What to do with Huberdeau?

[Flamesfan05]

Ideally you want to win before you have to pay/reward the guy
Otherwise you just contribute to his retirement contract. None of Gaudreau, Huberdeau, Kadri and soon Lindholm are worth what they are getting paid now.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Ideally you want to win before you have to pay/reward the guy
Otherwise you just contribute to his retirement contract. None of Gaudreau, Huberdeau, Kadri and soon Lindholm are worth what they are getting paid now.

Nope.

Of course no NHler is but there’s no real way you can even quantify what earns the salary. You certainly can’t figure ROI. How many ticket sales or ad sales or TV minutes is, let’s say, Michael Stone worth?

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Nope.

Of course no NHler is but there’s no real way you can even quantify what earns the salary. You certainly can’t figure ROI. How many ticket sales or ad sales or TV minutes is, let’s say, Michael Stone worth?

I am talking about building a winning team. Look at Chicago, once they had to pay Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabook and companies, it’s game over.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

I am talking about building a winning team. Look at Chicago, once they had to pay Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabook and companies, it’s game over.

Yeah, I get it. Winning teams tend to take advantage of of their stars before they hit the jackpot, or at least a lot of the secondary scoring.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Nope.

Of course no NHler is but there’s no real way you can even quantify what earns the salary. You certainly can’t figure ROI. How many ticket sales or ad sales or TV minutes is, let’s say, Michael Stone worth?

That’s just wrong. Of course there is a way to calculate how much a marginal win is worth.

Michael Stone was a replacement level 7th defenseman. We paid him like one and he played like one. No complaints there.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by butterfly

That’s just wrong. Of course there is a way to calculate how much a marginal win is worth.

Michael Stone was a replacement level 7th defenseman. We paid him like one and he played like one. No complaints there.

How much is a marginal win worth? In dollars. How much money did Calgary make from using Michael Stone?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

How much is a marginal win worth? In dollars. How much money did Calgary make from using Michael Stone?

It depends where on the win curve you are. You start out from a base line of using freely available players that are waived or the Ben Jones of the AHL types. Players you can get for nothing. A team of those people will win some non-zero number of games. It takes about 96-98 points to make the playoffs, so a team projected to get 48 points has very little incentive to try to improve to be a 51 point team. A team projected to get 95 points has a great incentive to improve to be a 98 point team. A team projected to get 122 points has very little incentive to improve.

The only things that contribute to winning games are goal prevention and goal creation. Sum up the total number of wins above replacement in the league and divide it by the difference between the cap and a team of league minimum players. Bob’s your uncle as far as an approximation goes. If you can consolidate those wins into fewer players, there is an argument to be made for that being worth something since ice time is a zero sum game.

Of course, whether it’s worth spending money to get a marginal win depends on your projection.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by butterfly

It depends where on the win curve you are. You start out from a base line of using freely available players that are waived or the Ben Jones of the AHL types. Players you can get for nothing. A team of those people will win some non-zero number of games. It takes about 96-98 points to make the playoffs, so a team projected to get 48 points has very little incentive to try to improve to be a 51 point team. A team projected to get 95 points has a great incentive to improve to be a 98 point team. A team projected to get 122 points has very little incentive to improve.

The only things that contribute to winning games are goal prevention and goal creation. Sum up the total number of wins above replacement in the league and divide it by the difference between the cap and a team of league minimum players. Bob’s your uncle as far as an approximation goes. If you can consolidate those wins into fewer players, there is an argument to be made for that being worth something since ice time is a zero sum game.

Of course, whether it’s worth spending money to get a marginal win depends on your projection.

That was a lot of words to say you have no idea how much money the Flames make by employing Michael Stone (or any other player). I never mentioned wins. I said monetary returns.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Ideally you want to win before you have to pay/reward the guy
Otherwise you just contribute to his retirement contract. None of Gaudreau, Huberdeau, Kadri and soon Lindholm are worth what they are getting paid now.

Kadri is worth 7M

[boogerz]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Kadri is worth 7M

Definitely. $7M makes him the 37th highest paid centerman in the league and he's definitely come as advertised as a good, offensively-oriented second-line centre. The only thing wrong with his contract is the term.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

10 and 88 switched at practice today.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1740431593431593445

Crap. I guess this marks the end of Yegor's run... But hopefully Mangiapane gets going now with Backlund and Coleman.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That was a lot of words to say you have no idea how much money the Flames make by employing Michael Stone (or any other player). I never mentioned wins. I said monetary returns.

So because I don’t know, as a fan, means it’s incalculable?

Who’s even talking about Michael Stone?

You’re being snippy.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by butterfly

So because I don’t know, as a fan, means it’s incalculable?

Who’s even talking about Michael Stone?

You’re being snippy.

Michael Stone is like the hockey equivalent of 9/11.

Everything has to do with him and he is inevitable.

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by activeStick

Crap. I guess this marks the end of Yegor's run... But hopefully Mangiapane gets going now with Backlund and Coleman.

Oh come on now, no need to be negative. Upside it shows Huberdeau can play up and down the lineup.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by butterfly

So because I don’t know, as a fan, means it’s incalculable?

Who’s even talking about Michael Stone?

You’re being snippy.

No, I mean you don’t know anything that can support your supposedly obvious assertion - that players’ value to a franchise is calculable.

Michael Stone was a mere example. Pick any player and tell me the monetary return on investment they provide.

In terms of salary rankings versus production, yes, we can all see what Huberdeau's paid and how many points he has. That’s not news to anyone, yet people keep posting it like it’s some sort of new information.

IMO Huberdeau’s salary was negotiated by him and agreed to by the team based on (a) his previous performance and (b) the perceived need for the Flames to inject excitement and sell tickets after the negative PR of Tkachuk and Gaudreau both leaving. Hell, maybe Huberdeau earned his money in the year he signed just by avoiding a bunch of seasons ticket cancellations and ad revenue loss. I don’t know that of course, and maybe this year’s numbers will look a lot different. But that was IMO the reason for his salary.

You seem to have a beef with the salary structure of the NHL. Well, take that up with the union I guess. Guaranteed multi-year contracts aren’t going away any time soon.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No, I mean you don’t know anything that can support your supposedly obvious assertion - that players’ value to a franchise is calculable.

Michael Stone was a mere example. Pick any player and tell me the monetary return on investment they provide.

Again, whether or not I can calculate the number does not prove that it doesn’t exist or is incalculable. It clearly exists.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

In terms of salary rankings versus production, yes, we can all see what Huberdeau's paid and how many points he has. That’s not news to anyone, yet people keep posting it like it’s some sort of new information.

IMO Huberdeau’s salary was negotiated by him and agreed to by the team based on (a) his previous performance and (b) the perceived need for the Flames to inject excitement and sell tickets after the negative PR of Tkachuk and Gaudreau both leaving. Hell, maybe Huberdeau earned his money in the year he signed just by avoiding a bunch of seasons ticket cancellations and ad revenue loss. I don’t know that of course, and maybe this year’s numbers will look a lot different. But that was IMO the reason for his salary.

You seem to have a beef with the salary structure of the NHL. Well, take that up with the union I guess. Guaranteed multi-year contracts aren’t going away any time soon.

Great. Then smart GMs will figure out not to give them to old players and dumb GMs will keep doing it.

[GioforPM]

“It clearly exists”.

Prove it.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by memphusk

Oh come on now, no need to be negative. Upside it shows Huberdeau can play up and down the lineup.

With positive or negative results though. That’s the question.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

I am talking about building a winning team. Look at Chicago, once they had to pay Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabook and companies, it’s game over.

Chicago’s window slammed shut when they traded Artemi Panarin for Brandon Saad.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Chicago’s window slammed shut when they traded Artemi Panarin for Brandon Saad.

But didn’t they trade him because he was going to be unaffordable (though making $6M at the time for 2 years)? Whereas Saad made the $6M for a much longer term.