Trade Tanner Pearson and 3rd to Habs, Casey DeSmith to Canucks

[tomh009]

19 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

Because as the rebuild progresses the Habs will have some need of spending money.

Everyone else will get the same spending money, too, and the contracts will quickly rise to use up any available cap space.

[GHT120]

16 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Everyone else will get the same spending money, too, and the contracts will quickly rise to use up any available cap space.

Very true ... but in the next two years they have Montembeault to extend or replace, 8 RFAs to deal with, 9 UFAs to replace and then the following two years come Dach and Newhook ... a growing cap cannot hurt that process.

[Commandant]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

Everyone else will get the same spending money, too, and the contracts will quickly rise to use up any available cap space.

 

All contracts don't rise equally.  

 

What we are seeing in the nhl is that the elite players are rising faster than the mid-tier, and the minimum value players. 

 

Since our best are locked up in Caufield and Suzuki long term, an increase in the cap will help us if one of our other youngsters grows into a franchise player and needs an appropriate extension, ie Slaf breakout, or Dach breakout, or one of Guhle/reinbacher/hutson becoming an elite D. .... or if none of that happens it will give us the cash to trade for one or bid in free agency. and the expiring contracts of the retained money and Armia and others will help too. 

[DON]

12 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Everyone else will get the same spending money, too, and the contracts will quickly rise to use up any available cap space.

Basically was my point and if give all GMs 110m or 80m seems irrelevant other than the "business" of the NHL (which i am not too concerned over) and level playing field isnt it?

They will all make mistakes, spend to the cap and manipulate the Owners salary cap as best they can.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

11 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

All contracts don't rise equally.  

 

What we are seeing in the nhl is that the elite players are rising faster than the mid-tier, and the minimum value players. 

 

Since our best are locked up in Caufield and Suzuki long term, an increase in the cap will help us if one of our other youngsters grows into a franchise player and needs an appropriate extension, ie Slaf breakout, or Dach breakout, or one of Guhle/reinbacher/hutson becoming an elite D. .... or if none of that happens it will give us the cash to trade for one or bid in free agency. and the expiring contracts of the retained money and Armia and others will help too. 

 

Great analysis. Of course, this assumes our GM actually holds the line on market value - as opposed to, say, throwing big money at the Armias of the world like a certain former GM I could name.

[hockeyrealist]

On 10/5/2023 at 12:06 PM, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Great analysis. Of course, this assumes our GM actually holds the line on market value - as opposed to, say, throwing big money at the Armias of the world like a certain former GM I could name.

Def not defending the contract or MB. But wonder if the cap had continued to rise as expected pre-pandemic if Armia’s contract would be seen as so poor?  Obv it would represent a smaller portion of available cap, but impossible to ignore the lack of production and apparent disinterest at times.

[alfredoh2009]

23 minutes ago, hockeyrealist said:

Def not defending the contract or MB. But wonder if the cap had continued to rise as expected pre-pandemic if Armia’s contract would be seen as so poor?  Obv it would represent a smaller portion of available cap, but impossible to ignore the lack of production and apparent disinterest at times.

concussion then covid, probably long covid. He was good and useful when signed but due to circumstances he is now damaged goods.

[GHT120]

1 hour ago, hockeyrealist said:

Def not defending the contract or MB. But wonder if the cap had continued to rise as expected pre-pandemic if Armia’s contract would be seen as so poor?  Obv it would represent a smaller portion of available cap, but impossible to ignore the lack of production and apparent disinterest at times.

 

Fair-ish point ... but hard to imagine that $3.4M for a 12/13th forward would not be problematic.