News Article: Delete

[Sensung]

And it's not just the D. We are going to have Anderson and Condon as our goalies next year, and both guys have struggled to keep their SV% about .900 this year.

The past couple games are just a taste of what this team will be like without EK playing 25-30 minutes a night.

No, no, no...clearly we are much better off without him! We might even get lucky and have one of the assets we get back turn into a generational player!!!

 

[Answer]

If we re-sign Karlsson then we need to go all in as being serious contenders. We need a legitimate 2nd line centre (and no Pageau won't cut it), a legitimate top pairing defenseman, along with a proven top4 defenseman, and finally a goal-tender (Anderson is past his prime, and if anything, can only be a back up, and same with Condon)

Hoffman - Duchene - Dzingal
Ryan - (#2 Centre) - Stone
MSP - Pageau - White
Smith/Mcormick - Chlapik - Pyatt

(#2 Defenseman) - Karlsson
(#3/4 Defenseman) - Chabot
Ceci / Boro / Cleasson / Wolanin
​

 

[albator71]

And then when one or more of those assets turn into a top 3 player in the league, we can trade them away for more magic beans...

Wash, rinse, repeat.

I know thats the problem with this franchise. it is what it is. thats what they do. As long as Melnyk is the owner.

 

[albator71]

No, no, no...clearly we are much better off without him! We might even get lucky and have one of the assets we get back turn into a generational player!!!

to be fair, he was not there at the start of the season and the teams played pretty well without him.

 

[topshelf15]

If we re-sign Karlsson then we need to go all in as being serious contenders. We need a legitimate 2nd line centre (and no Pageau won't cut it), a legitimate top pairing defenseman, along with a proven top4 defenseman, and finally a goal-tender (Anderson is past his prime, and if anything, can only be a back up, and same with Condon)

Hoffman - Duchene - Dzingal
Ryan - (#2 Centre) - Stone
MSP - Pageau - White
Smith/Mcormick - Chlapik - Pyatt

(#2 Defenseman) - Karlsson
(#3/4 Defenseman) - Chabot
Ceci / Boro / Cleasson / Wolanin
​

Even if we resign EK, we need to rebuild half our forward core..And half our D ,plus find a stud goalie....Spending to the cap may not fix this tbh

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

A worst case scenario, Karlsson+Stone+Duchene would combine for 28.5 million dollars (12.5 for Karlsson, 8M each for Stone+Duchene).

Add the opportunity cost lost with dumping Ryan, and now we're talking about 36 million dollars from 2019-20/20-21/21-22 on Stone+Duchene+Ryan.

Buyout Gaborik....during that same period, we have an additional average of 2.7M per season on the books for the first 2 years of Karl's extension via Gaborik+Phaneuf.

Mac will have 950k on the books during year 1 of a Karl extension....

So we could potentially be looking at this to keep Karlsson+Stone+Duchene and miss the opportunity of dumping Ryan with Karlsson....

Cost of keeping Karlsson+Duchene+Stone
2018-19: 25.8M
2019-20: 39.8M
2020-21: 38.5M
2021-22: 37.2M
2022-23: 29.7M

So it's not as simple as just purging the rest of the roster to keep them all because of our 68 million dollar budget. We would have between 28-30 million dollars to spend on an additional 19 skaters for the three seasons from 2019-2022. That means, we'd be limited to spending 1.5M per skater.

It also has to be noted that if guys like Chabot break out, they'll require major raises, which would further complicate things.

It's pretty much impossible to compete in this situation. So we can spend an average of 1.5M per skater, later on becoming a farm team for the rest of the league because we'll have to liquidate anybody who overperforms their way to star money, and if we make even minor mistakes with extensions and overpay even a 3rd liner, it will have potential to sink us....

It is a very harsh reality, but the reality is that under the conditions the Senators operate under, and with the bad money we already have on the books, the best option is to trade Karl+Ryan for a huge package of futures/young NHLers and rebuild with the intention of starting our "peak" 2-3 years from now. It goes against the grain of what most people would typically assume which is that when you have a player like Karlsson, it never makes sense not to keep them, but the situation we're in is the exception to the rule.

Blame Melnyk for his internal budget, blame management for paying players who have sunk us with bad contracts, blame those players for not living up to their contracts.....regardless of who people want to blame, it doesn't change the fact that we have to operate within the rules of the game that have been laid out for us.

The current rules? We have a 68M budget and double digits of wasted salary. Unfortunately, that means trading Karlsson is the best play right now if we want to be as successful as possible long term.

@danielpalfredsson you're way too thorough for my brief in between work responses lol, this is my lunch break response.

It looks bleak I know, but I still think it's manageable if they play it right. Pick your best players, surround them with youth & speed and just see what happens.

Next year is mostly a wash since Stone is the only one of the big 3 who needs a new deal for next season.

Bridge deals for guys like Chabot, White or any other breakout players may be needed to get through these next 4 years.

Start by trading Smith, Pageau & Ceci in that order this summer if needed. After a million give or take each for replacements, that's 7 million freed up for players much more important to this team and to help accommodate Stone's raise. We have depth coming at center to replace Pageau cheaply. Smith is nothing to be concerned about replacing imo. Ceci is the one that stings, but if it helps retain Karlsson, then so be it, and he has his share of detractors too.

Goaltending is an area we can hopefully save money in 2 years by going cheap and young with Gustavsson & Hogberg, or another cheapish option. We can't get worse than what we got out of Andy & Condon this year, they're one of if not the worst tandems in the league at an average of about 7 mil this year and the next 2, so why not just throw something else at the wall and see if it sticks.

The contracts below are all set to expire in the next 4 years, and the only players in that list I'm concerned about keeping or having to replace for more than a mil or so is Hoffman & Dzingel. We might be able to keep one, but not both. I'll throw Pageau in there too because I know everyone loves him, but I'm not attached to him and not concerned.

Expiring summer 2019: Burrows, Pyatt & Dzingel @ 5.8 combined.
Expiring summer 2020: Pageau, Hoffman, Boro, Andy & Condon @ 17.25 combined.
Expiring summer 2021: Gaborik & Smith @ 6.325 combined
Expiring summer 2022: Ryan @ 7.5

There is also the slim possibility of getting creative with buyouts or giving up assets to dump contracts.

It's similar to what Pittsburgh had to do. Sign your best players and go cheap around them even if it means taking a brief step back or losing a guy you would prefer to keep. Imo we will need a different play style/coaching system to accommodate a team like that as well. It's not perfect, and being a cap team would solve it all, but since that's not happening, this is best case scenario imo.

 

[BonkTastic]

Don't TELL me that you are going to do a thing. Telling me you are going to do a thing means nothing. It's simply lip service.

DO the thing. Actually do the thing that you say you are going to do.

Actions are louder than words. Words mean nothing at this point. This organization has lost the benefit of the doubt as far as I'm concerned.

I will believe you will do a thing once you've done that thing, and only then.

 

[Answer]

Even if we resign EK, we need to rebuild half our forward core..And half our D ,plus find a stud goalie....Spending to the cap may not fix this tbh

It is just sickening being a bubble team in a such a weird way.. and when I say in a weird way, I mean.. getting out-shot and out-played every single night, even when we win.

The other team circling around our net without being touched, while we just can't do that without our forwards being extremely pressured and falling down. It is ridiculous how every team single team despite how good or bad they are, can actually do that, but we can't. How ever, with Duchene we seeing that a bit more lately, but mostly with defenders on him like mad dogs.. on the contrary , the other team's forwards are free-wheeling like its a morning skate session. Our defenders can't even touch them.
Not to mention

Not to mention being one of the worst special teams for over a decade, can't have a single forward who can produce at a PPG, on a consistent base and can't develop a dang defenseman other that Karlsson, who can actually play a top 4(forget top2) roll for like FOREVER

 

[JD1]

Why do you assume our budget is not 68M?

the reason the cap rises is because revenues rise. the value of the TV deals go up.

salary has continued to increase as have revenues.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

the reason the cap rises is because revenues rise. the value of the TV deals go up.

salary has continued to increase as have revenues.

Our budget has remained at 68M for multiple years despite the cap rising every year during that time period. Recently Melnyk has threatened to CUT the player salary budget, or at the very least he outlined that as an option based on attendance levels. So with the owner discussing the prospect of cutting the budget, it doesn't make sense to me to expect it to increase.

Yes, if our budget rises significantly, it makes keeping Karlsson easier. But given what we know today, it doesn't make sense to expect our player salary budget to increase. People can only speculate with the info we currently have. The same way that I don't know with exact certainty that Karlsson won't turn around and take a discount in Ottawa, but it makes more sense to speculate that he won't given he has said in the past he does not intend to do that....

 

[BonkTastic]

If you're going to say stuff like that, don't you expect that you be asked to back it up?

Seeing how you could not, now we know.

1) Could not, or would not?
Again - I'm not sure why anyone here should bother acquiescing to your constant demand for proof of anything, considering your total lack of acknowledgement of it when it's provided.

2) While rumours should not be taken as fact, they should also not be dismissed, either. Just because a thing hasn't been confirmed 100% by an infallible source, it doesn't mean it is 100% untrue. There are plenty of rumours about Karlsson's questionable relationship with Melnyk - while I agree that rumours certainly have the ability to be untrue, I also am fully aware that rumours do have the potential to be mostly true, and that rumours should be considered as potential truths. Many rumours are partially true - the challenge is parsing out the truth from the fiction. It's why you should never consider rumours to be gospel, but also why you should pay attention to them and look for patterns. Use your ability to think critically about them and make a gut call based on reason, probability, and reliability.

It seems like you have a fear of even acknowledging the possibility that a thing might be true without having at least 3 primary sources of infallible, objective proof on the matter. Acknowledging that a thing might be true is part of the human existence. It's why the scientific method starts with "hypothesis". It's an educated guess. These are all good things, when used by those with the ability to critically analyze an issue.

There is a grey area in life that you fail to acknowledge whatsoever in any of your posts. You have a penchant to declare that nothing can be true without absolute proof - that even the possibility of it being true is impossible. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the world exists almost entirely in gray areas. You are going to have to get used to this fact if you are going to understand the complexities of world at large. I feel bad being the one to have to spell this out for you, on an internet hockey message board no less, but it really is a life lesson that needs to be learned if you are going to have any real sense of belonging in society at large.

 

[Karl Prime]

to be fair, he was not there at the start of the season and the teams played pretty well without him.

The Leafs were amazing without Matthews. I'd think that unless the goaltending is lights out, a team without Karlsson is closer to the team we have seen the last two games than in those October games.

 

[Boud]

There is a grey area in life

Do you have a written confirmation from the pope or the President to confirm this??

Because as far as I am concerned this is just another one of those rumours BonkTastic.

 

[Deku]

1) Could not, or would not?
Again - I'm not sure why anyone here should bother acquiescing to your constant demand for proof of anything, considering your total lack of acknowledgement of it when it's provided.

2) While rumours should not be taken as fact, they should also not be dismissed, either. Just because a thing hasn't been confirmed 100% by an infallible source, it doesn't mean it is 100% untrue. There are plenty of rumours about Karlsson's questionable relationship with Melnyk - while I agree that rumours certainly have the ability to be untrue, I also am fully aware that rumours do have the potential to be mostly true, and that rumours should be considered as potential truths. Many rumours are partially true - the challenge is parsing out the truth from the fiction. It's why you should never consider rumours to be gospel, but also why you should pay attention to them and look for patterns. Use your ability to think critically about them and make a gut call based on reason, probability, and reliability.

It seems like you have a fear of even acknowledging the possibility that a thing might be true without having at least 3 primary sources of infallible, objective proof on the matter. Acknowledging that a thing might be true is part of the human existence. It's why the scientific method starts with "hypothesis". It's an educated guess. These are all good things, when used by those with the ability to critically analyze an issue.

There is a grey area in life that you fail to acknowledge whatsoever in any of your posts. You have a penchant to declare that nothing can be true without absolute proof - that even the possibility of it being true is impossible. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the world exists almost entirely in gray areas. You are going to have to get used to this fact if you are going to understand the complexities of world at large. I feel bad being the one to have to spell this out for you, on an internet hockey message board no less, but it really is a life lesson that needs to be learned if you are going to have any real sense of belonging in society at large.

I love you Bonk.

 

[BonkTastic]

I love you Bonk.

 

[megalomania]

It is a very harsh reality, but the reality is that under the conditions the Senators operate under, and with the bad money we already have on the books, the best option is to trade Karl+Ryan for a huge package of futures/young NHLers and rebuild with the intention of starting our "peak" 2-3 years from now. It goes against the grain of what most people would typically assume which is that when you have a player like Karlsson, it never makes sense not to keep them, but the situation we're in is the exception to the rule.

I agree with your assessment of the reality but I tend to disagree with your conclusion. I've been working with the assumption that we can only afford to re-sign two of EK/Stone/Duchene because of the salary limitations. In that situation you IMHO keep EK at all cost, not only because he's the captain and the face of the franchise but also because he's among the best players in the league in a position where the Sens are very weak and have few quality prospects. That would mean losing one of Stone or Duchene (because their salary space is taken up by Bobby Ryan) which will not go well with the fanbase but to me would be the lesser evil. That is not to say that I don't expect them to trade EK - I fully do - but only that I think it's a bad decision any way you slice it. Adding Ryan onto him does nothing for a rebuild because by the time a re-built team would be competitive and the young talent you've gained need new contracts after their ELC, his money is gonna be off the books anyway.

If we let EK go our D is horrendous and there's little reason to think that would change quickly unless we somehow end up drafting two dmen in the top 8 of this upcoming draft. It took teams like CBJ or CAR years to build the deep defences they currently have and they had very little success while doing so. Others like TOR or BUF or EDM or NYI have been bad for years and years and their D-cores are still significant weaknesses. Personally I look around the league and see lots of teams with decent enough fwds but very few with a deep high-quality defense. We already have EK and Chabot, the makings of a very decent core. I'd rather try to build a top-flight D-core around them and complement it with decent fwd depth.

Ultimately a team is never gonna be a contender on a strict budget like the Sens are on right now. That's not only because nearly every team has some bad contracts (not to the extent the Sens currently do mind you) but also because there won't be many bridge contracts for top young talent anymore. We've seen it with McDavid, Eichel, Ekblad, Draisaitl and we're gonna see more of that soon with players like Matthews, Werenski, Boeser, Barzal and so on. We can trade EK now and try to go for a full rebuild, but even if we luck into drafting the next superstar of a similar caliber (very unlikely) he's gonna cost 10+ million after his ELC - leaving us right back where we are now. Or we rebuild, don't luck into drafting a superstar, and end up back on the fringe of the playoffs until the new core creeps towards their UFA years.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I agree with your assessment of the reality but I tend to disagree with your conclusion. I've been working with the assumption that we can only afford to re-sign two of EK/Stone/Duchene because of the salary limitations. In that situation you IMHO keep EK at all cost, not only because he's the captain and the face of the franchise but also because he's among the best players in the league in a position where the Sens are very weak and have few quality prospects. That would mean losing one of Stone or Duchene (because their salary space is taken up by Bobby Ryan) which will not go well with the fanbase but to me would be the lesser evil. That is not to say that I don't expect them to trade EK - I fully do - but only that I think it's a bad decision any way you slice it. Adding Ryan onto him does nothing for a rebuild because by the time a re-built team would be competitive and the young talent you've gained need new contracts after their ELC, his money is gonna be off the books anyway.

If we let EK go our D is horrendous and there's little reason to think that would change quickly unless we somehow end up drafting two dmen in the top 8 of this upcoming draft. It took teams like CBJ or CAR years to build the deep defences they currently have and they had very little success while doing so. Others like TOR or BUF or EDM or NYI have been bad for years and years and their D-cores are still significant weaknesses. Personally I look around the league and see lots of teams with decent enough fwds but very few with a deep high-quality defense. We already have EK and Chabot, the makings of a very decent core. I'd rather try to build a top-flight D-core around them and complement it with decent fwd depth.

Ultimately a team is never gonna be a contender on a strict budget like the Sens are on right now. That's not only because nearly every team has some bad contracts (not to the extent the Sens currently do mind you) but also because there won't be many bridge contracts for top young talent anymore. We've seen it with McDavid, Eichel, Ekblad, Draisaitl and we're gonna see more of that soon with players like Matthews, Werenski, Boeser, Barzal and so on. We can trade EK now and try to go for a full rebuild, but even if we luck into drafting the next superstar of a similar caliber (very unlikely) he's gonna cost 10+ million after his ELC - leaving us right back where we are now. Or we rebuild, don't luck into drafting a superstar, and end up back on the fringe of the playoffs until the new core creeps towards their UFA years.

I would argue that rather than not re-signing one of those 3 to make the other 2 fit, we can trade guys like Smith, Ceci, Pageau and even Hoffman & Dzingel if we have to in order to make room for that 3rd guy. Then we have staggered expiring contracts like Burrows, Gaborik, Condon, Anderson & Macarthur over the next 3 years to help. Just have to manage the next couple years somehow. I say sign your best 3 players and make the rest fit around them, kind of like what Pittsburgh and Chicago had to do. They identified their priorities and jettisoned the lower priority guys eating salary even if there was some pain involved.

 

[branch]

1) Could not, or would not?
Again - I'm not sure why anyone here should bother acquiescing to your constant demand for proof of anything, considering your total lack of acknowledgement of it when it's provided.

2) While rumours should not be taken as fact, they should also not be dismissed, either. Just because a thing hasn't been confirmed 100% by an infallible source, it doesn't mean it is 100% untrue. There are plenty of rumours about Karlsson's questionable relationship with Melnyk - while I agree that rumours certainly have the ability to be untrue, I also am fully aware that rumours do have the potential to be mostly true, and that rumours should be considered as potential truths. Many rumours are partially true - the challenge is parsing out the truth from the fiction. It's why you should never consider rumours to be gospel, but also why you should pay attention to them and look for patterns. Use your ability to think critically about them and make a gut call based on reason, probability, and reliability.

It seems like you have a fear of even acknowledging the possibility that a thing might be true without having at least 3 primary sources of infallible, objective proof on the matter. Acknowledging that a thing might be true is part of the human existence. It's why the scientific method starts with "hypothesis". It's an educated guess. These are all good things, when used by those with the ability to critically analyze an issue.

There is a grey area in life that you fail to acknowledge whatsoever in any of your posts. You have a penchant to declare that nothing can be true without absolute proof - that even the possibility of it being true is impossible. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the world exists almost entirely in gray areas. You are going to have to get used to this fact if you are going to understand the complexities of world at large. I feel bad being the one to have to spell this out for you, on an internet hockey message board no less, but it really is a life lesson that needs to be learned if you are going to have any real sense of belonging in society at large.

If MULTIPLE people were telling me my GF was cheating on me, gallivanting around, courting various gentleman callers, hooking up with male strippers, I would definitely be wary. It could be unsubstantiated, but I'm sure I could deduce pretty much what is happening. It wouldn't take me until the iMessage photos start to roll in for me to figure something is up. A total lack of any sort of intuition is the sign of a stupid person.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

If MULTIPLE people were telling me my GF was cheating on me, gallivanting around, courting various gentleman callers, hooking up with male strippers, I would definitely be wary. It could be unsubstantiated, but I'm sure I could deduce pretty much what is happening. I wouldn't take me until the iMessage photos start to roll in for me to figure something is up. A total lack of any sort of intuition is the sign of a stupid person.

How's she doing anyway? Say hi for me.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

I agree with your assessment of the reality but I tend to disagree with your conclusion. I've been working with the assumption that we can only afford to re-sign two of EK/Stone/Duchene because of the salary limitations. In that situation you IMHO keep EK at all cost, not only because he's the captain and the face of the franchise but also because he's among the best players in the league in a position where the Sens are very weak and have few quality prospects. That would mean losing one of Stone or Duchene (because their salary space is taken up by Bobby Ryan) which will not go well with the fanbase but to me would be the lesser evil. That is not to say that I don't expect them to trade EK - I fully do - but only that I think it's a bad decision any way you slice it. Adding Ryan onto him does nothing for a rebuild because by the time a re-built team would be competitive and the young talent you've gained need new contracts after their ELC, his money is gonna be off the books anyway.

If we let EK go our D is horrendous and there's little reason to think that would change quickly unless we somehow end up drafting two dmen in the top 8 of this upcoming draft. It took teams like CBJ or CAR years to build the deep defences they currently have and they had very little success while doing so. Others like TOR or BUF or EDM or NYI have been bad for years and years and their D-cores are still significant weaknesses. Personally I look around the league and see lots of teams with decent enough fwds but very few with a deep high-quality defense. We already have EK and Chabot, the makings of a very decent core. I'd rather try to build a top-flight D-core around them and complement it with decent fwd depth.

Ultimately a team is never gonna be a contender on a strict budget like the Sens are on right now. That's not only because nearly every team has some bad contracts (not to the extent the Sens currently do mind you) but also because there won't be many bridge contracts for top young talent anymore. We've seen it with McDavid, Eichel, Ekblad, Draisaitl and we're gonna see more of that soon with players like Matthews, Werenski, Boeser, Barzal and so on. We can trade EK now and try to go for a full rebuild, but even if we luck into drafting the next superstar of a similar caliber (very unlikely) he's gonna cost 10+ million after his ELC - leaving us right back where we are now. Or we rebuild, don't luck into drafting a superstar, and end up back on the fringe of the playoffs until the new core creeps towards their UFA years.

I appreciate the reply, but I'll disagree with your conclusion that we can keep two (and I assume remain competitive).

"Adding Ryan onto him does nothing for a rebuild because by the time a re-built team would be competitive and the young talent you've gained need new contracts after their ELC, his money is gonna be off the books anyway."

I don't think this is the case. Even with ELC/cheaper talent, we're going to have to pay players like Stone and Duchene significant money to keep them as soon as 2019-20. If our budget remains at 68 million, having Ryan leaves us at 60.5M we can actually spend, that's not even counting Gaborik+Phaneuf+MacArthur dead money. So there's value even in a rebuild of dumping Ryan with Karlsson.

I also don't think a rebuild these days takes quite as long as people think. With the parity of the NHL, teams can bounce back to playoff bubble team status very quickly.

With that said, whether or not we should bundle Ryan with Karlsson doesn't change that I think our current level of dead salary will prevent us from being competitive with Karlsson re-signed, that a rebuild around Duchene+Stone with Ryan's salary dumped in a Karl trade would be more effective if the end goal is to build the most successful team possible long term under a 68M budget.

Let's say we get rid of one of Stone or Duchene as you suggested, while the negative impact in the short term won't be as bad as if we lost Karlsson, I don't think Karlsson alone can lead a team like that to success. We'd also still have Ryan's dead salary on the books which will continue to handicap us....look at it this way, if by re-signing Karlsson we forgo the opportunity to dump Ryan, it's almost as if the opportunity cost of re-signing Karlsson would be 18-20 million per season under a (supposed) 68M budget. That is because by choosing to re-sign Karlsson, we've given up the opportunity to dump Ryan.....

So what I am proposing is a future where we have Duchene+Stone+Assets from Karlsson as a kick start to a rebuild/re-tool.

What you're proposing is a future where we have Karlsson+Only one of Stone or Duchene+Ryan's 7.5M salary+lesser assets from a Duchene or Stone trade.


"If we let EK go our D is horrendous and there's little reason to think that would change quickly unless we somehow end up drafting two dmen in the top 8 of this upcoming draft."

If we keep EK and do not dump Ryan, we'll have significantly more deficiencies than just a bad d-core. There just would not be money to address the sheer amount of holes that would need to be filled with Karl+Stone+Duchene+Ryan at roughly 38M combined. If we do not sign one of Duchene or Stone as your proposed in order to keep Karlsson, I don't think that's a solution. Losing Duchene for example would leave us with Pageau as our 1C until someone else develops into that role.

"Ultimately a team is never gonna be a contender on a strict budget like the Sens are on right now. "

I agree completely. I don't think we'll ever be a contender under our current budget, but I think we can build a more competitive team long term via bundling Ryan with Karlsson and going through a rebuild that way.


"That's not only because nearly every team has some bad contracts (not to the extent the Sens currently do mind you) but also because there won't be many bridge contracts for top young talent anymore. We've seen it with McDavid, Eichel, Ekblad, Draisaitl and we're gonna see more of that soon with players like Matthews, Werenski, Boeser, Barzal and so on. We can trade EK now and try to go for a full rebuild, but even if we luck into drafting the next superstar of a similar caliber (very unlikely) he's gonna cost 10+ million after his ELC - leaving us right back where we are now. Or we rebuild, don't luck into drafting a superstar, and end up back on the fringe of the playoffs until the new core creeps towards their UFA years."

The issue isn't that Karlsson might cost as much as 12.5M, the issue is that Karlsson might cost 12.5M, and we have double digits of bad money on the books for the next four seasons.

Let's say we win the lottery, and we draft Dahlin, who at minimum if he pans out will cost 7.5M (Ekblad) on an extension after his ELC and at most might cost 10M+. We should not have a problem locking him down at that money in 3 years time since we'd lose the Ryan money in a Karlsson trade, and Gaborik+Phaneuf will be off the books by then.

The thing is, there'll always be bad contracts to an extent. No GM hits it perfect, but the Sens situation isn't just bad contracts. It's a combination of both bad contracts, and the core players all reaching UFA or RFA arbitration age at the same time. All NHL teams are cyclical in how they are built. There needs to be superstars, and then underpaid ELC/RFA talent in order to keep the team competitive.

We've reached a stage where with not only there being a significant amount of bad money on the books, but also most of our core players have reached the end of their cheap contracts. These would be Stone, Karlsson, Duchene (Formerly Turris @ 3.5M), Ceci, Hoffman, and soon to be Pageau, Dzingel, (and would be Brassard if we didn't trade him)

It's not sustainable. We need to use Karlsson as a catalyst to start fresh. Dorion and co and absolved of getting us here, but they are right that we need to take one step (a big one) back in order to take two steps forward.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

If MULTIPLE people were telling me my GF was cheating on me, gallivanting around, courting various gentleman callers, hooking up with male strippers, I would definitely be wary. It could be unsubstantiated, but I'm sure I could deduce pretty much what is happening. It wouldn't take me until the iMessage photos start to roll in for me to figure something is up. A total lack of any sort of intuition is the sign of a stupid person.

Don't worry, you're fine. Bob McKenzie is just spreading rumours about your girlfriend to boost up his trade deadline show ratings.

 

[Alex1234]

1) Could not, or would not?
Again - I'm not sure why anyone here should bother acquiescing to your constant demand for proof of anything, considering your total lack of acknowledgement of it when it's provided.

2) While rumours should not be taken as fact, they should also not be dismissed, either. Just because a thing hasn't been confirmed 100% by an infallible source, it doesn't mean it is 100% untrue. There are plenty of rumours about Karlsson's questionable relationship with Melnyk - while I agree that rumours certainly have the ability to be untrue, I also am fully aware that rumours do have the potential to be mostly true, and that rumours should be considered as potential truths. Many rumours are partially true - the challenge is parsing out the truth from the fiction. It's why you should never consider rumours to be gospel, but also why you should pay attention to them and look for patterns. Use your ability to think critically about them and make a gut call based on reason, probability, and reliability.

It seems like you have a fear of even acknowledging the possibility that a thing might be true without having at least 3 primary sources of infallible, objective proof on the matter. Acknowledging that a thing might be true is part of the human existence. It's why the scientific method starts with "hypothesis". It's an educated guess. These are all good things, when used by those with the ability to critically analyze an issue.

There is a grey area in life that you fail to acknowledge whatsoever in any of your posts. You have a penchant to declare that nothing can be true without absolute proof - that even the possibility of it being true is impossible. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the world exists almost entirely in gray areas. You are going to have to get used to this fact if you are going to understand the complexities of world at large. I feel bad being the one to have to spell this out for you, on an internet hockey message board no less, but it really is a life lesson that needs to be learned if you are going to have any real sense of belonging in society at large.

Bump

 

[Alex1234]

Do you have a written confirmation from the pope or the President to confirm this??

Because as far as I am concerned this is just another one of those rumours BonkTastic.

Even if the pope or the president confirm
You can't be 100% sure
In fact even after the event has happened you will never be 100% sure
Could be media fabrication
Could be hallucination
Could be a total make up
You will never be 100% sure because even being 100% sure is unreliable
Theres no proof that certainty exist

His quest for proofs and certainty is just polluting the board

(don't quote me on this as Im not 100% sure of what I wrote)

 

[Ray Kinsella]

Even if the pope or the president confirm
You can't be 100% sure
In fact even after the event has happened you will never be 100% sure
Could be media fabrication
Could be hallucination
Could be a total make up
You will never be 100% sure because even being 100% sure is unreliable
Theres no proof that certainty exist

His quest for proofs and certainty is just polluting the board

(don't quote me on this as Im not 100% sure of what I wrote)

I’m 100% sure I’m reading this thread at the moment.
I don’t have a link though... I am my own 100% reliable source on this one!

 

[cashinstinct]

Subban for example playing in Nashville, Tennessee pays next to no income tax.

Subban signed his deal with Montreal High Taxes.