Salary Cap: The Salary Cap Thread | Trust me... nothing has changed.

[Ogrezilla]

Yeah I guess. I know JR can't force GMs to give him good centers, but it's not clear to me that he had a cohesive plan. The off-season just seems disjointed.

I'm just not sure what option you think he should have taken instead? Sign someone who isn't good enough? Someone who costs too much? Or some unknown trade that may or may not exist? Aside from the stars aligning with some out of nowhere trade, I just don't see what moves he could have made that would have us in a good spot. I'm sure we could have made moves that make us a better team today, but I think they likely would have gotten in the way of making moves to be even better down the line. I'd guess the guys he's targeting either cost good assets or a decent chunk of cap space. Maybe both. Signing a UFA would have gotten in the way of that. Trading for someone could use the assets he needs. Like I said, both of those options would make us a better team today, but that doesn't mean they are the right moves to make. Signing Bonino back certainly would make us a better team today, but I'm glad we didn't do it at that cost and term.

I mean sure, at 4C he could have moved on from Cullen right away. But we have a decent 4C in rowney, and 4c isn't that hard to acquire if we need better. Cullen is enough better than most 4cs to be worth the risk imo.

Hey if we get a Bonino caliber center for 3mm or under without spending significant assets, color me impressed. I doubt that will happen.

What do you consider significant assets? It was always going to cost assets to get a guy like that (just like it did for bonino). We don't have one internally and guys like him always cost too much as UFAs.

Now maybe it won't work. Maybe we don't get the guy we need and we don't threepeat. But if his other options were overpaying guys or getting guys who aren't good enough anyway, I can live with trying again next year. I want him to hold out for what we actually need to win it all, not settle for what will help us go out in the 2nd round instead of the 1st. That said, I don't think we need someone crazy good at 3C to win it all, so I am confident that he can get it. Even if it's a deadline deal on an expiring contract that doesn't help long term. That's better than being locked in to something we aren't happy with.

 

[Peat]

Unless we get a Duchene type of 3c I don't expect a whole lot better from whoever we bring in. I'd expect less month long stretches of .25 PPG play though. And I expect they will be cheaper than 4m if they have any sort of term unless they are closer to that Duchene type. I don't think we let bones walk because .4 PPG is unacceptable, i think we let him walk because .4 PPG isn't worth 4 mil with term.

I am content with .4 ppg from a defence first 3C - although I'd rather they did the .45 or so Bonino did as a season average and think that's an obtainable goal for the right player with the right support - as long as they don't get Phil Kessel to ride shotgun with them. I don't think its good enough for a player who's got that level of attacking support.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

It's illustrative to me that nobody who's overly critical of JR's lack of progress on the 3C front will commit to saying that letting Bonino go was a mistake.

To me, that's having your cake and eating it too.

 

[Gurglesons]

I'm just not sure what option you think he should have taken instead? Sign someone who isn't good enough? Someone who costs too much? Or some unknown trade that may or may not exist? Aside from the stars aligning with some out of nowhere trade, I just don't see what moves he could have made that would have us in a good spot. I'm sure we could have made moves that make us a better team today, but I think they likely would have gotten in the way of making moves to be even better down the line. I'd guess the guys he's targeting either cost good assets or a decent chunk of cap space. Maybe both. Signing a UFA would have gotten in the way of that. Trading for someone could use the assets he needs. Like I said, both of those options would make us a better team today, but that doesn't mean they are the right moves to make. Signing Bonino back certainly would make us a better team today, but I'm glad we didn't do it at that cost and term.

I mean sure, at 4C he could have moved on from Cullen right away. But we have a decent 4C in rowney, and 4c isn't that hard to acquire if we need better. Cullen is enough better than most 4cs to be worth the risk imo.



What do you consider significant assets? It was always going to cost assets to get a guy like that (just like it did for bonino). We don't have one internally and guys like him always cost too much as UFAs.

Now maybe it won't work. Maybe we don't get the guy we need and we don't threepeat. But if his other options were overpaying guys or getting guys who aren't good enough anyway, I can live with trying again next year. I want him to hold out for what we actually need to win it all, not settle for what will help us go out in the 2nd round instead of the 1st. That said, I don't think we need someone crazy good at 3C to win it all, so I am confident that he can get it. Even if it's a deadline deal on an expiring contract that doesn't help long term. That's better than being locked in to something we aren't happy with.

You sign a Boyle or Moore instead of Hunwick and the Reaves trade and you have center depth of Crosby - Malkin - Moore / Boyle - Sundqvist - Rowney with the same exact cap space we have now.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I am content with .4 ppg from a defence first 3C - although I'd rather they did the .45 or so Bonino did as a season average and think that's an obtainable goal for the right player with the right support - as long as they don't get Phil Kessel to ride shotgun with them. I don't think its good enough for a player who's got that level of attacking support.

But even with Phil Kessel on his wing, he was still used as a defense first 3C. You can't just throw anybody with Kessel and see them start scoring. And you need to remember that he was under a 2M a year player here. Now that he's getting 4M, expectations will rightfully be higher.

Bonino was a fine 3C. He wasn't great. He wasn't bad. He had stretches of both, but on the whole, he was a pretty middle of the road 3C. Reliable defensively the vast majority of the time though, which made the inconsistency a lot more tolerable.

 

[Ogrezilla]

You sign a Boyle or Moore instead of Hunwick and the Reaves trade and you have center depth of Crosby - Malkin - Moore / Boyle - Sundqvist - Rowney with the same exact cap space we have now.

And then we'd have a worse defense and still wouldn't have a 3C. But we'd have three 4C's, which is nice.

 

[PensandCaps]

And then we'd have a worse defense and still wouldn't have a 3C. But we'd have three 4C's, which is nice.

I kinda agree. I'd rather have a Boyle or Moore, very good 4th line centres. Boyle aurgably the best 4C in the NHL. I don't think not signing Hunwick gives you a worse defense.....i think signing him gives you a worse defense. Not a big fan of his. I would have been totally fine with Ruh being our #6 as he was real good for us in the playoffs, albeit kinda of sheltered.

Keep Ruh as our #6, not trade for Reaves, and sign Moore or Boyle would've been a much better move. At least we'd have a for sure good 4C. I don't see much of a difference between Hunwick or Ruh being our #6. There is a HUGE difference between Moore/Boyle compared to Rowney.

 

[Peat]

But even with Phil Kessel on his wing, he was still used as a defense first 3C. You can't just throw anybody with Kessel and see them start scoring. And you need to remember that he was under a 2M a year player here. Now that he's getting 4M, expectations will rightfully be higher.

Bonino was a fine 3C. He wasn't great. He wasn't bad. He had stretches of both, but on the whole, he was a pretty middle of the road 3C. Reliable defensively the vast majority of the time though, which made the inconsistency a lot more tolerable.

But we know he could score with Kessel. Its not like we threw just anyone in with Kessel, we threw in a guy who could cause mayhem with him. And its not like Kessel's offence disappears if you give him more d-zone starts than o-zone either. Hell, Bonino was perfectly capable of a .52 pace with 46pc o-zone starts with Vancouver.

Maybe my expectations are getting thrown by the HBK run, where he was getting plenty of offensive zone starts and was playing more of a 2C role than a 3C role. Not that I was expecting those numbers with a 10pc difference in zone starts. But I don't see how that alone would explain both guys turning in notably lower numbers than they could. And I do think most 3Cs would score more if they had a guy like Kessel on their wing.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I kinda agree. I'd rather have a Boyle or Moore, very good 4th line centres. Boyle aurgably the best 4C in the NHL. I don't think not signing Hunwick gives you a worse defense.....i think signing him gives you a worse defense. Not a big fan of his. I would have been totally fine with Ruh being our #6 as he was real good for us in the playoffs, albeit kinda of sheltered.

Keep Ruh as our #6, not trade for Reaves, and sign Moore or Boyle would've been a much better move. At least we'd have a for sure good 4C. I don't see much of a difference between Hunwick or Ruh being our #6. There is a HUGE difference between Moore/Boyle compared to Rowney.

Disagree. Boyle's a good 4C yeah, that's why he makes almost 3 mil. And he really couldn't fit our system much worse. On D, Hunwick is a clear upgrade over Ruh imo. And we can't be ignoring our #7D. This way it's Ruh, the other way it's Pouliot.

Moore I'd have liked. But as I said, I completely understand waiting for Cullen. You can always get a 4C at the deadline. Hell, half the time it's Moore

 

[Gurglesons]

Disagree. Boyle's a good 4C yeah, that's why he makes almost 3 mil. And he really couldn't fit our system much worse. On D, Hunwick is a clear upgrade over Ruh imo. And we can't be ignoring our #7D. This way it's Ruh, the other way it's Pouliot.

Moore I'd have liked. But as I said, I completely understand waiting for Cullen. You can always get a 4C at the deadline. Hell, half the time it's Moore

Remember when I posted a list of playoff teams that got a 4C at the deadline. It was Boyle and Desharnais last year and that was it.

Obviously McClement is a fine 4C for the first couple months.

 

[Ogrezilla]

But we know he could score with Kessel. Its not like we threw just anyone in with Kessel, we threw in a guy who could cause mayhem with him. And its not like Kessel's offence disappears if you give him more d-zone starts than o-zone either. Hell, Bonino was perfectly capable of a .52 pace with 46pc o-zone starts with Vancouver.

Maybe my expectations are getting thrown by the HBK run, where he was getting plenty of offensive zone starts and was playing more of a 2C role than a 3C role. Not that I was expecting those numbers with a 10pc difference in zone starts. But I don't see how that alone would explain both guys turning in notably lower numbers than they could. And I do think most 3Cs would score more if they had a guy like Kessel on their wing.

I'm not saying I wouldn't like better, but Bonino's overall production was very much in the realm one should expect from a 3C imo.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Remember when I posted a list of playoff teams that got a 4C at the deadline. It was Boyle and Desharnais last year and that was it.

Obviously McClement is a fine 4C for the first couple months.

yeah, and remember when I asked you why that meant anything for this year? And gave you some teams that won while adding centers at the deadline in recent years?

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

You sign a Boyle or Moore instead of Hunwick and the Reaves trade and you have center depth of Crosby - Malkin - Moore / Boyle - Sundqvist - Rowney with the same exact cap space we have now.

Would that be all you're asking for? Again?

 

[Gurglesons]

Would that be all you're asking for? Again?

I'd appreciate it if you would quit trolling me. Or at least make an actual point.

 

[Gurglesons]

yeah, and remember when I asked you why that meant anything for this year? And gave you some teams that won while adding centers at the deadline in recent years?

Chicago in 2013 when they had Richards Kruger and Toews right?

And LA in 2012 when they had Richards Kopi and Stoll?

If you have a Stoll or Kruger you can make a deadline tweak to bring in a player that pushes them down.

Right now we have Crosby, Malkin, Rowney McClement. We are a week from rookie camp.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Chicago in 2013 when they had Richards Kruger and Toews right?

And LA in 2012 when they had Richards Kopi and Stoll?

If you have a Stoll or Kruger you can make a deadline tweak to bring in a player that pushes them down.

Right now we have Crosby, Malkin, Rowney McClement. We are a week from rookie camp.

Okay, but it's not the deadline yet. And we have two 4cs. It's not ideal, but it's also not the end of the world. We need one trade, and could use a 2nd.

I'd have liked Moore here, but not nearly as much as Cullen so I get what they did there. Calculated risk with a decent 4c in place if it doesn't work out which we now know it didnt. At 3c I just don't see who was available that we should have brought in.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I'd appreciate it if you would quit trolling me. Or at least make an actual point.

You're mistaking being taken to task for being trolled. The point - clearly - is that you set up scenarios that you claim would satisfy you, only to move the goalposts when they come true.

There was a time when you said all you wanted was a 4C who could take over if Rowney failed, like McClement (who you explicitly mentioned by name). Then we got him, and you immediately started pining for other centers.

Basically, if we had signed either of your latest "all I want" centers in Moore and Boyle, odds are that you'd be complaining about the center situation again as soon as the ink was dry.

 

[Gurglesons]

Okay, but it's not the deadline yet. And we have two 4cs. It's not ideal, but it's also not the end of the world. We need one trade, and could use a 2nd.

I'd have liked Moore here, but not nearly as much as Cullen so I get what they did there. Calculated risk with a decent 4c in place if it doesn't work out. At 3c I just don't see who was available that we should have brought in.

By signing Hunwick and trading for Reaves, Rutherford essentially set himself up for Cullen or bust. If we make a move for a Bonino type 3C you are likely giving up a 1st +, if you make a move for a 4C like Boyle or Desharnais you are trading a 2nd or roster D like Cole. So, if McClement doesn't pan out we are likely giving up a 1st, 2nd and a roster player to fill out our roster for a potential run.

That is assuming our D holds up.

 

[Ogrezilla]

By signing Hunwick and trading for Reaves, Rutherford essentially set himself up for Cullen or bust. If we make a move for a Bonino type 3C you are likely giving up a 1st +, if you make a move for a 4C like Boyle or Desharnais you are trading a 2nd or roster D like Cole. So, if McClement doesn't pan out we are likely giving up a 1st, 2nd and a roster player to fill out our roster for a potential run.

That is assuming our D holds up.

That's likely true. Who could we have had that wouldn't have cost us those sorts of assets that would adequately fill our roster at reasonable deals? Moore I'll give you. But for 3c?

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

You're mistaking being taken to task for being trolled. The point - clearly - is that you set up scenarios that you claim would satisfy you, only to move the goalposts when they come true.

There was a time when you said all you wanted was a 4C who could take over if Rowney failed, like McClement (who you explicitly mentioned by name). Then we got him, and you immediately started pining for other centers.

Basically, if we had signed either of your latest "all I want" centers in Moore and Boyle, odds are that you'd be complaining about the center situation again as soon as the ink was dry.

The funny thing is even if JR had brought in either Moore or Boyle, it still wouldn't have addressed the gaping hole at 3C. So the complaint would have been that JR has done nothing to fix the 3C hole.

 

[mpp9]

It's illustrative to me that nobody who's overly critical of JR's lack of progress on the 3C front will commit to saying that letting Bonino go was a mistake.

To me, that's having your cake and eating it too.

Pretty much. I'm the opposite. I'm not critical and wouldn't have been if he was kept or let go. His contract isn't something that would be difficult to move.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

The funny thing is even if JR had brought in either Moore or Boyle, it still wouldn't have addressed the gaping hole at 3C. So the complaint would have been that JR has done nothing to fix the 3C hole.

Nail on the head.

 

[ColePens]

I would have been livid bringing in Boyle for his money. Infuriated.

 

[Rufus]

You sign a Boyle or Moore instead of Hunwick and the Reaves trade and you have center depth of Crosby - Malkin - Moore / Boyle - Sundqvist - Rowney with the same exact cap space we have now.

That's just signing someone for name's sake.

 

[madinsomniac]

I would have been livid bringing in Boyle for his money. Infuriated.

People forget the Cap is a thing....

Great we get a guy paid like a #2 center to play a # 4 c role and then we have to lose some depth elsewhere that evens us out overall...

I mean I think people are misunderstanding the relative difference between an average and above average bottom 6 center... we have above average wingers that can roleplay most of their key contributions... having a great one is a luxury, not a necessary thing...

I mean in 08 and 09 look at our 4c's

And Bonino was not close to Staal...