HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Free Agency Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-10-2012, 02:39 PM
  #501
EastonBlues22
Mod Supervisor
Team ϶(o)ϵ
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,334
vCash: 500
I had him pegged for an average of about $4.25 million once Perron signed. Anything over $4.5 will be slightly disappointing to me given Armstrong's other signings.

EastonBlues22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 02:41 PM
  #502
stlweir
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Does the signing of Langs elinimate Doan as a potential signing?

stlweir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 02:45 PM
  #503
bleedblue1223
Fire Army
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 24,821
vCash: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlweir View Post
Does the signing of Langs elinimate Doan as a potential signing?
No. Langs will have a 4th line role, where as if Doan or Morrow are added, they would be in a top 9 role.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 02:46 PM
  #504
EastonBlues22
Mod Supervisor
Team ϶(o)ϵ
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlweir View Post
Does the signing of Langs elinimate Doan as a potential signing?
Not if the Blues are looking to move out a forward in a trade, or are willing to put Schwartz in Peoria.

With that said, it seems very unlikely to me that Doan will end up with the Blues...which is pretty much status quo, IMO.

EastonBlues22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 03:01 PM
  #505
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10,555
vCash: 868
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastonBlues22 View Post
I had him pegged for an average of about $4.25 million once Perron signed. Anything over $4.5 will be slightly disappointing to me given Armstrong's other signings.
Armstong gave Backes his contract when his career numbers were 73-89-162 in 296 games, and he was coming off a 17-31-48 season. Oshie is 63-112-175 in 262 games, and is coming off a 19-35-54 season. The cap has also risen from $59m to $70m since Backes signed.

The Blues want to avoid arbitration more than Oshie at this point. Not ideal for getting the best deal.

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 03:35 PM
  #506
EastonBlues22
Mod Supervisor
Team ϶(o)ϵ
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alklha View Post
Armstong gave Backes his contract when his career numbers were 73-89-162 in 296 games, and he was coming off a 17-31-48 season. Oshie is 63-112-175 in 262 games, and is coming off a 19-35-54 season. The cap has also risen from $59m to $70m since Backes signed.

The Blues want to avoid arbitration more than Oshie at this point. Not ideal for getting the best deal.
You might be surprised. Arbitrators don't exactly have a history of being advanced metric savvy, and rate stats/intangibles don't tend to mean much to them either. Defensive value is hard to quantify, especially in comparison to other players, so that's not going to help Oshie's cause all that much. The Blues can easily point out that Oshie's broken 50 points exactly once in his career, has never broken 20 goals, has 3 points in 13 playoff games, and has a history of missing significant time with injuries. An arbitrator could look at that and easily decide that Oshie isn't worth $4 million, much less more than $5 million.

It all depends on the aribitrator, of course, but I'll personally be surprised if Oshie comes out of this process with a deal higher than Backes'.

EastonBlues22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 03:52 PM
  #507
TheOrganist
Don't Call Him Alex
 
TheOrganist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,027
vCash: 500
Backes was the lone core player that was less than a year away from unrestricted free agency when he signed his deal.

TheOrganist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 04:28 PM
  #508
BlueDream
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 10,040
vCash: 500
Correct me if I'm wrong but even with Oshie's signing (let's say he gets about 4.25 mil which would be fair) wouldn't the Blues still be below the cap floor?

I'm still guessing we're going to include D'Ags in a trade for a guy like Morrow. Maybe not him, but I just see a at least 1-2 new faces still being added.

BlueDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 04:53 PM
  #509
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10,555
vCash: 868
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastonBlues22 View Post
You might be surprised. Arbitrators don't exactly have a history of being advanced metric savvy, and rate stats/intangibles don't tend to mean much to them either. Defensive value is hard to quantify, especially in comparison to other players, so that's not going to help Oshie's cause all that much. The Blues can easily point out that Oshie's broken 50 points exactly once in his career, has never broken 20 goals, has 3 points in 13 playoff games, and has a history of missing significant time with injuries. An arbitrator could look at that and easily decide that Oshie isn't worth $4 million, much less more than $5 million.

It all depends on the aribitrator, of course, but I'll personally be surprised if Oshie comes out of this process with a deal higher than Backes'.
I hope I never get to find out what an arbitrator would decide, another 1 year deal isn't the way to go.

You are right though, it would probably be unlikely for an arbitrator to give $5m. They don't generally like comparing other players contracts, but when there is such a similar player on the same team, I think they would find it impossible to ignore. While the Blues have arguments on their side, the fact that $4.5m in 2010 is the equivalent to $5.3m in 2012... I'd expect a basic $4.5m ruling.

Hope I'm wrong and he signs a 6 year $25.5m deal tonight!

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 04:58 PM
  #510
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10,555
vCash: 868
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDream View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong but even with Oshie's signing (let's say he gets about 4.25 mil which would be fair) wouldn't the Blues still be below the cap floor?

I'm still guessing we're going to include D'Ags in a trade for a guy like Morrow. Maybe not him, but I just see a at least 1-2 new faces still being added.
The cap floor has not been set.

The NHL made the decision to tell teams to operate under a $70.2m cap, which would have been the 2012/13 cap under the old CBA. I don't expect them to backtrack on that when the new CBA is agreed to but I expect some provisions to be made going forward. I don't expect them to be enforcing a $54.2m floor.

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 05:15 PM
  #511
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alklha View Post
The cap floor has not been set.

The NHL made the decision to tell teams to operate under a $70.2m cap, which would have been the 2012/13 cap under the old CBA. I don't expect them to backtrack on that when the new CBA is agreed to but I expect some provisions to be made going forward. I don't expect them to be enforcing a $54.2m floor.
However I'm pretty sure if they roll back the cap then player salaries across the board would be rolled back. They could do something differently but that's what happened last time. The cap is set according to a formula. Players get 57% of total league revenues IIRC, and the owners want it rolled closer to 50% like the NFL and other leagues. So under 57% formula then 54.2 to 70.2 is the range, but under something closer to 50% the cap the range would be lower. But, player salaries would be reduced proportionally I think, in order to be fair to all parties. They can't have a team spending to the cap in good faith at 70.2M suddenly be millions over the cap and in non-compliance.

I'm not 100% this is how it would work but I think I'm on solid ground in understanding it that way. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong.) If this is the correct analysis then the Blues would still remain below the cap floor because while the cap floor would be lower, across the board all salaries would go lower.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 05:20 PM
  #512
bleedblue1223
Fire Army
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 24,821
vCash: 130
Yeah, that's how it worked before.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 05:29 PM
  #513
EastonBlues22
Mod Supervisor
Team ϶(o)ϵ
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,334
vCash: 500
IIRC, last time there was a fixed rollback of 24% for all existing contracts and a 6 day period where teams could buyout any contracts they wanted to shed.

I have no idea how it would work this time, but a relative rollback of about 12% across the board certainly seems possible. Alternatively, they might simply give teams a grace period to get under the new cap, which might not go into effect until next offseason.


Last edited by EastonBlues22: 07-10-2012 at 05:48 PM.
EastonBlues22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 05:38 PM
  #514
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10,555
vCash: 868
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
However I'm pretty sure if they roll back the cap then player salaries across the board would be rolled back. They could do something differently but that's what happened last time. The cap is set according to a formula. Players get 57% of total league revenues IIRC, and the owners want it rolled closer to 50% like the NFL and other leagues. So under 57% formula then 54.2 to 70.2 is the range, but under something closer to 50% the cap the range would be lower. But, player salaries would be reduced proportionally I think, in order to be fair to all parties. They can't have a team spending to the cap in good faith at 70.2M suddenly be millions over the cap and in non-compliance.

I'm not 100% this is how it would work but I think I'm on solid ground in understanding it that way. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong.) If this is the correct analysis then the Blues would still remain below the cap floor because while the cap floor would be lower, across the board all salaries would go lower.
Your understanding of what would happen in that scenario is correct.

I don't think that this will be considered this time though. For a start, the NHL told teams to operate under a $70.2m cap and allowed teams to be spend happy in free agency. It would now be unfair to players on existing deals to be punished for the stupidity of the NHL.

As you said, the owners want a reduction from 57% to 50% of League revenue. If something that drastic was to happen, the cap would drop to about $61.6m.

I suspect that any lowering of the share of League revenue will be on the basis that the cap stays at the current level until the new share is greater than the current $70.2m cap. Another aspect being the cap floor will be lower during that period as well.

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 05:42 PM
  #515
bleedblue1223
Fire Army
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 24,821
vCash: 130
You can't bring back the cap and not do anything about the players' salaries. You wouldn't even be doing anything.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 07:32 PM
  #516
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,728
vCash: 500
I'm guessing maybe the league isn't going to be too hard on the players with this deal.

The NBC contract really changed the revenue stream and attendance is solid. The few weak teams being the exception.

I think labor peace may be worth giving up a bigger slice of the pie to Bettman then some owners may want to.

execwrite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 10:57 PM
  #517
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 9,804
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by execwrite View Post
I'm guessing maybe the league isn't going to be too hard on the players with this deal.

The NBC contract really changed the revenue stream and attendance is solid. The few weak teams being the exception.

I think labor peace may be worth giving up a bigger slice of the pie to Bettman then some owners may want to.
Bettman works for the owners. And if they truly want to reduce the players to 50% of the revenue, something will have to give (or be negotiated).

2 Minute Minor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 11:20 PM
  #518
Dolph Ziggler
#TeamZiggler Captain
 
Dolph Ziggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 11,870
vCash: 380
I love T.J. Oshie but he shouldn't make 4.5 or more.

I wonder what Oshie's peak is, but I don't think it is much higher than 60 points.

Dolph Ziggler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 11:33 PM
  #519
Ignore42me*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inglorious One View Post
I love T.J. Oshie but he shouldn't make 4.5 or more.

I wonder what Oshie's peak is, but I don't think it is much higher than 60 points.
I agree, if he consistently scores 25+ goals i would be surprised.

Ignore42me* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2012, 12:34 AM
  #520
JustOneB4IDie
Everyone Overpayment
 
JustOneB4IDie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: St. Louis MO
Country: United States
Posts: 3,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignore42me View Post
I agree, if he consistently scores 25+ goals i would be surprised.
Agree, especially with Hitchcock as coach.

JustOneB4IDie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2012, 09:20 AM
  #521
Dolph Ziggler
#TeamZiggler Captain
 
Dolph Ziggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 11,870
vCash: 380
I wish I had more faith in Chris Stewart because it would make flipping Oshie for Yandle a whole lot easier.

Then again, if he was more consistent, we could just trade him for Yandle.

Dolph Ziggler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2012, 10:02 PM
  #522
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
The Oshie/Armstrong negotiation is foreshadowing for Chris Stewart actually "proving it" during his prove it contract this year. This has been a legitimate argument I've been making about why Stewart should be the guy traded (still). When guys prove it and are very near UFA (next summer Stewart will be one year from UFA) then they want big deals that aren't really hometown discounts. So if Stewart rebounds as we hope, we have a very probable chance at this similar situation next summer. If Stewart doesn't rebound, then his value is lower than it is right now. There's a very small sweet spot where he rebounds enough to be a contributor but not enough to demand a big deal. To expect him to hit that sweet spot is to assume a risk. IMO that risk is greater than the risk that would come from trading him, especially if he can help get you a needed piece that will improve the club in another area.

Anyway, wanted to use the Oshie situation as we await the final week before arbitration to underscore the point on Stewart. My top hope is they either use him in an acceptable package to get someone like Yandle or Giordano (though I would understand why CGY/PHX might be hesitant) OR that he starts out strong like Stempniak did just before he was traded and the Blues do the same with Stewart. Because if Stewart is still on single digits for goals by New Year's, he'll be on his way to being Anthony Stewart, one of the worst players in the whole league.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2012, 10:40 PM
  #523
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 9,804
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
The Oshie/Armstrong negotiation is foreshadowing for Chris Stewart actually "proving it" during his prove it contract this year. This has been a legitimate argument I've been making about why Stewart should be the guy traded (still). When guys prove it and are very near UFA (next summer Stewart will be one year from UFA) then they want big deals that aren't really hometown discounts. So if Stewart rebounds as we hope, we have a very probable chance at this similar situation next summer. If Stewart doesn't rebound, then his value is lower than it is right now. There's a very small sweet spot where he rebounds enough to be a contributor but not enough to demand a big deal. To expect him to hit that sweet spot is to assume a risk. IMO that risk is greater than the risk that would come from trading him, especially if he can help get you a needed piece that will improve the club in another area.

Anyway, wanted to use the Oshie situation as we await the final week before arbitration to underscore the point on Stewart. My top hope is they either use him in an acceptable package to get someone like Yandle or Giordano (though I would understand why CGY/PHX might be hesitant) OR that he starts out strong like Stempniak did just before he was traded and the Blues do the same with Stewart. Because if Stewart is still on single digits for goals by New Year's, he'll be on his way to being Anthony Stewart, one of the worst players in the whole league.
Stewart rebounding and wanting to get paid is a problem I'd like to have.

2 Minute Minor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2012, 10:47 PM
  #524
bleedblue1223
Fire Army
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 24,821
vCash: 130
If we have an in-form Stewart, I'm pretty a deep, deep run, which means more $$$.

If Stewart performs, I think it will be less likely that McDonald will be brought back if money becomes an issue.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2012, 01:38 AM
  #525
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2 Minute Minor View Post
Stewart rebounding and wanting to get paid is a problem I'd like to have.
It would be good ... for one, maybe two years. The year where he rebounds, this would be good, probably (unless he performed in regular season but not in playoffs in which case it's especially worthless). Then he'd be RFA for one year and would demand to be paid a lot (no home town discount for having had to prove it) in which case it could go to arbitration and the Blues would likely lose the asset at UFA. So you'd benefit from his improved services for one or two years or be forced to spend a lot on a player whose career signature trait is inconsistency.

On the other hand, if you traded him in a way that brought back something that helps the team (defined as in a package for a top LHD or a longer term asset), then you get the benefit of that player for longer. So trading him is still better than the "good problem" created by him rebounding, asset management-wise, IMO.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:22 AM.

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

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