Salary Cap: trouble in cap land?

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

He's using the Marleau trade as evidence. That they had to give up a first to get out of a bad contract.

Well no ****, Sherlock. Bad contracts suck. In our faces?

The "good problem to have" is drafting good players who contribute to the team and carry value. Yeah, those guys cost money too. And if you're lucky enough to have enough of them that you can't keep em all, some of them have to be dealt. But for value returns because they, you know, carry value. And if you're a good enough at drafting developing and dealing for draft currency, your team can continue a cycle of dealing with that good problem.

Again... Nothing that has anything to do with Patrick ****ing Marleau and his ****ty contract that the Leafs never would have had to dump if they never signed it in the first place.

How dare you make sense

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

So the point of this thread is that someone listened to Toronto radio, heard that the Leafs have to do some accounting for a player which means the whole league is screwed?

Just asking

 

[DominicT]

So the point of this thread is that someone listened Toronto radio, heard that the Leafs have to do some accounting for a player which means the whole league is screwed?

Just asking

When you go out and draft two franchise players, then sign another as a free agent, you are going to run into cap trouble at some point. It's as much a fact as death and taxes.

Teams always get out of that situation. Always have and always will.

Some teams deal with it differently. Example: Nashville.

It's the price you gotta pay in a hard cap world when you draft so high and draft elite players.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

When you go out and draft two franchise players, then sign another as a free agent, you are going to run into cap trouble at some point. It's as much a fact as death and taxes.

Teams always get out of that situation. Always have and always will.

Some teams deal with it differently. Example: Nashville.

It's the price you gotta pay in a hard cap world when you draft so high and draft elite players.

Thanks sir.

I will take that as a yes.

 

[corpfan1]

It is official.

$81.5M

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

It is official.

$81.5M

They are all doomed.

Shut it down. Learn Shuffle Board

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

He's using the Marleau trade as evidence. That they had to give up a first to get out of a bad contract.

Well no ****, Sherlock. Bad contracts suck. In our faces?

The "good problem to have" is drafting good players who contribute to the team and carry value. Yeah, those guys cost money too. And if you're lucky enough to have enough of them that you can't keep em all, some of them have to be dealt. But for value returns because they, you know, carry value. And if you're a good enough at drafting developing and dealing for draft currency, your team can continue a cycle of dealing with that good problem.

Again... Nothing that has anything to do with Patrick ****ing Marleau and his ****ty contract that the Leafs never would have had to dump if they never signed it in the first place.

you are completely missing the point... theres a few others here that wouldnt feel a point if they had a 3 foot sword in their throats but I feel better for you

the point is... was... will be... that the going rate for rfa contracts up to McDavid was around 6 mill. the number of exceptions was around 5-10 in the cap era... names like Crosby, Ovechkin, stamkos and a couple guys in Chicago were the exceptions... 1 or 2 others...

then came this notion that McDavid made the same % as Crosby... A/thats incorrect B/Crosby too his superstion number and didnt care what % he was getting

but every clever donkey said its the same %
{completely ignoring the fact Crosby took the same number on 2 contracts seperated by 5 years}

so... then the process of arbitration... and this new idea of paying rfa like ufa took over

so... thats the point. the point is that ufa always got their money and in a unionized league always will. remember the players get to help agree to the cba

us fans can bellyache we want exciting young players to be paid... but thats NOT HOW UNIONS WORK!!!

so I heard what the people here are screaming about... now in a couple years when the next cba comes they can listen to what the reality is going to say

I didnt want it to come so I raised a warning bell.. but honestly some people here will get exactly what they deserve

as for Toronto... I enjoy seeing them give away all their depth and give up first round picks to do it... im not shedding tears... but Toronto is the single most important market/ownership in the league. wait until reality hits them. if you wanted to know where the next lockout/lost year is coming from pay attention

bad contracts have happened for the last 40 years or more... but this rfa being paid 8-10 mill and more is something new that just happened in the last 2 seasons and is catching everyone with their pants down

 

[AngryMilkcrates]

Note: Re-posting this here since its a more relevant thread than the original

Boston Bruins
PROJECTED CAP SPACE: $12,803,334
via Capfriendly

UFAs:
Marcus Johansson
Noel Acciari
Steven Kampfer

UFA G6:
Zane McIntyre

RFAs:
Charlie McAvoy
Brandon Carlo
Danton Heinen


Unless cap space is created with moves. Some hard decisions are going to have to be made.

Resigning costs in my estimation:

McAvoy 7.5-8.5 Million
Carlo 5-5.5 Million
Heinen 2.5-3.5 Million

Thats 15 - 17.5 Million

Rut-Roh

Even if we get a hometown discount out of McAvoy and Carlo for 7 and 4 Million, we cannot afford Heinen and could barely afford Acciari(UFA 1.5m)

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Note: Re-posting this here since its a more relevant thread than the original

Boston Bruins
PROJECTED CAP SPACE: $12,803,334
via Capfriendly

UFAs:
Marcus Johansson
Noel Acciari
Steven Kampfer

UFA G6:
Zane McIntyre

RFAs:
Charlie McAvoy
Brandon Carlo
Danton Heinen


Unless cap space is created with moves. Some hard decisions are going to have to be made.

Resigning costs in my estimation:

McAvoy 7.5-8.5 Million
Carlo 5-5.5 Million
Heinen 2.5-3.5 Million

Thats 15 - 17.5 Million

Rut-Roh

Even if we get a hometown discount out of McAvoy and Carlo for 7 and 4 Million, we cannot afford Heinen and could barely afford Acciari(UFA 1.5m)

you show how things could go crazy in a hurry... and I agree to a degree

personally I think your numbers on the 2 dmen are a little high

whats interesting is that prolovov in philly {sp?} and werenski in Columbus are both rfa too. both pay around the same responsibility/icetime as McAvoy.

if we get lucky and those guys sign cheap {reasonable} contracts and considering pastrnak also signed on the old pay scale... we might get McAvoy at around 6. to be honest his comparables that have made more is not a long list.

carlo has an even more difficult time finding any dmen with his offensive totals that are much above 4 mill.

if they go on % then the argument will be brodin got his 4 mill when the cap was like 15% less and carlo needs 15% more or some nonsense like that. its a dumb argument but one that some fans think Is valid

in arbitration they usually argue numbers like goals/assists/possibly icetime… dom can correct me if he wants what the rules are for things allowed to be argued... im pretty sure % of the cap isnt one of them

im predicting/budgeting around 13 mill to resign McAvoy/carlo/and Heinen but if im off on the numbers we will get hurt.

crossing my fingers because if we can bring our team back intact and get a little more health I see potential cup winner here next year. I dont want to lose players and I want to keep room available for deadline day deals

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

you are completely missing the point... theres a few others here that wouldnt feel a point if they had a 3 foot sword in their throats but I feel better for you

the point is... was... will be... that the going rate for rfa contracts up to McDavid was around 6 mill. the number of exceptions was around 5-10 in the cap era... names like Crosby, Ovechkin, stamkos and a couple guys in Chicago were the exceptions... 1 or 2 others...

then came this notion that McDavid made the same % as Crosby... A/thats incorrect B/Crosby too his superstion number and didnt care what % he was getting

but every clever donkey said its the same %
{completely ignoring the fact Crosby took the same number on 2 contracts seperated by 5 years}

so... then the process of arbitration... and this new idea of paying rfa like ufa took over

so... thats the point. the point is that ufa always got their money and in a unionized league always will. remember the players get to help agree to the cba

us fans can bellyache we want exciting young players to be paid... but thats NOT HOW UNIONS WORK!!!

so I heard what the people here are screaming about... now in a couple years when the next cba comes they can listen to what the reality is going to say

I didnt want it to come so I raised a warning bell.. but honestly some people here will get exactly what they deserve

as for Toronto... I enjoy seeing them give away all their depth and give up first round picks to do it... im not shedding tears... but Toronto is the single most important market/ownership in the league. wait until reality hits them. if you wanted to know where the next lockout/lost year is coming from pay attention

bad contracts have happened for the last 40 years or more... but this rfa being paid 8-10 mill and more is something new that just happened in the last 2 seasons and is catching everyone with their pants down

In five sentences, I explained what the "good problem to have" is.

Then you respond with this post spinning tires about cap percentages and the function of unions, but not at all addressing anything in those five sentences. You even left out the catch phrase.

You want to argue that RFAs shouldn't be getting as much money or cap share as UFAs? Okay! I disagree, but that's a discussion I honestly enjoy having.

It's just a different one than the one you're claiming you're right about.

 

[AngryMilkcrates]

you show how things could go crazy in a hurry... and I agree to a degree

personally I think your numbers on the 2 dmen are a little high

whats interesting is that prolovov in philly {sp?} and werenski in Columbus are both rfa too. both pay around the same responsibility/icetime as McAvoy.

if we get lucky and those guys sign cheap {reasonable} contracts and considering pastrnak also signed on the old pay scale... we might get McAvoy at around 6. to be honest his comparables that have made more is not a long list.

carlo has an even more difficult time finding any dmen with his offensive totals that are much above 4 mill.

if they go on % then the argument will be brodin got his 4 mill when the cap was like 15% less and carlo needs 15% more or some nonsense like that. its a dumb argument but one that some fans think Is valid

in arbitration they usually argue numbers like goals/assists/possibly icetime… dom can correct me if he wants what the rules are for things allowed to be argued... im pretty sure % of the cap isnt one of them

im predicting/budgeting around 13 mill to resign McAvoy/carlo/and Heinen but if im off on the numbers we will get hurt.

crossing my fingers because if we can bring our team back intact and get a little more health I see potential cup winner here next year. I dont want to lose players and I want to keep room available for deadline day deals

Even if Don pulls off a miracle and gets all 3 RFAs signed, we lose Acciari and are at the extreme top of the cap.

That means no room for any movement. We lose Mojo and have no replacement outside of Providence. Kuhlman stays as Krejci's wing all year.

I don't see Don doing that at all. I think Heinen's rights are getting moved and some D(Miller/Moore) shipped elsewere to get us some cap relief.
I can't imagine Sweeny going into training camp with literaly zero cap room.

 

[EverettMike]

In five sentences, I explained what the "good problem to have" is.

Then you respond with this post spinning tires about cap percentages and the function of unions, but not at all addressing anything in those five sentences. You even left out the catch phrase.

You want to argue that RFAs shouldn't be getting as much money or cap share as UFAs? Okay! I disagree, but that's a discussion I honestly enjoy having.

It's just a different one than the one you're claiming you're right about.

Not feeling well today. Thanks for handling this.

 

[remer]

Note: Re-posting this here since its a more relevant thread than the original

Boston Bruins
PROJECTED CAP SPACE: $12,803,334
via Capfriendly

UFAs:
Marcus Johansson
Noel Acciari
Steven Kampfer

UFA G6:
Zane McIntyre

RFAs:
Charlie McAvoy
Brandon Carlo
Danton Heinen


Unless cap space is created with moves. Some hard decisions are going to have to be made.

Resigning costs in my estimation:

McAvoy 7.5-8.5 Million
Carlo 5-5.5 Million
Heinen 2.5-3.5 Million

Thats 15 - 17.5 Million

Rut-Roh

Even if we get a hometown discount out of McAvoy and Carlo for 7 and 4 Million, we cannot afford Heinen and could barely afford Acciari(UFA 1.5m)

I think a more realistic amounts would be:

McAvoy 5.0 Million
Carlo 3.5 Million
Heinen 2.0 Million

Acciari, Kampfer and McIntyre are gone as UFAs. I could see the Bruins trying to move Moore as well. Don't think there is room for Marcus unless Backes gets moved.

 

[AngryMilkcrates]

I think a more realistic amounts would be:

McAvoy 5.0 Million
Carlo 3.5 Million
Heinen 2.0 Million

Acciari, Kampfer and McIntyre are gone as UFAs. I could see the Bruins trying to move Moore as well. Don't think there is room for Marcus unless Backes gets moved.

McAvoy and Carlo are two of the best young D in the league. They are not getting 5 and 3.5. Heinen will get more than 2 just from an arbitrator.

 

[roflstomper]

We have issues but the cap isn't one of them. This year might be tight but going forward it's not bad at all. Tons of dead money coming off books in 365 days.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

In five sentences, I explained what the "good problem to have" is.

Then you respond with this post spinning tires about cap percentages and the function of unions, but not at all addressing anything in those five sentences. You even left out the catch phrase.

You want to argue that RFAs shouldn't be getting as much money or cap share as UFAs? Okay! I disagree, but that's a discussion I honestly enjoy having.

It's just a different one than the one you're claiming you're right about.

ok... so I said that the big problem is these rfa contracts... its been what ive been talking about for 2 years and a few people corrected me and said its a good problem to have a couple years ago. I dont expect you to follow my posts for 2 years so trust me when I tell you thats my point

I said that these rfa contracts were resulting from bigger forces at work and would result in a labour lockout/strike/cba problem... again I apologize you joined this debate late

I said that origionally the big market teams agreed to a cap because they assumed they would end up with all the famous brand name veterns once the small market teams couldnt afford them... and then as the rfa started getting ufa money I said that not only will the small market teams like Winnipeg be hurt... but the big market teams like Toronto will also be hurt

Toronto in particular is an important battle ground as I have mentioned for the past few years. I said they would lose all their depth before they ever won a thing and this would freak them out and create a revolt

its all connected... sorry you got confused by joining in late. this is all stuff ive been posting about for a couple years and I was told I was wrong. I was told Toronto would make great trades to fix their cap problem because it was a good problem to have

I said what I said… its all in the archieves. anyone can go look. ive been consistent and ive been correct. and still it seems people tell me I was wrong

its pretty funny. but the trail of bread crumbs is well laid out. no one can come now and say im changing my argument or trying to move goal posts. I dont need to. I was the one that said all this would happen a couple years ago. people said dont pat myself on the back then. so I waited.

I will be doing more patting myself on the back a month from now when this tire fire is really in full bloom. and I will do some in a couple years when the cba is a total train wreck. I hate that im right but I like patting myself on the back

 

[Baddkarma]

McAvoy at 7.5 x 8 would be a steal and I think he would sign it.
Carlo at 4.75 x 5 is a good deal for both sides.
Heinen over 3 is traded in my book. At this point he not worth the money. He doesnt win draws, he doesnt win puck battles, he just doesnt win, so he is a complimentary peice the Bruins can't afford right now at 3m+.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

Will sum this up in short

This is not a problem


Christ...

 

[Flannelman]

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

View attachment 239583

Perfect

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

McAvoy at 7.5 x 8 would be a steal and I think he would sign it.
Carlo at 4.75 x 5 is a good deal for both sides.
Heinen over 3 is traded in my book. At this point he not worth the money. He doesnt win draws, he doesnt win puck battles, he just doesnt win, so he is a complimentary peice the Bruins can't afford right now at 3m+.

Agree on CMac
Agree on Heinen
Big Disagree on Carlo. Not sold on him wouldn’t give him a cent over $4M

So, we’re trading Heinen; hopefully keep Noel at $1.25; Backes to minors; Blidh and Cehlarik up; maybe another add. I would consider trading Krejci.

Trade Miller (if possible) and Moore. Bring up Vaak and Lauzon.

This year was our year to win. Not gonna be back to the dance for years. Shame.

 

[Mainehockey33]

Agree on CMac
Agree on Heinen
Big Disagree on Carlo. Not sold on him wouldn’t give him a cent over $4M

So, we’re trading Heinen; hopefully keep Noel at $1.25; Backes to minors; Blidh and Cehlarik up; maybe another add. I would consider trading Krejci.

Trade Miller (if possible) and Moore. Bring up Vaak and Lauzon.

This year was our year to win. Not gonna be back to the dance for years. Shame.

If the window is closed, shouldn’t we also trade Bergeron? He’s older than Krejci.

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

If the window is closed, shouldn’t we also trade Bergeron? He’s older than Krejci.

They're only months apart but I'll play along.
No, because he's as untouchable as one can get, though no one should be in this league.
Great players do get traded. Even the Bruins, as sacreligious as so many here would find it.
We traded Espo for Park and Ratelle.
Anyhow, if we're keeping one, we keep PB37.

 

[Mainehockey33]

They're only months apart but I'll play along.
No, because he's as untouchable as one can get, though no one should be in this league.
Great players do get traded. Even the Bruins, as sacreligious as so many here would find it.
We traded Espo for Park and Ratelle.
Anyhow, if we're keeping one, we keep PB37.

If we trade Krejci we close Bergeron’s window, so it makes no sense to trade one and keep the other for sentimental reasons.

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

sorry, not following, you'll have to educate me on what you mean. We have Bergeron under contract for 3 more years until he's 36; not following the connection to DK46

Unless you mean that you need both for a Cup and that Bergeron wouldn't get a Cup with whoever replaced DK46.

If so, I don't know how anyone could definitively state that. After all, one could argue that if they didn't do it together THIS year, they ain't doin it at all.