Hammertime Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 Are they going to do that though? Poolman will be on LTIR to start the season IMO. I am incredibly doubtful that he will be on our active roster ever again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 2 hours ago, HKSR said: Like I said, 20/20 hindsight aside, I wasn't as deep into analyzing value based on stats and performance patterns back then. But what I can say now is that if a player had a performance pattern like LE today, I would be pretty skeptical about the Canucks signing said player for $6M AAV. Looking back, I can understand why Lucic was paid big bucks, it was his strength and intimidation factor, no different than Zadorov today. Okposo was coming off 3 straight seasons where he was scoring on a 60+ point pace, so that makes sense to me. LE had a 37pt season, then a 47pt season, then ticked up to 63 points in a contract year. That should have been a red flag right there. I would have looked at the 63 point season as an outlier given his age. That's just me. Put another way... $6M back then with the upper cap limit at $73.5M is equivalent to $7.2M in today's $88M cap world. Would you have paid $7.2M for a 63pt scorer that had a 37 and 47 point season prior? And also was about 31yo? There's a ton of recency bias though. Obviously the market price from back then and now would've been a lot different. We had fewer 80+ point player back then for instance, so anything that was 40 or 50+ points would've been HUGE. You're also banking on the fact that the player would IMPROVE. All I'm saying is that we are overanalyzing things after the fact. The market prices for ALL the players mentioned above were not at all out of range. It's easy to pick out one contract from the above and then talk about how bad it is. However, we saw ALL the players did poorly under their contracts, regardless of salary cap percentage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 14 minutes ago, PureQuickness said: There's a ton of recency bias though. Obviously the market price from back then and now would've been a lot different. We had fewer 80+ point player back then for instance, so anything that was 40 or 50+ points would've been HUGE. You're also banking on the fact that the player would IMPROVE. All I'm saying is that we are overanalyzing things after the fact. The market prices for ALL the players mentioned above were not at all out of range. It's easy to pick out one contract from the above and then talk about how bad it is. However, we saw ALL the players did poorly under their contracts, regardless of salary cap percentage. We can agree to disagree. I personally just think there were some things going against him for him to be worth that money back then. I've made my points. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 (edited) 10 hours ago, HKSR said: We can agree to disagree. I personally just think there were some things going against him for him to be worth that money back then. I've made my points. And you could say that about every SINGLE player when looking at things. I've made my points as well. It's not that I'm ignoring your points or glossing over them; I just feel like your points don't adequately explain why all the other players who got signed for around 6M, including the 5M, did so poorly as well. It wasn't the percentage of the cap, nor was it the GMs. There may very well just not be an explanation that would be satisfactory. That UFA class was just AWFUL, right across the board. You can say the same things about Eriksson as you could say about Lucic. Not sure why you thought Lucic's signing was any better than Eriksson's. Edited July 4 by PureQuickness 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 Just because there's been so much movement in the last week, doesn't mean there won't still be more (for the Canucks, that is) I would think there could literally be anything from a roster player or two, to even more minor league switcharoos. Having said that; It's early July and I'm in Hockey withdrawl already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 44 minutes ago, PureQuickness said: And you could say that about every SINGLE player when looking at things. I've made my points as well. It's not that I'm ignoring your points or glossing over them; I just feel like your points don't adequately explain why all the other players who got signed for around 6M, including the 5M, did so poorly as well. It wasn't the percentage of the cap, nor was it the GMs. There may very well just not be an explanation that would be satisfactory. That UFA class was just AWFUL, right across the board. You can say the same things about Eriksson as you could say about Lucic. Not sure why you thought Lucic's signing was any better than Eriksson's. I wasn't saying anything about their performance after their signing. I was simply saying there was more logic to the signings of guys like Lucic and okposo. One was a Zadorov-like forward, the other was consistently putting up 60ish points for a few years BEFORE being signed. LE had an increase the year of his contract. The years before that were significantly lower in production. That's all I'm saying. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agkr3w Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 On 7/2/2024 at 10:40 AM, Bob Long said: I think it'll be 1x1 . He was awesome in a bubble but still needs development time. The roster is over 24 so auto sending someone down, we would be under the cap, also I think goalies are on there and they will be going down as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 5 minutes ago, Agkr3w said: The roster is over 24 so auto sending someone down, we would be under the cap, also I think goalies are on there and they will be going down as well. Yep we can end up just under the cap if Silovs comes in at 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSVII Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 (edited) I am still marveling at the fact that it only took this management group two years to ice a competitive roster under the cap after years of cap mismanagement, and this is after giving Petey, Joshua and Hronek raises. Edited July 4 by DSVII 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Dr. Crossbar Posted July 5 Popular Post Share Posted July 5 Blows me away how so many people just doom and gloom for months and weeks on end over the cap with endless "concerns" as if we're still dealing with the previous regime. This management group has been fantastic to date since they took over. They continue to impress. We're fortunate to have these types of decision-makers after so many years of ineptitude and country-club. 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureQuickness Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 11 hours ago, HKSR said: I wasn't saying anything about their performance after their signing. I was simply saying there was more logic to the signings of guys like Lucic and okposo. One was a Zadorov-like forward, the other was consistently putting up 60ish points for a few years BEFORE being signed. LE had an increase the year of his contract. The years before that were significantly lower in production. That's all I'm saying. Logic or not, the signings all ended up bad. Like I said above, we might not ever be able to put our fingers on why they busted so hard. I remember hearing about James "the real deal" Neal. It didn't matter if he was signed for 5 M or 6M. He definitely couldn't live up to his contract - and neither could anyone else. I think the cautionary tale is the long and expensive contracts. They tend to age poorly more than anything else. The whole purpose of the lockout was the supposed dispute of long, expensive contract. Fast forward to now, very little has actually changed. I am totally speculating here, but I think owners are addicted to spending money for the most part. They are not sincere about their complaints. They just want a better profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCheese Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 If we can package poolman + out for another capable top 4 dman im not the biggest fan of our defensive signings and hopefully we can utilize the cap to work a trade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 When it comes to the cap ... There's no easy way out. There's no shortcut home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyG Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 On 7/4/2024 at 2:56 PM, DSVII said: I am still marveling at the fact that it only took this management group two years to ice a competitive roster under the cap after years of cap mismanagement, and this is after giving Petey, Joshua and Hronek raises. Player performance is what held us back from being competitive. now that Boeser, Hughes, Demko, and Pettersson are all star players playing like star players we are competing. Prior to that there wasn’t on single season where our star players played like stars. It’s the growth and development part of the process to becoming a contender. Look at Colorado how much star power they had and how long it took to put it all together, same with Edmonton, New Jersey, Arizona etc etc etc, it’s the learning curves for players who are not generational talent 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancan Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 What the hell is going on in Washington? TEAM ROSTER SIZE CONTRACTS RETAINED PROJ. CAP HIT PROJ. CAP SPACE LTIR CAND. LTIR CAND. CAP SPACE TEAM ROSTER SIZE CONTRACTS RETAINED PROJ. CAP HIT PROJ. CAP SPACE LTIR CAND. LTIR CAND. CAP SPACE Washington Capitals 22/23 48/50 1/3 $101,306,667 $0 (-$13,306,667 ) $9,200,000 $0 (-$4,106,667) Vegas Golden Knights 23/23 46/50 0/3 $91,689,984 $0 (-$3,689,984 ) $5,000,000 $1,310,016 Toronto Maple Leafs 23/23 43/50 0/3 $88,694,667 $0 (-$694,667 ) - - Edmonton Oilers 21/23 42/50 0/3 $88,354,167 $0 (-$354,167 ) - - Nashville Predators 21/23 42/50 2/3 $88,179,199 $0 (-$179,199 ) - - Florida Panthers 23/23 45/50 0/3 $88,008,334 $0 (-$8,334 ) - - Vancouver Canucks 23/23 47/50 1/3 $87,759,167 $240,833 $2,500,000 $2,740,833 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 13 minutes ago, Vancan said: What the hell is going on in Washington? TEAM ROSTER SIZE CONTRACTS RETAINED PROJ. CAP HIT PROJ. CAP SPACE LTIR CAND. LTIR CAND. CAP SPACE TEAM ROSTER SIZE CONTRACTS RETAINED PROJ. CAP HIT PROJ. CAP SPACE LTIR CAND. LTIR CAND. CAP SPACE Washington Capitals 22/23 48/50 1/3 $101,306,667 $0 (-$13,306,667 ) $9,200,000 $0 (-$4,106,667) Vegas Golden Knights 23/23 46/50 0/3 $91,689,984 $0 (-$3,689,984 ) $5,000,000 $1,310,016 Toronto Maple Leafs 23/23 43/50 0/3 $88,694,667 $0 (-$694,667 ) - - Edmonton Oilers 21/23 42/50 0/3 $88,354,167 $0 (-$354,167 ) - - Nashville Predators 21/23 42/50 2/3 $88,179,199 $0 (-$179,199 ) - - Florida Panthers 23/23 45/50 0/3 $88,008,334 $0 (-$8,334 ) - - Vancouver Canucks 23/23 47/50 1/3 $87,759,167 $240,833 $2,500,000 $2,740,833 They figure they can fudge the numbers now that they own capfriendly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.