• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Around The League - 2024-25 Regular Season

GGpX said:
The single best way to win, regardless of which professional sports league you watch, is to have as many players on a team that will grossly outproduce relative to what they earn. It's why quarterbacks on rookie contracts are so precious and why giving a second contract to running backs (like my Cowboys stupidly did with Zeke and are probably stupidly going to do with Pollard) is the height of lunacy.

In an ideal world, yes, you would love it if you had players like Cale Makar who has a completely incompetent agent takes a team-friendly deal to improve the team's chances to win. But that isn't something that should be expected, frankly.

So, what should McDavid/Matthews get paid? The answer is simple: Whatever amount they want, up to the limit that permissible by the CBA.

McDavid & Matthews are dictionary definitions of irreplaceable. There is no single team in the NHL that could make a package that would make Edmonton consider trading McDavid. We could offer Suzuki, Caufield, Guhle, our next ten first round picks and second round picks, any prospects in our pool that they'd want, and Deadmonton wouldn't even consider it. Despite getting all of that offered, they'd still get fleeced.

The problem in Toronto/Deadmonton isn't what McDavid/Matthews get paid, it's what everyone else is getting paid.
Click to expand...
Makar went from 950k to 9 mil , hardly a team friendly for 6 years

He will cash in in 2027 again but his contract is very fair for both sides

If he went to 8 years he nets 10.5+
 
GrandWazoo said:
For the record, I agree with 20%. I’d prefer lower but. You need to adapt to market prices. And yes, those RFA team friendly deals are exactly what I’m talking about, and why teams in those eras were able to build dynasties. Now that it’s gone, teams needs to be a lot smarter.
Click to expand...

Teams need to lock in their young stars after ELC to full term if possible

Hughes for example was a fabulous move by Jersey

It also helps when your studs arent studs from the get go like Hughes or Stuzle and take life time security instead of betting on themselves with shorter deals

Regimes need to be much smarter these days and walk away or trade players ahead of time

80+ mil is plenty of money to figure out how to make 20+ players millionaires

When your a fool to play Gally and Price stupid money and term , you deserve cap problems
 
GrandWazoo said:
Given the cap space, and my blueprint of of winning team m, where does my math go wrong?

Elite C: 11
Elite scoring W: 8
Top 2c 2way : 8
Top D: 8
Goalies: 9
Subtotal: 44

3rd line : 8
4th line: 4
Top 2D: 6

Subtotal : 44 + 18 = 62

Bottom 6 D : 3.5 (2x1.75)
Top 4 Ds: 6.5 (2x3.25)
Complementary top 6 F: 10 (3x3.33)
Depth: 1M (2x0.5)
Total: 83M

You increase the top earners and you’re going to have to make sacrifices somewhere else or have some cheap rookies to fill in.
Click to expand...
Isn't league minimum 750000 not.5, otherwise all good
 
GGpX said:
The single best way to win, regardless of which professional sports league you watch, is to have as many players on a team that will grossly outproduce relative to what they earn. It's why quarterbacks on rookie contracts are so precious and why giving a second contract to running backs (like my Cowboys stupidly did with Zeke and are probably stupidly going to do with Pollard) is the height of lunacy.

In an ideal world, yes, you would love it if you had players like Cale Makar who has a completely incompetent agent takes a team-friendly deal to improve the team's chances to win. But that isn't something that should be expected, frankly.

So, what should McDavid/Matthews get paid? The answer is simple: Whatever amount they want, up to the limit that permissible by the CBA.

McDavid & Matthews are dictionary definitions of irreplaceable. There is no single team in the NHL that could make a package that would make Edmonton consider trading McDavid. We could offer Suzuki, Caufield, Guhle, our next ten first round picks and second round picks, any prospects in our pool that they'd want, and Deadmonton wouldn't even consider it. Despite getting all of that offered, they'd still get fleeced.

The problem in Toronto/Deadmonton isn't what McDavid/Matthews get paid, it's what everyone else is getting paid.
Click to expand...
The argument works re McJebus but not Matthews. McDavid is light years better than Matthews will ever be and if Matthews wasn't a Leaf this fact would be plainly obvious to everyone. Matthews isn't comparable to McDavid, he's more comparable to Draisaitl. A great piece to have, but ultimately not the difference between winning and losing. The Leafs can afford to trade Matthews for a huge haul. They can't afford to keep him unless they don't care about winning. You're going to pay a guy 8 years at $15 million per who can't even lead you past the first round? Fill your boots and enjoy the long off season.
 
TheCountofMonteCristo said:
wouldn't be a loser failure for losing in 3rd rd?
Click to expand...
Less of a failure than losing in the first round every year. Toronto should have no trouble attracting better players than Edmonton. There's no good reason for them to be less successful yet they are. McDavid got his owner more than 2 or 3 playoff gates last spring.
 
He has 1 more year left on his deal. They are willing to move a high draft pick to eat salary?
I'll take him for their first this year, let's go!
 
My understanding is that they want to make a trade. If that's the case, Edmunsson for Zaitsev + 1st or Ridley Greig.
 
Ukrainians and pinhead columnists like Larry Brooks are now turning their minds to 8. Ukrainians want 8 banned from Canada (curiously not Orlov or Kuznetsov/any other Russian in the NHL).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top