[Signing] Ducks agree to 8 yr extension with Perry ($8.625M AAV)

[Nasty]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

Yeah, with Cammalleri given 6 mill even in an era where cap circumvention was alive and well, it is hard to argue that Perry is not worth this money. Will the Ducks regret it in years six, seven, and eight? Remains to be seen. But what is clear in the NHL these days is that building a championship team is incredibly difficult with no clear path. If you find yourself with players that can give you a chance to go deep every year, you do everything you can to keep them. Look at Philadelphia who traded known playoff contributors for promising youth and are on the outside looking in while the name players they dealt went on to win a cup with someone else. Signing Perry was the only option.

so why trade iginla he is a beast to have in the playoffs

[Nasty]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

This is not true at all. They won the cup on the back of an astoundingly strong collection of (at the time) depth players - Byfuglien, Ladd, Versteeg, Sharp, Bolland. The lineup was stacked. Even now, they are not doing as well as they are because of their top guys alone. Sure, Kane's great, but the reason they're winning so much is that Hjalmarsson / Oduya are playing like a top-flite #1 pairing and both of their goalies are playing out of their minds - not to mention guys like Saad and Kruger and Shaw are playing like top 6 forwards.


Classic example of how Pittsburgh players are underrated because C and M get all the credit. That team is just plain good, top to bottom, outside of goaltending. The role-players, guys like Kennedy and Orpik and even Cooke, get no credit. This is why they're winning and the Lightning, despite having similar top-end skill, are not. That being said, having arguably the two best players in the world on your team does make a difference - I'm not saying you can't win on this model, but it's not exactly easy to build a team that way.


You're just naming big names off each of these teams. The Carolina run was on the backs of stellar performances by Brind'Amour, Francis, Cole, Stillman, Ray Whitney and a bunch of OT goals by Nic Wallin. As for Detroit... well yeah, it was pretty much just Nick Lidstrom. Wait, no there was Cleary, Draper, Franzen, Helm, Holmstrom, Kronwall, Rafalski and others on that team too...

The Bruins had contributions from everyone from top to bottom, the reason they won wasn't just good goaltending and big Chara slapshots, they were tough, a large part of the contribution came from the Rich Peverleys, Brad Marchands and Shawn Thorntons of the world not to mention Seidenberg playing all-world. If anything Boston's a good example of what I'm talking about; outside of Chara they don't have any real superstars but they just kick the crap out of everyone.

Really though none of the past examples matter because my assertion is based on the CURRENT CBA MARKET.


No, they won because they had Malhotra taking all the defensive minutes and Kesler destroying the other teams' 3rd and 4th lines while the Sedins spent all their time in the offensive zone because Malhotra and company took all the defensive assignments. Your comments is so wrong, just look at how the Canucks are doing right now WITH the Sedins and WITHOUT Kesler, Malhotra and the rest of their depth. They demonstrate my point perfectly - a team with a fantastic top line, but every other line is just trying not to get outplayed by the other team. And they're losing. In this case it's more because of injuries and mediocre goaltending (and some bad luck; they're like 5th in the NHL in fenwick or something and have lost games they should've won) but the roster makeup looks like a team that overspent on its first line and couldn't afford the depth guys.

Again, the key to winning the cup is being generally good at hockey, having a goalie play well and then getting luckier than the other guys in terms of games, calls, and injuries.

Basically everything you just said was wrong.

You cant say he is wrong! There is no way to know who is wrong or right. you make good points but misintrepreted his main point.

You are right you need a good supporting cast. But if you dont have a good elite core your supporting cast can only lead you so far. I think St. Louis is a good example of not having any elite players ( backes might be considered this) and they can only go so far in the playoffs.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Nasty

You cant say he is wrong! There is no way to know who is wrong or right.

Basically my view on sports opinions is that your argument should be informed, yet so obstinately self-assured as to dismiss any disagreement in spite of the total impossibility of certainty in an area with as many variables as the NHL.

you make good points but misintrepreted his main point.

You are right you need a good supporting cast. But if you dont have a good elite core your supporting cast can only lead you so far. I think St. Louis is a good example of not having any elite players ( backes might be considered this) and they can only go so far in the playoffs.

The issue is simple. Do you spend big bucks, i.e. ~$8.5M per on multiple elite caliber players (I listed some - Gaborik, Nash, St. Louis, Getzlaf, Perry, Staal, Zetterberg, Kane, Giroux) or do you spend that money on less expensive guys and end up with more depth? His view is you spend the money on the elite guys, mine is you skip them (or maybe spend it on one D-man) and spread the money around the lineup more.

I disagree, I think if St. Louis gets the goaltending they are perfectly equipped to go all the way in the playoffs, same as Boston did. Who is Boston's superstar? Just Chara. Their best forward is maybe Seguin or Lucic, neither of whom approaches "elite".

Again, this isn't about examples, really. Examples have to be based on the past and present and there just hasn't been enough time under this CBA for teams' salary structures to adapt. In about 3 years you will see teams made up mostly of players whose contracts were signed under this CBA, and you'll be able to compare. But these decisions have to be made prospectively right now, and I don't like how Anaheim's going about it.

You know who I'd like to be right now? Doug Wilson. Know how many forwards he has under contract for 2014-2015? Martin Havlat and Adam Burish. Now, granted, I'd much rather be Doug Wilson WITH Charlie Coyle (stupid trade), but my point is when you have a clean slate like that you have every opportunity to attack the market and make your team the way you want it. And if I am Doug Wilson, I am not making a play for Malkin or Vanek or Gaborik that offseason. No. I'm signing Callahan, Pavelski, Hjalmarsson, Steen and Bolland. Other teams can have their superstars, those are the guys I target, and if those other teams are paying out the ass for those superstars, I might be able to get a couple of them on the relatively cheap.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Different era's... you can't have back diving contracts anymore. This is the same offers given to Brad Richards, and Perry is a far superior player.

Yeah, its different era. Richards isn't getting close to what he would now if he signed a contract today, so not sure why the comparison. Of course if any team could add on retirement years they would be happy to give Perry 75M+. They can't, so it's moot. To give him more money than the Ducks (with the exception of a sign and trade) they would have to sacrifice over 15% of their cap towards him.

With a 64M cap ceiling next year, there's only 1 player worth more than 10M. If any team did give Perry comparable money to the Ducks, Perry would have to know that it would be a trainwreck. So he gets the most money staying with the Ducks and gets a cap hit that helps keep the team maybe stay competitive, still seems like a no-brainer for Perry.

[blender]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

Who is Boston's superstar? Just Chara. Their best forward is maybe Seguin or Lucic, neither of whom approaches "elite".

His name is Patrice Bergeron, and he is one of the best players in the game. IMO Boston's best forward by a mile. Seguin looks pretty good, too.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by blender

His name is Patrice Bergeron, and he is one of the best players in the game. IMO Boston's best forward by a mile. Seguin looks pretty good, too.

Lucic is just ok.

It's not like he's the best power forward in hockey...

[blender]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Lucic is just ok.

It's not like he's the best power forward in hockey...

Lucic is a great player, too. Not trying to be exclusive. Boston's got lots of talent. I still think Bergeron is the Bruins best forward, though.

[blender]

And all I meant by the Seguin comment was that he is so young, that in 3-4 years he could easily be one of the best centers in the game.

[Flash Walken]

Yeah, I agree Blender.

[Nasty]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

No. I'm signing Callahan, Pavelski, Hjalmarsson, Steen and Bolland. Other teams can have their superstars, those are the guys I target, and if those other teams are paying out the ass for those superstars, I might be able to get a couple of them on the relatively cheap.

Ya in a perfect world but lets be real here. How much is pavelski, Callahan, Hjalmarsson, and Steen, Your right they are not superstars but they are almost as expensive as one. So as a GM why do you not grab a superstar for a little more, Create a buzz and sell more tickets (because it is a business), Gain leadership with a guy that mostly all team mates respect or idolize, and spend your money on a proven quality player. Aside from pavelski and callahan i think paying big dollars on guys like Hjalmarsson and steen is almost as bad as spending money on Giordano the last 2 years. Pavelski might cost you a First rounder and a mediocre prospect where a guy like Iggy might cost you a little more than that like a 1st and a great prospect.

[Nasty]

In other news "Thats Hockey" stated that because Perry is off the market it only creates a mad dash for Iggy. They went further on to say that a team like Boston must be now setting their sights for Iggy.

If Iggy goes to Boston I would love to see Seguin come back. 1 for 1 almost the same trade like the one where we got Iggy for Nieuendyk. Might as well keep the legend going

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Nasty

In other news "Thats Hockey" stated that because Perry is off the market it only creates a mad dash for Iggy. They went further on to say that a team like Boston must be now setting their sights for Iggy.

If Iggy goes to Boston I would love to see Seguin come back. 1 for 1 almost the same trade like the one where we got Iggy for Nieuendyk. Might as well keep the legend going

There is more of a chance that you win the lottery than the Bruins giving up Seguin for Iginla.

[Nasty]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

There is more of a chance that you win the lottery than the Bruins giving up Seguin for Iginla.

I know, but i think this team has been bent over multiple times with trades that we should have gotten better returns with.

we cant screw this one up, so you must ask for a lot. If Iggy's value is really that high and the bruins really want a high caliber winger that bad they better be ready to pay.

[Red John]

My exact quote was that it seems teams win by having a couple elite players, and surrounding them with cheap talent that they drafted and developed.

In light of that comment, it makes it hard to sift through all this drivel but here goes. You'll understand just how silly it is that in your entire rant, you continued to prove my point instead of contradicting it.

Originally Posted by AR_Six

This is not true at all. They won the cup on the back of an astoundingly strong collection of (at the time) depth players - Byfuglien, Ladd, Versteeg, Sharp, Bolland.

So you're choosing to argue that a Cup win happened only because of these players and not others on the team. Depth players are great but having stars to lead the team, allowed those depth players the chance to contribute to a successful team. Who won the Conn Smythe that year again? None of your listed guys.

The lineup was stacked. Even now, they are not doing as well as they are because of their top guys alone. Sure, Kane's great, but the reason they're winning so much is that Hjalmarsson / Oduya are playing like a top-flite #1 pairing and both of their goalies are playing out of their minds - not to mention guys like Saad and Kruger and Shaw are playing like top 6 forwards.

Wait - they're playing well because of Hjalmarsson, Saad, Kruger and Shaw? Which are...wait for it....guys they drafted and developed as per my earlier point. What about Toews - he's done nothing. Bum.

Classic example of how Pittsburgh players are underrated because C and M get all the credit. That team is just plain good, top to bottom, outside of goaltending. The role-players, guys like Kennedy and Orpik and even Cooke, get no credit.

Wait...they drafted and developed Kennedy and Orpik...as per my point. Those guys (and Cooke) look good in a Penguins system thats set them up to succeed - plus there's no pressure to score since there's plenty of that when you have 2 of the best players in the world.

This is why they're winning and the Lightning, despite having similar top-end skill, are not.

The Lightning have similar top-end skill as the Penguins? News to me. Stamkos is close to Malkin but no one touches Crosby. So if the Lightning just traded for Kennedy and Cooke they'd switch places with the Pens. Intriguing...does Yzerman know this? Get on the horn to him!

That being said, having arguably the two best players in the world on your team does make a difference - I'm not saying you can't win on this model, but it's not exactly easy to build a team that way.

It's harder to win without any star players. You need elite coaching, a group of players willing to buy in, and get lucky with lesser guys having breakout career years at the same time.

Or as Pittsburgh you just trot out 87 and 71 each year, surround them with cheap spare parts and watch the wins roll in.

You're just naming big names off each of these teams. The Carolina run was on the backs of stellar performances by Brind'Amour, Francis, Cole, Stillman, Ray Whitney and a bunch of OT goals by Nic Wallin.

Ok...Staal had nothing to do with it, same with Ward. Who won the Conn Smythe again? Hint - none of the guys you listed.

As for Detroit... well yeah, it was pretty much just Nick Lidstrom. Wait, no there was Cleary, Draper, Franzen, Helm, Holmstrom, Kronwall, Rafalski and others on that team too...

How are the Wings doing this season with almost all the guys you listed, minus Lidstrom?

The Bruins had contributions from everyone from top to bottom, the reason they won wasn't just good goaltending and big Chara slapshots, they were tough, a large part of the contribution came from the Rich Peverleys, Brad Marchands and Shawn Thorntons of the world not to mention Seidenberg playing all-world. If anything Boston's a good example of what I'm talking about; outside of Chara they don't have any real superstars but they just kick the crap out of everyone.

Seidenberg played with Chara. And he was all-world. Coincidence of course. Without him or Thomas the Bruins don't win.

Really though none of the past examples matter because my assertion is based on the CURRENT CBA MARKET.

Then why did you give the above examples? The new CBA is less than 4 months old and you already know the secret to success in it, and no one else does? How lucky of you.

No, they won because they had Malhotra taking all the defensive minutes and Kesler destroying the other teams' 3rd and 4th lines while the Sedins spent all their time in the offensive zone because Malhotra and company took all the defensive assignments.

Without the Sedins the team would have had no one to take those offensive minutes, or at least maximize them. Pretty funny how in a team sport dynamic you have this idea that only foot soldiers contribute to success not the best players on the team. Sure they often do the dirty necessary little things, but those things help you to win, they don't lead you to victory.

Your comments is so wrong, just look at how the Canucks are doing right now WITH the Sedins and WITHOUT Kesler, Malhotra and the rest of their depth. They demonstrate my point perfectly - a team with a fantastic top line, but every other line is just trying not to get outplayed by the other team.

Or maybe the Sedins have regressed back to 75-80 point players instead of Art Ross winners. Or maybe they aren't getting elite goaltending. Or maybe when your top 3 on defense (Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler) have regressed from being elite to merely good.

And they're losing. In this case it's more because of injuries and mediocre goaltending (and some bad luck; they're like 5th in the NHL in fenwick or something and have lost games they should've won)

Thought you said it was because they didn't have Malhotra?

but the roster makeup looks like a team that overspent on its first line and couldn't afford the depth guys.

It does? Thought they just got injured.

Again, the key to winning the cup is being generally good at hockey, having a goalie play well and then getting luckier than the other guys in terms of games, calls, and injuries.

Thought you said it was having better foot soldiers than the other guys.

Basically everything you just said was wrong.

It doesn't look like you're qualified to give out that assessment. Ironically.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

I don't necessarily know that this is the case. In my view if you're spending significantly more time in your opponent's end of the ice than they are in yours, you will, over the long run, win out. This applies to teams with above league-average goaltending, at least.

That might sound good in theory but it simply doesn't work in practice. Elite players are elite players for a reason. They find a way to play their game and produce. Over the long run, an elite top line will have a positive goal differential when pitted against an elite checking line or lesser scoring line. Your superior "other lines" can spend more time in the offensive zone all they want but the chances are they won't score enough to make up the difference.


Like I said, you got to take into consider matchups. You're not going to be able to match your checking line against the other team's top line and hope that your superior other lines will win the game for you every single night. There will be nights where your lesser top line will be up against an elite top line and get outclassed.

Originally Posted by AR_Six

This isn't about winning the Cup. I think at this point everyone needs to sober up and realize that you do not build a team "to win the cup". You build a team to be good at hockey, and if you do that, you will win enough games over the regular season to make the playoffs. When you're in the playoffs, you need a run of good puck luck, a run of not having major injuries (which could also be termed "luck"), and a run of strong goaltending, in order to win the cup.

It's not about winning the Cup? I don't mean to be rude, but that's just... nevermind. Okay... let me ask you... have you been watching the trade deadline in recent years? Most buyers have a playoff spot locked up. If it's not about winning the Cup what is it about? Playing the maximum number of playoff home games? I can just imagine the owner(s), GM, and coach telling the players that they have home ice advantage... make sure the series goes to 7.

Originally Posted by AR_Six

And if I am Doug Wilson, I am not making a play for Malkin or Vanek or Gaborik that offseason. No. I'm signing Callahan, Pavelski, Hjalmarsson, Steen and Bolland. Other teams can have their superstars, those are the guys I target, and if those other teams are paying out the ass for those superstars, I might be able to get a couple of them on the relatively cheap.

Guess how much Callahan, Pavelski, Hjalmarsson, Steen, and Bolland will cost you?

[doctajones428]

Originally Posted by Nasty

I know, but i think this team has been bent over multiple times with trades that we should have gotten better returns with.

we cant screw this one up, so you must ask for a lot. If Iggy's value is really that high and the bruins really want a high caliber winger that bad they better be ready to pay.

Iginla straight up for Seguin would be so lopsided it's not even funny...

...I hope it happens