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

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
07-23-2013, 03:22 PM
  #701
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lozela View Post
I don't get your point.

Bergevin didn't show good faith in the negociation. He knew that PK wanted to remain a Hab and he took advantage of it. O'Reiley got an offersheet at one point and you can bet that PK would've signed to another team if he really wanted to.
But he didn't...so.....

417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 03:29 PM
  #702
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
First off, number should be 5M, not 5.5M, but let's leave it at that.
Second, I don't get your 8M in year three. It's 5.5M all the way through.

The difference is a 2.5M extra cap space available to us in year 3-4-5.
As for the cap dropping (and I'm assuming you meant 64M not 34) it's irrelevant because we're talking about an extra 2.7M which we had more than enough money for. Two compliance buyouts were already confirmed. So we had enough space confirmed for him even with a cap reduction.

Btw, this has already been explained to you more than once and by more than one poster.
Money which you have NO IDEA in which fashion it would have been spent. (again, see Ryder/Cole trade followed by Desharnais signing 19 days later)

I have no clue why you keep bringing this up? It's an imcomplete conclusion...if you're going to keep knocking MB for losing valuable cap space, then at the very least provide a reasonable hypothetical for what he should have done with the money saved

Hell even arguing that the money saved could of been used to plan for raises for guys like Eller or re-signing Alexei Emelin (all of which are easily countered with the cap going up, but I digress)...I could understand that

But all you've done is knock MB for losing cap space to sign some hypothetical players that you have no idea of who they are or even if they would sign in MTL or just anything tangible.

417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 03:37 PM
  #703
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Since hypotheticals seems to be vogue around here...let's play a game

Let's say that Bergevin had indeed signed Subban to a 5yr 25M deal like so many of you wanted and subsequently saved all that valuable and scarce cap space you all keep obsessing about...

Then, this offseason with all the money he has saved from that deal...he goes out and signs Ryane Clowe to the same deal Clowe signed in New Jersey

How many of you would be sitting here blasting Bergevin not over the Subban deal...but over overpaying for Ryane Clowe and his 3 goals last year and wasting valuable and scarce cap space on Clowe?

Be honest...




Now, I get it...the idea is having a player of Subban's caliber, Norris Trophy caliber, at a very affordable 5M per year for the next 5 years (actually 5 because the present year had already expired).

But the Habs are still at square 1, with as you all pointed out...no cap space to play with.

Add on top of that, Subban's deal expires right in his prime years...what the hell is it going to cost him to sign then???

Just throwing that out there...curious to see the responses.

417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 03:40 PM
  #704
Lozela
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 372
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Money which you have NO IDEA in which fashion it would have been spent. (again, see Ryder/Cole trade followed by Desharnais signing 19 days later)

I have no clue why you keep bringing this up? It's an imcomplete conclusion...if you're going to keep knocking MB for losing valuable cap space, then at the very least provide a reasonable hypothetical for what he should have done with the money saved

Hell even arguing that the money saved could of been used to plan for raises for guys like Eller or re-signing Alexei Emelin (all of which are easily countered with the cap going up, but I digress)...I could understand that

But all you've done is knock MB for losing cap space to sign some hypothetical players that you have no idea of who they are or even if they would sign in MTL or just anything tangible.


Wow man. Since the beginning we've been talking about how its important to manage the cap well so you can add more quality players to the roster.

He overpaid for Price

overpaid for Desharnais

is in the process of spending 2.5-3 more than he woul've spent on PK

He clearly showed that he had no vision by giving that stupid contract to Desharnais, what more do you want us to tell you ?

Lozela is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 03:45 PM
  #705
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lozela View Post


Wow man. Since the beginning we've been talking about how its important to manage the cap well so you can add more quality players to the roster.

He overpaid for Price

overpaid for Desharnais

is in the process of spending 2.5-3 more than he woul've spent on PK

He clearly showed that he had no vision by giving that stupid contract to Desharnais, what more do you want us to tell you ?
But hold on...didn't he show how important managing the cap was by trading Erik Cole and his bloated contract for Michael Ryder, a pending UFA? Go look at some of the threads when that trade was made. People were calling MB a genius for getting rid of that cap space and freeing up all that money on the cap, people were already dreaming of all the big name UFA's the Habs were going to be able to sign...what the hell happened to all those dreams though?


You don't get it...even if he would of signed PK to that deal, the money saved would of been re-invested somewhere else and you could just as easily be sitting here knocing Bergevin for using that cap space on Player A

It's like a vicious cycle...just complain to complain

it's never ending.

Now as far as the rest of your post...he overpaid for Price?

That's your opinion, seems to be the market for a goalie who plays 65+ games a year

Get over it...you can all sit here and knock Bergevin for how he handled the Subban situation, just like you sat there and knocked Bergevin for how he handled the Desharnais signing, yet just a few days prior, you were all praising him. The point here is none of that really matters, things change quickly. You're all focused on one contract when there are 22 other contracts that the GM deals with that all have an effect on each other. Not all the chips have been played yet you're all ready to say he's lost the game...

Typical Habs fans hysteria


Last edited by 417: 07-23-2013 at 03:53 PM.
417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 03:50 PM
  #706
ECWHSWI
bought a MB jersey
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 20,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lozela View Post


Wow man. Since the beginning we've been talking about how its important to manage the cap well so you can add more quality players to the roster.

He overpaid for Price

overpaid for Desharnais

is in the process of spending 2.5-3 more than he woul've spent on PK

He clearly showed that he had no vision by giving that stupid contract to Desharnais, what more do you want us to tell you ?
you do not know that, and never will.

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 03:53 PM
  #707
ECWHSWI
bought a MB jersey
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 20,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by uiCk View Post
What resolved the lock out? negotiations, compromise on both sides. So, what caused lockout? no negotiations and no compromises obviously... What caused PK sittout out? no negotiations and no compromises by MB... obviously.

Yea he signed, because he saw MB wasn't going to budge, and PK being who he is just took it, realizing there were no "talks" and only demands, on one side, and that wasn't going to change... i mean, put yourself in PK's shoes for once, and imagine you just finished a terrific campaign, obvious #1 Dman in ALL situations, and you go into negotiations and boss is like "Yo sorry what u did in past means nothing, so heres minimum wage +1, that's the rules LOL "
the kid asn his agent knew he may miss a few games (or more) by refusing the initial offer, he too was OK with sitting out.

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 03:59 PM
  #708
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 32,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Money which you have NO IDEA in which fashion it would have been spent. (again, see Ryder/Cole trade followed by Desharnais signing 19 days later)

I have no clue why you keep bringing this up? It's an imcomplete conclusion...if you're going to keep knocking MB for losing valuable cap space, then at the very least provide a reasonable hypothetical for what he should have done with the money saved

Hell even arguing that the money saved could of been used to plan for raises for guys like Eller or re-signing Alexei Emelin (all of which are easily countered with the cap going up, but I digress)...I could understand that

But all you've done is knock MB for losing cap space to sign some hypothetical players that you have no idea of who they are or even if they would sign in MTL or just anything tangible.
What they do with the extra cash is completely irrelevant, or are you suggesting we shouldn't care about cap space at all since we might use it inappropriately?

You're really not making any sense on this.

What Bergevin decides to do with the extra cap space is an another question, one that we will either applaud him for, or criticize him on (like many did with Briere). I'm not going to go into hypothetical situations are they're countless.

Point is it's better to have this space when it's right there for the taking so we have more flexibility than not.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 04:07 PM
  #709
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
What they do with the extra cash is completely irrelevant, or are you suggesting we shouldn't care about cap space at all since we might use it inappropriately?

You're really not making any sense on this.

What Bergevin decides to do with the extra cap space is an another question, one that we will either applaud him for, or criticize him on (like many did with Briere). I'm not going to go into hypothetical situations are they're countless.

Point is it's better to have this space when it's right there for the taking so we have more flexibility than not.
Then I guess you can't have that as part of your reasoning for why it was a bad decision to give him a bridge contract

You can't have it both ways..

Not sure how I'M the one not making sense here...then again, i'm not cap obssesed. So we've got two different schools of thought here

417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 04:23 PM
  #710
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 32,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Then I guess you can't have that as part of your reasoning for why it was a bad decision to give him a bridge contract

You can't have it both ways..

Not sure how I'M the one not making sense here...then again, i'm not cap obssesed. So we've got two different schools of thought here
What are you talking about?

You need cap space to sign players. Shall we never discuss contracts because we don't know how the rest will later be used?

I'm not cap obsessed either. You're turning it into a huge cap thing when I've repeated countless times it wasn't the end of the world. But it's not because it's not the be all end all of things that you have to use the ''who cares'' attitude.

Any space saved helps. Funny you say this but then mention that we saved on the space last year and this up coming one. Then when people mention that the cap will be more important during the competitive years (like to be in the next 2-3-4 years) you go back to ''well give me an example and if you can't, you're wrong'' BS.

It's not even about needing the cap or not, it's about having the flexibility of having a couple extra million there. If we don't use it, then it's pretty irrelevant, but that's using hindsight. But the point stands, any time you can save cash when it's there for the taking, you do it. This is not even debatable. Stop being so hard pressed on making it seem as if cap space is overrated. It is, I agree. But if it's there, you take it.
Would you rather have our current roster with 0M on the cap, or 6M? It's seriously not hard to understand. Stop being stubborn on this issue, you're a better poster.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 04:39 PM
  #711
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
What are you talking about?

You need cap space to sign players. Shall we never discuss contracts because we don't know how the rest will later be used?

I'm not cap obsessed either. You're turning it into a huge cap thing when I've repeated countless times it wasn't the end of the world. But it's not because it's not the be all end all of things that you have to use the ''who cares'' attitude.

Any space saved helps. Funny you say this but then mention that we saved on the space last year and this up coming one. Then when people mention that the cap will be more important during the competitive years (like to be in the next 2-3-4 years) you go back to ''well give me an example and if you can't, you're wrong'' BS.

It's not even about needing the cap or not, it's about having the flexibility of having a couple extra million there. If we don't use it, then it's pretty irrelevant, but that's using hindsight. But the point stands, any time you can save cash when it's there for the taking, you do it. This is not even debatable. Stop being so hard pressed on making it seem as if cap space is overrated. It is, I agree. But if it's there, you take it.
Would you rather have our current roster with 0M on the cap, or 6M? It's seriously not hard to understand. Stop being stubborn on this issue, you're a better poster.
Would I rather have our current roster with 0M or 6M in cap space?

You're not asking the right question...or course I would rather have it with 6M in capspace (never argued that).

I could ask you..."would you rather have the Boston Bruins roster with virtually no cap space or the Columbus Blue Jackets who have a lot of it???" (actually, HAD a lot of it, take the New York Islanders if you want a better example)

BUT (and sorry, this HAS to be part of the conversation) that additional cap space does not equal improved performance, it only means a lighter payroll

And I don't think I'm being stubborn either, I have an opinion, I think i've said several times that I would have no qualms with either scenario (long term deal off of ELC or bridge deal)...

What I'm arguing is that neither scenario necessarily impacts what happens on the ice...

A lighter payroll and additional cap space (aka flexibility), is not a reason, onto itself, for saying the bridge deal was the wrong decision

417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:12 PM
  #712
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,280
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CrAzYNiNe
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Would I rather have our current roster with 0M or 6M in cap space?

You're not asking the right question...or course I would rather have it with 6M in capspace (never argued that).

I could ask you..."would you rather have the Boston Bruins roster with virtually no cap space or the Columbus Blue Jackets who have a lot of it???" (actually, HAD a lot of it, take the New York Islanders if you want a better example)

BUT (and sorry, this HAS to be part of the conversation) that additional cap space does not equal improved performance, it only means a lighter payroll

And I don't think I'm being stubborn either, I have an opinion, I think i've said several times that I would have no qualms with either scenario (long term deal off of ELC or bridge deal)...

What I'm arguing is that neither scenario necessarily impacts what happens on the ice...

A lighter payroll and additional cap space (aka flexibility), is not a reason, onto itself, for saying the bridge deal was the wrong decision
PK Subban signed to a 5 year - 25 million dollar contract would give us the best chance to ice the best team.

Signing him next year to a contract let's say 8 years - 56 million dollars, gives us less chance, not a zero chance, but less chance to go and get who we need to put us in contention if we are indeed contenders.

In the end it comes down to how to manage the cap. Every decision is crucial, some more than others. In this case all we are saying is that MB missed a great opportunity to sign one of his best assets long term at a very friendly cap hit that would give him better chances at other players.

Does this mean because Subban will make a higher cap hit that it will be impossible? Of course not. But logic dictates that having your best player at a cheap cap hit will give you more maneuverability to sign needed players that the organization hasn't been able to acquire via trade or draft. This is all that we are trying to say.

CrAzYNiNe is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:16 PM
  #713
One Less Louise
Dale Weise it !
 
One Less Louise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 23,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Since hypotheticals seems to be vogue around here...let's play a game

Let's say that Bergevin had indeed signed Subban to a 5yr 25M deal like so many of you wanted and subsequently saved all that valuable and scarce cap space you all keep obsessing about...

Then, this offseason with all the money he has saved from that deal...he goes out and signs Ryane Clowe to the same deal Clowe signed in New Jersey

How many of you would be sitting here blasting Bergevin not over the Subban deal...but over overpaying for Ryane Clowe and his 3 goals last year and wasting valuable and scarce cap space on Clowe?

Be honest...
None of us.

We wouldn't have saved money for this summer. We would have 2.25M less. You should know this if you are arguing one way or another.

The savings would begin next summer.

If you are going to argue this, you should know basic things like this.

EDIT:
Also, I would have signed Subban to an even longer deal if possible. And I wouldn't have touched Clowe with the savings, I'd have gone harder for Lecavalier and I wouldn't have touched Briere with a 10 foot pole.


Last edited by One Less Louise: 07-23-2013 at 05:24 PM.
One Less Louise is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:18 PM
  #714
68*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,022
vCash: 500
Wow OT but I just probably had the worst nightmare in my life. We had to give PK to the Jets for nothing after some violation of the CBA.

68* is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:21 PM
  #715
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrAzYNiNe View Post
PK Subban signed to a 5 year - 25 million dollar contract would give us the best chance to ice the best team.

Signing him next year to a contract let's say 8 years - 56 million dollars, gives us less chance, not a zero chance, but less chance to go and get who we need to put us in contention if we are indeed contenders.

In the end it comes down to how to manage the cap. Every decision is crucial, some more than others. In this case all we are saying is that MB missed a great opportunity to sign one of his best assets long term at a very friendly cap hit that would give him better chances at other players.

Does this mean because Subban will make a higher cap hit that it will be impossible? Of course not. But logic dictates that having your best player at a cheap cap hit will give you more maneuverability to sign needed players that the organization hasn't been able to acquire via trade or draft. This is all that we are trying to say.
I disagree that signing Subban at 5yrs 25M gives the Habs the best chance to ice the best team.

That's simply not true, not a single signing can determine the outcome of a team's success. Please stop spreading this fallacy. Player performances impact results, not dollar and cents, at least not exclusively.

Let me ask you this, if your best player, Subban is making 5M per year...what does it say for any free agent you have ideas of signing?

It's extremely difficult to sign an impact UFA for under 5M...so you're gonna pay a UFA MORE money then your franchise player?

Hmmm...seems to me that's the kind of deal that throws your salary cap way out of whack, you got your best player making 5M...and you have UFA's who are new to the team making more then your best player

When Subban is up for his new deal in just 4 short years, what do you think he's going to ask for then? Furthermore, how could you justify paying anyone more then your best player at that point?

Look, there are a lot of ways to manipulate your cap situation, yet you guys are convinced there's only ONE way...

I'm not saying that's wrong, I just disagree

Not sure why we can't just agree to have different opinions...no one will ever be able to trace back whether or not the deal Subban signed and will sign was a mistake.

It's impossible to trace that...the consequence of contracts on a roster are so fluid, there are so many moving parts.

Yet you continue to obsess over this single one, when there are 22 other contracts that have just as much of an effect as this one

417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:30 PM
  #716
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,280
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CrAzYNiNe
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
I disagree that signing Subban at 5yrs 25M gives the Habs the best chance to ice the best team.

That's simply not true, not a single signing can determine the outcome of a team's success. Please stop spreading this fallacy

Let me ask you this, if your best player, Subban is making 5M per year...what does it say for any free agent you have ideas of signing?

It's extremely difficult to sign an impact UFA for under 5M...so you're gonna pay a UFA MORE money then your franchise player?

Hmmm...seems to me that's the kind of deal that throws your salary cap way out of whack, you got your best player making 5M...and you have UFA's who are new to the team making more then your best player

When Subban is up for his new deal in just 4 short years, what do you think he's going to ask for then? Furthermore, how could you justify paying anyone more then your best player at that point?

Look, there are a lot of ways to manipulate your cap situation, yet you guys are convinced there's only ONE way...

I'm not saying that's wrong, I just disagree

Not sure why we can't just agree to have different opinions...no one will ever be able to trace back whether or not the deal Subban signed and will sign was a mistake.

It's impossible to trace that...the consequence of contracts on a roster are so fluid, there are so many moving parts.

Yet you continue to obsess over this single one, when there are 22 other contracts that have just as much of an effect as this one
This is what I would of done/do:

2013 ---------> 4,000,000$
2013-2014 ---> 4,500,000$
2014-2015 ---> 5,000,000$
2015-2016 ---> 6,500,000$
2016-2017 ---> 7,000,000$
2018-2019 ---> 7,500,000$
Cap hit of 5,750,000$

See how he makes less money at the beginning then at the end? This is how you get a great player on a cheap cap hit. He is paid like Norris Trophy winner and the Habs get him on a cheap cap hit.

Now on the downside of his career, the Habs get the same luxury as the last contract, because as he approaches his mid 30s, his salary can come down.

To stay in compliance with the 35% year to year rule + the 50% of lowest to highest, this is the deal I would offer
2019-2020 ---> 7,000,000$ (end of the season he is 30)
2020-2021 ---> 7,000,000$ (end of the season he is 31)
2021-2022 ---> 5,600,000$ (end of the season he is 32)
2022-2023 ---> 5,600,000$ (end of the season he is 33)
2023-2024 ---> 5,600,000$ (end of the season he is 34)
2024-2025 ---> 3,700,000$ (end of the season he is 35)
2025-2026 ---> 3,700,000$ (end of the season he is 36)
Cap hit of 5,457,000

I find the concept of saving as much space on each individual contract is important to helping a team win. Like you said, a lot of moving parts. Well this is one of them and why not have it as an added positive?

CrAzYNiNe is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:42 PM
  #717
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 25,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
None of us.

We wouldn't have saved money for this summer. We would have 2.25M less. You should know this if you are arguing one way or another.

The savings would begin next summer.

If you are going to argue this, you should know basic things like this.

EDIT:
Also, I would have signed Subban to an even longer deal if possible. And I wouldn't have touched Clowe with the savings, I'd have gone harder for Lecavalier and I wouldn't have touched Briere with a 10 foot pole.
You've obviously don't know the meaning of 'hypothetical'

417 is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:47 PM
  #718
One Less Louise
Dale Weise it !
 
One Less Louise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 23,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
You've obviously don't know the meaning of 'hypothetical'
You compared his current deal with a 5 year 25M deal.

If that had happened, then we would be paying 2.25M more than the 2.75M cap hit he has. So we wouldn't have gone after Clowe with the savings cuz there wouldn't have been any.

It appears to be you who do not understand your very own hypothetical situations you make up in your own mind to try and prove points. Just saying...

One Less Louise is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:52 PM
  #719
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 38,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68 View Post
Wow OT but I just probably had the worst nightmare in my life. We had to give PK to the Jets for nothing after some violation of the CBA.
Kind of reminds me of the Flames with ROR.

If the Avs had refused to match, apparently the Flames would've had to forfeit the picks and then ROR would have had to have cleared waivers. The Flames never would've got him... There was also some weird clause that would've meant they would've had to pay some or all of ROR's salary too.

Now that would be a nightmare.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 05:58 PM
  #720
Pat Paeplow
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 187
vCash: 500
I personally think PK Subban is a phenomenal talent. But what if Bergevin doesn't feel the same way?

Doesn't the bridge contract make perfect sense if Bergevin plans to move him? If he lets him test the RFA waters its highly likely the Habs get 4 #1 picks coming back. If he shops him in a trade, he might get even better assets especially given PK's marketability in non-traditional hockey markets.

I think he's a generational talent but maybe Bergevin doesn't believe in him. Maybe he's taken full advantage of this year to evaluate what he has in Bealieu and Tinordi. It would be proper asset management and if you make the major assumption that PK Subban isn't good value in the long-term it makes that 2.75 AAV bridge contract look ingenius.

Pat Paeplow is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 06:02 PM
  #721
overlords
youmyboyblou!
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Planet Squanch
Posts: 26,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopamine Fiend View Post
I personally think PK Subban is a phenomenal talent. But what if Bergevin doesn't feel the same way?

.
Then he needs to be fired as soon as possible.


No excuses.

overlords is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 06:04 PM
  #722
One Less Louise
Dale Weise it !
 
One Less Louise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 23,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Then he needs to be fired as soon as possible.


No excuses.
This, a million times this.

If Bergevin can't know basic things about his own team he is not fit to be the GM.

But MB is well aware that Subban is his best player... I have to believe that.

One Less Louise is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 06:04 PM
  #723
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 32,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Would I rather have our current roster with 0M or 6M in cap space?

You're not asking the right question...or course I would rather have it with 6M in capspace (never argued that).

I could ask you..."would you rather have the Boston Bruins roster with virtually no cap space or the Columbus Blue Jackets who have a lot of it???" (actually, HAD a lot of it, take the New York Islanders if you want a better example)

BUT (and sorry, this HAS to be part of the conversation) that additional cap space does not equal improved performance, it only means a lighter payroll

And I don't think I'm being stubborn either, I have an opinion, I think i've said several times that I would have no qualms with either scenario (long term deal off of ELC or bridge deal)...

What I'm arguing is that neither scenario necessarily impacts what happens on the ice...

A lighter payroll and additional cap space (aka flexibility), is not a reason, onto itself, for saying the bridge deal was the wrong decision
Boston and Columbus have entirely different line ups. It is completely impossible and unrealistic.
Now the figures thrown around here is PK making 5M next year as opposed to 8M.
Say the roster stays intact, with identical salaries, but with PK making 5M instead of 8M. We currently have 3M free, that would add another 3M in savings, + cap increase.
So very simple question, would you rather have 6M+cap raise or 3M+cap raise?? Very simple question and I ask it because this was actually possible, it's not an unrealistic scenario like switching an entire team.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 06:12 PM
  #724
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 38,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Then he needs to be fired as soon as possible.
And shot twice and pissed on.








































No excuses.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
07-23-2013, 06:17 PM
  #725
Laboeuf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 138
vCash: 500
it doesn't really matter now. After this season, Subban will make $7+ million per season. It doesn't matter how but he will get his money.

Laboeuf is offline  
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 08:01 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.