Willey101 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Kostitsyn at least does more than Gomez but $4.5 is too high. I have absolutely nothing against #46 and want him on this team going forward but if he wants more than even $4.0 then I am parting with him now. Nashville is a good fit because they need scoring and have some grinder type forwards that we can use. Sign him or trade him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 I hope that they resign him to a 4 year deal. I'd do up to $4.5M and then dump Gomez next year. I still think we should be looking for a centre who compliments Plekanec with Gomez's money. Thats a bigger need to me, than keeping Kostitsyn. I'd like to do both ideally... but if push comes to shove, and its one or the other, give me the centre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 I still think we should be looking for a centre who compliments Plekanec with Gomez's money. Thats a bigger need to me, than keeping Kostitsyn. I'd like to do both ideally... but if push comes to shove, and its one or the other, give me the centre. If we get another center then apart from Gomez which one leaves? Plekanec/DD/Eller? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 If we get another center then apart from Gomez which one leaves? Plekanec/DD/Eller? DD moves to wing. I still think this is the end game for a guy his size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 DD moves to wing. I still think this is the end game for a guy his size. So hard to say....I think the same thing but the kid produces. How can we take that away you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 So hard to say....I think the same thing but the kid produces. How can we take that away you know. I think he produces because of his great hockey IQ. I still think he'll produce on the wing, but he'll be given much easier defensive assignments, where he's not asked to contain cycling forwards down low. This is the biggest problem in his game, and its the reason why he's effective defensively on the PK but not 5 on 5. On the PK he's able to play higher, and his job is to anticipate passes and get in front of shots, but not necessarily to win board battles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 I think he produces because of his great hockey IQ. I still think he'll produce on the wing, but he'll be given much easier defensive assignments, where he's not asked to contain cycling forwards down low. This is the biggest problem in his game, and its the reason why he's effective defensively on the PK but not 5 on 5. On the PK he's able to play higher, and his job is to anticipate passes and get in front of shots, but not necessarily to win board battles. At the same time the line working right now. I'd hate to break them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 At the same time the line working right now. I'd hate to break them up. Agreed there, but I'm not advocating breaking them up right away. Eventually they will stop producing and its at that point you can move DD to wing. If you were able to acquire that 1B centre tomorrow and stuff Gomez in the minors, you can put Eller on the wing for a short time, with the 1b, until its time to alter DD's line. Its really not a bad problem to have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Agreed there, but I'm not advocating breaking them up right away. Eventually they will stop producing and its at that point you can move DD to wing. If you were able to acquire that 1B centre tomorrow and stuff Gomez in the minors, you can put Eller on the wing for a short time, with the 1b, until its time to alter DD's line. Its really not a bad problem to have. Certainly not.....depth depth depth. Key to any good team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Certainly not.....depth depth depth. Key to any good team. Agreed. I really like the top 9/bottom 3 philosophy... especially if Plekanec's line and Eller's line can be used in matchups against the other teams 1/2 lines. But I think the big piece missing in this top 9 philosophy is the 2nd line centre (or 1B). Gomez just isn't doing the job we expected of him. If he's the 65-70 point guy that the organization obviously thought he was when we traded for him we'd be a real cup contender. If he was the 60 point guy he was in his first season with us, we still might be a cup contender, but I'm not as sure. With his current 35-40 point output, we're a bottom tier playoff team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davehab Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 unless gomez is moved/buried before this summer i dont see how we can keep this team together next year......Subban,Price,Kosty, DD, Gorges, Eller, the rest fo the D besides Markov all have expiring contracts. Out of that group I see Kosty as the most likely to be traded for assets.... perhaps a certain Dman from Nashville so move Gomez or lose one of the more valuble pieces of the team...most likely Kosty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 The chances of us moving Gomez is practically nil. The chances the organization buries him is also pretty close to zero. This is one of those moments where we're going to have to hope he finds his 'a' game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 The chances of us moving Gomez is practically nil. The chances the organization buries him is also pretty close to zero. This is one of those moments where we're going to have to hope he finds his 'a' game. or at least a game of some kind at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 or at least a game of some kind at all. Well, I'd kind of debate that. I've been impressed with his work the last couple of games. His feet are moving better and he's making some good plays that just haven't been finished. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 19, 2011 Author Share Posted November 19, 2011 I still think we should be looking for a centre who compliments Plekanec with Gomez's money. Thats a bigger need to me, than keeping Kostitsyn. I'd like to do both ideally... but if push comes to shove, and its one or the other, give me the centre. I think we should have enough in the budget for replacing Gomez and resigning AK. Next year we should be dropping Gomez, Spacek, Gill, Moen and Darche and Laraque's buyout which will free up over $16M. Subban, Price, Eller and Gorges will be looking for raises and we do need to solidify the D - how much that cost and who those replacements need to be, will depend on largely on how Emelin, Weber and Diaz prove themselves by the end of the year and of course whether Markov has fully recovered and stays injury free. However, the cap has gone up every year, with Atlanta out and Winnipeg back the league, should also provide an additional boost to league revenues. I don't think there should be an issue of being able to resign Subban, Eller, Gorges, AK46, a 1a/b type centre and at least one other top 3 dman. I think the issue we really have is the following year, when MaxPac is due for a raise and the commitments made to Cammy, Gionta and Cole ($15.5M is around what the three of them are getting) will make for some tough choices, because, if MaxPac pans out the way I hope he does, he is going to be looking for a big raise and with Cammy making $6M, it will be hard to lock him up for less if he is out producing Cammy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Well, I'd kind of debate that. I've been impressed with his work the last couple of games. His feet are moving better and he's making some good plays that just haven't been finished. All I have seen from him is draw ability... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davehab Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 the longer this situation carries on with Gomez the harder it will be for the rest of the team to ignore his lack of production....I would be pissed if i was Eller or Kosty watching Gomez get more ice time for less production. with our luck PG will probly trade Eller for complaining about it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Subban, Price, Eller and Gorges will be looking for raises and we do need to solidify the D - how much that cost and who those replacements need to be, will depend on largely on how Emelin, Weber and Diaz prove themselves by the end of the year and of course whether Markov has fully recovered and stays injury free. However, the cap has gone up every year, with Atlanta out and Winnipeg back the league, should also provide an additional boost to league revenues. It may provide a boost to league revenues but with the CBA expiring, it's all but a foregone conclusion that the owners will be looking to cut the percentage of HRR that the players get (currently at 57% I believe). Even with the bit of extra revenue from Winnipeg (although attendance across the league is down which may offset that), the change in HRR% will almost assuredly drop the cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 I would be pissed if i was Eller or Kosty watching Gomez get more ice time for less production. Not to mention the millions and millions of more dollars. You just know that thought runs through their heads at some point, how could it not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 19, 2011 Author Share Posted November 19, 2011 It may provide a boost to league revenues but with the CBA expiring, it's all but a foregone conclusion that the owners will be looking to cut the percentage of HRR that the players get (currently at 57% I believe). Even with the bit of extra revenue from Winnipeg (although attendance across the league is down which may offset that), the change in HRR% will almost assuredly drop the cap. There will probably also be a rollback, which means right now would be an ideal time to start locking players up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 I wouldn't assume there will be a rollback, nor that there will be a huge reduction in the players share. This is a league that was under 2 Billion in annual revenues pre-lockout and is at 3 Billion post lockout. I cant see the big market owners really wanting to lose a lot of revenues by locking out long term again. There are far more teams making money and good money than in the NBA. The system doesn't need a radical change. I think we'll see a minor tweak... (ie allow the cap floor to drop and the ceiling to rise; more revenue sharing) to keep our percentages about the same (maybe 1 or 2% down to 55%); but I don't foresee a major lockout here. The system isn't fundamentally broken in the way it was. I also think its highly unlikely we see a salary rollback; or free buyout period. People who think that these will create the solution to the Gomez dilemna are going to be disappointed IMO. I think you have to work under the assumption that the rules won't be radically changing; and adjust to any minor changes after they are agreed to; not before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I wouldn't assume there will be a rollback, nor that there will be a huge reduction in the players share. This is a league that was under 2 Billion in annual revenues pre-lockout and is at 3 Billion post lockout. I cant see the big market owners really wanting to lose a lot of revenues by locking out long term again. There are far more teams making money and good money than in the NBA. The system doesn't need a radical change. I think we'll see a minor tweak... (ie allow the cap floor to drop and the ceiling to rise; more revenue sharing) to keep our percentages about the same (maybe 1 or 2% down to 55%); but I don't foresee a major lockout here. The system isn't fundamentally broken in the way it was. I also think its highly unlikely we see a salary rollback; or free buyout period. People who think that these will create the solution to the Gomez dilemna are going to be disappointed IMO. I think you have to work under the assumption that the rules won't be radically changing; and adjust to any minor changes after they are agreed to; not before. I think you nailed this right on. if the league survives with the current teams then the floor has to drop ultimately meaning the ceiling has to rise.There is just no way many teams can survive given this floor and the amount of money they are losing. I wonder if we will see a tweak to the buy out however or a tweak in sending salary to the minors to avoid cap hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 The floor is currently set where it is always exactly 16 million below the cap. This was fine in 2005 when the cap was 39 million, but has been a major problem as the cap has risen. A system where the floor is a % of the cap, instead of a set number below it, would be much more beneficial. To illustrate the problem consider.... The Cap has risen from 39 million to over 64 million.... its gone up... The new cap is 1.667x the old cap. The floor meanwhile has risen from 23 million to over 48 million..... The new floor is 2.1 x the old floor. Because the floor cap relationship is a set number instead of a percentage, the floor actually rises at a quicker rate than the cap... which means that small market teams have to increase their revenues quicker than the big market teams in order to stay profitable, and they are finding it very hard to do so. If the Floor was a set number, say 60% of the cap... (or some other figure to be negotiated), it would rise at the same rate as the Cap and eliminate this issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willey101 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Makes sense to me. Wonder if the NHLPA will think logically though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.