HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Armchair GM Thread - XXXVII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-16-2013, 02:25 PM
  #1001
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,157
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Those numbers don't add up. With the same roster (and $2M committed to a #6 defenseman) I get $63,749,458 leaving $550K in space and a 21 man roster (12 forwards, 7 defensemen, and 2 goalies). For some reason Capgeek is treating Luongo's retained salary as a roster spot, so despite what it says below, it's actually a 21 man roster:


CAPGEEK.COM USER GENERATED ROSTER
My Custom Lineup
FORWARDS
Daniel Sedin ($6.100m) / Henrik Sedin ($6.100m) / Alexandre Burrows ($4.500m)
Ryan Kesler ($5.000m) / Derek Roy ($5.000m) / Zack Kassian ($0.870m)
Chris Higgins ($2.500m) / Jordan Schroeder ($1.025m) / Jannik Hansen ($1.350m)
Kellan Lain ($0.874m) / Maxim Lapierre ($1.000m) / Dale Weise ($0.851m)
DEFENSEMEN
Alexander Edler ($5.000m) / Kevin Bieksa ($4.600m)
Jason Garrison ($4.600m) / Dan Hamhuis ($4.500m)
Chris Tanev ($1.851m) / 6th Defenseman ($2.000m)
Andrew Alberts ($1.225m) /
GOALTENDERS
Eddie Lack ($0.750m)
Cory Schneider ($4.000m)
OTHER
Buyout: David Booth ($0.000m)
Buyout: Keith Ballard ($0.000m)
RETAINED SALARY TRANSACTIONS (0.083% of upper limit)
Roberto Luongo ($0.053m—1.0%)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $63,749,458; BONUSES: $0
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $550,542
I hadn't included the 6th defenseman in the salary cap, and I manually subtracted the retained 1% of Luongo's contract because I couldn't figure out how to trade him without retaining contract.

So basically it leaves us $2.6M for BOTH a 6th defenseman AND a 13th forward.

LeftCoast is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 03:17 PM
  #1002
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
I hadn't included the 6th defenseman in the salary cap, and I manually subtracted the retained 1% of Luongo's contract because I couldn't figure out how to trade him without retaining contract.

So basically it leaves us $2.6M for BOTH a 6th defenseman AND a 13th forward.
I see. Still, that's a 20 man roster with $2.6M in cap space to fill 3 spaces. I guess I just don't see the team trying to go 82 games with a permanently shortened roster and no cap space. I see any roster that's not made up of 23 players as being sort of unrealistic.

They might be able to pull off a lineup like you've posted, but I think it would require some cutbacks in the quality of depth players similar to what they had in 10-11 where they had Bolduc/Desbiens/Glass/Rypien level players on the 4th line. Guys like Lapierre and Lain are probably too expensive for that role. Defense is a similar story where Alberts is probably too expensive for a 7th defenseman. Either he'd have to be considered part of the top 6 or he'd have to be let go.

If the Canucks are going to keep Roy and can manage to get rid of Ballard, Luongo, and Booth without any salary coming back they'd probably need a lineup like the following:


Forwards:

D. Sedin ($6.1M) / H. Sedin ($6.1M) / Burrows ($4.5M)
Roy ($5M) / Kesler ($5M) / Hansen ($1.35M)
Higgins ($2.5M) / Schroeder ($1M) / Kassian ($870K)
4th line winger ($650K) / 4th line center ($650K) / Weise ($800K)
13th forward ($600K)



Defense:

Hamhuis ($4.5M) / Garrison ($4.6M)
Edler ($5M) / Bieksa ($4.6M)
Tanev ($1.5M) / 6th Defenseman ($2M)
7th Defenseman ($750K)
8th Defenseman ($750K)


Goaltenders:

Schneider ($4M)
Backup Goalie ($1M)


Payroll: $63.67M

Cap space: $630K


Far from ideal, but I think those are the kind of sacrifices that will need to be made if they want to keep Roy (or Booth).

opendoor is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 03:30 PM
  #1003
kanuck87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post

Forwards:

D. Sedin ($6.1M) / H. Sedin ($6.1M) / Burrows ($4.5M)
Roy ($5M) / Kesler ($5M) / Hansen ($1.35M)
Higgins ($2.5M) / Schroeder ($1M) / Kassian ($870K)
4th line winger ($650K) / 4th line center ($650K) / Weise ($800K)
13th forward ($600K)



Defense:

Hamhuis ($4.5M) / Garrison ($4.6M)
Edler ($5M) / Bieksa ($4.6M)
Tanev ($1.5M) / 6th Defenseman ($2M)
7th Defenseman ($750K)
8th Defenseman ($750K)


Goaltenders:

Schneider ($4M)
Backup Goalie ($1M)


Payroll: $63.67M

Cap space: $630K
Yikes, that's cutting it pretty close, but yeah, I see nowhere else that we can make any more sacrifices. That's why I don't particularly like the Higgins signing. The signing itself is great, but from a cap perspective, either you lose a lot of cap flexibility, or it means you wont be able to go out and sign or re-sign a player like Roy, who is a more important player than Higgins.

kanuck87 is online now  
Old
04-16-2013, 04:15 PM
  #1004
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanuck87 View Post
Yikes, that's cutting it pretty close, but yeah, I see nowhere else that we can make any more sacrifices. That's why I don't particularly like the Higgins signing. The signing itself is great, but from a cap perspective, either you lose a lot of cap flexibility, or it means you wont be able to go out and sign or re-sign a player like Roy, who is a more important player than Higgins.
$630K might be doable because they'll have a 23 man roster which means 3 spares when healthy. Still, it is pretty inflexible.

If they did want to cut back, the defense would probably be the first place to do it. A $1.5M 6th defenseman would put them at over $1M in space which is probably sufficient.

The problem is that it relies on a bunch of things all falling into place perfectly. Luongo, Ballard, and Booth would have to be moved out without any salary coming back in return and Roy would have to agree to re-sign. All 4 of those things happening is something I don't really see as being realistic.

opendoor is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 04:46 PM
  #1005
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 22,709
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Luongo, Ballard, and Booth would have to be moved out without any salary coming back in return
Two compliance buyouts (Ballard & Booth) would solve that pretty easily.


(granted it's not my money )

Barney Gumble is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 04:47 PM
  #1006
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
I see. Still, that's a 20 man roster with $2.6M in cap space to fill 3 spaces. I guess I just don't see the team trying to go 82 games with a permanently shortened roster and no cap space. I see any roster that's not made up of 23 players as being sort of unrealistic.
This was a problem in the old CBA, no nearly as much anymore. Excerpt from the new CBA:

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBA - Economic & System Issues, 24. Minimum Playing Roster
Clubs who are forced by reason of insufficient Cap Room (resulting from Player injury or suspension) to dress short of 18 and 2 for consecutive games (“roster emergency”) may, beginning for the second and continuing with all subsequent consecutive games, and without any charge to the team’s Payroll Range for the duration of the roster emergency, add to its Playing Roster and dress the requisite number of “emergency replacement” Players provided, however, that:

a) Any and all such recalled “emergency replacement” Players shall have an AA that is not more than the then-applicable NHL Minimum Salary plus $100,000 ( e.g., currently $625,000), and
b) Each such Player may only remain on that Club’s Active Roster during the period of the “roster emergency."
Basically looks like we can call up as many league minimum players as we need during roster emergencies, unless I'm reading it incorrectly. If you want to bring up more valuable players (like Schroeder, who make more than 100k over the league minimum) it will cost you like it does today but this still provides an out for cap hugging teams to play risky.

Andrew Ebbett, for example, is a free callup for roster emergencies. Stack the farm with a few people like that and we should be fine playing with a 21/22 man roster right at the cap.

CloutierForVezina is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 05:10 PM
  #1007
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
This was a problem in the old CBA, no nearly as much anymore. Excerpt from the new CBA:



Basically looks like we can call up as many league minimum players as we need during roster emergencies, unless I'm reading it incorrectly. If you want to bring up more valuable players (like Schroeder, who make more than 100k over the league minimum) it will cost you like it does today but this still provides an out for cap hugging teams to play risky.

Andrew Ebbett, for example, is a free callup for roster emergencies. Stack the farm with a few people like that and we should be fine playing with a 21/22 man roster right at the cap.
Yeah, but that doesn't kick in until the 2nd game that a guy misses so you still have to play at least once with a 19 man roster prior to each callup. It'd work in a catastrophic situation, but I'm doubtful anyone's going to rely on that as their primary means of recalling a player because it would mean willingly playing several games a year with a shortened lineup.

Not to mention there are many other reasons other than injuries as to why it's not good to be so close to the cap. You never build up space for an acquisition at the deadline, you can't really recall any guys on ELCs unless you have LTIR room for them, and it eliminates a lot of roster flexibility with regards to waiver claims or trades.

Maybe I'll be proven wrong, but I'm skeptical that going with a non 23 man roster and no cap space for an 82 game season is a viable option that any team will willingly undertake.

opendoor is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 05:57 PM
  #1008
CloutierForVezina
Registered User
 
CloutierForVezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Yeah, but that doesn't kick in until the 2nd game that a guy misses so you still have to play at least once with a 19 man roster prior to each callup. It'd work in a catastrophic situation, but I'm doubtful anyone's going to rely on that as their primary means of recalling a player because it would mean willingly playing several games a year with a shortened lineup.

Not to mention there are many other reasons other than injuries as to why it's not good to be so close to the cap. You never build up space for an acquisition at the deadline, you can't really recall any guys on ELCs unless you have LTIR room for them, and it eliminates a lot of roster flexibility with regards to waiver claims or trades.

Maybe I'll be proven wrong, but I'm skeptical that going with a non 23 man roster and no cap space for an 82 game season is a viable option that any team will willingly undertake.
It depends how risk averse you are and what your outlook is.

Would you rather run a 22 man roster with Roy @ 5M or would you rather run a 23 man roster with Raymond @ 4M? I'd rather go with the Roy roster and swing for the fences because if injuries hit, we're going to be screwed either way. I would rather just stack the team and hope for the best.

I totally understand why some people would prefer playing it safe (and I agree there's other issues that would make you want to stay below the cap), but I don't think teams win the Stanley Cup without some serious roster juicing. You need one or more of: some crazy talented rookies on ELCs, discounts all around (everyone playing above their salary) or to squeeze every last penny out of the cap space you have.

I doubt any team will try this tactic because they are managed by GMs who want to keep their jobs and "I gambled and lost" is a good way to get yourself fired.

CloutierForVezina is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 06:01 PM
  #1009
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,230
vCash: 1815
If Bozak's getting 5 mil, I shudder at what Roy would get...

I honestly think he'll walk next year and sign with a team like St. Louis.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 06:50 PM
  #1010
Al Swearengen
Smug Nation National
 
Al Swearengen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,320
vCash: 500
Anyone who likes rap music and hockey might get a kick out of this article from SmugNation.com regarding the authenticity of our six remaining regular season opponents.

Al Swearengen is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 09:35 PM
  #1011
vector209
Registered User
 
vector209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 624
vCash: 500
Is it possible to get Ehrhoff back somehow. Please?

vector209 is offline  
Old
04-20-2013, 11:12 PM
  #1012
nmain37*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 125
vCash: 500
Alexander Edler and Ryan Keeler for Shea Weber

nmain37* 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 07:38 PM.

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

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