Jump to content

Tank Nation


Commandant

Recommended Posts

How much money beyond this season you're willing to take back (either via salary retention or taking a player or two signed beyond this season) will have a big impact on the 'future asset' you're getting for any of these players. With there already being talk of a stagnant or even lower cap, I suspect teams will be more gun shy than usual on taking contracts beyond this season unless they're moving some salary back the other way.

It's unfortunate timing for this, inasmuch as Molson is looking at lost playoff revenue as well as expenses skyrocketing due to the low dollar. He will probably be more reluctant than he otherwise might have been to just take back other team's garbage contracts and bury them in the minors, say. Just one more thing that's not going our way in this nightmare season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope Molson isn't thinking about pinching pennies right now. The dollar could fall to 30 cents and the Habs would still be profitable.

Not saying he WILL pinch pennies, but the guy is a businessman. He may not react too kindly to being asked to piss away millions of dollars on bad contracts just to fix MB's mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much money beyond this season you're willing to take back (either via salary retention or taking a player or two signed beyond this season) will have a big impact on the 'future asset' you're getting for any of these players. With there already being talk of a stagnant or even lower cap, I suspect teams will be more gun shy than usual on taking contracts beyond this season unless they're moving some salary back the other way.

First you get the value of the player your trading in futures. Then if you have to take money back, you ask for another asset. They are buying cap space. The teams you will be trading with are looking to augment their roster for the playoff run. They don't want to send you good ready assets now, and you don't want their garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First you get the value of the player your trading in futures. Then if you have to take money back, you ask for another asset. They are buying cap space. The teams you will be trading with are looking to augment their roster for the playoff run. They don't want to send you good ready assets now, and you don't want their garbage.

In theory, that's how it should work. With so many near-capped out teams plus the looming crunch though, I don't think it's going to go that way. Either you take back the they guy don't want to offset salary, or they'll go elsewhere and pay for a rental (which in some cases, will be the preferred route no matter what).

Think of it this way, if you want the 2nd round pick for someone with term, they'll want to send money back...otherwise, they'll send the 2nd for a comparable rental and not hurt their cap situation for the next season. The value of the player you're selling may very well be a 2nd, but you just won't get it without eating another contract or retaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory, that's how it should work. With so many near-capped out teams plus the looming crunch though, I don't think it's going to go that way. Either you take back the they guy don't want to offset salary, or they'll go elsewhere and pay for a rental (which in some cases, will be the preferred route no matter what).

Think of it this way, if you want the 2nd round pick for someone with term, they'll want to send money back...otherwise, they'll send the 2nd for a comparable rental and not hurt their cap situation for the next season. The value of the player you're selling may very well be a 2nd, but you just won't get it without eating another contract or retaining.

What about adding a later pick instead of giving a rental player ? Maybe could be a way to have the other team swallow the extra year on a player's contract without receiving money back..

For example : DD + 3rd pick for a 2nd pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about adding a later pick instead of giving a rental player ? Maybe could be a way to have the other team swallow the extra year on a player's contract without receiving money back..

For example : DD + 3rd pick for a 2nd pick.

It still paints that team into more of a cap crunch. If I'm running a team that's flirting with cap issues next year, what's more desirable, getting Desharnais and a 3rd for a 2nd rounder or trading that 2nd rounder for a comparable rental and giving myself $3.5 million to work with next year, either to bring someone else in via free agency, to use for re-signings/extensions, etc. Is $3.5 M in cap space worth more or less than a 3rd round pick? In the current landscape, I'd say more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really see how the picks offer us much help, for the near term, anyways. We can all agree that most picks, even the highly touted ones, will be 3-5 year projects before they hit their prime - if they make it at all. This does nothing to help us out if we're expecting Pac, PK, and Price to be the instruments that bring us to the SCF and want to have a long window like the Kings and Hawks are enjoying at the moment. They'd all be in their 30s by then.

Yes, we can remove some anchors, free the cap space, and then maybe win on free agency day or open a spot for an up-and-coming youngster from the farm. But if we had better players down there - they'd be up with the team already. Because we don't, they'd still need to get acclimated. I don't think the likes of Hudon, Ghetto, Carr (ok, maybe), McCarron or even Sherbak are improvements to anything we have right now, and would probably need a few years to break out in the big league.

I sympathize with MB. Seriously, who predicted this happening? The trajectory we've been on since he arrived, coupled with the start we had - shit, we all figured the gel was turning to concrete and that the entire lineup was one big machine that was simply dominate.

Are we under-achieving right now, for the last 20+ games, or did we over-achieve for the last 200+ games? I'm thinking the former, while too many believe the latter. Price or no Price, i think this team is way better than it's playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or a pick can be traded tomorrow and help the team right away.

Maybe loss of Prust's leadership is bigger factor?

My Cowboys suffered similar fate when their "superstar" went down with injury.

How would Cavs do if Lebron got hurt?

But, interesting that some vets (or just Plekanec) spoke up in Sept that are tired of hearing that team does well only because of Price. But, seems the vets are the ones who have shown absolutely ZERO leadership and the kids have been the only positives. Maybe need a Prust or cheerleading Josh Gorges type? And maybe Subban's self marketing inside and outside dressing room, dosent sit well with teammates? Who knows why team is so lackluster after looking like a well oiled machine to start the season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the pick doesn't reach his prime for 2-3 years, but is it better to have that talent in the system, or double down on this team who I really don't think is going to do damage in the playoffs, Price or no Price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the pick doesn't reach his prime for 2-3 years, but is it better to have that talent in the system, or double down on this team who I really don't think is going to do damage in the playoffs, Price or no Price.

The pick is free, too. The fans pay, but not the team.

I say I'm another four losses out of five from joining Tank Nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

If they lose two more in a row Therrien should step down. Highly unlikely, but this team seems to have lost the will to win under Therrien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they lose two more in a row Therrien should step down. Highly unlikely, but this team seems to have lost the will to win under Therrien

He's not going to step down. Stepping down means that he never collects the money left on his extension.

Also teams that have lost the will to win, don't continually outshoot their opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not going to step down. Stepping down means that he never collects the money left on his extension.

Unless it's agreed upon to pay him. There have been the odd case in sports where the coach steps down but still gets paid. Something like this would probably suffice:

Michel Therrien resigns as head coach but will be reassigned in the organization in a capacity to be determined for the duration of his contract. Technically, he's still an employee and is entitled to his pay but they could bring in another head coach in that scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not going to step down. Stepping down means that he never collects the money left on his extension.

Also teams that have lost the will to win, don't continually outshoot their opponent.

I think the team is still buying in, but also that the players no longer believe they CAN win. It's like Plekanec says, they have to work twice as hard as the other team to score a goal. Most of them still appear willing to put in that work, but what's missing seems to be the conviction - this shot is gonna go in the f***ng net!!' - that comes from confidence. I'm so damned sick and tired of seeing Grade-A scoring chances miss the net, hit the post, or somehow get deflected, just like I'm so fed up with seeing Habs players fiddle or hesitate with the puck for a split second or two before finally shooting.

If I were Therrien (and maybe he's already done this), I would devote practices entirely to shooting the damned puck. That's it. My emphasis would not be one scoring but on getting the puck on net, hard and quickly, and I would rip the flesh of the faces of any player who failed to do so with machine-like ferocity. This would be the main theme, practice after practice, until I finally start to see players doing it in games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was funny to hear Chris Nilan go off the deep end yesterday on 690, ranting about Habs practice. basically said "they had twelve 3 on 2s and couldn't even score...but does Therrien stop and try and correct or say anything, no he lets them simply continue with "high tempo" practice."

And he mentioned being told by Larry Robinson and others when he started that you need to "practice as you play games".

So he may be on to something, as haven't heard of any altercations between teammates at practice during this slump (no one is that intense this year to get pissed off?) and seems that they do repeatedly miss open scoring chances way too often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

Was funny to hear Chris Nilan go off the deep end yesterday on 690, ranting about Habs practice. basically said "they had twelve 3 on 2s and couldn't even score...but does Therrien stop and try and correct or say anything, no he lets them simply continue with "high tempo" practice."

And he mentioned being told by Larry Robinson and others when he started that you need to "practice as you play games".

So he may be on to something, as haven't heard of any altercations between teammates at practice during this slump (no one is that intense this year to get pissed off?) and seems that they do repeatedly miss open scoring chances way too often.

Ya, I heard that too. They had Wilde on there a little while ago, him and Melnick were going off on Therrien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They don't give a shit, that's why there haven't been any practice fights, or real fights for that matter. No shows of frustration outside of the odd press conference incident. I've never seen anything like it.

Or they're a bunch of losers that have internalized the oft repeated hot take that they can't win without Price.

Bergevin really dropped the ball pinching pennies on a backup. Condon came into camp and stole Tokarski's job. Can you imagine forty games with Ticker in net? #1 for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory, that's how it should work. With so many near-capped out teams plus the looming crunch though, I don't think it's going to go that way. Either you take back the they guy don't want to offset salary, or they'll go elsewhere and pay for a rental (which in some cases, will be the preferred route no matter what).

Think of it this way, if you want the 2nd round pick for someone with term, they'll want to send money back...otherwise, they'll send the 2nd for a comparable rental and not hurt their cap situation for the next season. The value of the player you're selling may very well be a 2nd, but you just won't get it without eating another contract or retaining.

Your in a sellers market. Say markov-- you ask for a prospect and a pick. If you have to take on a bad salary you have to make it worth your while. We are not going anyplace, we don't have to make move if it doesn't work for us. It's the buyer that needs the assets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your in a sellers market. Say markov-- you ask for a prospect and a pick. If you have to take on a bad salary you have to make it worth your while. We are not going anyplace, we don't have to make move if it doesn't work for us. It's the buyer that needs the assets

Again, that works in theory and really, that's the way it should be. Seldom has that been the case lately though, buyers or sellers market. You have to eat the salary merely to get the real asset you want, you don't often get something as a gift for taking on the unwanted money.

For the sake of a simplistic example, let's say Markov's value is a 2nd rounder. The only way they get that 2nd is if they take a contract back. They're not getting the 2nd plus say, a 3rd, for taking on the unwanted contract. It'd be nice if they did but when there are going to be rental options out there, the buyer will just go that route and give up the 2nd for the rental, keeping the 3rd and not putting themselves in worse of a cap situation for the following season. That's more ideal from the other teams' perspective.

Cap space is a premium asset, more so now than ever. That makes the rentals the most desired commodities. A team would rather take a lesser rental than a better player with term in a deal for the same acquisition cost, one that doesn't send any offsetting money the other way.

At one point, term (cost certainty) was viewed as an asset. It isn't really anymore, not unless it's someone with a long-term under-market value. The veterans that many want Montreal to sell don't fall under that category; it will work against them and lower their value. If Montreal wants to move them and receive a real asset in return, they will have to take on unwanted contracts/players in return as an absolute must-have requirement in the trade and they won't be compensated additionally for it.

Should Montreal take the unwanted player anyway or hold onto the players they have? Therein lies the real question. But that's the situation they're going to be in; they're not going to get real bonus assets for taking on players they don't want merely to balance the financial side of the deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...