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

[BCHabnut]

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

Since I am not concerned about winning this year, ANYWHERE that will take him (IDEALLY no retention) ... as soon as possible ... either see what Newhook does the rest of the year or give Evans the minutes to up his trade deadline value (I am off the "no extension" camp).

The percentage of players drafted in the later rounds, that actually become nhlers is very low. I think I remember seeing 5%. With all of their picks and prospects now, I wonder if the Habs could start running into issues with the 50 contract limit. Maybe a guy like dvorak plays out his final season and then walks as a ufa. Is a 3rd or or 4th round pick better than having 40 or so games of stability in the bottom 6 centre position? 

[Butterface]

I have a lot to add to this…

 

But need some contract help. I will post something now… I will explain any number you want…. I am happy to re-jig numbers. I’m okay with you guys telling me I’m wrong. We can change shit. I will go out another two years. Many multiple of contract changes. But due to how we play this guessing game, I can only take players we have under contract or that we have in system or are scheduled to draft.

 

1. If we pick low enough there is chance that rookie plays next season and we’d already have 23 players without Armia, Savard and Evans.

 

2. we have to exit from players to make sure we stay under the 50 contract limit. Decisions will need to be made soon on Tuch and Davidson. We will need cheap contracts in a few years.. these guys get out of their ELCs just a bit too soon. We may have to use them as asset sales for players or picks.

 

3. I have shown if we keep Laine, Dach, Newhook etc… where we are. That at least gives you an idea of what I’m trying to achieve. I feel if we get a low draft pick Centre in the 2025 Draft. Dach is expendable. Keeping Laine and Dach is near impossible if we pick at 5th in this years draft due to timing of two ELCs expiring at same time. (Demidov and the 5th overall) … should we drop to 7-15 in draft then that player is not nearly as good, he wont get paid nearly as well and he won’t burn through his ELC a year early. When is see where we pick I will change that, to reflect this. For now I have us picking up an elite talent.

 

4. We actually have too many players 2026-27… so we need to trade out someone.

 

PS… I go out the full 8-10 years. 
 

 

 

 

[Commandant]

8 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

I'm not sure there is a centre spot available this year for Newhook. 
 

Dach is at centre because they want him to be the second line centre going forward. 
 

Suzuki is our #1 centre 

 

If Newhook played third line centre where would Dvorak play? Marty uses Dvorak for faceoffs and PK. 
 

Evans is our 4th line centre.

 

Dvorak will be gone for sure next season. Is your idea to play Evans as the third line centre and Kapanen as the 4th?

 

If so where does Newhook play next season? Or do you see Demidov in Laval?

 

I'm just guessing about Newhook as third line centre because it makes sense to me. Newhook also played a pretty damned good season (relatively speaking) as the third line centre last season. 

 

If the team saw Newhook as a long term answer at centre, they would move Dvorak to wing and let him play there this year.  Why keep Dvorak in the spot if your plan is for Newhook to be a centre?  The fact they aren't playing him there tells me their long term plan has him on the wing. 

 

If your plan is Newhook at Centre, you play him there, let him get the experience and what happens to a guy like Dvorak?  Meh, who cares given that he has no future with the franchise. 

[Prime Minister Koivu]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

If the team saw Newhook as a long term answer at centre, they would move Dvorak to wing and let him play there this year.  Why keep Dvorak in the spot if your plan is for Newhook to be a centre?  The fact they aren't playing him there tells me their long term plan has him on the wing. 

 

If your plan is Newhook at Centre, you play him there, let him get the experience and what happens to a guy like Dvorak?  Meh, who cares given that he has no future with the franchise. 

I think they see Newhook as a temporary solution for third centre until Beck is ready. 

[Commandant]

1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

I think they see Newhook as a temporary solution for third centre until Beck is ready. 

 

I don't know who kills penalties on a centre line of Suzuki, Dach, Newhook and Kapanen.

[Butterface]

If you double tap on the excel “photo” it is easier to see.

 

The spreadsheet will likely age badly for me because I’m taking shots at guessing future contracts of dollar and term with guys that are hurt like Reinbacher. Some players might be get squeezed out, but I still put contract dollars on them… those will also make me look bad (potentially Newhook, Struble, Barron and maybe Dach)… I am thinking now differently on Laine… depending on how Dach performs over the next year to 15 months, Laine may make it into the Core.

 

I really could use a contract for Heineman to get a better picture for a few guys. In my head if Hughes takes a longterm approach with Slaf, Caufield, Suzuki and Guhle, he will do the same with Hutson. He might use bridge deals to play it safer with Kapanen, Reinbacher (due to injury), Roy, Mailloux and Engstrom. With Heineman he may too, although I gave him a four year deal on spreadsheet. Beck looks to push his way onto secondary core if he continues to excel in AHL. I gave him 3 years which is dumb. It’s either 2, 4 or 5. Three year deals after an ELC should be considered equal to limping-in in poker.

 

Anyway if I screw up on amounts with one guy low, I may screw up with another high, but the two contracts or multiple contracts together will hopefully even out the money.

 

I settled on 8.5 for Hutson. Makar, Fox, Q Hughes had similar rookie seasons and were given, off the top of my head, 9, 9.5 and 7.6 million. Hutson doesn’t score goals, but he may out-point them. Could 8 or 8.25 happen ? Yes. But just as easily as 9.

 

Again as the season goes on lots of these numbers can be reworked. Lots of players could be added or subtracted when Hughes gets to TDL.

 

This article is being talked about in a few places…

https://montrealhockeynow.com/2024/12/11/montreal-canadiens-pending-free-agents-most-likely-to-be-traded/

 

Saying Savard and Evans most tradable. Dvorak and Armia less so. Also Evans might be priced out of market for a fourth line centre for us.

 

My feeling is, and don’t hit me, trade all four pending UFAs that you can. Play Heineman and Newhook on the PK. Play more Primeau to see if we walk away or there is value there to trade him still. Hopefully without much in RHD and weaker PK and Primeau, we stay within striking distance of Martone, Hagens, Misa or at least one of the next two guys.

 

The above article may have touched on it, but I’ve been saying it for a while, we need to draft more top end talent in 2025 (and 2026) before we begin moving up the standings.

 

As a side note I look at the goalie situation. I think Dobeš may end up traded in a few years. Can’t find an acceptable way of getting him as backup to Fowler. We also end up parting ways with Montembeault, but only once Fowler has proven his heir apparentness. If Fowler is a bust, we at least still have Monty. If Fowler is the man we can trade Monty once holding both contracts is too expensive vis-a-vis the cap.. (See Boston and don’t @#&$ it up like they did) … at that point bring in a reasonably priced veteran back-up to help Fowler navigate the NHL. (I guess Dobeš could out-perform Monty during next two years…and then that would be interesting)

 

I don’t know our goalie depth. I think we have another NCAA goalie, but we may need to draft another for the farm soon. Our goalie situation is precarious. Three of four looking for new contracts.

 

Also the numbers at bottom of spreadsheet are percentages for core. In building a team I want the core players to be a mix of forwards and defensemen. Not top heavy like Oilers and Toronto have been. (Toronto now has good mix.) You can’t build a team and have 5 million left over in cap space to pay 8 guys. It needs to have decent balance.

 

So I aim to have 50% cap in core guys, 25% in secondary guys and 25% in non-core or pluggers. I do allow for 75% in core and secondary core (say 65% core and 10% secondary core) and 25% in non-core as well.

 

Anyway the Core % at the bottom just shows where percentages are and what dollar values need to swing where. Minus numbers mean we have too much invested and positive number mean we can invest more.

 

Again… if we all help guesstimate the contract dollars and terms I’m sure we can get closer to the truth of it. Leaving it up to one person will eventually make me look foolish for the lines I’ve chosen. If we all pitch in with brain power and agree, it would be more beneficial.

 

I am not an expert.

 

[dlbalr]

On 12/9/2024 at 4:52 PM, Butterface said:

I do want to get term and dollar estimates on some contracts so I can roll out the spreadsheet for another two years and argue about bigger assumptions. Assumptions that I put in assuming where we pick in the 2025 Draft.

 

1. Heineman term and $$ (I have 4 years at 3)… secondary at this point

2. Dobes term and $$ (I have 2 years at 1.5 but likely can get for less) 

3. Struble term and $$ (I have 2 years at 1.3 to mirror Xhekaj) .. plugger

4. Primeau term and $$ or gone (I have Primeau vanishing into thin air)… ghost

 

These are all contracts that need to get done by July 1, 2025.

 

Then we need to discuss contracts of:

 

1. Hutson term and $$ (I have 8 years at 9 million)(core contract)

2. Dach term and $$ (3 years at 5.5 million)…could be secondary (or trade)

3. Mailloux term and $$ (2 years at 2 million).. could be either core or secondary

4. Roy term and $$ (2 years at 2 million).. could be secondary or plugger

5. Xhekaj term and $$ (3 years at 2.8 million).. could be secondary or plugger

6. Barron term and $$ or trade (no score at moment)… could be trade or plugger

 

Heineman - Hard to see the Habs committing that much to a player with one year of NHL experience.  He should land higher than Harvey-Pinard from his half-year but even so, we're talking a two-year bridge no higher than $1.5M.

Dobes - The deals for Askarov and Wallstedt skew things but they're elite prospects and Dobes has yet to play an NHL game; they're not comparable.  It should be a six-figure two-year or three-year deal with at least one season on a one-way salary, much like Primeau's current contract.

Struble - Makes sense, should be in that general range.

Primeau - Likely non-tendered.

 

Hutson - Is his rookie year as good as Faber's 2023-24 performance that got him 8 x $8.5M?  Probably not so going higher than that doesn't make much sense, even in a higher cap environment.  I expect they plan to get him in the Suzuki/Caufield range, maybe dropping to a seven-year deal if they have to.

Dach - Way too high based on his current performance with Montreal.  They have to qualify him at $4M and I don't see them going much higher than that on a short-term offer unless he turns things around. 

Mailloux - If he's a full-time regular by the end of next season, this could be close.  If he's still not established as a full-time piece though, it might be more in the current Barron/Xhekaj/Struble level.

Roy - Seems too high for someone who might not be a full-time NHL player by then.  Prospects don't get that type of money.  I could see a seven-figure bridge deal but more in the $1.25M range unless he's a regular by the end of 25-26.

Xhekaj - Pretty pricey for someone not yet averaging even 16 minutes a game.  That walks him right to UFA as well; they'll probably want to stay two years or lower unless they're doing a long-term deal.

Barron - $1.2M is the qualifying offer with arb rights that might push it closer to $1.75M.  If he's still around by then, that might still be feasible for a 6/7 role.

[Butterface]

35 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Heineman - Hard to see the Habs committing that much to a player with one year of NHL experience.  He should land higher than Harvey-Pinard from his half-year but even so, we're talking a two-year bridge no higher than $1.5M.

Dobes - The deals for Askarov and Wallstedt skew things but they're elite prospects and Dobes has yet to play an NHL game; they're not comparable.  It should be a six-figure two-year or three-year deal with at least one season on a one-way salary, much like Primeau's current contract.

Struble - Makes sense, should be in that general range.

Primeau - Likely non-tendered.

 

Hutson - Is his rookie year as good as Faber's 2023-24 performance that got him 8 x $8.5M?  Probably not so going higher than that doesn't make much sense, even in a higher cap environment.  I expect they plan to get him in the Suzuki/Caufield range, maybe dropping to a seven-year deal if they have to.

Dach - Way too high based on his current performance with Montreal.  They have to qualify him at $4M and I don't see them going much higher than that on a short-term offer unless he turns things around. 

Mailloux - If he's a full-time regular by the end of next season, this could be close.  If he's still not established as a full-time piece though, it might be more in the current Barron/Xhekaj/Struble level.

Roy - Seems too high for someone who might not be a full-time NHL player by then.  Prospects don't get that type of money.  I could see a seven-figure bridge deal but more in the $1.25M range unless he's a regular by the end of 25-26.

Xhekaj - Pretty pricey for someone not yet averaging even 16 minutes a game.  That walks him right to UFA as well; they'll probably want to stay two years or lower unless they're doing a long-term deal.

Barron - $1.2M is the qualifying offer with arb rights that might push it closer to $1.75M.  If he's still around by then, that might still be feasible for a 6/7 role.

Thanks for help..

 

so..

 

Heineman you’re saying 2 years at 1.5 ?

 

Dobes you think 3 years at 1m per is good ?

 

Struble ok

 

Primeau Ghost

 

Hutson 7-8 years at 8m per ?

 

Dach at 4m ? Term 2 years ?

 

Roy 2 years at 1.25m ?

 

Xhekaj did not understand that one… so less than 2.2m… 2 more years or 5 years type thing ?

 

Barron you’re thinking like 1.5m ? Term ?

 

[dlbalr]

7 minutes ago, Butterface said:

Thanks for help..

 

so..

 

Heineman you’re saying 2 years at 1.5 ?

 

Dobes you think 3 years at 1m per is good ?

 

Struble ok

 

Primeau Ghost

 

Hutson 7-8 years at 8m per ?

 

Dach at 4m ? Term 2 years ?

 

Roy 2 years at 1.25m ?

 

Xhekaj did not understand that one… so less than 2.2m… 2 more years or 5 years type thing ?

 

Barron you’re thinking like 1.5m ? Term ?

 

Heineman/Dobes yes.

 

I could see Hutson being 7 x $7.8 or around there, I suspect they'll want it below Suzuki's if they can.  And with just one season of NHL experience, that might be doable.

 

Two years, low-$4M for Dach as it stands, it'd buy them one extra year of control to see if he can turn it around.

 

That might even be a bit high for Roy but it's in the right range.

 

2 years or 4-plus years for Xhekaj and the cost is going to vary considerably.  If it's two years, $2.2M is reasonable.  Four years would start with a three which is why I didn't give you a number there.

 

Barron was a one-year thought, a little above his QO.

[Butterface]

Thanks I’ll re-jig and repost … I’d love to see Hutson in your range… I’d agree that Hughes may want Hutson there.. but Hutson has an agent… 7-8 years could make a contract that low look cheap. I would say the Guhle, Suzuki, Caufield contracts look cheap already… 

 

[Butterface]

So the spreadsheet I’m showing with this post doesn’t really prove anything.

 

I’ve taken a few of the better teams this year and put their 8 highest paid players and their highest paid goalie on a spreadsheet to see how much of the core salary cap they take up as a percentage. Then broke it down as a percentage of just their forward group and as a percentage of just their defensive group. Goalies were included in the defensive group. Kane was added into the Oilers.

 

Of the teams I looked at (I did not look at them all) the Lightning have the highest percentage of cap paid to these 9 contracts… followed by Toronto, Florida and Vegas. Those 4 teams all pay those 9 guys over 70% of the NHL cap. The Lightening were at almost 80%.

 

Minnesota was lowest at 57.8%. The average was 68.8%.

 

I don’t think these numbers do anything but lay a rough estimate for spending future contract dollars versus the NHL Salary Cap.

 

Vegas and Tampa Bay have the most balance between Forward and Defence pay percentages.

 

Defensively, the highest percentage of the NHL cap paid by a team is the Lightening. Minnesota has the 2nd lowest percentage for paying forwards and the lowest for paying the defence by percentage of Cap. I can only assume Minnesota is a deep team with non-core players getting more money on average then non-core players on other teams. If money equals talent (which it should), they are a deep team, with fewer superstars.

 

The average team spends 43.5 % of the cap for their most talented forwards verses 25.2% of the cap for their most talented defensive guys.

 

This is primarily the reason why I want core and secondary core to equal about 75% of the cap…. And non-core to fill in the rest of the team. This gives a rough estimate of 68.8% being more the norm, but the above only gave teams a finite amount of players and had to include a goalie. But 68.8-75 % is reasonable…. The Lightening at 80% may be a bit too top heavy.

 

 

[BCHabnut]

2 hours ago, dlbalr said:

 

Heineman/Dobes yes.

 

I could see Hutson being 7 x $7.8 or around there, I suspect they'll want it below Suzuki's if they can.  And with just one season of NHL experience, that might be doable.

 

 

This feels optimistic to me. If they can get him to sign in Suzuki country, that's a huge win for future depth. 

[Butterface]

Okay here are updates…

 

I gave Xhekaj a longer contract at 3M 

Followed everything else to a tee.

 

Still lots to be guesstimated..

 

1) extension for Reinbacher

2) extension for Engstrom
3) extension for Mailloux

4) extension for Beck

5) extension for Newhook if we keep him

6) extension for Kapanen

 

Heineman opened up a few more dollars for next year..and we have lots of Cap Room until 2028-29. That cap room in 2028-29 might not be an issue if we fail to secure top 5 talent in the 2025 Draft. It means we won’t be coming off an ELC from a prospect that could need a big dollar jump… might be a year later… and it might be a lower dollar amount.

 

Appreciate the input…

 

[Butterface]

Listening some Leafs show.

 

An ex-GM Doug McLean is on saying to build a team you need three things.

 

Speed and Skill is number one thing to get.

Second is to bring in players that are hard to play against.

The third thing you need is goaltending.

 

We’ve got lots of speed and talent coming in next few years.

We don’t have enough of hard to play against…. 

Monty is decent… we have to hope Fowler will be elite.

 

We are coming along. There will be plenty of down nights like last night coming. Happy so far with management. Hopefully they won’t be pressured to make changes after nights like this. Patience under fire is tough to hold on to. We still don’t have enough assets to weaponize them, but we’re almost there. This year and next to go.

 

 

[Butterface]

Are Tuch, Davidson, Kidney, Farrell or Trudeau worth anything in the NHL trade market ?

 

Can any of the above be seen as a sweetener ?

The only one I saw and noticed in preseason was Tuch. I don’t mind a guy like that on the fourth line if you’re squeezed against the cap. How is he doing ? Will he be an NHLer ?

[dlbalr]

1 hour ago, BCHabnut said:

This feels optimistic to me. If they can get him to sign in Suzuki country, that's a huge win for future depth. 

 

While Hutson is doing well, he's not producing at the level of Makar, Fox, and Faber were so he shouldn't be in that category of contract.  Now if he lights it up in the second half, that changes things but for right now, his numbers aren't jumping out as being worthy of $9M or so per season.

[Butterface]

 

Q Hughes had 8 goals and 45 assists for 53 points in 68 games…… 7.85 million…

A Fox had 8 goals and 34 assists for 42 points in 70 games….. 9.5 million

C Makar had 12 goals and 38 assists for 50 points in 57 games … 9 million

B Faber had 8 goals and 39 assists for 47 points in 82 games …8.5 million

 

Hutson working on 0 goals and 55 assists for 55 points over 82 games.

I can see him at 8 or more. Lane doesn’t have a booming shot which might hurt.

If we had guys who could finish, Lane would have about 10 more assists ..

 

[dlbalr]

11 minutes ago, Butterface said:

Q Hughes had 8 goals and 45 assists for 53 points in 68 games…… 7.85 million…

A Fox had 8 goals and 34 assists for 42 points in 70 games….. 9.5 million

C Makar had 12 goals and 38 assists for 50 points in 57 games … 9 million

 

Hughes had 129 career NHL regular games under his belt when he signed plus 17 playoff contests.  Fox had 125 and 3.  Makar had 101 and 35.  Two full ELC years (though they all had injuries at some point).  As a result, this is not the direct comparable group for Hutson as a result if the idea is to try to sign him this summer on an early extension.  Brock Faber is the most recent in Hutson's comparable group and he isn't having the same impact Faber was last year.

[Butterface]

On 12/13/2024 at 8:12 PM, dlbalr said:

 

Hughes had 129 career NHL regular games under his belt when he signed plus 17 playoff contests.  Fox had 125 and 3.  Makar had 101 and 35.  Two full ELC years (though they all had injuries at some point).  As a result, this is not the direct comparable group for Hutson as a result if the idea is to try to sign him this summer on an early extension.  Brock Faber is the most recent in Hutson's comparable group and he isn't having the same impact Faber was last year.

ok.. I’m cool with that. Sign him early might be to our advantage.. or disadvantage… but under 8M would be great. So earlier the better. 

[GNick]

On 12/6/2024 at 5:51 PM, Butterface said:

Was Laine brought to the team by Hughes because:

 

1) Hughes wants to work Laine into the core ?
2) Hughes could get Laine for practically nothing and flip him for another big asset TDL 2026 ?
3) Hughes wanted Laine’s career and health to improve and had no ulterior motives ?

4) Hughes took a chance. All options are on the table.

4

 

Out come TBD

[alfredoh2009]

21 hours ago, Butterface said:

Are Tuch, Davidson, Kidney, Farrell or Trudeau worth anything in the NHL trade market ?

 

Can any of the above be seen as a sweetener ?

The only one I saw and noticed in preseason was Tuch. I don’t mind a guy like that on the fourth line if you’re squeezed against the cap. How is he doing ? Will he be an NHLer ?

Tuch will be a good option on the 4th line. I am not sure about Kidney and Davidson. Davidson is playing well on the 🤩 Beck 🤩 line but he has never wowed me.

Trudeau is too slow

[Butterface]

Very oversimplified way of dispersing cap dollars here:

 

In reading and discussing with ChatGPT I have broken down team make up in the most simplified way to look at it.

 

A rough guideline of 75% of cap going to a set of top core players. 25% going to a secondary core and 25% going to a final core of pluggers (plugging holes).

 

From here figuring out number of contracts that should be in that top core and adding a goalie (as sometimes a large contract is involved and sometimes not). Stanley cup winning goalies have been from varying priced contracts. I wanted to add a goalie to the top core to reflect that variance.…

 

A core of 8 largest contracts and a largest goalie contract should fall in the 65% of overall cap. A secondary group of 4 players that cost about 21% of the cap. Then pluggers, ELCs taking up the last 14%.

 

This is not an exact science, but most of the last few Cup winners had a similar make up. St Louis had less at top end and more in secondary. Tampa had more money in top end. Vegas had the money at top end. But all were reasonably similar.

 

This is a good guide of how money should be spent.

 

65% of cap on 8 highest paid contracts plus highest paid goalie.

 

Spreading the money in the top 65% (8 contracts and a goalie) … about 36% of cap to forwards and 29% of the cap to defence and goalies.

Spreading 21% of the cap over the next 4 contracts (could be 5).

Spreading the last 14% of the cap over 10 contracts (could be 9).

 

Seems highly paid goalies helped get teams to the Stanley Cup finals, but they didn’t always win it. There have been a lot of young goalies winning cups.. Binnington (rookie) and Murray (rookie) (2nd Murray win was still under his ELC)… mid tier Crawford and Kuemper … top tier Quick, Vasilevskiy, Holtby, Bobrovsky… Vegas’ Hill was a lower tier (cheap) goalie.

 

Average save percentage in finals is .916 last 18 or so years…

The most common save percentage ranged .920 to .924…

 

So although the goalie came from varying cost, they had to perform…

 

 

[alfredoh2009]

I view an NHL roster and the 50 contracts (limit) as investment assets where the yield is in improving chances of winning a Stanley Cup (not point stats). It is why in this model a shutdown defenseman has more value than a first round pick center that is still learning the game in the AHL. Both have a role and the 1dt rounder may be considered to a higher ceiling; not necessarily for me.

Building a roster in this view has some constraints: 2 goalies, 6 defensemen, 12 forwards are gameday players. 23 total is maximum. The cap floor and ceiling are other constraints.

At a minimum, 1G+2D+3F = 6/23 (26%) are core players and hopefully they are elite-level

At the same time, 1G, 1D+1F = 3/23 (13%) are depth players

That leaves 61% of the team to be filled with the remaining 14 players: 9F+4D+1hotdog-eating-filler

How one build this 61% depends on where the team is. For the Habs these 14 players are:

Newhook-Dach-Laine

Anderson-Dvorak-Gallagher

Heineman-Evans-Armia

Pezzetta

 

On D, it is interesting. The are missing two elite Ds but use a patchwork of players:

Elite-LD-Elite-RD

-----------------

Matheson-Hutson

Guhle-Davard

Xhekaj-Barron/Struble

 

Out of this bunch, if I want the Habs to become a cup contending team, I would start by the top-pair D and then build the middle-6 forwards from prospects and trades

[alfredoh2009]

salary-wise, I would not be giving unproven players rich 8 year contracts unless they are trending like Suzuki was when signed. I will wait before paying Hutson and I am not a fan of the Caufield and Slafkovsky contracts

[Butterface]

3 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I view an NHL roster and the 50 contracts (limit) as investment assets where the yield is in improving chances of winning a Stanley Cup (not point stats). It is why in this model a shutdown defenseman has more value than a first round pick center that is still learning the game in the AHL. Both have a role and the 1dt rounder may be considered to a higher ceiling; not necessarily for me.

Building a roster in this view has some constraints: 2 goalies, 6 defensemen, 12 forwards are gameday players. 23 total is maximum. The cap floor and ceiling are other constraints.

At a minimum, 1G+2D+3F = 6/23 (26%) are core players and hopefully they are elite-level

At the same time, 1G, 1D+1F = 3/23 (13%) are depth players

That leaves 61% of the team to be filled with the remaining 14 players: 9F+4D+1hotdog-eating-filler

How one build this 61% depends on where the team is. For the Habs these 14 players are:

Newhook-Dach-Laine

Anderson-Dvorak-Gallagher

Heineman-Evans-Armia

Pezzetta

 

On D, it is interesting. The are missing two elite Ds but use a patchwork of players:

Elite-LD-Elite-RD

-----------------

Matheson-Hutson

Guhle-Davard

Xhekaj-Barron/Struble

 

Out of this bunch, if I want the Habs to become a cup contending team, I would start by the top-pair D and then build the middle-6 forwards from prospects and trades

Okay to understand you…

 

You would start with Matheson and Hutson ? So you would re-sign Matheson ?

Or move Guhle up and start building from Guhle and Hutson ?

 

And you’d build down from Caufield, Suzuki and Slafkovsky… and Montembeault ?

So you’d be looking for 2 more elite Defensemen. Two RHD I assume ? …. 
 

We aren’t far off. I’ve mapped out 8 years ahead on a spreadsheet. I have filled in all those positions with players we have control over and penciled them in as far out as three years. Where you look for them to excel before adding them in, I am looking for them to underperform before I remove them.