Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > Fire on Ice: The Calgary Flames Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-30-2018, 11:45 AM   #21
CaptainYooh
Franchise Player
 
CaptainYooh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Every time a team signs a star player to a big contract, same comments: “How stupid! Too much money! They gonna be screwed!”. This is an entertainment business! Superstar players make it exciting, not the penny-pinching fourth-line bargains. Same cap space, same budget for all. Yet, some teams keep adding the horsepower, while we suck dust. Treliving might be saving a few bucks for the owners, but we have not been entertained much lately. In a good way, that is...
__________________
"An idea is always a generalization, and generalization is a property of thinking. To generalize means to think." Georg Hegel
“To generalize is to be an idiot.” William Blake
CaptainYooh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 12:40 PM   #22
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainYooh View Post
Every time a team signs a star player to a big contract, same comments: “How stupid! Too much money! They gonna be screwed!”. This is an entertainment business! Superstar players make it exciting, not the penny-pinching fourth-line bargains. Same cap space, same budget for all. Yet, some teams keep adding the horsepower, while we suck dust. Treliving might be saving a few bucks for the owners, but we have not been entertained much lately. In a good way, that is...
No one is saying 'don't have star players', but in a cap world, how much you pay each player matters.

Having Couture at $7M per is better than having him at $8M per, no?
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 01:07 PM   #23
tkflames
First Line Centre
 
tkflames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM View Post
6x6 is still pretty rich for RFAs. Gaudreau and Monahan didn't do much more than that and they are better than at least two of the three 6x6 players.
I think this is where you and I will need to agree to disagree. I would suggest that all other things being equal, Gaudreau and Monahan likely would have commanded "Couture" type money this year much like Draisaitl last year. Hence my perceived step change in salaries over the last two years since the Monahan and Gaudreau deals. Hard to prove either way, but I am kind of bracing myself for a similar +2M cost for tomorrow.
__________________
Go Flames Go
tkflames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 01:32 PM   #24
Oling_Roachinen
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
No one is saying 'don't have star players', but in a cap world, how much you pay each player matters.

Having Couture at $7M per is better than having him at $8M per, no?
But that's not the question the Sharks had. It was if having him at 8M was better than not having him at all as some other team would just give him 8M in a year.

Not every star player can be overpaid, if that's the case it's just being called "paid."
Oling_Roachinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 02:37 PM   #25
GreenLantern2814
Franchise Player
 
GreenLantern2814's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
No one is saying 'don't have star players', but in a cap world, how much you pay each player matters.

Having Couture at $7M per is better than having him at $8M per, no?
I'd rather have Couture at either price than the two or three depth forwards I could afford if I let Couture walk.

That being said, I don't like giving forwards contracts that take them past 35. Even for the elite of the elite it's tough to keep it up past that age. The elite D (and even journeymen) can play into their late 30s and do it regularly. Forwards, not so much.
GreenLantern2814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 02:48 PM   #26
Dajazz
Scoring Winger
 
Dajazz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Sweden
Exp:
Default

Seems like a lot of teams are banking on buy out extravaganza next lockout.
Dajazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 02:49 PM   #27
GreenLantern2814
Franchise Player
 
GreenLantern2814's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dajazz View Post
Seems like a lot of teams are banking on buy out extravaganza next lockout.
They would be foolish not to - compliance buyouts are the best part of lockouts
GreenLantern2814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 03:06 PM   #28
Locke
Franchise Player
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dajazz View Post
Seems like a lot of teams are banking on buy out extravaganza next lockout.
Oh yeah. It is going to be grim. But you'd think the PA loves them, the players get paid and generally it opens up more room to pay other players. Wins all around.
__________________
The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!

This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.

The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans

If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
Locke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 03:06 PM   #29
Coach
Franchise Player
 
Coach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vancouver
Exp:
Default

Man our star players all under 7 is highway robbery.
__________________
Coach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 03:08 PM   #30
Phaneuf_Phan
Scoring Winger
 
Phaneuf_Phan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach View Post
Man our star players all under 7 is highway robbery.
Wait until tomorrow - Tavares?
Phaneuf_Phan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 03:51 PM   #31
getbak
Franchise Player
 
getbak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke View Post
Oh yeah. It is going to be grim. But you'd think the PA loves them, the players get paid and generally it opens up more room to pay other players. Wins all around.
It kills the players in escrow though. Compliance buyouts don't count against the Cap, but they still count against the players' share of HRR.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
getbak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 04:05 PM   #32
Finger Cookin
Franchise Player
 
Finger Cookin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkflames View Post
I get your point, but it is blind to not acknowledge there has been another step change in salaries. The last time it happened was the "6x6 contract era". It will be interesting to see in the next couple of years if we are reaching capacity on the salary cap and these associated contracts or if the league will find ways to continue to grow. I would suggest that as it stands right now, the league is pretty close to what can be achieved in terms of gate generated revenue. Hard to imagine fans will be able to absorb another 50% increase in the next 5 or so years. If the cap does stagnate, 10% is a lot to pay your #2 center for 8 of his UFA years.
It'll be interesting to see if the cap growth (and therefore revenue growth) slows down or reverses. Since 05-06, the cap has grown at an average rate of 5.36% per season. It's gone down exactly once in 13 seasons, from the 11-12 to the 12-13 season - though the prorated cap in the shortened 12-13 was actually an increase if extrapolated out to an 82 game season. The cap being the same value it was in 13-14 as it was in 11-12 means the cap stayed flat exactly once, too.

Even if you only look at cap increases since 14-15 when the Rogers TV contract kicked in and the CAD stopped trading at around par with the USD and instead fell to a lower $0.70 - $0.80 range, the cap has still increased an average of 3.6% per season.

An even slower growth rate of 3.2% per season on average still has the cap just a shade under $100M per club in the 25-26 when the Rogers TV contract expires.
Finger Cookin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 04:12 PM   #33
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkflames View Post
I think this is where you and I will need to agree to disagree. I would suggest that all other things being equal, Gaudreau and Monahan likely would have commanded "Couture" type money this year much like Draisaitl last year. Hence my perceived step change in salaries over the last two years since the Monahan and Gaudreau deals. Hard to prove either way, but I am kind of bracing myself for a similar +2M cost for tomorrow.
I’d agree Draisaitl moved the bar except every one sees it was dumb and there’s also Pasternak’s contract in the mix. Nylander will be an interesting contract
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 09:06 PM   #34
Aarongavey
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Exp:
Default

Maybe they signed him because of his playoff prowess. If you exclude his rookie season (when he was a mid-season call-up and was a 4th liner) his playoff stats are

Couture - 77 points in 81 games

Compare that to other studs on the market

JVR - excluding rookie year as well, 23 points in 38 games

James Neal - 55 points in 100 games

I would suspect being able to perform in the playoffs has some additional value that should be compensated for.
Aarongavey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:26 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy