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

Bettman says cap likely up $2 million next season

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-28-2010, 05:36 PM
  #26
Darth Joker
Registered User
 
Darth Joker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonCH View Post
I wouldn't bet on it
He's come this far, i just don't see him signing pre-July 1
He will test the market
UFA at 27 only comes around once, he'd be crazy not to
Pleks made $2.8 million last year.

$2.8 million plus this additional $2 million = $4.8 million

That really ought to be enough for Pleks. It's more than I think he's worth, frankly, but if the salary cap goes up, then so be it.

If Pleks wants more than that, we might as well let him walk and make a pitch for Marleau. I mean, if you can get Marleau for just a million or two more than Pleks, then you might as well go for it.

Darth Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 05:49 PM
  #27
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Joker View Post
Pleks made $2.8 million last year.

$2.8 million plus this additional $2 million = $4.8 million

That really ought to be enough for Pleks. It's more than I think he's worth, frankly, but if the salary cap goes up, then so be it.

If Pleks wants more than that, we might as well let him walk and make a pitch for Marleau. I mean, if you can get Marleau for just a million or two more than Pleks, then you might as well go for it.
Actually, unless Plekanec signs prior to July 1st, we would be better advised to target Marleau before him at all. It is not even remotely debatable who the superior player of the two is. Frankly I am hard pressed to offer Plekanec $5 million after one good season and a lackluster playoff run. I would rather use that money to target a cheaper centre and make a pitch for Marleau as previously mentioned and/or Hamhuis or Volchenkov. If we could reel in the latter, between him Gill and Jorges, we could leave that net empty half the game and still never be scored on.

Bourne Endeavor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 05:57 PM
  #28
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
So the Habs alarmists were wrong yet again, this time about the cap increase...what a surprise.

Ozymandias has been saying this the entire year, it was quite obvious the cap was going to increase.
Wow forget the conversation, lets move this into the "was trading chips a mistake" thread, since you and ozy obviously have all the answers there is no need for a discussion. We will put this beside the Guy Boucher thread and how the habs will block other teams from signing him.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:02 PM
  #29
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
So the Habs alarmists were wrong yet again, this time about the cap increase...what a surprise.

Ozymandias has been saying this the entire year, it was quite obvious the cap was going to increase.
I wouldn't say it was obvious. But the alarmists were certainly wrong in screaming murder for a problem that was purely hypothetical.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:03 PM
  #30
mvp76
Registered User
 
mvp76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: planet earth
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,825
vCash: 500
Great news for us eighter way we go about using it..If we could still manage to free up some more space, even better. There are always some tempting free agents around

mvp76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:11 PM
  #31
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
I wouldn't say it was obvious. But the alarmists were certainly wrong in screaming murder for a problem that was purely hypothetical.
The alarmists were 100% right when they said Scott Gomez and other overpriced contracts would make it difficult to improve their team. Regardless of the 2million dollar increase or Halak carrying this team to the ECF I still believe those in favor of a different direction were 100% right, until the Habs win a cup, you can't prove otherwise.

The results were great this year, but I don't believe that they are 1 bit indicative of where this team stands, we overachieved by a wide margin, largely do to Halak and I don't think anyone was ever arguing these poor contracts would hurt us short term.

The true effects of Gaineys off season acquisitions will not be felt for a few years. Wait until 2011-2012 at least before you go tooting the Gainey horn.


Last edited by habsjunkie2*: 05-28-2010 at 06:16 PM.
habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:17 PM
  #32
scottyG
Registered User
 
scottyG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal,Qc
Posts: 4,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
The alarmists were 100% right when they said Scott Gomez and other overpriced contracts would make it difficult to improve their team. Regardless of the 2million dollar increase or Halak carrying this team to the ECF I still beleive those in favor of a different direction were 100% right, until the Habs win a cup, you can't prove otherwise.

The results were great this year, but I don't believe that they are 1 bit indicative of where this team stands, we overachieved by a wide margin, largely do to Halak
If this is true than the cap will go from 56.8 million to 58.8 million.

Gomez
Cammy
Gionta
Markov
Price/Halak

Our core will all be locked up mid-long term

We will then loses big salaries in 1-2 years (Hamrlik,Gill,Spacek,etc)

I really don't see a problem with our contracts unless their not producing(Drury,Redden,Horcoff)

If every couple of drafts we can find a Streit,Halak,Subban,etc we'll be fine

scottyG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:18 PM
  #33
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
The alarmists were 100% right when they said Scott Gomez and other overpriced contracts would make it difficult to improve their team. Regardless of the 2million dollar increase or Halak carrying this team to the ECF I still beleive those in favor of a different direction were 100% right, until the Habs win a cup, you can't prove otherwise.

The results were great this year, but I don't believe that they are 1 bit indicative of where this team stands, we overachieved by a wide margin, largely do to Halak
Oh please. You make it sound like it's some kind of threshold that screw us forever, and that Gomez magically crossed it.

They weren't 100% right, for the obvious reason that all these talk about not being to sign anyone are suddenly obsolete with the cap rising. We can actually affort keeping everyone worthwile and signing Plekanec back, which is something the doom and gloomer were calling wishful thinking.

If a incredible deal for a top center manifest himself and we can't move because of Gomez, THEN the alarmists will have a point. Until then it's all talk.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:20 PM
  #34
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyG View Post
If this is true than the cap will go from 56.8 million to 58.8 million.

Gomez
Cammy
Gionta
Markov
Price/Halak

Our core will all be locked up mid-long term

We will then loses big salaries in 1-2 years (Hamrlik,Gill,Spacek,etc)

I really don't see a problem with our contracts unless their not producing(Drury,Redden,Horcoff)

If every couple of drafts we can find a Streit,Halak,Subban,etc we'll be fine
Common Scotty, we might have to sacrifice someone from our strongest position (goal tending) how will you feel if CP is traded prematurely because of our terrible cap structure?

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:23 PM
  #35
scottyG
Registered User
 
scottyG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal,Qc
Posts: 4,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
Common Scotty, we might have to sacrifice someone from our strongest position (goal tending) how will you feel if CP is traded prematurely because of our terrible cap structure?
If we get back a great player I wouldn't mind... You can't have 2 #1's for 5-10 years anyways. One will be traded this year or next

You make it seem like were ****ed... Go look around the league at teams over 50 million in salaries, you will see not all of them are stanley cup contenders

scottyG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:23 PM
  #36
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Oh please. You make it sound like it's some kind of threshold that screw us forever, and that Gomez magically crossed it.

They weren't 100% right, for the obvious reason that all these talk about not being to sign anyone are suddenly obsolete with the cap rising. We can actually affort keeping everyone worthwile and signing Plekanec back, which is something the doom and gloomer were calling wishful thinking.

If a incredible deal for a top center manifest himself and we can't move because of Gomez, THEN the alarmists will have a point. Until then it's all talk.
No one ever thought we wouldn't be able to resign pleks. The argument was we have no flexibility to improve the roster and our current roster isn't good enough. At least argue what was actually discussed instead of making things up. Sure we can keep Pleks, no one ever thought otherwise, but the overpriced contracts in our top 6 make it extremely difficult to improve our bottom 6. Our bottom 6 has been below average all year and will not change a whole lot.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:27 PM
  #37
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
No one ever thought we wouldn't be able to resign pleks. The argument was we have no flexibility to improve the roster and our current roster isn't good enough. At least argue what was actually discussed instead of making things up. Sure we can keep Pleks, no one ever thought otherwise, but the overpriced contracts in our top 6 make it extremely difficult to improve our bottom 6. Our bottom 6 has been below average all year and will not change a whole lot.
Keeping Plekanec at what he reportedly want was only doable if we traded away some salary - that's why there was so much talk regarding letting Hamrlik or Spacek go. Now it's no longer necessary.

2M goes a LONG way in helping us iron out our current lineup.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:33 PM
  #38
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyG View Post
If we get back a great player I wouldn't mind... You can't have 2 #1's for 5-10 years anyways. One will be traded this year or next

You make it seem like were ****ed... Go look around the league at teams over 50 million in salaries, you will see not all of them are stanley cup contenders
Neither has been able to prove they are a bonafide number 1, not even CP. If we have to let one go because of cap restraints it truly is a tragedy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Keeping Plekanec at what he reportedly want was only doable if we traded away some salary - that's why there was so much talk regarding letting Hamrlik or Spacek go. Now it's no longer necessary.

2M goes a LONG way in helping us iron out our current lineup.
It goes a long way to keeping it the same. Staying the same isn't good enough. It does nothing to help us improve our roster. Most fans thought the cap would increase slightly, no one knew how much.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:37 PM
  #39
scottyG
Registered User
 
scottyG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal,Qc
Posts: 4,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
Neither has been able to prove they are a bonafide number 1, not even CP. If we have to let one go because of cap restraints it truly is a tragedy
That happens to every team in the league. You are bound to lose players in a salary cap world, plus how is it bad anyways? When we drafted Price 5th overall it was because hes going to be our #1, if he doesn't pan out its just going to be because he busted(which as nothing to do with a salary cap)

scottyG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:40 PM
  #40
Daice
Registered User
 
Daice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 947
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Le depisteur View Post
LECAVALIER!!!
/ SLAP

Daice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 06:43 PM
  #41
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyG View Post
That happens to every team in the league. You are bound to lose players in a salary cap world, plus how is it bad anyways? When we drafted Price 5th overall it was because hes going to be our #1, if he doesn't pan out its just going to be because he busted(which as nothing to do with a salary cap)
Not true, if we trade him next year, it doesn't mean he is a bust. You know this very well. It will be a grave mistake, I have been a huge Halak fan, but can admit that trading Price at 23 would be a bad move.

BTW it wasn't only so-called alarmist who suggested trading Hamrlik, some people who pretend to know better, think not only is it better, but likely, we can trade both Hamrlik and Spacek while improving our d.

There is zero chance it happens, but it's fun to dream about.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 07:01 PM
  #42
ReVeuF
Registered User
 
ReVeuF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,038
vCash: 500
The agents of all our UFA/RFA were waiting for the cap raise announcement, now the negotiations starts for real.

ReVeuF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 07:03 PM
  #43
Westcoasthabsfan
Registered User
 
Westcoasthabsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In Pandoras Box
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bretvincent View Post
Cap will likely go down in next few years though because canadian dollar is expected to fall I believe and most of these raises in cap are due to strong dollar.
Wrong the dollar is expected to rival the american dollar for years to come as our economy is in better shape then our neighbours to the South

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Joker View Post
Pleks made $2.8 million last year.

$2.8 million plus this additional $2 million = $4.8 million

That really ought to be enough for Pleks. It's more than I think he's worth, frankly, but if the salary cap goes up, then so be it.

If Pleks wants more than that, we might as well let him walk and make a pitch for Marleau. I mean, if you can get Marleau for just a million or two more than Pleks, then you might as well go for it.
5 mil for Pleks? Lol he won't get that from the habs

Westcoasthabsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 07:15 PM
  #44
katatoniak
Registered User
 
katatoniak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jonquiere, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,235
vCash: 500
Good news if it goes up 2 millions.

1000th posts!!!!

katatoniak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 07:39 PM
  #45
Newhabfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,048
vCash: 500
I'm very disappointed.

Am I the only one that thinks this is actually "bad news" for the Habs ?

See - the Habs always built their team in a cap responsible manner. Meaning we never offered one of those front loaded 12 years contract for 35 year old star veterans. 'Cause we thought that the cap is going to stay stable and only reflect the economical situation of the NHL and maybe the society.

You can not convince me that the league's revenues justify this increase.

There are teams with huuuuge cap problems (like the two playing tomorrow). They put themselves in that position by giving absurd money, and not respecting the cap. Up to now, they were in danger of not being able to keep some of their stars, and forced to trade them .... who would have benefited out of that ? That's right, cap responsible teams like the Habs.

It's almost as if we were playing a game with a set of rules. Those teams did not respect the rules and they pressured Bettman into changing the rules so that they can keep their stars (and their precious american fans). In my book that's cheating.

It's the same as when teams post lookout built on speed and skill, basing themselves on the new stricter penalty rules....only to discover in the Playoffs that the penalty calling rules were switched back to pre lookout.

Cheating - and the Habs are losing. Now there will be a team offering a front loaded 15 years deal to Pleks that we will not afford to counter, cause we play by the rules.

Oh, and guess where the Bell Centre ticket raise will go now....

Newhabfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 08:42 PM
  #46
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newhabfan View Post
I'm very disappointed.

Am I the only one that thinks this is actually "bad news" for the Habs ?

See - the Habs always built their team in a cap responsible manner. Meaning we never offered one of those front loaded 12 years contract for 35 year old star veterans. 'Cause we thought that the cap is going to stay stable and only reflect the economical situation of the NHL and maybe the society.

You can not convince me that the league's revenues justify this increase.

There are teams with huuuuge cap problems (like the two playing tomorrow). They put themselves in that position by giving absurd money, and not respecting the cap. Up to now, they were in danger of not being able to keep some of their stars, and forced to trade them .... who would have benefited out of that ? That's right, cap responsible teams like the Habs.

It's almost as if we were playing a game with a set of rules. Those teams did not respect the rules and they pressured Bettman into changing the rules so that they can keep their stars (and their precious american fans). In my book that's cheating.

It's the same as when teams post lookout built on speed and skill, basing themselves on the new stricter penalty rules....only to discover in the Playoffs that the penalty calling rules were switched back to pre lookout.

Cheating - and the Habs are losing. Now there will be a team offering a front loaded 15 years deal to Pleks that we will not afford to counter, cause we play by the rules.

Oh, and guess where the Bell Centre ticket raise will go now....
To be fair, the Habs were not exactly sporting excellence in cap management by acquiring Gomez's ridiculous contract and overpaying for a handful of other players. We were in a difficult position had this rumored two million increase not arose because with Plekanec, Price and Halak, the likelihood of signing all three in addition to our lower tier RFAs would have been impossible.

Of course Chicago and Philadelphia benefit significantly more so because they were up against the wire and in nigh desperation to move specific players. That being said, you may cite it as cheating however the NHL is a business and their ultimate goal is to earn an annual profit. Chicago is currently selling tickets for over $1,200 per person. From a business position, allowing the Hawks to falter would be foolish. All it unjustified however c'est la vie. Money trumps everything in today's society and I personally have nary a qualm with this increase. We benefit in the long haul as well, so why not take advantage?

Bourne Endeavor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 09:14 PM
  #47
Newhabfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne View Post
To be fair, the Habs were not exactly sporting excellence in cap management by acquiring Gomez's ridiculous contract and overpaying for a handful of other players. We were in a difficult position had this rumored two million increase not arose because with Plekanec, Price and Halak, the likelihood of signing all three in addition to our lower tier RFAs would have been impossible.

Of course Chicago and Philadelphia benefit significantly more so because they were up against the wire and in nigh desperation to move specific players. That being said, you may cite it as cheating however the NHL is a business and their ultimate goal is to earn an annual profit. Chicago is currently selling tickets for over $1,200 per person. From a business position, allowing the Hawks to falter would be foolish. All it unjustified however c'est la vie. Money trumps everything in today's society and I personally have nary a qualm with this increase. We benefit in the long haul as well, so why not take advantage?
Gomez is overpaid by 1-1.5 million for 4 more years. And who are you targeting with "overpaying for a handful of other players" ? Camalleri ? Gionta ? Gill ? None of those can compare to Brian Campbell, Pronger or Huet or other front loaded monsters.

Speaking of dollars - how many did the Hawks and other American teams get through revenue sharing ? The Habs are giving money to Tampa Bay so that they can offer a 10 years contract to Lecavalier - frustrating isn't it ?

Basically - they paid no attention to the cap whatsoever - who cares if we have 45 million locked on 12 players or worse - we 'll just ask uncle Gary to raise the cap again...

Maybe the Habs benefit a little - but the Habs opponents will benefit a lot more from this "adjustment". That sucks.

Newhabfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2010, 11:34 PM
  #48
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,175
vCash: 500
Amazing how a strong Canadian dollar that only affects 6 teams can get the league to raise the cap by 60mill overall eh.

...and Gary wants to keep the Coyotes in Arizona instead of Winnipeg or Hamilton....smart business right there what a joke.
Sooner or later the NHL will figure out that the Canadian teams are the heart of and what really powers the NHL.
Too bad it will take a couple dozen or more boxes of crayons to finally explain it to 'em.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2010, 02:13 AM
  #49
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koseegin View Post
So the Habs alarmists were wrong yet again, this time about the cap increase...what a surprise.

Ozymandias has been saying this the entire year, it was quite obvious the cap was going to increase.
Thank you.

Yup, as always, right on the mark of the mid-season analysis.

As long as revenues go up, the cap goes up. The NHL hasn't had a single season were there wasn't an improvement in revenues since the new CBA came into place, hence, the cap keeps going up. And usually when Bettman comes out in mid-season and says the cap COULD go up -x- mil $, it usually ends-up being right. I hate Bettman, but the NHL's financial forecasts are very good.

So now the cap is gonna be close to 59 mil.

And the Habs have the entire defense locked-up, and 4 of the top 6 on offense and have 15 mil, to sign -6-7 role players, and Plex, Halak and Price.

The Habs have quite enough leeway to modify the team and improve it. Trades will be key, but not necessarily to acquire players, rather to create free spots on the lineup and further cap space (Hammer, Spacek, AK).

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2010, 09:05 AM
  #50
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
The alarmists were 100% right when they said Scott Gomez and other overpriced contracts would make it difficult to improve their team. Regardless of the 2million dollar increase or Halak carrying this team to the ECF I still believe those in favor of a different direction were 100% right, until the Habs win a cup, you can't prove otherwise.

The results were great this year, but I don't believe that they are 1 bit indicative of where this team stands, we overachieved by a wide margin, largely do to Halak and I don't think anyone was ever arguing these poor contracts would hurt us short term.

The true effects of Gaineys off season acquisitions will not be felt for a few years. Wait until 2011-2012 at least before you go tooting the Gainey horn.
Massive injuries to key players also had something to do with the teams lack of success in the reg season also.....the team during the season wasn't that bad, if they had some injury luck so to speak...and the teams goalie is part of the team....

BLONG7 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 11:14 AM.

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.