HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Does Bergevin have to sign PK Subban before the season start ?

View Poll Results: should bergy sign PK before the season start ?
yes 76 32.20%
no 67 28.39%
it doesn't matter 93 39.41%
Voters: 236. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-22-2013, 10:26 AM
  #576
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
My stance has more to do with playing hardball in contract negotiations than an absolute strategy. Unlike other sports, in the NHL the cap is extremely structured and there is little wiggle room and no forgiveness for bad contracts. With the ability to hide money in the AHL gone it is more important than ever to be prudent with long term signings. Bergevin's plan may very well become the standard before too long as previous management methods may be too risky for the rigidity of the current CBA. Asking me to site previous examples of this method is kind of misleading as the landscape has just recently changed....let's give teams some time to see if this isn't considered "best practice" moving forward.

That's fair. It's a far cry from 'that's how winners are built', and I agree with the bulk of your post.

p.s. Another team that seems to like to give out bridge contracts is the Avalanche. We'll have to wait and see if their strategy, like Bergevin's, pans out.

Dr Gonzo is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:26 AM
  #577
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
Sure I can, especially in this case, because the post I originally responded to was focusing on this one commonality. (Contract control)

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, no?

I'm open to discussing the other factors, but that wasn't the subject at hand.

I still think salary structure is fairly important for winning teams, which you seem to disagree with (IIRC), but I think that's probably a good subject for another thread.
If you want to go that route? I guess....but we both know there are other, much more important and influential factors at play here, and these factors seemed to have gotten lost in the wash over the years with the advent of fans turning into capologists.

Furthermore, I don't disagree that salary structure is important for winning teams, and any team really (oddly enough, some are criticizing MB for trying to institute a salary structure, but I digress...), but salaries can be offset. There are ways teams can get around some of the limits of the salary cap (see Rangers, Flyers, Pens, Bruins). When you have a lot of assets, acquired via trade or draft, the salary cap might as well not exist as far as i'm concerned.

But you can't get away with not drafting/developing well, or making awful trades, or not choosing the right coaching staff and having a poor GM. Those things are insurmountable.

The salary cap is

417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:31 AM
  #578
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
If you want to go that route? I guess....but we both know there are other, much more important and influential factors at play here, and these factors seemed to have gotten lost in the wash over the years with the advent of fans turning into capologists.
s
I've noticed that some people almost seem insulted when fans discuss the cap and it's implications moving forward. Not you in particular, but it's a vibe I get from a lot of posters that are entrenched in their view of the team. It seems to be viewed as a slight towards our general manager.

I get that none of us are MIT graduated, but it's almost as if discussing the cap & our team's use of it is taboo. I constantly read appeals to authority along the lines of "dont worry about that, you aren't in charge..." which is a weird way of dismissing an argument.

Of course, I disagree with that, especially on a Habs board. It's made for opining.

And honestly, I'm not commenting on what you said in particular, just a vibe I get when discussing the cap on here. I might be way off though.

Dr Gonzo is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:34 AM
  #579
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
That's fair. It's a far cry from 'that's how winners are built', and I agree with the bulk of your post.

p.s. Another team that seems to like to give out bridge contracts is the Avalanche. We'll have to wait and see if their strategy, like Bergevin's, pans out.
Glad we can agree.....Now I can bail out and join the masses in our quest for meaning.

Estimated_Prophet is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:35 AM
  #580
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Glad we can agree.....Now I can bail out and join the masses in our quest for meaning.
The cake is a lie.

Dr Gonzo is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:35 AM
  #581
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
I've noticed that some people almost seem insulted when fans discuss the cap and it's implications moving forward. Not you in particular, but it's a vibe I get from a lot of posters that are entrenched in their view of the team. It seems to be viewed as a slight towards our general manager.

I get that none of us are MIT graduated, but it's almost as if discussing the cap & our teams use of it is taboo. I constantly read appeals to authority along the lines of "dont worry about that, you aren't in charge..." which is a weird way of dismissing an argument.

Of course, I disagree with that, especially on a Habs board. It's made for opining.

And honestly, I'm not commenting on what you said in particular, just a vibe I get when discussing the cap on here. I might be way off though.
I don't take anything on here personally...so really, it's all good

But to address your post, I see where you're coming from. But really, as fans, from where we sit. Do you really think we understand the entire picture of a teams salary structure?

I think some fans are looking at a huge landscape using a micro lense, and some think that gives them the entire picture.

I think it's ok to discuss the management of the salary cap...but when it gets to the 'doom & gloom' portion of arguing, that's when I can't take it and really, as it relates to Subban and his upcoming deal, that's a lot of what i've seen (not saying you specifically either)

417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:35 AM
  #582
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,033
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Actually, i'd argue that it's almost as closed to guaranteed that it turns out to be meaningless.

Which makes the whole debate about his salary, as i've been saying from the beginning, completely arbitrary.
relativist thinking has it's place, though makes holding an opinion on either side of the equation a bit pointless (so then why even contribute?)

impossible for it to be meaningless, since every single roster/contract decision afterward is by default affected (since the remaining cap space to work with influences every other contract signing or player target).

how meaningful it is will be difficult -near impossible, to determine. anticipating Subban's cap hit for next year undoubtably has already influenced UFA, trade & internal contract decisions, & will impact contract negotiations with impending RFA's/UFA's.

how much different/impact it will have compared to if Subban was on contract for another 2-4 years at a known cap hit is pretty impossible to know, even for MB himself...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Value of 'good signings'

That's often quite subjective...fan A might think a contract is good value, fan B might think the player is overpaid

Neither is right and in the end, neither really matters.

There are many reasons why a team wins a Cup, the salary renumeration of their players ranks somewhere near the bottom
of course it's subjective... I'd argue "always".

nothing "really" matters, but again, relativism doesn't have much place here.

in a cap system, salary implications play a HUGE role in a teams ability to win a cup, that much is hard to argue i would think...

deadline additions are completely constrained and guided by both immediate and future cap implications, which massively changes/influences the make-up of teams going into the playoffs.

ditto the offseason impact of playoff performances. every year teams with deep playoff runs end up losing a guy or 2 that had a great playoffs which pushed his UFA market value outside of their cap limitations. Salary factors greatly affect the ability for teams to keep rosters intact & force them into calculated short vs. long term roster decisions which have, i would suggest, a greater impact on their competitive ability than any other single factor.

could not disagree with you more in this instance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
The irony here is too good to ignore lol

Gainey has been vilified on this board for just handing out money like candy

Now we've got MB who's doing the opposite (at least in relation to Subban) and he's ben knocked for it

Like I been saying...you guys are just looking for something, anything to complain.

There will always be a segment of the fanbase who think they know best and the guy running the show is clueless.
or perhaps, it's that some of us don't view situations as black/white?

it isn't "always" a good decision to give out big long contracts, just like is isn't "always" a good decision to play it conservative with contracts.

Gainey was more vilified for the players he chose to throw money at, and how poorly his cap-spending team was assembled, than for the sheer fact that he spent money.

the 09 summer of blunder was a problem not because he spent a lot of money, it was a problem because he tied up ~19M$ for long-term on 3 players who were all of the same diminutive physical stature, and none of which where at an elite, or even all-star, level of performance.

Don't think anyone would have complained or critiqued (at least not beyond the first glimpse of performance) had he spent that same ~19M$ on Chara/Gaborik/Hossa (not implying he could have landed them, we know he tried on Hossa, just using those three as an example of ~19M$ spent by other teams during his tenure that would have been applauded here as opposed to the, justifiably, ridiculed Cammy-Gomez-Gionta trio we ended up with for the same price).

of course the fan base will always have opposing view points... GM's & other hockey "experts" across the league disagree just as much. No surprise there I would think?

Where MB went "policy/conservative" with Subban, he went "aggressive" with DD... and this in the span of 2-3 months.

THAT is far more concerning imo. If you're going to gamble a bit, and throw around some money to lock someone up long-term, you do it with the asset that has been both more consistent & gives you a greater bang for your buck potential.

Subban was, pre-norris, on a very clear and disctinct upward trajectory performance-wise. For all the overblown media coverage of his "issues" with teammates, a little digging from the fan side easily and quickly revealed that there was just as much, if not more, evidence that he has been a well-liked teammate on every successful team he's been on... and more importantly, his character reputation away from the rink is absolutely impeccable.

was an EASY target to gamble on, MB decided otherwise... hindsight shows he made a mistake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
This is the point that some people keep ignoring...

The window that teams can control salaries are so small these days. They only have that control with entry-level contracts and sometimes, depending on team philosophy, the 2nd contract.

The precedent has been set with Price, Pacioretty, Eller and Subban...it'll be the same for Galchenyuk, Gallagher and whoever else will be in the same situation.
it's not that people are ignoring it...

it's that some people argue that the "bridge/RFA" contract leverage a team has to work with is a tool that needs to be used strategically, as opposed to wielded like a sledghammer in one black/white direction.

FYI, neither Toews nor Kane (he of the cab & frat off-ice issues) signed a "bridge" deal. They both jumped from ELC to longer term big money contracts...

ditto Kopitar, Doughty & Voynov

Bruins gave Lucic/Krecj 3 year deals @ 3.5-4M$, somewhat of a middle ground approach


none of those 3 organizations have an issue using the bridge deal, when appropriate, but all 3 seem ok with gambling on young players they, correctly, target as key franchise pieces worth a greater commitment/investment in, regardless of their leverage advantage.

If MB is indeed taking the 'Gainey-esque' "POLICY" approach to RFA contracts, then I definitely criticize him for that.

managing a pro sports team is a fluid, ever changing, endeavour. Having a plan, having guidelines, committing to a degree of organizational consistency, is all fine and good... but doing so without the wisdom/flexibility to know when to make calculated gambles is absolutely idiotic.

otherwise, who needs a GM at all? Just hire a good contract negotiator, and stick to advance statistics following whatever narrow metrics/policies you decide on, and let a computer do all the work.

Miller Time is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:43 AM
  #583
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post

But to address your post, I see where you're coming from. But really, as fans, from where we sit. Do you really think we understand the entire picture of a teams salary structure?
We don't have access to the GM, the players, their agents or past negotiations, so we definitely don't have the whole picture.

But I think we have enough to discuss the possible outcomes.

Quote:
I think it's ok to discuss the management of the salary cap...but when it gets to the 'doom & gloom' portion of arguing, that's when I can't take it and really, as it relates to Subban and his upcoming deal, that's a lot of what i've seen (not saying you specifically either)
One part of what you have repeated that I definitely agree with, is that the cap can be managed, even with some mistakes (unlike drafting, developing, etc).

However it's getting harder and harder to find loopholes. Hell, Bergevin was lucky that he had 2 compliance buy-outs so that he could bury the errors of previous GMs.

Imagine if the NHL hadn't screwed up so badly, and we were stuck with those contracts? The horror.

There are no more gimmies moving forward though, so obviously Bergevin has to limit his mistakes. He's made a few IMO (Desharnais being the biggest one), but in general I am happy with his work. Not great, not bad, but he's pretty much still a rookie GM, so some errors will be par for the course.

Dr Gonzo is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:47 AM
  #584
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
The cake is a lie.
Cake or death!

Estimated_Prophet is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:48 AM
  #585
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Speaking of rehashing, I've been saying all along that there are solid arguments on both side. I'm concluding with my opinion, nothing more, nothing less, that the bridging contract was my preference, all along respecting that others may think differently. As 417 is saying, we don't see that from the other side where it's an attack saying that whoever thinks differently brings garbage to the debate, which is obviously NOT the case, but they can't (in most part) see and recognize that.


I understand that. But one must recognize the savings on the cap hit for last year and mostly, mostly next year, when the cap goes down drastically. This pretty much evens the playing field, no?
People ''attack'' your post because of your lame attempts at ridiculing them.

As for the savings, what were they? We had enough cap space last season to have PK signed to a deal doubled his cap hit, and that still applies now. That space we ''saved'' was used for absolutely nothing.
That was actually one of the reason some were saying the deal was a good one, because it would permit Bergevin to get a player around the deadline (he didn't), and then it was because he was going to sign some UFA (he did except not the guy anybody here wanted) but we still have the room.
So what's the point in saving some cash if you don't use it?

Also, we were/are in a transitional period, saving some cash last season or this year, even with the cap coming down, wasn't the time to do it. You want to save cash when you're ready to compete, that way you can go after some bigger names that will require over payments. That's in 2-5 years, not 1 1/2.
We are hoping to be competitive when PK, MAxPAc, Price, Eller, Emelin, Diaz, Gally, Galla, Tinordi, Beaulieu (most if not all of them) are holding key positions on our team, those are the guys who's salary we can control, but we will need to sign free agents as well and those guys are the ones that get overpaid. So any little bit of cash saved from the controllable gang in the following 2-4 years is what is a lot more beneficial than now as it should be the time where we overpay for guys.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:50 AM
  #586
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
relativist thinking has it's place, though makes holding an opinion on either side of the equation a bit pointless (so then why even contribute?)

impossible for it to be meaningless, since every single roster/contract decision afterward is by default affected (since the remaining cap space to work with influences every other contract signing or player target).

how meaningful it is will be difficult -near impossible, to determine. anticipating Subban's cap hit for next year undoubtably has already influenced UFA, trade & internal contract decisions, & will impact contract negotiations with impending RFA's/UFA's.

how much different/impact it will have compared to if Subban was on contract for another 2-4 years at a known cap hit is pretty impossible to know, even for MB himself...



of course it's subjective... I'd argue "always".

nothing "really" matters, but again, relativism doesn't have much place here.

in a cap system, salary implications play a HUGE role in a teams ability to win a cup, that much is hard to argue i would think...

deadline additions are completely constrained and guided by both immediate and future cap implications, which massively changes/influences the make-up of teams going into the playoffs.

ditto the offseason impact of playoff performances. every year teams with deep playoff runs end up losing a guy or 2 that had a great playoffs which pushed his UFA market value outside of their cap limitations. Salary factors greatly affect the ability for teams to keep rosters intact & force them into calculated short vs. long term roster decisions which have, i would suggest, a greater impact on their competitive ability than any other single factor.could not disagree with you more in this instance.


MillerTime - Good post here. Some solid points.

Unfortunately, I can't address everything here, but will try my best to address the points that I can, specifically the bolded portion.

No team can remain intact forever, especially successful teams. Success has a price and really, THIS is the main reason why the salary cap exists, it's to allow financial competitiveness from all teams. Otherwise the richest teams would just keep all the talent.

As i've said, yes salary affects a lot of factors in how you build a team...I just disagree with you about HOW much it affects things. I think when you draft/develop well, salary doesn't have to be a big factor, it only becomes a big factor when it's the only thing you rely on to be competitive.

There are several ways to offset salary limitation. The Chicago Blackhawks are a perfect example, after their 1st Cup win 4 years ago, they had to trade some players (partly due to an administrative error), but they made some smart trades (Stalberg, Leddy) that were able to give them the assets required to continue being a competitive team before they won the Cup this past year

Not to mention that they continued to draft/develop their own players (Bickell, Shaw, Crawford).

You can't keep EVERYONE, it's impossible...even the Bruins have had to pay for the price of their success, but because they had accumulated assets and Chiarelli made some smart trades, they'll continue to be a competitive team even though their player salaries are somewhat limiting.

The way I see it, and again, it's just my opinion of how i've seen how things have developed over the years since the salary cap has been instituted

Drafting & Developing
Astute trades or Player evaluation
coaching (and the choosing of the right coach)

and then...

Cap management

That's how I happen to think the best teams are built...without the first 3, cap management doesn't really matter.

417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:56 AM
  #587
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
exactly...
amazing how some get so caught up in "being right" that they can't even glimpse the other side of the argument.

either way you viewed it at the outset/time of the deal, at this point it's pretty hard to make a case that Subban on a multi-year deal under 6M$ (let alone closer to 5M$, which was entirely possible) would be better for the team than the likely 7-8M$ he will cost as of next season.

with the make-up of our current roster, the next 2-4 years would have been an ideal time to have a norris-caliber dman locked up for well below market value. The added cap space coming from Markov-Gionta + the benefit of Galch-Gallagher-Tinordi-Beaulieu all on ELC's, combined with a 2-3M$ savings on our best player, would have been a perfect situation to aggressively pursue the right UFA/trade fit even in having to "overpay" to get it.

losing that 2-3M$ in flexibility, that was right there for the taking, isn't a disaster, it's just a lost opportunity. One that many around here suggested AT THE TIME of the contract... BEFORE Subban went out and played at a certifiable Norris-level.

some of us saw that he was moving quickly to that level, and would have gambled on him in a positive way vs. gambling on a conservative way as our GM did.

you win some, you lose some... but worse than losing is denial, which some posters seem caught up in for whatever reason.
Even if he didn't move that way, he was already well worth 5 million just based on how he was already playing. The fact that there was huge upside as well is what made it a no-brainer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Nobody was lowballed and everything turned out well.
2.8 for PK Subban isn't lowballing????? Okay...

As for everything turning out well... sure, we'll be paying 2-3 million dollars more per year for no reason. I guess everything turned out great.

Unless of course you mean that he didn't demand a trade. If that's your standard for "everything turning out well" then you and I have different standards as to what this actually means.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Meehan is a shark and that is why there was a holdout. Lets stop overreacting and creating hysteria over future trade demands without any evidence to substantiate these bold predictions of impending doom.
Meehan IS a shark. But that's not why there was a holdout here. There was a holdout because we lowballed a guy who's now arguably our best player. We're paying him less than 3 million a year dude. You don't see this as a reason for him to holdout? If you can't understand this, it's no wonder you don't see why this was such a brutal move.

There is absolutely no way to justify paying Subban less than 3 million a year. None.

We're lucky Subban is a Hab fan and was willing to take it on the chin for us. 99% of other players out there would've told MB to take a jump in the lake. Bob Mackenzie thought that this was going to result in a trade.

Think about this for a second. PK is our best blueliner since Chris Chelios and our GM is sitting there playing chicken with him so that he can lowball him for 2.8 mil a year? Why? How on God's green earth does this make any sense whatsoever? Nevermind the fact that we'll now have to pay significantly more going forward. The fact that he played chicken on this is mind-blowingly dumb.

And you want him to do this again with Galchenyuk? Really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
IMO Bergevin has done a great job and has laid an impressive foundation on the ice and at the negotiating table. The team has structure and a plan that does not make room for individuals who don't put the team first. This battle was an investment in the resolve of the franchise to see their plan through to fruition.
?????

So Subban asking for 5 million a year is putting himself first? Dude, you do understand that he's actually worth more than that right? And with the way he was playing it wasn't hard to see that he'd be conservatively around a 5 million dollar man already let alone for the future. Yes he's an RFA so there'd be a discount but his widely reported demands were extremely reasonable. At 5 for 25 the discount would ALREADY be factored in.

Putting the team first? So we screw over our best player and pay him less than three million to put the team first? You realize that a team is a collection of individuals right? When you screw one guy over you aren't doing it for the team. You are hurting the team. Esp when this guy bears the bulk of the responsibility on the back end.

I want you for a second to consider something... Consider if PK had actually told MB to **** off. Imagine if he demanded a trade (something a lot of analysts were expecting to happen) and we were forced to move him. Would it have been worth it? The cap savings (that mean almost nothing to us right now) for this year and next would justify us pissing off our star 22 year old blueliner to the point of demanding a trade makes this worthwhile? How is this a good risk/reward strategy?

Think about that for a second because if it happens again with Galchenyuk that could very well be the scenario. Nevermind the additional cost that we'll have to bear as we will with PK. Pissing off your best players is not a good strategy dude.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 07-22-2013 at 11:23 AM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 10:58 AM
  #588
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
We don't have access to the GM, the players, their agents or past negotiations, so we definitely don't have the whole picture.

But I think we have enough to discuss the possible outcomes.



One part of what you have repeated that I definitely agree with, is that the cap can be managed, even with some mistakes (unlike drafting, developing, etc).

However it's getting harder and harder to find loopholes. Hell, Bergevin was lucky that he had 2 compliance buy-outs so that he could bury the errors of previous GMs.

Imagine if the NHL hadn't screwed up so badly, and we were stuck with those contracts? The horror.

There are no more gimmies moving forward though, so obviously Bergevin has to limit his mistakes. He's made a few IMO (Desharnais being the biggest one), but in general I am happy with his work. Not great, not bad, but he's pretty much still a rookie GM, so some errors will be par for the course.
Hmmm...not sure I agree with that, I think before conclusions like "MB made a mistake by giving him a bridge deal" it's important to know all the facts. But this IS discussion forum, so I guess that's why we're here.

As for the rest of your post, I think part of the reason that the NHL screwed up badly is specifically due to the famous '2nd contract'.

it's throwing all subsequent contracts completely out of whack.

Young players are making big money without having proven anything...meanwhile, veterans who have a bit more of a resume are still getting paid HUGE money in free agency, partly because it's a free market, but also because of player comparisons (those signed to big money deals in their 2nd contracts).

When GM's started to relinquish the control they had over player salaries coming off their ELC's, it messed up a lot of things IMO. On the surface, it looks good. You lock one of your not-yet-proven-but-likely-to-reach potential young studs, but that has a trickle down effect on everyone else.


Last edited by 417: 07-22-2013 at 11:05 AM.
417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 11:55 AM
  #589
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,336
vCash: 500
Obviously he doesn't have to sign him.

Does it matter? Not much, but it could, and that potential ultimately does mean that it "matters" if he does or doesn't. But he doesn't have to.

Blind Gardien is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 12:04 PM
  #590
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
MillerTime - Good post here. Some solid points.

Unfortunately, I can't address everything here, but will try my best to address the points that I can, specifically the bolded portion.

No team can remain intact forever, especially successful teams. Success has a price and really, THIS is the main reason why the salary cap exists, it's to allow financial competitiveness from all teams. Otherwise the richest teams would just keep all the talent.

As i've said, yes salary affects a lot of factors in how you build a team...I just disagree with you about HOW much it affects things. I think when you draft/develop well, salary doesn't have to be a big factor, it only becomes a big factor when it's the only thing you rely on to be competitive.

There are several ways to offset salary limitation. The Chicago Blackhawks are a perfect example, after their 1st Cup win 4 years ago, they had to trade some players (partly due to an administrative error), but they made some smart trades (Stalberg, Leddy) that were able to give them the assets required to continue being a competitive team before they won the Cup this past year

Not to mention that they continued to draft/develop their own players (Bickell, Shaw, Crawford).

You can't keep EVERYONE, it's impossible...even the Bruins have had to pay for the price of their success, but because they had accumulated assets and Chiarelli made some smart trades, they'll continue to be a competitive team even though their player salaries are somewhat limiting.

The way I see it, and again, it's just my opinion of how i've seen how things have developed over the years since the salary cap has been instituted

Drafting & Developing
Astute trades or Player evaluation
coaching (and the choosing of the right coach)

and then...

Cap management

That's how I happen to think the best teams are built...without the first 3, cap management doesn't really matter.
Funny you mention those teams but completely disregard the fact these teams have a few players with a cap hit well under their value. There is no more front loaded contract possibility. The new CBA made sure of that. So saving cash will have to come from somewhere else if you want to compete with those other teams.
We only have MaxPac that is at a discounted price. We had the chance to do the same with PK but skipped on it. He could have been our 2nd discounted player.

Making solid trades is a lot more complicated than re-signing a player that wants a long cheap term deal. Sure you can say there are other ways, but why make your life more complicated? If the player wasn't a sure bet, I'd agree, but there was no risk with PK.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 12:17 PM
  #591
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Funny you mention those teams but completely disregard the fact these teams have a few players with a cap hit well under their value. There is no more front loaded contract possibility. The new CBA made sure of that. So saving cash will have to come from somewhere else if you want to compete with those other teams.
We only have MaxPac that is at a discounted price. We had the chance to do the same with PK but skipped on it. He could have been our 2nd discounted player.

Making solid trades is a lot more complicated than re-signing a player that wants a long cheap term deal. Sure you can say there are other ways, but why make your life more complicated? If the player wasn't a sure bet, I'd agree, but there was no risk with PK.
I'd say in addition to Pacioretty, there's also Lars Eller, Galchenyuk & Gallagher are on ELC's and their salary in relation to their production, at least the production expected going forward, is well under their value. Rene Bourque, when healthy can easily pot 20-25 goals, at 3.3M per year, I'd say that's solid value...and PK Subban, this year and next year provides EXCELLENT value.

The Habs will over the next few years be graduating a fair bit of players from their prospect pool which should offset any raises they'll be forced to hand out to players over the next few years...add in the cap going up, and there's more then enough money to go around.

The Habs currently have ONE player makign 6M or more, Carey Price...the roof isn't caving in, yet you're sitting here 'doomsday prepping'. Seems kind of silly

I get the premise of what you're saying, yes, it would of been nice to have Subban over the next 5 years at 5.5M cap hit (although you're just buying one or two of his UFA years and then who knows what you'll be paying for him then) but the alternative route that MB chose isn't the doomsday scenario you're trying to portray.


Last edited by 417: 07-22-2013 at 12:24 PM.
417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 01:39 PM
  #592
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
People ''attack'' your post because of your lame attempts at ridiculing them.
Sorry, I don't buy it as if it were true, not many of your posts would remain "without attacks" as it seems to be your favourite strategy of debate, seeing your interaction in this thread. No respect for others' opinion because they differ from yours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
As for the savings, what were they? We had enough cap space last season to have PK signed to a deal doubled his cap hit, and that still applies now. That space we ''saved'' was used for absolutely nothing.
That was actually one of the reason some were saying the deal was a good one, because it would permit Bergevin to get a player around the deadline (he didn't), and then it was because he was going to sign some UFA (he did except not the guy anybody here wanted) but we still have the room.
So what's the point in saving some cash if you don't use it?

Also, we were/are in a transitional period, saving some cash last season or this year, even with the cap coming down, wasn't the time to do it. You want to save cash when you're ready to compete, that way you can go after some bigger names that will require over payments. That's in 2-5 years, not 1 1/2.
We are hoping to be competitive when PK, MAxPAc, Price, Eller, Emelin, Diaz, Gally, Galla, Tinordi, Beaulieu (most if not all of them) are holding key positions on our team, those are the guys who's salary we can control, but we will need to sign free agents as well and those guys are the ones that get overpaid. So any little bit of cash saved from the controllable gang in the following 2-4 years is what is a lot more beneficial than now as it should be the time where we overpay for guys.
Hindsight is a beautiful thing, isn't it?

Funny that you reply to this message but not to that one. The kitchen getting too hot?

Habsterix* is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 02:14 PM
  #593
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
I'd say in addition to Pacioretty, there's also Lars Eller, Galchenyuk & Gallagher are on ELC's and their salary in relation to their production, at least the production expected going forward, is well under their value. Rene Bourque, when healthy can easily pot 20-25 goals, at 3.3M per year, I'd say that's solid value...and PK Subban, this year and next year provides EXCELLENT value.

The Habs will over the next few years be graduating a fair bit of players from their prospect pool which should offset any raises they'll be forced to hand out to players over the next few years...add in the cap going up, and there's more then enough money to go around.

The Habs currently have ONE player makign 6M or more, Carey Price...the roof isn't caving in, yet you're sitting here 'doomsday prepping'. Seems kind of silly

I get the premise of what you're saying, yes, it would of been nice to have Subban over the next 5 years at 5.5M cap hit (although you're just buying one or two of his UFA years and then who knows what you'll be paying for him then) but the alternative route that MB chose isn't the doomsday scenario you're trying to portray.
Bourque has yet to provide us with a value of over his cap hit. The day he'll score 25-30 goal, then we can agree. That hasn't happened yet.
Has for rookies or ELC players, Chicago and Boston have them as well, and we're not talking about their elite star players like Chara, Toews, Kane, Keith, etc..
Those kids you're talking about will also come out of their ELC within the next two seasons and their salary won't drop. Add Emelin and possibly Diaz to that mix.

In any event, you seem to want to argue one thing only, that it isn't the end of the world. Not sure why you think I'm trying to portray a doomsday scenario, I'm only stating the facts. I also mentioned quite a few times now that it isn't the end of the world. In no way does it mean it's not a mistake. You're the one that seems dead set on proving it wasn't one and your main argument is that it's not the end of the world.
Really, it's foolish..

It's not the end of the world that PK was signed to a bridge deal, we'll get by. We could have had him for cheaper, but it's too late now, so be it.
What I find absolutely dumb was forcing a 2.8M, when he's already worth more, to the point of locking out your best player to start the year. That is stupid. Is it the end of the world? No, PK signed and stayed. But then he hurries himself to extend DD and Bouillon? This doesn't strike me as good planning. Those are more the alarm signs. I've brought this up before, so have others, but it gets ignored and people focus on the cap instead.

It was a mistake, we could have had him for cheaper, simple and clear. Not the end of the world.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 02:20 PM
  #594
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Sorry, I don't buy it as if it were true, not many of your posts would remain "without attacks" as it seems to be your favourite strategy of debate, seeing your interaction in this thread. No respect for others' opinion because they differ from yours.
What are you talking about? KrissE has been pretty respectful and has provided some strong arguments. Stop deflecting from the topic, unless of course you want to



Quote:
Hindsight is a beautiful thing, isn't it?
It's not a matter of hindsight. Subban was already playing at a 5 million dollar level. Outside from a few string of games here and there which is normal for a young player, Subban was the team's number one D-men since his call up in the 09 playoffs, and this is not because we had no other option, but because Subban was already that good. Not only that, but Subban also showed that his development wasn't done yet and that there was still huge room to grow.

Not only would have paying him 5 million over 5-6 years have been paying him what he was worth at the time, but it would have given the Canadiens the opportunity to have the player at a discount should he continue to develop, which many were sure he would (and were vindicated in the fact that he was the Norris winner this year). This was all stated BEFORE the contract and BEFORE his outstanding season, so it's not a question of hindsight.


Oh and before I forget... I need to finish this off with a and


Last edited by Andy: 07-22-2013 at 02:28 PM.
Andy is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 02:29 PM
  #595
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Bourque has yet to provide us with a value of over his cap hit. The day he'll score 25-30 goal, then we can agree. That hasn't happened yet.
Has for rookies or ELC players, Chicago and Boston have them as well, and we're not talking about their elite star players like Chara, Toews, Kane, Keith, etc..
Those kids you're talking about will also come out of their ELC within the next two seasons and their salary won't drop. Add Emelin and possibly Diaz to that mix.

In any event, you seem to want to argue one thing only, that it isn't the end of the world. Not sure why you think I'm trying to portray a doomsday scenario, I'm only stating the facts. I also mentioned quite a few times now that it isn't the end of the world. In no way does it mean it's not a mistake. You're the one that seems dead set on proving it wasn't one and your main argument is that it's not the end of the world.
Really, it's foolish..

It's not the end of the world that PK was signed to a bridge deal, we'll get by. We could have had him for cheaper, but it's too late now, so be it.
What I find absolutely dumb was forcing a 2.8M, when he's already worth more, to the point of locking out your best player to start the year. That is stupid. Is it the end of the world? No, PK signed and stayed. But then he hurries himself to extend DD and Bouillon? This doesn't strike me as good planning. Those are more the alarm signs. I've brought this up before, so have others, but it gets ignored and people focus on the cap instead.

It was a mistake, we could have had him for cheaper, simple and clear. Not the end of the world.
I don't disagree with you there...I didn't like the way it went down. But there were two sides to this negotiation.

So if you blame one, you have to blame the other as well.

As far as paying him what he's worth, that's not always how things work...especially with ELC's and 2nd contracts. It's the only time teams have control to pay players what they think they can afford, not necessarily what the player is worth.

They have that right...why not take advantage of it???

Also, again...not you, nor anyone can say it was a mistake. You're speaking in absolutes, when not all of the data is complete to come to a conclusion.

417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 02:36 PM
  #596
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
What are you talking about? KrissE has been pretty respectful and has provided some strong arguments. Stop deflecting from the topic, unless of course you want to





It's not a matter of hindsight. Subban was already playing at a 5 million dollar level. Outside from a few string of games here and there which is normal for a young player, Subban was the team's number one D-men since his call up in the 09 playoffs, and this is not because we had no other option, but because Subban was already that good. Not only that, but Subban also showed that his development wasn't done yet and that there was still huge room to grow.

Not only would have paying him 5 million over 5-6 years have been paying him what he was worth at the time, but it would have given the Canadiens the opportunity to have the player at a discount should he continue to develop, which many were sure he would (and were vindicated in the fact that he was the Norris winner this year). This was all stated BEFORE the contract and BEFORE his outstanding season, so it's not a question of hindsight.


Oh and before I forget... I need to finish this off with a and
The Habs had him at a discount this year, and will again next year...you know, when it matters the most and the cap is going down.

417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 02:46 PM
  #597
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
The Habs had him at a discount this year, and will again next year...you know, when it matters the most and the cap is going down.
But the Canadiens have been fine cap wise and will be fine. Hell they have 4 million in cap space right now after giving 4 to Briere. The roster is pretty much set. So I don't accept that excuse, especially with the fact that Bergevin had two buy-outs to work with.

Again, the bridge deal was very short sighted on the part of Bergevin...it sought short-term gain. It shows a lack of fore-sight on his part to have missed the opportunity to get Subban discounted for the next 5-6 years where the team will probably be competitive.

Andy is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 02:53 PM
  #598
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Sorry, I don't buy it as if it were true, not many of your posts would remain "without attacks" as it seems to be your favourite strategy of debate, seeing your interaction in this thread. No respect for others' opinion because they differ from yours.
I respect other opinions. Yours and some others, on this matter, are just not worthy of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Hindsight is a beautiful thing, isn't it?

Funny that you reply to this message but not to that one. The kitchen getting too hot?
No hindsight needed, go read the PK thread during the negotiation. You'll see I was very much for the long term deal.

As for your previous post, I didn't see the need to respond to it considering you wrote the same thing to LG and he countered your points well. But if you want me to shred it apart I'll be glad to do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Again, refusing to see the reality of the evidence I've brought up or brushing it off because you disagree doesn't make it any less valid. Put the shoe on the other foot... I disagree with your opinion on the matter. Should I also say that it's not valid? Perhaps.

The fact of the matter is that Pacioretty had finished a second season with the Habs, accumulating 24 points (14 goals) in 37 games. He was the Habs' top rated power forward, a huge lack on that team. While he may not have played Subban's minutes, he also didn't get $2.9M per season for his bridging deal, signing for $1.6M instead. Some will argue that Patches is the Habs best player (or forward), winning the scoring race on the team this past season.

Price? He had played pretty much 3 full seasons in the NHL by the time his ELC expired, stealing the starter's job from Huet. He had already won 60 NHL regular seasons' games and had a Sv% of about .915 at that stage in his career, including winning a Molson Cup, being named on the NHL All-Rookie Team and was an NHL All-Star and that's leaving out what he had done in junior and in the AHL! What more do you want? Yet, he signed a bridging contract at $2.75M for two years.

I know that you want to discredit both those players when comparing them to Subban but they were (and still are) key players on this team today and even though Bergevin did not sign those bridging contract, they obviously fit with his current and future plan for this franchise, meaning that we don't mind paying you what you'll be worth once we start buying some of your UFA years but in the mean time, a bridging contract is necessary. We won't take huge risks like they did with Myers in Buffalo and Skinner in Carolina.
MaxPac almost got decapitated, how you conveniently leave this out makes me lose respect for your post. This isn't something that you can just shove under the rug.
He also, as you mentioned, just scored 24pts. I don't care in how many games, the sample size is just way too small for it to warrant a long term investment.

As for Price, no, he didn't steal the starting job from Huet. They were both used evenly, and then Gainey moved Huet giving Price the position, it left a lot of people scratching their heads. Now that this is clear. Price also LOST the #1 spot to Halak. How you again leave this out shows you're only trying to find excuses.

What about Kane? Toews? and the many others who have been gambled on and it paid off??
As for Myers, he struggled in his sophomore year, a lot. Then he got injured. Never been the same since. But really a 10M signing bonus? Not at all comparable to PK.
Skinner is the same, those kids showed signs of dropping after their rookie year.
Not PK.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
There you go again... because I disagree with you, you feel like my points are garbage. It's becoming a constant don't you think? I, on the other hand, respect your opinion even though I strongly disagree with it. I guess it comes with age, experience and maturity.

So let's see YOUR facts:
  1. PK signed for $2.8M. Well, it's almost $2.9M ($2.875M to be precise) but that's effectively a fact.
  2. PK won a Norris. Absolutely, I never denied it... but that happened AFTER the bridging contract.
So two facts, including one that's in hindsight. Pretty good. Here are the ones I've brought forward:
  1. Bergevin wants to instate a way of doing business with the bridging contract
  2. The cap will go down to a little over $60M next year, down from $70M+
  3. By the time Subban's contract is up, Gionta and Markov's contracts will be done, which will free up close to $11M on the cap, monies not available last year and this coming season as the cap is going down.
  4. With the revenues from this season, the salary cap is predicted to go back to around $70M from the $64M it will be next season, adding another $6M of cap space.
  5. PK is making almost $3M in cap hit ($2.875M), which means that the team will have close to $20M to sign Subban. Even if they give him $8M, they still have $12M to sign two players to replace Gionta and Markov, more than what they make now!
  6. Subban had issues in the dressing room, even fighting with teammates in practice
  7. Hockey is a business and feelings come second, meaning that feelings may appear to get hurt in the process but players and management know that it's not personal. That's why Plekanec re-signed after going to arbitration when the fan base was acting like you guys saying that he'd be pissed and leave at the first opportunity.
  8. Alex Galchenyuk is next on the highly rated list to have to go through this scenario. Seeing that Pacioretty, Price and Subban did the same, it will be a lot easier to make him swallow the bridging contract when his ELC expires as history is made.
  9. Gallagher will also be going through that, then Tinordi and others there after. The precedent is set.
  10. Now that he's proving himself and has improved, including winning the Norris, PK will be getting his big contract, something Bergevin has said not having a problem with.
But you're right though, I did make some speculations. I did say that at the time of negotiating his last contract, there was a risk for PK to have a drop in production (Myers & Skinner) and that he might have used this bridging contract as additional motivation to prove the Habs wrong. But I've never claimed that those were facts, not even once. It doesn't mean that it's not true or that it's false, it only means that there's no way to prove that unless we look in hindsight (Norris).
First off, I think your points are garbage because they are that, not because you disagree with me.

Take your list:
1- Bridge contract is one thing, I have mentioned I could let this go. Forcing your star player to miss the beginning of the season because you want him to sign a way below value deal is something completely different.

2- The cap will go down, and we had enough space with the compliance buy outs.

3- Gionta and Markov's contracts will come off by next year, but you're assuming they won't be re-signed or replaced. Gionta maybe can be let go, but Markov, if he has a similar year or even improves shouldn't. You also don't mention there are other FAs up for re-signals like Emelin and Eller, and perhaps Diaz if we keep him. Not to mention, addition of UFAs.

4- Subban having issues in the locker room is media hoopla garbage. Nothing factual came of this other than Gill telling PK to pick up his jersey when he threw it on the floor, or others telling him to change the music. It's completely speculative from your part. He did fight in practice, but if you see it's from him battling with guys in corners. Plekanec has been involved as well, so did DD, so do a million of other guys. Obviously the guy that has a bigger personality gets the bad rep.
Otherwise, PK's work ethic is irreproachable, he is a professional, never caught doing something bad, off ice training is amazing, always in camp in great shape. But ya, he has issues..

5- Completely speculative. Players can hold grudges via coaches or GMs. It's not because it's a business that every decision from management is right, and when it's wrong, players have every right to be upset.
Arbitration is completely different than making your star miss the start of the year, seemingly alienate him from the team, and force him to take a well below value deal. They are world apart. For the record, I never thought arbitration would make Plekanec leave.

6/7- Again, a bridge contract is one thing, forcing him to take well below his value is another. If Gally ends up having two 80pts+ season back to back, I'll be very surprised if he agrees to 2y/4M. Same can be said of every other player.

8- Yes, Bergevin has no choice but to give him his big pay day now. He could have had him for cheaper before, he decided to make the commitments and risks on local less important players like DD and Bouillon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
So is PK Subban a better deal at $5-6M per season for 5 years? If you look at last year and next, no but for the following 3 years, absolutely. But then again, if you take what was saved this year and next and deduct it off Subban's next contract for the next 3 years, it makes those 3 years more affordable and closer. Here's an example:

$2.875M + $2.875M + $8M + $8M + $8M = $29.75M
$5.5M + $5.5M + $5.5M + $5.5M + $5.5M = $27.5M

So you have a difference of about $2M total over the length of the 5 years and yet, you save the dollars when the cap will be at its tightest, next season! I truly and genuinely feel like the bridging contract was the right thing to do.

So you and the others can go on a Bergevin witch hunt all you want, but in my opinion, while I recognize, appreciate and respect your opinion, I feel like not only was he justified with his actions, but he was right in doing so. Subban is now maturing as a player, as a man, and he's buying into the team concept or so it seems. Great, he will be that much better for the Habs.

So you may call that garbage all you want Kriss, but it isn't, at least not in my (and others) eyes.
The cap hit is where it differs, this is also following your numbers only.

You're right that the cap will be the lowest next year, but that's not when it'll be the most important to us. The cap hit will be the most important when we're closer to contention, that's hopefully between 2-4years. That's when we'll have a few players off their ELC, some entering their prime, and we'll need as much cash saved off them so we can go after big names and over pay.

Also, entirely speculative that PK never bought into a team concept before, and I have a hard time understanding where this comes from when it's clear he's a huge team player. Always praises his teammates, always defends them, never throws anyone under the bridge.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 02:59 PM
  #599
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
But the Canadiens have been fine cap wise and will be fine. Hell they have 4 million in cap space right now after giving 4 to Briere. The roster is pretty much set. So I don't accept that excuse, especially with the fact that Bergevin had two buy-outs to work with.

Again, the bridge deal was very short sighted on the part of Bergevin...it sought short-term gain. It shows a lack of fore-sight on his part to have missed the opportunity to get Subban discounted for the next 5-6 years where the team will probably be competitive.
IMO, on the surface it does...but in reality, I think it's quite the opposite.

You assume that the Habs have a problem with paying Subban a higher cap hit, they don't, and rightfully so.

There will be other players coming off ELC looking for new deals...because of the way things were handled with Price, Pacioretty, Eller and Subban. The Habs will be able to control costs when they have the most leverage.

It's just a different way of doing things, it's not necessarily wrong and no one has been able to prove that it is. Just alot of assumptions and conjecture which don't make it reality

417 is online now  
Old
07-22-2013, 03:05 PM
  #600
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post

You're right that the cap will be the lowest next year, but that's not when it'll be the most important to us. The cap hit will be the most important when we're closer to contention, that's hopefully between 2-4years. That's when we'll have a few players off their ELC, some entering their prime, and we'll need as much cash saved off them so we can go after big names and over pay.

Also, entirely speculative that PK never bought into a team concept before, and I have a hard time understanding where this comes from when it's clear he's a huge team player. Always praises his teammates, always defends them, never throws anyone under the bridge.
In 2-4 years based on current projections, the cap will be at 70M+

As far as having as much cash saved to go after big names and over pay? Do you mean via free agency?

If so, I think MB has said that that's not the way he will operate...furthermore, can you guarantee that

A - Big names will be available? (there is less and less quality available via free agency)
B - that they will sign in Montreal?

Furthermore, the last time the Habs had a ton of cap space and used it to overpay for free agents, they ended up trading for Scott Gomez, and signing Gionta/Cammalleri etc to bloated contracts

How did that work out?

417 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 04:26 PM.

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.