• 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:
Meanwhile, in Calgary...

Nazem Kadri: 9GP, 1G 1A 2PTS - $7M until 2028-2029
Jonathan Huberdeau: 9GP, 2G 3A 5PTS - $10.5M until 2030-2031
Jacob Markstrom 7GP .901 S% - $6M until 2025-2026

With Hanifin, Lindholm, Zadorov & Tanev UFAs at the end of this season and an unremarkable prospect pool.

Man, they are so fucked. They are so, so, so beyond fucked. They literally don't have a good, logical path to follow. They can't blow it up, they got Kadri & Huberdeau there as a win-now move and even if they don't live up to their contracts, they'll still be decent enough to get Calgary as fringe playoff contenders year over year, not allowing them to get to the basement. They can't go for it either when they've spent more than 25% of their cap on three players that are playing like anchors. All three of their contracts are buyout proof too.

When comes time to paying those players in their late 20s, early 30s... You better be careful. Just one of those contracts will fuck your team beyond any bad first round pick ever could.

I'm happy all three of them got paid, but the NHL needs to do something to fix problems like this. You can't have a franchise be dead to rights for the next decade because of two bad contracts under a hard cap system. All three other sports have ways to maneuver your way around bad contracts. NBA has reasonable term limits, MLB has a soft cap and NFL has (99.9% of the time) contracts that aren't fully guaranteed & most players can be cut from the roster in the second or third year into their second contract without too much of a cap penalty.
Click to expand...
Doesn't this help us with their draft pick?
 
Hoiles said:
Does anyone completely understand that trade tree/forest? From my understanding, we would have Calgary's 2025 first round pick unless it is first overall.
Click to expand...
last line is the best outcome , how the hell did Hugo even come up with this flow chart

2025 1st round pick (CGY) [Conditional]*
*Conditions: 1. If CGY’s 2024 1st round pick is between 20 and 32, MTL can take that pick instead. Result: TBD

Scenario: In the event CGY receives FLA’s 2025 1st round pick:
1. If both CGY AND FLA’s picks are NOT top 10, MTL will receive the better of the CGY and FLA 2025 1st round picks. Result: TBD

2. If CGY’s pick is top 10, AND FLA’s pick is NOT top 10, MTL receives FLA’s pick. Result: TBD


Scenario: In the event CGY does NOT receive FLA’s 1st round pick:

Sub-scenario: CGY’s pick is NOT top 10
1. MTL will receive the CGY pick, and
2. If FLA’s pick is not top 10, is a better pick than CGY’s, and was transferred to another team due to prior conditions, MTL will also receive CGY’s 2025 4th round pick.
Result: TBD

Sub-scenario: CGY’s pick is top 10:
1. If CGY’s pick is 1st overall, MTL will receive CGY’s 2025 3rd, and the better of CGY and FLA’s 2026 1st round pick. Result: TBD

2. If CGY’s pick is 2nd to 10th, MTL receives CGY’s 2025 1st round pick. Result: TBD
 
GEEMAN said:
The NHL doesnt need to do anything except ............HAVE FEWER STUPID REGIMES

This is 100000% on Treliving

He knew the midget and Tkatchuk were gone and not resigning

Flames were entering the dreaded middle but they pushed their chips to the middle of the table

Handed out 2 mega contacts and now have other vets to ink

Yes the NHL is the toughest of the big 4 to manage your cap/roster with limited flexibility

However you need to be smarter and get ahead of the curve and make tough roster decisions

Stop handing out NTC to half your roster and 3 extra years when you know the back end of most deals end in tears
Click to expand...

I kinda disagree, one stupid regime shouldn't fuck over a franchise for the next decade. I agree with GGpX that there should be easier ways to maneuver out of bad contract situations. It can still be painful without essentially hamstringing a franchise for 8 years. This was all done by a GM in survival mode, which will happen over and over again.
 
GGpX said:
Meanwhile, in Calgary...

Nazem Kadri: 9GP, 1G 1A 2PTS - $7M until 2028-2029
Jonathan Huberdeau: 9GP, 2G 3A 5PTS - $10.5M until 2030-2031
Jacob Markstrom 7GP .901 S% - $6M until 2025-2026

With Hanifin, Lindholm, Zadorov & Tanev UFAs at the end of this season and an unremarkable prospect pool.

Man, they are so fucked. They are so, so, so beyond fucked. They literally don't have a good, logical path to follow. They can't blow it up, they got Kadri & Huberdeau there as a win-now move and even if they don't live up to their contracts, they'll still be decent enough to get Calgary as fringe playoff contenders year over year, not allowing them to get to the basement. They can't go for it either when they've spent more than 25% of their cap on three players that are playing like anchors. All three of their contracts are buyout proof too.

When comes time to paying those players in their late 20s, early 30s... You better be careful. Just one of those contracts will fuck your team beyond any bad first round pick ever could.

I'm happy all three of them got paid, but the NHL needs to do something to fix problems like this. You can't have a franchise be dead to rights for the next decade because of two bad contracts under a hard cap system. All three other sports have ways to maneuver your way around bad contracts. NBA has reasonable term limits, MLB has a soft cap and NFL has (99.9% of the time) contracts that aren't fully guaranteed & most players can be cut from the roster in the second or third year into their second contract without too much of a cap penalty.
Click to expand...
Kadri and Huberdeau are a combined -21 :oops:
 
GrandWazoo said:
I kinda disagree, one stupid regime shouldn't fuck over a franchise for the next decade. I agree with GGpX that there should be easier ways to maneuver out of bad contract situations. It can still be painful without essentially hamstringing a franchise for 8 years. This was all done by a GM in survival mode, which will happen over and over again.
Click to expand...
Dont get to survival mode forcing stupid moves

You get around bad contracts by not handing them out

If your contending for cups you deal with it later

Pretenders you deserve it
 
GEEMAN said:
Dont get to survival mode forcing stupid moves

You get around bad contracts by not handing them out

If your contending for cups you deal with it later

Pretenders you deserve it
Click to expand...
I think you're missing the point.

1) "Don't be stupid" has never been an effective preventive solution to anything, ever.
2) The person who caused the damage is gone but his move will impair the organization for almost a decade. This is the only sport that doesn't offer a way out to turn things around.
3) There is no benefit for the league or the team to have an hopeless franchise for a decade. It's not good for anyone.
 
The whole "don't be dumb" argument holds no ground or merit because every day you'll have very intelligent people make poor decisions with consequences. To say "don't be dumb" also ignores external factors beyond the control of the person making those decisions. Don't wanna give Tkachuk/Gaudreau/Kadri/Huberdeau long term deals? Don't wanna give Hanifin & the other pending UFAs long-term contracts? Cool story, then those guys are all gone and in a cap league where every team is counting dollars, there's not a great market to trade those players. The players have a lot of leverage in this, whether you like it or not.

Also, another external factor: While I have no proof of this, it seems rather obvious to me that the upper management / ownership in Calgary loves to have their fingerprints on the roster. If you're a GM and ownership demands that you sign players regardless of the cost, welp...
 
GrandWazoo said:
I think you're missing the point.

1) "Don't be stupid" has never been an effective preventive solution to anything, ever.
2) The person who caused the damage is gone but his move will impair the organization for almost a decade. This is the only sport that doesn't offer a way out to turn things around.
3) There is no benefit for the league or the team to have an hopeless franchise for a decade. It's not good for anyone.
Click to expand...
Not just that, it's a hindrance. It kills interest. You've seen it firsthand: If you know your team is going to suck and they're going to suck for the foreseeable future, you drift to something else. It's something that literally drives fans away.

Why is the NFL the king of sports in America and the other three leagues combined don't even come to the ankles of the NFL? Besides a couple of teams like the Lions and Browns who are perennial losers, and even then they've gotten better in recent times, teams don't suck for very long. A team that finishes in the basement this year has a realistic chance at making the playoffs next year with one good draft and roster make-over.

The NHL needs to do one of two things, either eliminate the hard cap or reduce the maximum term limit on contracts & eliminate no move/trade clauses. While the players would never agree to that, the NHL could give the players something in return that would make the league 10x better overnight: Earlier UFA status. Instead of being a full-on UFA after 7 accrued seasons or 27 years old, make it after 4 accrued seasons or 24 years old.

You want a real free agency frenzy? When you could give a 24 year old UFA a five year contract in the prime of his career?
 
TheCountofMonteCristo said:
Matthews wanted short.

The NHL needs to change cap to NBA
Click to expand...
Auston Matthews, to his credit, is one of the very rare players in the history of the league that has taken full advantage of his leverage and his understanding of the economics of the league to his benefit.

Why McDavid took an 8 year is beyond me and it's sheer lunacy. It's a heist by Deadmonton. He should have taken a 4 or 3 year deal at the same cap number, and he would have had Deadmonton by the balls. He'd get a new contract for another 3-4 years and he'd be making $15M. And then, depending on how he feels, he could then take yet another 3-4 year contract at $18M+, and finally, when he's finally in the late 20s, early 30s, finally take an 8 year $20M+ contract.
 
GGpX said:
Auston Matthews, to his credit, is one of the very rare players in the history of the league that has taken full advantage of his leverage and his understanding of the economics of the league to his benefit.

Why McDavid took an 8 year is beyond me and it's sheer lunacy. It's a heist by Deadmonton. He should have taken a 4 or 3 year deal at the same cap number, and he would have had Deadmonton by the balls. He'd get a new contract for another 3-4 years and he'd be making $15M. And then, depending on how he feels, he could then take yet another 3-4 year contract at $18M+, and finally, when he's finally in the late 20s, early 30s, finally take an 8 year $20M+ contract.
Click to expand...
yep Pig for all his faults, is the smartest star out there when it comes to money.
 
worm said:
Doesn't this help us with their draft pick?
Click to expand...
Selfishly, it does, yeah. The worse they are in 2025, the better their 2025 pick is for us.

But my point is more in a general sense. San Jose's in the same boat as Calgary. They'll have gone through a full decade of shit before being good again.
 
GGpX said:
The whole "don't be dumb" argument holds no ground or merit because every day you'll have very intelligent people make poor decisions with consequences. To say "don't be dumb" also ignores external factors beyond the control of the person making those decisions. Don't wanna give Tkachuk/Gaudreau/Kadri/Huberdeau long term deals? Don't wanna give Hanifin & the other pending UFAs long-term contracts? Cool story, then those guys are all gone and in a cap league where every team is counting dollars, there's not a great market to trade those players. The players have a lot of leverage in this, whether you like it or not.

Also, another external factor: While I have no proof of this, it seems rather obvious to me that the upper management / ownership in Calgary loves to have their fingerprints on the roster. If you're a GM and ownership demands that you sign players regardless of the cost, welp...
Click to expand...
Sure you do - both Gord Miller & Craig Button openly stated (multiple times on Mitch Melnick’s show) that Murray Edwards hired Sutter & extended him without so much as asking Treliving his thoughts on the matter. Also said rebuild was out of the question w Cgy ownership

It’s why I keep saying there’s no such thing as a superstar GM in the NHL - the margin between GMs in the NHL when factoring in market geographical advantage (taxes, weather, scrutiny) is very slim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top