Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread: Clever Thread Title Needed

[KIRK]

@Big Friggin Dummy . . . I'm afraid I've got some bad news for ya.

 

[Gurglesons]

Reinhart's also 3 years younger - I know one of your points about re-signing Rust is that he's hitting the age where players fall off - and Reinhart's been killing it at C down the stretch, which would be a great fallback option if Malkin isn't able to continue as 2C here for whatever reason.

Still. Seems like a ton for a 50-60 pt guy. He isn’t getting 20 minutes a night and all situational usage here.

 

[KIRK]

Still. Seems like a ton for a 50-60 pt guy. He isn’t getting 20 minutes a night and all situational usage here.

I can't see Hextall moving his 1st. A lateral move with Rust for someone comparable with size or something like that? Sure. But Rust plus POJ plus a 1st? Certainly not for Reinhart . . .

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

@Big Friggin Dummy . . . I'm afraid I've got some bad news for ya.

I give about as much of a f*** about what some random podcasters or twitter jockeys say as any of us, so whatever. I, @Big Friggin Dummy of HFboards, project Hyman gets $5.5 million for 5 years. That's my STONE COLD LOCK OF THE CENTURY, of the week.

We'll see. I don't think anyone's gonna be slinging that type of deal at Hyman. I love the dude and think he'd be f***ing awesome here, but he's not a franchise cornerstone piece. That type of deal is a franchise cornerstone type deal.

I'd easily give him Zucker's money for 4 or 5 years though. In a couple years, contracts aren't gonna matter anymore.

 

[KIRK]

I give about as much of a f*** about what some random podcasters or twitter jockeys say as any of us, so whatever.

We'll see. I don't think anyone's gonna be slinging that type of deal at Hyman. I love the dude and think he'd be f***ing awesome here, but he's not a franchise cornerstone piece. That type of deal is a franchise cornerstone type deal.

I'd easily give him Zucker's money for 4 or 5 years though. In a couple years, contracts aren't gonna matter anymore.

Never underestimate the stupidity of NHL GMs.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Never underestimate the stupidity of NHL GMs.

I think we all know how stupid GMs can be after some of Shero's moves and the majority of JR's. I just think the flat cap for the next few seasons (rumored) is gonna keep almost everyone in check.

 

[Gurglesons]

I think we all know how stupid GMs can be after some of Shero's moves and the majority of JR's. I just think the flat cap for the next few seasons (rumored) is gonna keep almost everyone in check.

Issue being Hyman is the skill set everyone wants what with Tom Wilson running this league.

 

[KIRK]

I think we all know how stupid GMs can be after some of Shero's moves and the majority of JR's. I just think the flat cap for the next few seasons (rumored) is gonna keep almost everyone in check.

All it takes is one, and several have space. But yeah it's certainly not a players' market this summer. We'll see.

 

[Tom Hanks]

I give about as much of a f*** about what some random podcasters or twitter jockeys say as any of us, so whatever. I, @Big Friggin Dummy of HFboards, project Hyman gets $5.5 million for 5 years. That's my STONE COLD LOCK OF THE CENTURY, of the week.

We'll see. I don't think anyone's gonna be slinging that type of deal at Hyman. I love the dude and think he'd be f***ing awesome here, but he's not a franchise cornerstone piece. That type of deal is a franchise cornerstone type deal.

I'd easily give him Zucker's money for 4 or 5 years though. In a couple years, contracts aren't gonna matter anymore.

I checked a couple of Pens recent signings and these "Twitter jockeys" were very very close to what the players signed for.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Those middle three aren't the same thing and my willingness to add a 1st to that deal slides drastically from player to player.

A lot would depend on what Reinhart wanted on his next contract too.

They aren't the same thing, but it gives Sabres the flexibility to choose what's right for them. I'd be comfortable with any of the options even if it were Blueger...who's obviously the hardest one to give up.

While Carter's here it looks like Blueger will be the 4C, and Gaudreau can give us solid minutes in that role. Plus Reinhart has the versatility to play RW or C as needed, and it would help us tremendously in a post-Malkin world if it comes to that.

I don't think we'd need to worry about Reinhart going much over 7 mil per.

Still. Seems like a ton for a 50-60 pt guy. He isn’t getting 20 minutes a night and all situational usage here.

Reinhart's scored at a 62 points per 82 game pace for the last 3 seasons, and has more goals this year than any Penguin...while playing on the Sabres.

I'd say playing in Buffalo's a bigger disadvantage than having his minutes reduced. Look what happened with Taylor Hall. That's a broken organization and Reinhart's thrived regardless.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I checked a couple of Pens recent signings and these "Twitter jockeys" were very very close to what the players signed for.

Awesome. I'm sure some people here guessed correctly on some stuff too.

All it takes is one, and several have space. But yeah it's certainly not a players' market this summer. We'll see.

I kinda want us to get swept just to see things go nuclear. It'd be more entertaining than going out in the 1st or 2nd round.

 

[KIRK]

Issue being Hyman is the skill set everyone wants what with Tom Wilson running this league.

Tom Wilson doesn't run the league.

 

[Peat]

Tom Wilson doesn't run the league.

I dunno about that...

 

[KIRK]

I dunno about that...

Oh I do. Hence the sarcasm emoji.

 

[Peat]

I am confused as to why the cap hit goes up with more term for the Hyman projection, and want to know whether they're factoring in flat cap discounts into their projections.

Still. Seems like a ton for a 50-60 pt guy. He isn’t getting 20 minutes a night and all situational usage here.

If Reinhart slipped into the open spot on Sid's line that a Rust trade would create, I think he'd be getting pretty close... and if he gets the PP slot as well, I think his scoring would soar here.

They aren't the same thing, but it gives Sabres the flexibility to choose what's right for them. I'd be comfortable with any of the options even if it were Blueger...who's obviously the hardest one to give up.

While Carter's here it looks like Blueger will be the 4C, and Gaudreau can give us solid minutes in that role. Plus Reinhart has the versatility to play RW or C as needed, and it would help us tremendously in a post-Malkin world if it comes to that.

I don't think we'd need to worry about Reinhart going much over 7 mil per.

I'm happy to give them some flexibility, but I don't think I'd go as far as Rust + Blueger/POJ + 1st, but would happily do Pettersson.

Also... 7m, not sure we can do that.

 

[Jesse]

Jesse.. it's an NHL defender. They are going to have ups/downs.

I think my intent on TH's initial post is that two things can both be true. I think Pets is a solid dman with a high floor/very low ceiling. He's consistent. I think for the Pittsburgh Penguins, the way they want to play, and how they structure their game... it would not be worth letting Ceci walk and keeping Pets at 4m.

I think it would really benefit the Pens to encourage Seattle to take Pets and incentivize it. Then use money to spread around but offer Ceci something fair because he fits here in that 3rd pairing. We got POJ on his way and I would like to see him play next year.

I wouldn't be upset either way. Ceci is good with sensical deployment, Pettersson has been pretty solid defensively without some of the bells and whistles of puck carrying. If POJ doesn't have a spot next year, that'd likely make me the most upset of all scenarios.

 

[brewski420]

1. @ColePens believes we must protect his boy ZAR at all costs.

2. I think part of the reason for the incentive is cap/depth related . . . lot of money tied up in the defense with Marino's raise and presumably trying to keep Ceci. Combined with POJ waiting in the wings and depth like Friedman and Run, I think he (correctly) thinks it's in the Pens best interest if Seattle takes their 4M bottom pairing defenseman.

OK that does make sense. I don't like throwing incentives as part of the process but I definitely was not thinking in terms of cap. As a Pens and Kraken fan I would not be disappointed to get Pettersson on Seattle's team. Young with potential. Francis might go after him without incentive. Maybe?!!

 

[KIRK]

OK that does make sense. I don't like throwing incentives as part of the process but I definitely was not thinking in terms of cap. As a Pens and Kraken fan I would not be disappointed to get Pettersson on Seattle's team. Young with potential. Francis might go after him without incentive. Maybe?!!

Not sure.

Other names exposed will be Zucker (if not traded before), Tanev, Aston-Reese, and DeSmith.

Not sure Francis won't pick one of those guys first, but it's so hard to know without running through each team's protected list.

I suspect Hextall will want to open up some space beyond the Marino raise to tinker with his lineup, so I suspect he'll try one way or another to find new homes for Pettersson and Zucker.

 

[ColePens]

1. @ColePens believes we must protect his boy ZAR at all costs.

2. I think part of the reason for the incentive is cap/depth related . . . lot of money tied up in the defense with Marino's raise and presumably trying to keep Ceci. Combined with POJ waiting in the wings and depth like Friedman and Run, I think he (correctly) thinks it's in the Pens best interest if Seattle takes their 4M bottom pairing defenseman.

You are dead to me

 

[brewski420]

Not sure.

Other names exposed will be Zucker (if not traded before), Tanev, Aston-Reese, and DeSmith.

Not sure Francis won't pick one of those guys first, but it's so hard tp know without running through each team's protected list.

I suspect Hextall will want to open up some space beyond the Marino raise to tinker with his lineup, so I suspect he'll try one way or another to find new homes for Pettersson and Zucker.

I do agree on Pettersson and Zucker. Of all those you list I would like to see the Kraken get Tanev or Pettersson.

 

[Zirakzigil]

You are dead to me

I think he got it spot on. Or did he forget to protect eRod as well?

I dont think moving Petts will be that difficult, if thats the move Hex wants to make. Top 4 defenseman have a lot of value around the league. Petts is a decent player and not a bad cap hit.

 

[KIRK]

I think he got it spot on. Or did he forget to protect eRod as well?

I dont think moving Petts will be that difficult, if thats the move Hex wants to make. Top 4 defenseman have a lot of value around the league. Petts is a decent player and not a bad cap hit.

I think it was the first part of my post that slightly triggered @ColePens.

At least he didn't lose his shit . . .

 

[KIRK]

I do agree on Pettersson and Zucker. Of all those you list I would like to see the Kraken get Tanev or Pettersson.

I can see that.

I do think Francis will have better bang for buck options on D but again it'll be much easier to know once lists are released and pre expansion draft trades are done.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

It's a bummer that they haven't been using POJ on the right side in WBS at all.

 

[Tom Hanks]

I am confused as to why the cap hit goes up with more term for the Hyman projection, and want to know whether they're factoring in flat cap discounts into their projections.



If Reinhart slipped into the open spot on Sid's line that a Rust trade would create, I think he'd be getting pretty close... and if he gets the PP slot as well, I think his scoring would soar here.



I'm happy to give them some flexibility, but I don't think I'd go as far as Rust + Blueger/POJ + 1st, but would happily do Pettersson.

Also... 7m, not sure we can do that.

With the projections you can input what you believe the cap will be so it would take the flat cap into consideration.

Here’s some light reading from their glossary:


These projections are modeled using data that CapFriendly has graciously made available to us. In addition, we’ve used metrics available on our site along with biographical/draft information from the NHL. The final numbers that you see are the outputs of two separate models that work in tandem. The first model is built to predict the length of a given player’s future contract (term). A contract can be anywhere from 1 to 8 years in length. Our dataset does include contracts from the past that were longer than 8 years, but these have been adjusted to 8 years in the model for continuity. The second model is built to predict a given player’s salary cap % (a contract’s % of the cap ceiling excluding bonuses). Predicting this percentage allows us to control for the change in the NHL’s salary cap year over year. For our term model, we used Random Forest. For our cap % model, we used Cubist.
Both of these models use a weighting system that takes into account up to the prior 3 years a given player played in the NHL. If a player signs an in-season extension, we determine prior years based on whether they signed before or after February 15 within a given year. (Before: the prior year is the prior season. After: the current season stats are used). Each prior year is weighted as follows, where “n” represents “now”:
Term:

• n-1: 11
• n-2: 2
• n-3: 1
• (78.6%, 14.3%, 7.1%)

Cap %:

• n-1: 6
• n-2: 3
• n-3: 2
• (54.5%, 27.3%, 18.2%)

These weights were determined based on a lengthy cross-validation grid-search process (25 total sets of weights). In addition, other tests were performed on the 3 sets of weights that performed best in cross-validation for each model to determine the most robust system. If a player has less than 3 total seasons in the NHL, we weight differently. For two-year players, the n-1 and n-2 weights are used. For one-year players, we use only the season they played previously. A note: this model is designed with NHL players in mind. If a player does not have NHL data (i.e. they have not played in the NHL – ELC, KHL, etc.), then they are excluded from these projections.
The following features were included in both models to varying degrees:

• Position, Age Tier, Contract Status (UFA/RFA), Signing Period, Signed with Prior Team (yes/no),
• Years since Draft, Shooting Hand, Draft Round, Max Possible Contract (age),
• TOI (All Situations), TOI %,
• Goals, Primary Assists, Game Score (Dom L’s original formula),
• iCF, iXG,
• Giveaways, Takeaways,
• 5v5 GF Differential, 5v5 CF Differential,
• Term, iPEND2, iPENT2 (Cap % model only)

As mentioned, these two models work in tandem with one another – a given contract’s length (term) is included in the cap % model. This allows us to project the total contract value for any length between 1 and 8 years. Predicting term is a multiclass classification problem – there are 8 possible outcomes. This model assigns probabilities (between 0 and 1) for all 8 years, where the term with the highest probability becomes our “expected” term. The cap % model is built using the “known” term for a given contract, and we predict cap % for every player for every possible term (1-8 years). The cap % associated with the highest probability from the term model is chosen. The dollar amount displayed is based on the salary cap input by the user (we’ve set this to $84MM). The final value comes from multiplying a given player’s cap % by the total salary cap (a 10% player in an $84MM cap league = a $8.4MM total cap hit).
We’ve also added some new features this year that not only add flexibility overall, but also significantly improve each model’s respective performance: Signing Period (or the “Period” column) and “Signs With”. Signing period works like how it sounds: at what point in the year was a given contract signed? For this feature, we arrived at three “periods” within the year that a given contract can be signed – both of these features significantly contribute to both expected term and cap %. For display purposes, we’ve set this as “July”, but the other periods are available for you to look at via the “Signing Period” dropdown.

• Period 1: July (free agency)
• Period 2: August 1st – October 11th (free agency holdout)
• Period 3: October 12th – June 30th (in-season extension)

“Signs With” is a binary feature that accounts for whether a player signed a given contract with the team that they most recently played for (yes / no) – for projected contracts, this takes the form of “if a player signs with their previous team or with a new team, what do we expect their projected contract to look like?”. For display purposes, we’ve set the dropdown so all UFAs sign with a new team and all RFAs sign with their previous team. However, you can look at both options for UFAs and RFAs. It’s important to keep in mind that RFAs who sign with a different team are rare cases; the model doesn’t have a lot of prior data to work with here, so please take these projections with a grain of salt. A NOTE: we are NOT predicting whether a given player will sign with their prior team or with a new team. We are simply allowing users to view both scenarios, for all players.
While this does a good job accounting for 8-year contracts overall (please reference Rule 50.8, subsection (b) (iv) of the CBA), it doesn’t do this perfectly. Alex Pietrangelo, as of this writing, is still projected to sign an 8-year deal with a different team, which is impossible. For now, we’ve chosen to leave this as is since it’s somewhat telling of just how “valuable” the model(s) think he is based on historical signings. But please keep in mind: he can’t sign an 8-year deal with a different team, nor can any other player.
Finally, we’ve made projections for all active players available as well (anyone who played more than 1 game in the ’19-20 season) – the “Free Agent” dropdown. Looking at non-free agents, however, can be a bit strange since this assumes that any and all players could sign a new contract at any given time. This isn’t really how it works and is unrealistic. Even more important here is that players who recently (within the last 3 years) signed a contract will likely be quite close to their previously signed contract since both models were trained using those same recent contracts. While both models are significantly weighted towards the most recent season, the “biographical” features will be the same, and recent players’ metrics will be similar overall. It’s best to disregard projections here for players who signed a contract within the last 3 years, or at the very least, understand that their results are going to be biased (close to their previous contract).