Jump to content

Big Picture Ideas, Questions and Predictions Based on Cap Management, Team Construction and the Theory of Everything


Butterface

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

The way I see it, this year's TDL is about managing the pending UFA contracts. While Bergevin's "get in the playoffs and anything can happen" almost came true in 2021, I don't expect that Hughes will be pushing for that this season. What he wants is meaning games in the spring. So, don't strip the team but don't let meaningful assets walk away, either.

 

I do believe that Savard is gone, assuming that Hughes gets something in return; Struble has already filled in well enough for him, and we have the Mailloux option as well. And changing one D-man does not destroy the chemistry or cohesion of a defence corps: it didn't when we got Carrier for Barron, either.

 

One the other side, Matheson is unlikely to be moved.Losing him would have a much bigger impact, and he is on contract for next year still. The 2026 TDL may be a different matter, but let's wait and see on that.

 

So, the key to the forwards has got to be Evans, and what he would accept from the Habs. If we can sign him for 3x$4M or 4x$3M I expect that Hughes will not hesitate to pull out his pen and get the deal done. But if he wants a big long-term deal, something approaching 6x$4M--and he might, given that he has never had a contract at even $2M AAV before--that surely isn't going to work for the team. Where exactly that line is, only Hughes and Gorton know.

 

So, instead of a spreadsheet, here is my flowchart 😊 for this year's TDL.

 

image.png


I agree with all that.

 

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:


I can easily disagree with that assessment by writing a novel…

 

 

 

And you did write a novel. Just saying that Hughes will have a tough decision to make because he might have to choose between sticking to the plan or keeping a bunch of assets that he might lose for nothing in order to go on a cup run. Don't think that's an outrageous assertion but if it inspires others to write a novel then so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a footnote to my flowchart, you will note that in the scenario where we trade Evans, we will end up losing Dvorak for nothing at the end of the season. Based on my assessment of Dvorak's trade value, that's a reasonable cost for keeping a veteran centre for the remaining quarter of the season.

 

Oh, and we do have one retention slot: we surely would not need that for an Evans trade so I would likely use that for Savard, or, failing that, Armia.We'll have two additional retention slots opening up on July 1 anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Based on my assessment of Dvorak's trade value, that's a reasonable cost for keeping a veteran centre for the remaining quarter of the season.


yes !

 

4 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Oh, and we do have one retention slot: we surely would not need that for an Evans trade so I would likely use that for Savard, or, failing that, Armia.We'll have two additional retention slots opening up on July 1 anyway.


yes !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

And you did write a novel. Just saying that Hughes will have a tough decision to make because he might have to choose between sticking to the plan or keeping a bunch of assets that he might lose for nothing in order to go on a cup run. Don't think that's an outrageous assertion but if it inspires others to write a novel then so be it. 


And it looks like you chose not to read the novel because my point was that what you are stating is not Hughes’ plan.  It’s only the plan of certain fans. The plan is for the Habs to be in the mix and as Hughes stated, they have plenty of draft picks next year and as a result he is completely willing to omit selling a player for another pick at the draft if the Habs are in good position at the deadline. There is no difficult decision as if the Habs are in the mix, Hughes has already stated that he will be willing to hold on to most of our players.
 

The main moves we have made this year have been to acquire Laine and Carrier. Seems a bit backwards from a plan that talks about only acquiring things for the future rather than the now.

 

Finally, the inspiration for my novel came from this thread and the post you quoted, not yours. The only thing I disagreed with from your post, was that it was difficult to argue against what was being said.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two questions:

 

1. We already have draft picks coming out of our ears and a plethora of young players already in the system looking to crack the team. Does acquiring a few extra 2nd or 3rd round picks really move the needle on anything significant? 

 

2. What do you do if the Habs are in a playoff position come the deadline, still trade the UFAs? 

 

Here are my answers:

 

1. No

 

2. Also No

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

that Hughes will have a tough decision to make because he might have to choose between sticking to the plan or keeping a bunch of assets that he might lose for nothing in order to go on a cup run.


and yes, those are his choices.

 

and I would rather stick to the plan.

 

I hope we can sign Evans. I think Savard is a trade.

 

Dvorak is a trade, but if the return is a 7th, we might as well keep him.

 

Same with Armia… anything less than a 3rd, keep him.

 

Evans and Savard are different. A 1st or a 2nd with a sweetener is worth it. (But only if Evans asks for the moon)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again guys.

 

We don’t need to actually use the picks to pick in the draft.

 

They can be used to package and trade for actual NHL players to help us now.

 

Example: What would Newhook and three second round picks get us ? (Essentially that is Newhook plus a late first)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, illWill said:

Two questions:

 

1. We already have draft picks coming out of our ears and a plethora of young players already in the system looking to crack the team. Does acquiring a few extra 2nd or 3rd round picks really move the needle on anything significant? 

 

2. What do you do if the Habs are in a playoff position come the deadline, still trade the UFAs? 

 

Here are my answers:

 

1. No

 

2. Also No

 

On the first question, nothing acquired for Dvorak or Armia is a needle mover.

 

If someone offers a first or even a second for Savard, with retention, then of course make that trade.  I highly doubt it though.  And given our picks and prospects dont think another third round pick is a needle mover.

 

Evans Id need a first to move.  And that would be assuming i cant get him to sign at a reasonable number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Butterface said:

Again guys.

 

We don’t need to actually use the picks to pick in the draft.

 

They can be used to package and trade for actual NHL players to help us now.

 

Example: What would Newhook and three second round picks get us ? (Essentially that is Newhook plus a late first)

 

We all know that.

 

But we need to make a deal with another NHL GM.

 

And here is the secret.  Other GMs will see with the 50 contract limit, and 75 man reserve list limits, that we quite simply have too many picks and prospects to keep them all and some will need to be consolidated in 2 for 1 or similar trades.  If i can see this... nhl teams can too and are going to lowball offers as a result.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Evans Id need a first to move.  And that would be assuming i cant get him to sign at a reasonable number.

More or less what I had in my flowchart. 😊

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

100%

 

This is why the spreadsheet is too rigid and lacks the ability to pivot, take advantage of opportunities and look at the team in the way a real GM does.

 

We've been discussing how to build the team for.YEARS on this site without the rigidity of the spreadsheet.  

 

If Butterface wants to use it, fine.

 

But dont demand everyone else lay out a similar spreadsheet or something different.  Not every user here agrees with being so rigid about a plan and not wanting to trade Armia for.a 4th rounder or Evans for a 2nd rounder doesnt mean we are Bergevin 2.0 and suggesting that we are is quite frankly insulting.

 

 


 

What you’re proposing here is to look at capwages.com and manage by the seat of your pants.

 

I’m trying to make capwages 2.0 with expected contracts added in at market prices. 

 

I can pivot very quickly by taking out one contract and putting in another and seeing where the salary cap runs into problems down the road.

 

I don’t understand what you’re proposing. 
 

Please put your thinking in some sort of visual representation.

 

Also, I don’t think we are too far off in logic.

 

You want to keep the ufas for a playoff run. I want to monetize them if they are valuable enough.

 

I want to trade Savard, Dvorak and Armia…. I would like to sign Evans.

 

So you wish to keep three more players than I.

 

Savard.. with Carrier and the way we’ve won the last two games is expendable. The asset would be nice.

 

Dvorak is good on PK… I doubt we can even get worthwhile value. He likely has to stay 🫤

 

So Evans is a problem and Armia is a problem. I agree we are weaker without them. 
 

But I’m not willing to lose Evans for nothing… even at the expense of missing a cup run.

 

We are playing 40 meaningful games right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not proposing managing by the seat of my pants.  Im proposing managing with flexibility in mind.  You dont need to have every position in your bottom 6 forwards and bottom pair defence planned out for the next 10 years.  You call that managing by the seat of your pants, i call it flexibility and being able to take advantage of opportunities.

 

I say There is a certain percentage of cap allocated to positions.  You want to name every player.  I dont.  I name more core and fill in around it as needed.  Going short term and keeping flexibility.

 

As for a visual aid... no... i talk on here as a hobby and to talk for fun.  You are making it work in what you are asking for, Im sorry but Im not going to do that.  Others might but i dont need charts and spreadsheets to talk on message board.  Nor should anyone elsebe forced to (if you want to, i have no issue).  People should respect that position too without insults like Bergevin 2.0 or flying by the seat of my pants or anything else.

 

As for cap wages, i recommend using puckpedia which is more accurate.  Last time i looked at capwages several contracts and details were wrong.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the start of this thread I have been very clear that I would like input from everybody.

 

I don’t mind being called stupid or dumb.

 

Just don’t say it without showing your visual representation of how you would build this team from what we have now.

 

Give at least a two or three year future projection with salary cap expectations.

 

It does not help for just me to show what I would do to manage and you all to ridicule it.

 

I’ll defend what I do, but I am not so closed minded as to not make changes in the spreadsheet or my feelings on how to manage the growth of a rebuild.

 

I have opened my mind to a new Laine contract when initially I thought he would be a trade at the 2026 TDL… that’s not rigid. I changed term and salaries with your input. 
 

We made projections of the cap together. 
 

I would rather this be a group project.

 

We can debate the how we get there part… but we can’t debate the contracts we have under management in the spreadsheet. Those are the only rigid concepts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Butterface said:

Again guys.

 

We don’t need to actually use the picks to pick in the draft.

 

They can be used to package and trade for actual NHL players to help us now.

 

Example: What would Newhook and three second round picks get us ? (Essentially that is Newhook plus a late first)

 

I can confidently speak for everyone by saying that we all know that draft picks are tradable. 

 

How many more draft picks do we need? 

 

image.png

 

 

31 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

On the first question, nothing acquired for Dvorak or Armia is a needle mover.

 

If someone offers a first or even a second for Savard, with retention, then of course make that trade.  I highly doubt it though.  And given our picks and prospects dont think another third round pick is a needle mover.

 

Evans Id need a first to move.  And that would be assuming i cant get him to sign at a reasonable number.

 

I wouldn't trade Savard or Evans for a 1st if we are "in the mix". I think it sends the wrong message to the players and to the fans. You also need to consider if we want either of those players beyond this year, and I think that we will still need a veteran RD and bottom 6 center. Can we resign them during the summer if we trade them? Sure, but it's not likely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Commandant said:

You dont need to have every position in your bottom 6 forwards and bottom pair defence planned out for the next 10 years.


I don’t have them playing in any certain positions. Although I would recognize that we need more balance and guess future changes based on the imbalance.

 

The 23 man roster I would have 14 forwards, 7 Dmen and 2 goalies. But also open to 13, 8 and 2.

 

I would aim for a certain percentages of salary cap paid to various tiers of players.

 

I’m okay with a 4th line winger making 5.5M… just like I’m okay with Demidov making 1M on the first or second line.

 

This also means I’m okay paying Evans up to 4.25M while he plays in the bottom 6. I am watching for when this becomes a problem with the salary cap though.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm comfortable losing Dvorak and Savard for free so as to keep them for the run "to the Cup"😉

 

Re-up Evans and Armia... I would think that Armia clearing waivers last year twice?  is indicative of his next contract not being as lucrative as his last. Evans will get a raise for sure but not more than 3% of total CaP i would think

 

We don't need anymore futures right now, Hughes pretty much came out and said so himself emphasising the amount of high picks in the first 3 rounds we currently have for 2025.

 

Evans Beck Kapanen and Newhook fight for 3 and 4C next year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, illWill said:

I can confidently speak for everyone by saying that we all know that draft picks are tradable. 

 

How many more draft picks do we need? 


More isn’t the answer.

 

We want to pick higher in the draft. Package picks with players we won’t need or bundle picks.

 

(Example:  more Dach or Newhook type trades. Picks for a player.)

 

Try to defer picks to future years. Trade a second round 2025 for a second round 2029….four years is the max I think. Some teams need to fill their rosters now and will take you up on it. In four years we might need more picks to fill voids in the AHL.

 

But you are right, more isn’t the answer, weaponizing them is.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

I can confidently speak for everyone by saying that we all know that draft picks are tradable. 

 

How many more draft picks do we need? 

 

image.png

 

 

 

I wouldn't trade Savard or Evans for a 1st if we are "in the mix". I think it sends the wrong message to the players and to the fans. You also need to consider if we want either of those players beyond this year, and I think that we will still need a veteran RD and bottom 6 center. Can we resign them during the summer if we trade them? Sure, but it's not likely. 

 

I think Savard is a 6th defenceman now that we have Carrier.  Hes older and slowing down.  We can survive without him.  Even if that's struble/mailloux rotating IMO.  

 

I think Evans is much harder to replace of course.  Thats why my first priority is to sign him but if he wont sign and I can get a first round pick or top prospect i do the trade.  If its just a second rounder i dont. 

 

There is weight to everything, and I agree there is value to keeping the team together and fighting for a spot.  Thats the value I put though around a first round pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:


And it looks like you chose not to read the novel because my point was that what you are stating is not Hughes’ plan.  It’s only the plan of certain fans. The plan is for the Habs to be in the mix and as Hughes stated, they have plenty of draft picks next year and as a result he is completely willing to omit selling a player for another pick at the draft if the Habs are in good position at the deadline. There is no difficult decision as if the Habs are in the mix, Hughes has already stated that he will be willing to hold on to most of our players.
 

The main moves we have made this year have been to acquire Laine and Carrier. Seems a bit backwards from a plan that talks about only acquiring things for the future rather than the now.

 

Finally, the inspiration for my novel came from this thread and the post you quoted, not yours. The only thing I disagreed with from your post, was that it was difficult to argue against what was being said.

 

You are correct, I didn't read the novel and what you are disagreeing with had more to do with the post I was referencing. My bad on that. 

 

However I do think it will be a difficult decision for Hughes to make if the Habs are in the mix at the deadline and he is offered a 1st rounder for Savard. That would be difficult to turn down. 

 

I have no problem keeping Dvorak or Armia if they are in the mix as any return wouldn't be anything to write home about anyway. We will see if they can resign Evans by the deadline. If not, another tough decision to make. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Butterface said:

Try to defer picks to future years. Trade a second round 2025 for a second round 2029….four years is the max I think. Some teams need to fill their rosters now and will take you up on it. In four years we might need more picks to fill voids in the AHL.

 

There's a big difference in value between a 2025 second and a 2029 second and I'm not talking in terms of the quality of the draft class.  I don't think any team would willingly slide back four years just for the heck of it, including Montreal in their current situation.  A year or two, sure, it's risky but less risky.  Four years, no team does that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

A 2028 or 2029 pick for, say, Tampa, could potentially be more valuable than the 2025, no?

 

We're talking about trading for a player who's effectively 14 or 15 right now.  It could be worth more or it could be worth less.  And Montreal's picks might be in the middle of the round.  Is a mid-40's pick today worth less than a pick four years ago that isn't guaranteed to be any better?  (I know you picked Tampa Bay thinking they could be struggling by then but lots can change roster-wise in that long of time.)  Two years is generally the cap for a straight swap unless you're gaining a round in the trade (ie MTL 3rd in 2025 for TB 2nd in 2029).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is self preservation in GMs too.  Who is secure enough in their job that they want a 2nd rounder or later for 4 years from now, knowing that best case scenario, you are getting an NHL player 6 years from now and maybe longer.

 

You could be long gone as GM before even being able to use the assets you acquired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Commandant said:

There is self preservation in GMs too.  Who is secure enough in their job that they want a 2nd rounder or later for 4 years from now, knowing that best case scenario, you are getting an NHL player 6 years from now and maybe longer.

 

You could be long gone as GM before even being able to use the assets you acquired.

Yes ... and yet if you have more picks than you need now, you need to do something with them. Nobody is going to take half a dozen late picks for a second-rounder.

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...