Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Where can MON find Cap flexibility more easily in the future?
#1
Looking at our draft situation this year, the developing prospects in the system and the team's cap situation, overall, I suspect that Bergevin will need to draft wisely on the back end in a draft year that appears deep in quality prospects at that position. 

MON is currently deeper on the right side with Weber (7,857M until the end of the world), Petry (5.5M for three more years) and Juulsen (1.063M for two more years). Plus, we have Brook and Fleury who have yet to play professionally or begin counting down their ELC. 

On the left side, we are, IMO, saddled with unimpressive veteran contracts to Alzner (4.625M for another 4 years), Schlemko (2.1M for another two years) and Benn (1.1M for another year). Mete is a good deal as a young D for 870K over the next two years, like Juulsen.

I'm not concerned about Schlemko and Benn's contracts because I believe that they can be more easily moved. Maybe a full season of playing with Juulsen (like at the end of last season) might make Alzner's contract more moveable without needing to hold salary to do it? If not, the cost of buying out Alzner is 1.55M per year for twice the remaining term of the contract. It's hard to evaluate whether a team would agree to taking on Alzner's contract with an amount withheld equivalent to the buyback amount (to cut the term of the cap handicap in half)?

MON needs to get better on the back end -- especially the left side -- and down the middle. However, while they are deep on the wing, this position will become more and more expensive as the years go by, no matter what they do. 

Drouin, along with Gallagher are the only expenditures locked mid to long term with 5 more years at 5.5M, for drouin and 3.75M for three more years in Gallagher's case.

If they keep Pacioretty, it's hard to imagine less than a 2M raise on his current 4.5M payday and, to many, that's with pacioretty giving a home discount to stay in Montreal.

If they keep Galchenyuk and, to everyone's good fortune, he breaks out for good and becomes a consistent 60+ point producing, 25+ goal-scoring winger, I expect that he will want a substantial raise from the 4.9M he is currently earning, somewhere close to what Pacioretty is making, if not more, because of previous hard ball negotiations with Bergevin and because he will be entering his prime at the same time as he is negotiating a new contract. Another potential 1.5M - 2M rise in Cap expenditure with Galchenyuk.

Hudon, at only 650K for one more year, will need to be renegotiated soon. This year, many agree that he has established himself as a legitimate NHLer. What's the upside on that and, more importantly, on his future renumeration? Even if it's a bridge contract for a couple of years, it's hard to imagine MON could impose less than a 1.5M payout per year. That's in 850K rise in Cap cost, minimum. Hudon and Byron don't compare, IMO, even if Byron managed to turn his 3-yr contract into a steal for MON.

Lehkonen is in the same boat as Hudon, with his contract (925K) up at the end of this year. His performance in the upcoming season will be crucial to determining both the term and the amount of his next contract with MON. A return to a 20G-pace, or a near 20-Goal pace, like in his first season, could lead to a medium term contract in the 2.75M - 3M mark, rather than a bridge contract closer to 1,75M -2M range. Anywhere from 825K - 2.075M rise in the Cap for Lehkonen, depending on his progression this year.

Shaw is becoming more and more of a drain on the Cap at 3.9M with his health being nebulous, but not enough to place him on the LTIR for the long haul.

Byron is coming off back to back seasons with 20 goals or more and his shoulder injury shouldn't affect his greatest asset, his speed. How much is a depth player that can score 20+ goals while playing a two-way game without All-star line mates really worth. Byron will be 30 at the end of his contract next season and looking for what will amount to his biggest payday, period, including if he ends up signing another contract after that. How much more than 1.167M will that contract be? Figure an added Cap hit of at least 1.833M (probably more) if MON keeps Byron. 3M for a steady 20-Goal scorer that can slot up and down the lineup without exposing you defensively doesn't seem very expensive for today's NHL. 

Scherbak is another player ending his ELC after this upcoming season. What step forward will he take. He definitely has skill to do so and last year's progression was a huge positive in his development, despite another injury that just reinforces the perception of him as an injury prone player. Perhaps his play remains inconclusive and he is offered a bridge contract for a couple of years at 1.5M like Hudon might be, or he has a breakout year and takes the next step forward, getting a medium term contract closer to that of Lehkonen in the 2.75M - 3M mark. MON will need to make these decisions (bridge, medium term, long term contracts) as they will this offseason with Hudon, who is up for renegotiation of his current contract. Doing so will push towards the cap ceiling, but may prove to help along the way in the not too distant future, like it once did with Gallagher,

Danault will, by all accounts, be due for a 2M - 2.5M raise, most pundits leaning towards the 3.5M Cap hit for Danault on his new contract.

Depth players like DLR, Carr, McCarron or ELC contract holders like Evans, Vejdemo, etc., aren't excessive concerns right now because the players haven't yet placed themselves on the map as future Cap concerns. DLR can perhaps expect a raise of a few 100K and Evans has three years of limited earnings. Decisions will need to be made whether MON even keeps Carr and McCarron as they are no longer waiver wire eligible and could be plucked off od our roster for absolutely nothing in return.

If MON doesn't improve it's C-line strictly via the draft and development, adding talent will impact the cap situation from mildly to dramatically, depending who agrees to come here.

Signing a Tavares or a Stasny, or trading for young enough veteran like O'Reilly, or even Nugent-Hopkins, will put pressure on the Cap as the winger costs increase and as any pure additions on the left side of D also implicate a higher total Cap hit.

The G position is a huge impact towards the Cap for the next 8 years, point final. Right now, with Niemi or Lindgren, the Cap cost for the G position doesn't exceed Price's 10.5M by more than a Million, but that won't be eternal, unless Bergevin keeps trading his young backs and making the next one graduate to take his place. For a team with aspirations to contend down the line, this can have a huge impact on team success. A five-win swing from one backup G to the other can be a huge difference in the season's standings, especially in a strong conference. It can make the difference between easily making the playoffs and being able to better one tune the lineup for a playoff push and barely, or just not making the playoffs in any given year. Having a steady backup shouldn't be marginalized. IMO, Niemi at 950K is a bargain in terms of experience, as well as skill. Plus, his salary doesn't even count towards the cap if his production tapers off and he is replaced by Lindgren without being claimed off waivers. His entire salary can be buried in the AHL without any negative repercussions towards the Cap.

Technically, with hopes that Poehling develops into a top-6 C and hopes that Bergevin can pick a potential top-line C (although, for this year, we are apparently wearing rose-coloured glasses with that expectation), we could potentially find Cap flexibility down the middle going forward. However, IMO, if we don't get help up the middle sooner rather than later, we are only wasting more affordable years from our wingers, as well as perhaps preventing them from developing closer to their projected ceilings. Especially since neither Poehling nor the C we might succeed to draft this year are any kind of blue chip prospect to be high end top-6 Cs.

IMO, Bergevin needs to at least add one legitimate high end, top-6 C (whether it is a legitimate top-line C, actual or in the making, or a borderline top-line C that could eventually slot down as an elite 2nd line C when a better C comes along. In either case, whomever MON adds at C, in whatever way they do (trade or UFA market), that C needs to be a plausible solution for the long term. That leaves only Tavares (at a huge price tag) on the UFA market or a younger C via a trade, ready to make their mark in the NHL, or having already made their mark in the NHL while being young enough to remain a long term solution, in order to provide three or four more years of quality production after three more years of rebuilding/tweaking/adjusting/development/whatever. That's a C that would be useful for another 7 years or so, to get a 3-4 year window at a Cup.

All the better if we can ship out a Pacioretty (re-signed with his accord if need be and if there is a fit with our trade partner) for a Thomas, a Vilardi or some other such C prospect with genuine upside. That would mean less pressure towards the cap going forward as the wingers this C is feeding keep getting paid more handsomely.

However, a UFA C like Tavares would make someone in Management (or more than one person) lose sleep over Cap concerns going forward. Clearly, 30M - 32M in Cap space spent on three players (Tavares, Price and Weber), representing 37.5% of the projected 80M Cap for next season, and leaving an average of 2.4M to 2.5M in Cap hit for the remaining 20 players on a full NHL roster card for a game, tends to do that.

Even a C like O'Reilly with 5 more years at 7,5M, or a C like Nugent-Hopkins with three more years at 6M will bring up Cap considerations going forward.

IMO, it's at D where we are more likely to find Cap flexibility. While this might not seem apparent with Weber being one of the triumvirat accounting for 37.5% of the total Cap in a scenario with Tavares signing here as a free agent, Petry earning 5.5M for three more years and the necessity to upgrade the left side with a young, left-handed, puck-moving D that generally commands a salary in the 4M - 5M dollar range (Klefbom is 4.167M, Matheson is 4.875M, Brodie, an older D that isn't over-the-hill yet is at 4.65M).

However, with Mete and Juulsen that have two more years left on their ELCs and likely won't be cashing in like All-Stars at the end of this contract, as well as Brook and Fleury getting good reviews as they continue to develop, the D situation, financially, doesn't look that bad going forward. Consider 5 more years of controlled costs for Mete and Juulsen that leaves them with a year as RFAs when negotiating past a 3-yr bridge contract and a likely 4-years until the end of Fleury's ELC and 5 years, probably, until the end of Brook's ELC, that's a good chunk of controlled talent, Cap-wise, on the back end.

The importance, to gain Cap flexibility from the back end begins by acquiring a young D that has enough term remaining in the mid-range of salaries for Ds (around the 4M - 5M mark) or that can be signed long term in that range (i.e., a Hanifin). 

Beyond that, MON needs to take advantage of their picks (straight picks, moving up, trading for other picks high enough as they see players slip, whatever) this season to choose as many Ds as they can from players such as (in no particular order) Wilde, Alexeyev, McIsaac, Miller, Sandin, Addison, Samuelsson and other quality prospects on D, both on the left and the right side.

MON can come out of this draft rich in Ds -- and choosing a Hughes or a Dobson instead of a winger like Zadina isn't out of the picture either -- both in terms of talent to replace other Ds and/or fill current holes in the roster, but also in terms of Cap flexibility stemming from the back end as we eventually (and gradually) move away from Petry, and then Weber.

Tough decisions and proper evaluation of current players, prospects and draft choices to make for the Gm and his team as they plan ahead to try and build a contender while remaining within the constraints of the salary cap.

Not as easy as some might think, for sure and, while just going via the draft route might make more sense in terms of keeping Cap costs down, there is zero certainty that a team can accumulate all the necessary pieces towards winning a Cup that way. Some good pieces may have worn out by the time long term missing pieces are acquired (situations like MON unable to draft and develop quality top-6 Cs).

MON will need to mix and match to build that contender, IMO, and the D, going forward, might well be the means to make the right choices going forward.
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by:
#2
I know I sound like a broken record on this but cap flexibility comes from drafting stars plain and simple. You need guys on their first or second contracts that are cost controlled and producing way above their levels. you are never going to get those guys in trades because of how valuable they are and they are by definition not available as free agents. While there is no certainty in getting everything that way that's where your high end guys need to come from because that's how you save on cap space. It is the only way to get guys that perform beyond what their salary would normally command. Some guys on the current roster will be declining by then so those are guys we should be looking to trade for more picks and prospects.

Once that core of drafted top tier talent is in place that's when you start looking at trades and free agency as a way to get over the hump. Getting pieces as important as first line centres and top pairing defensemen via trade or free agency will never be worth what it costs and never get you the best guys in the league, i.e. the kind of guys you need to be building around. Even in the rare time these guys become free agents the salary they will command will make building around them difficult to impossible. No team this century has succeeded in building a cup champion this way. Everyone that wins gets their best guys from the draft then supplements them after that.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#3
You set up 2 twitter account, @REALBaileyWeber and @REALAngelaPrice and you start tweeting about how you hate francophones, Molson beer and the colour purple.

#done
The MB Trifecta: Low Cost, Low Risk, No Return
Reply
Thanks given by:
#4
(2018-06-14, 11:52 AM)Captain aHab Wrote: You set up 2 twitter account, @REALBaileyWeber and @REALAngelaPrice and you start tweeting about how you hate francophones, Molson beer and the colour purple.

#done

Don't U even dare THINK about saying anything bad about the color Purple.


Attached Files
.jpg   0*hkgcuKu2RGg8RAWx.jpg (Size: 12.66 KB / Downloads: 48)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#5
Bergy's a a one-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater
(One-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater)
A one-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater
Sure looks strange to me (one eye?)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#6
(2018-06-14, 06:12 PM)Cal Wrote: Bergy's a a one-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater
(One-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater)
A one-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater
Sure looks strange to me (one eye?)

I love you, you love me, who's your best friend? Me, MB...

[Image: giphy.gif]
Reply
Thanks given by: Habysmal
#7
(2018-06-14, 06:47 PM)RightNyder Wrote:
(2018-06-14, 06:12 PM)Cal Wrote: Bergy's a a one-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater
(One-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater)
A one-eyed, one-horned, flyin' purple player eater
Sure looks strange to me (one eye?)

I love you, you love me, who's your best friend? Me, MB...

[Image: giphy.gif]


SaveSave
SaveSave
SaveSave


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply
Thanks given by:
#8
The lower one has the same eyebrows as Bergevin, I think.
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by: Habysmal
#9
Well I for one am not too worried about the cap.

On essence all teams have to draft and develop well not only to get a competitive roster but to keep cap at bay. Before teams managed it by older Ufa vet 4th liners. Now those jobs are being done for the same price by young, more talented players.

Presently we have a few good young players and a few more coming. I don't think we need to worry about our future cap at all. Especially if JT stays in NY
Reply
Thanks given by:
#10
(2018-06-14, 08:10 PM)Scriptor Wrote: The lower one has the same eyebrows as Bergevin, I think.

..... and the pants .....
Reply
Thanks given by: RightNyder , RightNyder
#11
(2018-06-14, 08:27 PM)Haba-daba-do Wrote: Well I for one am not too worried about the cap.

On essence all teams have to draft and develop well not only to get a competitive roster but to keep cap at bay. Before teams managed it by older Ufa vet 4th liners. Now those jobs are being done for the same price by young, more talented players.

Presently we have a few good young players and a few more coming. I don't think we need to worry about our future cap at all. Especially if JT stays in NY

None that are projected to fill top line forward or defense duty and very little in the niche below that and even then that's if those guys max out their potential. I know you have very low expectations for anyone that's not a first rounder but our cupboards are pretty bare at the moment if you factor in high end talent potential regardless of the reason for it
Reply
Thanks given by:
#12
No worry! We are only a few years remove from the next lock-out and the next round of free buyouts.
"Only one thing matters in life, and it's the cup"  
                                            - Caresse Crosby


Reply
Thanks given by:
#13
(2018-06-14, 11:15 PM)Leb7 Wrote: No worry! We are only a few years remove from the next lock-out and the next round of free buyouts.
Good point. Bettman will save the day again! Wink
Ancient Chinese Proverb: A mosquito landing on your testicle should help you realize that violence doesn't solve every problem
Reply
Thanks given by:
#14
Keep 8 million in your pocket like he did this year.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#15
(2018-06-15, 10:59 AM)Bong13 Wrote: Keep 8 million in your pocket like he did this year.

Golden State Warriors reportedly grossed $130M in 11 playoff home games this year.

Playoff revenue is like found money (as opposed to simply not spending it). 

If MB doesn't carve a purple path to the post-season this year he's finished.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#16
We just saved 1.8M in trading Chuck. Add it to the waller
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)