Steve Shutt
Don't Poke the Bear
 
Steve Shutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Colombia
Posts: 435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post

Chicago? Cap hell?

Looks like they still have the nucleaus of their team, Jonathan Toews, Marian Hossa, Patrick Kane, Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Patrick Sharp...they're all still blackhawks.

So you're telling me they were in 'cap hell' because they had to trade Dustin Byfuglien and Andrew Ladd? lol...Oh God, must be the first time in history a team has to move some players after winning a Cup lol

Give me a break...

The Chicago Blackhawks are still a very healthy franchise today...if they're going through salary cap hell, then I would hope the same for the Habs
You forgot to mention they also had to move that same summer: Ben Eager, Brent Sopel, Akim Aliu, Colin Fraser, Kris Versteeg, Bill Sweatt, Antti Niemi, and they had to deal with an offer sheet to Niklas Hjalmarsson because of their cap vulnerability. Not all great players, but cap pressure definitely resulted in a lot of transactions to get themselves under the cap for the following season.

Steve Shutt is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 02:08 PM
  #83
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 20,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Shutt View Post
You forgot to mention they also had to move that same summer: Ben Eager, Brent Sopel, Akim Aliu, Colin Fraser, Kris Versteeg, Bill Sweatt, Antti Niemi, and they had to deal with an offer sheet to Niklas Hjalmarsson because of their cap vulnerability. Not all great players, but cap pressure definitely resulted in a lot of transactions to get themselves under the cap for the following season.
So they lost some depth players (btw Aliu, Fraser, Sweatt weren't Haws when they won the Cup and I hardly call any of them big losses), in case you haven't noticed, there's alot of turnover on these types of players every year on every team, that has more to do with the reality of today's game, than it does with the Hawks being in 'salary cap hell'.

There's no such thing as salary cap hell...it's something fans and people in the media keep mentionning, but yet, teams keep spending money like it's going out of style. Every team has challenges EVERY summer to build their roster for the upcoming year, but all teams are allowed to spend up to the same amount of money (hell, it forces some teams to spend MORE), some GM's are better than others at managing those issues.

The Chicago Blackhawks yes had some cap issues to deal with following their Cup win, but it didn't stop them from keeping the nucleus of their team, ALL if not most of their key players are still there, hell, some of them have even re-signed richer deals.

To expect teams to not lose players anymore, in today's realilty, just isn't realistic...The hawks cap issues or not, weren't going to be able to hold on to ALL the talent they had when they won the Cup anyways...


Last edited by 417: 07-27-2012 at 02:16 PM.
417 is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 03:11 PM
  #84
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 34,128
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Shutt View Post
You forgot to mention they also had to move that same summer: Ben Eager, Brent Sopel, Akim Aliu, Colin Fraser, Kris Versteeg, Bill Sweatt, Antti Niemi, and they had to deal with an offer sheet to Niklas Hjalmarsson because of their cap vulnerability. Not all great players, but cap pressure definitely resulted in a lot of transactions to get themselves under the cap for the following season.
Just depth but forgot to mention that they haven't passed the 1st round since. Didn't affect them that much those plugs

Habs 4 Life is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 03:45 PM
  #85
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 13,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
The Carolina Hurricanes spent within the allowed limits of the cap just like all other 29 NHL teams last year....I don't get what you're saying?

Chicago? Cap hell?

Looks like they still have the nucleaus of their team, Jonathan Toews, Marian Hossa, Patrick Kane, Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Patrick Sharp...they're all still blackhawks.

So you're telling me they were in 'cap hell' because they had to trade Dustin Byfuglien and Andrew Ladd? lol...Oh God, must be the first time in history a team has to move some players after winning a Cup lol

Give me a break...

The Chicago Blackhawks are still a very healthy franchise today...if they're going through salary cap hell, then I would hope the same for the Habs
The Blackhawks barely made the playoffs after winning the Cup, and haven't gotten past the 1st round since their Cup...not rosy by any means...a good core group, one that I would love to have, but they are now just a good team, because of the cap issues...

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 06:14 PM
  #86
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
The Blackhawks barely made the playoffs after winning the Cup, and haven't gotten past the 1st round since their Cup...not rosy by any means...a good core group, one that I would love to have, but they are now just a good team, because of the cap issues...
What are you talking about? They have nobody to re-sign and they're about 8M away from the ceiling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post

There's no such thing as salary cap hell...it's something fans and people in the media keep mentionning, but yet, teams keep spending money like it's going out of style.
I think it's something that was true after the lockout, when we started at a 39M cap hit. Back then, yea, teams could end up in some cap hell. But nowadays, it's just not the case anymore.

Kriss E is online now  
Old
07-27-2012, 10:26 PM
  #87
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,320
vCash: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Of course cap space matters, just like pro player evaluation matters, just like amateur player evaluation matters, just like drafting matters, etc.

It's just with the cap being so high...it matters way less then it did before. Everyone who breaks out their calculators after any signing just makes me laugh...look at the Flyers, they're always spending near the cap, hell, no team spent more in player salaries last year than the Flyers...yet here they were ready to offer a single player a 14yr 110M deal.

Because of the cap floor, most teams are spending roughly the same on salaries...managing a salary cap is like a puzzle, some teams are better at it then others. But this idea that the salary cap can somehow handcuff teams, is a complete myth, if a team wants a certain player and that player wants to play for that team, it can happen.

For years all i've heard were terms like 'salary cap hell'...but I haven't seen one single team actually be in 'salary cap hell'.

For example, this idea that the Carolina Hurricanes were somehow able to sign Alexander Semin because they moved Tomas Kaberle last year is absolutely ludicrous. Makes no sense at all
Well, while we can't be certain that they were in cap hell, pretty sure we can't be certain they aren't as well. Some teams have their own cap. So yes, it is possible that some are more hesitant to spend their money on guys that don't deserve it than others. Yes, he gave all that money to Staal, yet pretty sure he thinks it's worth it. Did Semin signed there because Kaberle isn't there? Again, I guess we can say no. Do we know for sure though? What about an owner with "we already have 4 M$ on useless Kaberle, are we really going to spend 11 M$ on useless material if Semin doesn't deliver...". Nobody knows that. Yet, one thing is sure.....why would you get rid of the great Kaberle, which people in here love and adore, for an aging vet who is going UFA at the end of the year? If that's not to get rid of a salary...I don't know what is. For the Cap? For the sake of not paying a guy who's not delivering? All of those answers? I guess we won't know for sure.

So yes, teams do spend. But....what if the cap goes down? We'll see when it does? Okay...but I guess that teams that will be less in trouble when that happens are the ones who would have dealt with that accordingly. And frankly, if we take the Habs situation....we are not in cap hell? Subban to be signed...and if things doesn't work out....a Gomez and a Bourque who might be totally useless and almost AHL Material.....But will the Habs have the nerve to send Gomez in Hamilton? Or will he be a 4th liner PK specialist? And Bourque be on the 2nd line because we have nobody else or maybe because we can't acquire anybody else....So maybe not cap hell....but not cap friendly either.

I mean, there are a lot of things we don't know. And maybe a lot of non-decisions exist because the cap is there. So you won't exactly know, but maybe a team wants to improve and can't because of the cap. Is that considered cap hell?

Personnally, I have no problem spending close to the cap with a small cushion in case of. But my spending would be based on guys that deserve it. Until they deliver, to the cap and see if I care.

Whitesnake is online now  
Old
07-28-2012, 10:19 AM
  #88
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 20,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Well, while we can't be certain that they were in cap hell, pretty sure we can't be certain they aren't as well. Some teams have their own cap. So yes, it is possible that some are more hesitant to spend their money on guys that don't deserve it than others. Yes, he gave all that money to Staal, yet pretty sure he thinks it's worth it. Did Semin signed there because Kaberle isn't there? Again, I guess we can say no. Do we know for sure though? What about an owner with "we already have 4 M$ on useless Kaberle, are we really going to spend 11 M$ on useless material if Semin doesn't deliver...". Nobody knows that. Yet, one thing is sure.....why would you get rid of the great Kaberle, which people in here love and adore, for an aging vet who is going UFA at the end of the year? If that's not to get rid of a salary...I don't know what is. For the Cap? For the sake of not paying a guy who's not delivering? All of those answers? I guess we won't know for sure.

So yes, teams do spend. But....what if the cap goes down? We'll see when it does? Okay...but I guess that teams that will be less in trouble when that happens are the ones who would have dealt with that accordingly. And frankly, if we take the Habs situation....we are not in cap hell? Subban to be signed...and if things doesn't work out....a Gomez and a Bourque who might be totally useless and almost AHL Material.....But will the Habs have the nerve to send Gomez in Hamilton? Or will he be a 4th liner PK specialist? And Bourque be on the 2nd line because we have nobody else or maybe because we can't acquire anybody else....So maybe not cap hell....but not cap friendly either.

I mean, there are a lot of things we don't know. And maybe a lot of non-decisions exist because the cap is there. So you won't exactly know, but maybe a team wants to improve and can't because of the cap. Is that considered cap hell?

Personnally, I have no problem spending close to the cap with a small cushion in case of. But my spending would be based on guys that deserve it. Until they deliver, to the cap and see if I care.
Here's the thing WS, and not that I disagree with the general tone of your post...but ALL 30 NHL are allowed to spend the same amount of money and because of the cap floor, ALL 30 NHL teams need to spend a minimum amount of money. There's usually about a 12M-15M difference between teams who are at the cap ceiling and those at the bottom. So in essence, ALL teams are spending roughly the same amount on salaries.

The salary cap today (not 7 yrs ago when it was at 39M) does not exist to handcuff teams, it exists to allow ALL teams to compete financially with each other. Some teams are better at managing their cap situations than others, see the Philadelphia Flyers who are constantly spending up to the cap, yet always manage to acquire either via trade or signing, big ticket players...but that's not only because they manage their cap situation well (actually, it could be argued the Flyers are very reckless with their cap), but also because they've drafted well and have been aggressive on the trade market.

ALL teams have 'overpaid' players, there's no team in the NHL that's more frugal than the other (and certainly no award for being that team either ) but the best teams are able to offset that by having contributing players on entry-level deals or by having players other teams desire (M.Richards /J.Carter).

So obviously, i'm not advocating paying a 4th liner a max contract...but every type of player generally makes within the same range of money. Contrary to popular beliefe, salaries are very controlled. There's no 4th line goon making 4M, there's no shutdown center making 7M, just like there's no #1 center making 1M either...

Furthermore, this idea that teams have 'their' own internal salary cap is also not very well developped, because the salary cap essentially serves that purpose. The New York Islanders HAVE to spend to the salary cap floor, it doesn't matter if they have their 'own' cap...

Given today's reality, there's no such thing as immovable contracts...alot of people point to the Habs still having Scott Gomez on their roster, but why should he not be? Simply removing Scott Gomez from the Canadiens roster does not make them a better team, there's no guarantee that his departure would lead to the funds being properly reallocated, furthermore, you have to be able to re-allocate those funds in the first place.

For example, if Shane Doan wants 6M from the Habs, and the Habs desperately want Shane Doan...they can make it happen, several options are available, either trade or buyout or bury him in the minors. This idea that 'bad' contracts somehow handcuff teams is a total myth, and several examples of this are apparent over the years. I can point out a 'bad' contract on any of the Stanley Cup winning teams since the lockout.

417 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 10:31 AM
  #89
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 20,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
The Blackhawks barely made the playoffs after winning the Cup, and haven't gotten past the 1st round since their Cup...not rosy by any means...a good core group, one that I would love to have, but they are now just a good team, because of the cap issues...
So the Blackhaws barely made the playoffs and haven't gotten past the 1st round since their Cup? Ok, how can you quantify that by pointing to the salary cap??? The Hawks still have their core group, hell, they were able to re-sign some of them after the Cup....I don't get why people keep pointing to the Hawks, they are one of the healthiest franchises in the league today.

The Pittsburgh Penguins, since winning the Cup, went to the 2nd round the following year and haven't gotten past the 1st round since? Is that also because of the salary cap???

the Boston Bruins won the Cup last year, this year they got bounced in the 1st round, are you going to blame 'salary cap hell' for that too?

The NHL is a competitive league (that was the idea behind instituting a salary cap, parity)...Winning the Cup doesnt guarantee you're going to repeat the year after, hell, it's damn near impossible, and that's because the salary cap allows ALL teams to spend and not just the select few (though the select few still spend more than others)

417 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 10:41 AM
  #90
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,320
vCash: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Furthermore, this idea that teams have 'their' own internal salary cap is also not very well developped, because the salary cap essentially serves that purpose. The New York Islanders HAVE to spend to the salary cap floor, it doesn't matter if they have their 'own' cap...
But it does matter. Not talking about the fact that Isles' own cap might be lower than the floor. But it could certainly be in between the floor and the ceiling. 70 M$ versus 54 M$. Any chance a team has a 60 M$ salary cap of their own? Which makes every penny an important one. So OF COURSE, based on the 70M$ ceiling, they are not in a cap hell, but an owner who doesn't want to pay 'cause he's already losing a ton, might not want to use that 10 M$ the ceiling suggest. Just my point.

Thing is the Canes, with the Staal and the Semin signing, are still at 57 M$. Are they really going to spend to 70 M$? Then paying that much only serves 2 purposes. Getting better AND reaching the floor.....but it doesn't mean that they suddenly found more money and be spending it on Doan, Subban and everything else till 70 M$. They can still be in cap hell of their own very soon despite those signings. And my question is still legit....why would they get rid of such a good player in Kaberle? If his salary and his play wasn't at the same level. Solely for a hockey point of view? Kaberle did mention that a couple of weeks before he left, his play was picking up. Somehow, you do feel that at that time, it was a money issue.

Whitesnake is online now  
Old
07-28-2012, 10:52 AM
  #91
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 20,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
But it does matter. Not talking about the fact that Isles' own cap might be lower than the floor. But it could certainly be in between the floor and the ceiling. 70 M$ versus 54 M$. Any chance a team has a 60 M$ salary cap of their own? Which makes every penny an important one. So OF COURSE, based on the 70M$ ceiling, they are not in a cap hell, but an owner who doesn't want to pay 'cause he's already losing a ton, might not want to use that 10 M$ the ceiling suggest. Just my point.

Thing is the Canes, with the Staal and the Semin signing, are still at 57 M$. Are they really going to spend to 70 M$? Then paying that much only serves 2 purposes. Getting better AND reaching the floor.....but it doesn't mean that they suddenly found more money and be spending it on Doan, Subban and everything else till 70 M$. They can still be in cap hell of their own very soon despite those signings. And my question is still legit....why would they get rid of such a good player in Kaberle? If his salary and his play wasn't at the same level. Solely for a hockey point of view? Kaberle did mention that a couple of weeks before he left, his play was picking up. Somehow, you do feel that at that time, it was a money issue.
They got rid of Kaberle for primarily, performance issues...his performance didn't justify his salary. If Kaberle played up to his normal standards, he'd still be there obviously.

That's why I keep saying, there's no such thing as a 'bad contract'...when a player, plays well, no one cares about his salary. The salary only becomes an issue when the performance dips.

Take Erik Cole...last summer almost everyone thought the Habs overpaid and he had a 'bad contract'. He responds with a career high in goals and everyone today thinks it's a steal (further pointing to the fact that the perception of bad contracts is totally subjective). However, this coming year, IMO, it will be very difficult for Cole to improve on his career high in goals, so if he struggles a bit this coming year...does he go back to being a 'bad contract' and being overpaid?

That's my point...all this talk about who is overpaid or has a bad contract is nonsense. It doesn't matter, only thing that matters is the performance on the ice. Player salaries are just wages, they don't have nearly the effect on overall team performances that fans think they do.

417 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 11:41 AM
  #92
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,320
vCash: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
They got rid of Kaberle for primarily, performance issues...his performance didn't justify his salary. If Kaberle played up to his normal standards, he'd still be there obviously.

That's why I keep saying, there's no such thing as a 'bad contract'...when a player, plays well, no one cares about his salary. The salary only becomes an issue when the performance dips.

Take Erik Cole...last summer almost everyone thought the Habs overpaid and he had a 'bad contract'. He responds with a career high in goals and everyone today thinks it's a steal (further pointing to the fact that the perception of bad contracts is totally subjective). However, this coming year, IMO, it will be very difficult for Cole to improve on his career high in goals, so if he struggles a bit this coming year...does he go back to being a 'bad contract' and being overpaid?

That's my point...all this talk about who is overpaid or has a bad contract is nonsense. It doesn't matter, only thing that matters is the performance on the ice. Player salaries are just wages, they don't have nearly the effect on overall team performances that fans think they do.
But I always thought that was obvious. A player is never paid TOO much till he performs. When he doesn't perform at the standards of what other guys who are paid around that salary are doing, his salary is then called too high....but it is always based on performances. Believe both go together. Kaberle's salary did end up too high the day he wasn't performing up to standards. Yet, some were already stating that this contract made no sense based on the non-showing of Kaberle with the Bruins and that's WITHOUT the performances he put on with the Canes. So you can somewhat also determine how high a salary before the performances. See Gomez....As much better he could be, there is no way Gomez performs at a 7M$ rate. No way. Unless he goes back at 90 points which he's just unable to do anymore.

But usually it does equal performances. I mean even if it won't be his fault....just watch how Price will now be scrutinized and even more than he was if that's possible. But now....you can add a salary to his performances. He has now no choice but to STEAL games and almost singlehandidly (sorry...) win games and bring his team in the playoffs.

Also....players' salaries will always be more scrutinized on mediocre teams. You can have the most overpaid scrub on a cup winning team....people won't talk about it. You won. Just what matters. Till next year and if your team don't win and you still carry that plug well then he might hear about it....Also add the fact that we overanalyzed more in big markets like us and you have other reasons why there's so much talk about stuff like that.

Where I'll agree with you is that I just hope that the same people who continously bashes the overpaid people aren't the same ones who wants us to get a UFA guy. This is overpaid time. You don't want to overpay. You don't shop UFA's. ESPECIALLY not in Montreal. I'd overpaid for Doan. Believe he is what we need as far as type of player, character guy, leader and so on. Don't give him 10 years...but overpay him moneywise. Yet, it probably has to mean to make some moves though which I have no problem in doing as far as Gomez is concerned.


Last edited by Whitesnake: 07-28-2012 at 11:48 AM.
Whitesnake is online now  
Old
07-28-2012, 01:33 PM
  #93
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Here's the thing WS, and not that I disagree with the general tone of your post...but ALL 30 NHL are allowed to spend the same amount of money and because of the cap floor, ALL 30 NHL teams need to spend a minimum amount of money. There's usually about a 12M-15M difference between teams who are at the cap ceiling and those at the bottom. So in essence, ALL teams are spending roughly the same amount on salaries.

The salary cap today (not 7 yrs ago when it was at 39M) does not exist to handcuff teams, it exists to allow ALL teams to compete financially with each other. Some teams are better at managing their cap situations than others, see the Philadelphia Flyers who are constantly spending up to the cap, yet always manage to acquire either via trade or signing, big ticket players...but that's not only because they manage their cap situation well (actually, it could be argued the Flyers are very reckless with their cap), but also because they've drafted well and have been aggressive on the trade market.

ALL teams have 'overpaid' players, there's no team in the NHL that's more frugal than the other (and certainly no award for being that team either ) but the best teams are able to offset that by having contributing players on entry-level deals or by having players other teams desire (M.Richards /J.Carter).

So obviously, i'm not advocating paying a 4th liner a max contract...but every type of player generally makes within the same range of money. Contrary to popular beliefe, salaries are very controlled. There's no 4th line goon making 4M, there's no shutdown center making 7M, just like there's no #1 center making 1M either...

Furthermore, this idea that teams have 'their' own internal salary cap is also not very well developped, because the salary cap essentially serves that purpose. The New York Islanders HAVE to spend to the salary cap floor, it doesn't matter if they have their 'own' cap...

Given today's reality, there's no such thing as immovable contracts...alot of people point to the Habs still having Scott Gomez on their roster, but why should he not be? Simply removing Scott Gomez from the Canadiens roster does not make them a better team, there's no guarantee that his departure would lead to the funds being properly reallocated, furthermore, you have to be able to re-allocate those funds in the first place.

For example, if Shane Doan wants 6M from the Habs, and the Habs desperately want Shane Doan...they can make it happen, several options are available, either trade or buyout or bury him in the minors. This idea that 'bad' contracts somehow handcuff teams is a total myth, and several examples of this are apparent over the years. I can point out a 'bad' contract on any of the Stanley Cup winning teams since the lockout.
Doan isn't signing anywhere for $6M. The Habs are out of it (thank God).

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 02:02 PM
  #94
Analyzer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Renfrew, ON.
Country: Canada
Posts: 44,747
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Wasn't sure where to ask this but HabsProspects directed me to the board..

The flyers each summer have a sale with authentic jerseys of players who are no longer with the team and they are about 10 bucks each.. Do the canadiens do that? Would love to get a canadiens jersey
They might at the bell centre shop, but not anywhere else I'm aware of.

Where do you get the Flyers' one ?

Analyzer is offline  
Old
07-29-2012, 12:18 PM
  #95
Theosis
#freegalchenyuk
 
Theosis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DDO, Montreal
Country: Greece
Posts: 10,771
vCash: 50


Brown grocery shopping with the Cup.

Theosis is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 02:29 PM
  #96
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,618
vCash: 500
Just curious, what do you guys think the odds of the NHL folding the coyotes, dividing up its remaining assets/players amongst the other teams and using last seasons rankings as the order in which teams get to take?

If we could snag Gormley, Larsson or Yandle that would be amazing.

OneSharpMarble is online now  
Old
07-30-2012, 02:40 PM
  #97
Paul Dipietro
Registered User
 
Paul Dipietro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
Just curious, what do you guys think the odds of the NHL folding the coyotes, dividing up its remaining assets/players amongst the other teams and using last seasons rankings as the order in which teams get to take?

If we could snag Gormley, Larsson or Yandle that would be amazing.
Probably much lower than selling the team and relocating to either Seattle, Vegas or Quebec City

Paul Dipietro is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 02:49 PM
  #98
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Dipietro View Post
Probably much lower than selling the team and relocating to either Seattle, Vegas or Quebec City
They would make a pile of cash just selling expansion franchises to those cities than relocating Phoenix. Also are any of those cities ready for a team? Quebec needs a new arena no?

OneSharpMarble is online now  
Old
07-30-2012, 03:48 PM
  #99
vokiel
Nothing blind
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 8,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
They would make a pile of cash just selling expansion franchises to those cities than relocating Phoenix. Also are any of those cities ready for a team? Quebec needs a new arena no?
I think all the cities mentioned need an Arena. One city not usually mentioned however already has one and IIRC was built for the purpose of getting an NHL/NBA team: Kansas City.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_Center

vokiel is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 04:03 PM
  #100
Frozenice
the random dude
 
Frozenice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
They would make a pile of cash just selling expansion franchises to those cities than relocating Phoenix. Also are any of those cities ready for a team? Quebec needs a new arena no?
Other than a franchise in Southern Ontario I don't see any reason for anyone to pony up the going price for an expansion franchise with several present teams on the ropes, that could end up selling their teams at a much cheaper price. Winnipeg waited at least 5 years to get their franchise, I doubt new cities will have to wait that long - unless, of course, the owners get the players to cave completely.

Frozenice is online now  
Closed Thread

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 11:00 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.