Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Building a winner

DeluxeMoustache · 09-17-2019, 04:50 PM

I saw a poster that noted that hockey is a “weak link” game. As much as you need game breakers, many games are close and it is the errors that cost goals and games.

With the new RFA contracts, I thought it would be interesting to look at the salary cap allocation from Stanley Cup winners and finalists.

How did the GMs of the winning teams and finalists spend their money to build a winner? How did they allocate by position, and what percent of the cap did they throw towards their top contracts?

I took these from Sportrac, where you can report on Cap hit by position (F / D / G), as well as breaking out F by C/LW/RW. It seems that in some cases they don’t add up to 100 percent, whether because a team did not spend to the cap, or in a case where for example Malkin spent a bunch of time on IR.

So here it is. First the Stanley Cup winners and next the teams that lost the Stanley Cup

Year
Team
% of cap allocated to top contract
% of cap allocated to top 3 contracts
% of cap allocated to F / D / G

Year team Top1 Top3 Fwd Def Goal
2019 STL 9.40 27.0 58.4 32.3 6.0
2018 WAS 12.7 33.8 59.7 29.9 9.9
2017 PIT 13.0 34.9 60.7 27.2 9.1
2016 PIT 13.3 35.0 67.9 25.0 9.2
2015 CHI 9.10 27.0 54.4 33.5 9.6
2014 LAK 10.9 30.5 51.8 35.3 9.6
2013 CHI 9.00 26.4 57.9 34.9 7.2
2012 LAK 10.9 30.4 60.7 34.4 4.9

AVERAGE. 11.1 30.6 58.9 31.6 8.18

Stanley Cup Finalists

2019 BOS 9.10 26.6 54.6 24.8 12.5
2018 VGK 8.70 23.3 60.2 20.5 9.4
2017 NAS 12.3 32.9 50.2 30.0 10.9
2016 SJS 9.50 27.2 54.0 34.1 5.1
2015 TBL 11.3 27.7 50.0 36.1 3.9
2014 NYR 12.1 33.2 51.6 26.5 11.5
2013 BOS 9.90 24.5 61.9 31.4 6.3
2012 NJD 10.4 29.0 56.9 28.5 10.6

AVERAGE. 10.4 28.1 54.9 29.0 8.77

OVERALL. 10.7 29.3 56.9 30.3 8.47

So what are the takeaways?

On average, cap is split ~F 56.9% / D 30.3 % / G 8.5% for all finalists
The top player on average for Stanley Cup Finalists makes 10.7%.
On the high end is Malkin at 13.3% when he made 9.5 M on a cap of 69 in 2016. (and only played 57 games)
On the low end for winners is when Chicago had Toews and Kane at 6.3 M or 9.1%each, in 2015. (2013 is a bit wonky as the cap was pro rated post lockout and teams could spend up to equivalent of 70 M). No wins since they paid them 10.5 M each!

In terms of % allocated to top 3 cap hits, the average for finalists is 29.3 percent. 30.6 percent for winners and 28.1 percent for runner ups.

Now the Toronto GM in particular seems to be the smartest guy in the room, with an idea that you pay $$$ to the top 6 F, top 4 D, and one goalie, and basically fill out the bottom 6 F and bottom pairing D with players under $1 M. As a result, they are paying 14.3% for their top contract and 41.1% for their top 3. I really question how they can avoid exposure due to weak links at the bottom of the roster.

I think the Flames are about ideal in allocation now, but they have some great contracts balanced out at all positions.

Any other observations?

09-17-2019, 04:50 PM	#1
DeluxeMoustache Moustache Join Date: Mar 2010 Exp:	Building a winner - salary cap allocation for SC finalists I saw a poster that noted that hockey is a “weak link” game. As much as you need game breakers, many games are close and it is the errors that cost goals and games. With the new RFA contracts, I thought it would be interesting to look at the salary cap allocation from Stanley Cup winners and finalists. How did the GMs of the winning teams and finalists spend their money to build a winner? How did they allocate by position, and what percent of the cap did they throw towards their top contracts? I took these from Sportrac, where you can report on Cap hit by position (F / D / G), as well as breaking out F by C/LW/RW. It seems that in some cases they don’t add up to 100 percent, whether because a team did not spend to the cap, or in a case where for example Malkin spent a bunch of time on IR. So here it is. First the Stanley Cup winners and next the teams that lost the Stanley Cup Year Team % of cap allocated to top contract % of cap allocated to top 3 contracts % of cap allocated to F / D / G Year team Top1 Top3 Fwd Def Goal 2019 STL 9.40 27.0 58.4 32.3 6.0 2018 WAS 12.7 33.8 59.7 29.9 9.9 2017 PIT 13.0 34.9 60.7 27.2 9.1 2016 PIT 13.3 35.0 67.9 25.0 9.2 2015 CHI 9.10 27.0 54.4 33.5 9.6 2014 LAK 10.9 30.5 51.8 35.3 9.6 2013 CHI 9.00 26.4 57.9 34.9 7.2 2012 LAK 10.9 30.4 60.7 34.4 4.9 AVERAGE. 11.1 30.6 58.9 31.6 8.18 Stanley Cup Finalists 2019 BOS 9.10 26.6 54.6 24.8 12.5 2018 VGK 8.70 23.3 60.2 20.5 9.4 2017 NAS 12.3 32.9 50.2 30.0 10.9 2016 SJS 9.50 27.2 54.0 34.1 5.1 2015 TBL 11.3 27.7 50.0 36.1 3.9 2014 NYR 12.1 33.2 51.6 26.5 11.5 2013 BOS 9.90 24.5 61.9 31.4 6.3 2012 NJD 10.4 29.0 56.9 28.5 10.6 AVERAGE. 10.4 28.1 54.9 29.0 8.77 OVERALL. 10.7 29.3 56.9 30.3 8.47 So what are the takeaways? On average, cap is split ~F 56.9% / D 30.3 % / G 8.5% for all finalists The top player on average for Stanley Cup Finalists makes 10.7%. On the high end is Malkin at 13.3% when he made 9.5 M on a cap of 69 in 2016. (and only played 57 games) On the low end for winners is when Chicago had Toews and Kane at 6.3 M or 9.1%each, in 2015. (2013 is a bit wonky as the cap was pro rated post lockout and teams could spend up to equivalent of 70 M). No wins since they paid them 10.5 M each! In terms of % allocated to top 3 cap hits, the average for finalists is 29.3 percent. 30.6 percent for winners and 28.1 percent for runner ups. Now the Toronto GM in particular seems to be the smartest guy in the room, with an idea that you pay $$$ to the top 6 F, top 4 D, and one goalie, and basically fill out the bottom 6 F and bottom pairing D with players under $1 M. As a result, they are paying 14.3% for their top contract and 41.1% for their top 3. I really question how they can avoid exposure due to weak links at the bottom of the roster. I think the Flames are about ideal in allocation now, but they have some great contracts balanced out at all positions. Any other observations?