Jump to content

2021 Around The League Thread


Satans Hockey
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, MB3 said:

Yes, I want us to overpay him. “Cap hell”, lmao, try your fvcking damndest to invent a scenario where the Devils are in cap hell in the future. 

The lightning found a way around it and they were deemed to be in “the worst possible cap hell there could be!!!!!!!!!!!!” The Devils are currently overpaying for Subban and Johnsson and have to claw and scratch to reach the cap FLOOR. Nico is already signed to a deal that would make him the fifth highest paid player on the Lightning. Fifth! Find me four more players who will be making more than Nico. 

Oh no, Vegas is in cap hell?! They had to trade guys away?! They were fvcking minutes from their second SCF appearance in three years. Teams figure it out; and any team worth half of a sh!t has their pube hairs up against “cap hell”, until — ya know — they don’t. 

Spare me the bullsh!t. Spare everyone the bullsh!t. I don’t want another “2022 New Jersey Devils, ready to weaponize cap space!!!!” to be the only thing I’m excited about for the tenth fvcking year in a row.

Use it. Use it! USE IT. Because if you don’t, you won’t have to worry about cap-hell when Jack, Ty, and whoever the fvck else you think is worth $9+ in the future won’t be sticking around a losing, failing franchise to sign the goddamned contract.

33585_snickers_bar_1.86_oz_1_800x.thumb.jpg.bf4816ab212b828f2653190c1c09b719.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, MB3 said:

Yes, I want us to overpay him. “Cap hell”, lmao, try your fvcking damndest to invent a scenario where the Devils are in cap hell in the future. 

The lightning found a way around it and they were deemed to be in “the worst possible cap hell there could be!!!!!!!!!!!!” The Devils are currently overpaying for Subban and Johnsson and have to claw and scratch to reach the cap FLOOR. Nico is already signed to a deal that would make him the fifth highest paid player on the Lightning. Fifth! Find me four more players who will be making more than Nico. 

Oh no, Vegas is in cap hell?! They had to trade guys away?! They were fvcking minutes from their second SCF appearance in three years. Teams figure it out; and any team worth half of a sh!t has their pube hairs up against “cap hell”, until — ya know — they don’t. 

Spare me the bullsh!t. Spare everyone the bullsh!t. I don’t want another “2022 New Jersey Devils, ready to weaponize cap space!!!!” to be the only thing I’m excited about for the tenth fvcking year in a row.

Use it. Use it! USE IT. Because if you don’t, you won’t have to worry about cap-hell when Jack, Ty, and whoever the fvck else you think is worth $9+ in the future won’t be sticking around a losing, failing franchise to sign the goddamned contract.

I'm trying to be more positive about this team in general but I find it difficult, I think the season will end up being 21-22 well at least I was back in the arena in my seats, yay normalcy. Would love nothing more than to be wrong though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, MB3 said:

Nah man, have some nuts and actually answer and then I’ll be satisfied. Your biggest ghost story is becoming the.... ghasp... Vegas Golden Knights? Or, omg, the Colorado Avalanche!?

It’s not just you. In fact it’s mostly not you! But you said it so I had to reply to you. All of you guys keep saying OH! NO! POSSIBLE CAP HELL IN 2028!!! fvcking bring that sh!t on! That means a team that’s dedicated to winning. That means a team that has core pieces making  good money establishing themselves as an actual force in the NHL. Every year there’s a section of this board who acts like we should avoid at all costs overpaying for players while simultaneously building a better team. It’s exhausting and it’s so hard to read. 

Good players don’t sign UFA contracts with bad teams unless they are overpaid.

To everyone, not just SD who I pick on because of my slightly homoerotic fanfiction I write about him at midnight on weekdays, read that sentence again. Fifty times. 

The things that would have to take place to find the Devils in cap hell would be the best things that have happened to this franchise since Henrique found a puck in a scramble in front. Root for that sh!t to fvcking happen.

You gotta learn to be more patient, almost a full decade of ineptitude and losing hasn't been enough time to rebuild a proper franchise. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, MB3 said:

Nah man, have some nuts and actually answer and then I’ll be satisfied. Your biggest ghost story is becoming the.... ghasp... Vegas Golden Knights? Or, omg, the Colorado Avalanche!?

It’s not just you. In fact it’s mostly not you! But you said it so I had to reply to you. All of you guys keep saying OH! NO! POSSIBLE CAP HELL IN 2028!!! fvcking bring that sh!t on! That means a team that’s dedicated to winning. That means a team that has core pieces making  good money establishing themselves as an actual force in the NHL. Every year there’s a section of this board who acts like we should avoid at all costs overpaying for players while simultaneously building a better team. It’s exhausting and it’s so hard to read. 

Good players don’t sign UFA contracts with bad teams unless they are overpaid.

To everyone, not just SD who I pick on because of my slightly homoerotic fanfiction I write about him at midnight on weekdays, read that sentence again. Fifty times. 

The things that would have to take place to find the Devils in cap hell would be the best things that have happened to this franchise since Henrique found a puck in a scramble in front. Root for that sh!t to fvcking happen.

Well i never said the biggest story was Vegas. I used Vegas as an example of a team who went from... not existing at all. To be in a position where they had to trade players because of the cap. And yeah they were a good team but its not always the case.

The Oilers this year... spent to the cap... Blackhawks... spent to the cap... the Blues.. spent to the cap... Vancouver spent to the cap... the SABRES, had 1.something million of cap space this year. Well... the point is there was only like 6 teams this year not spending up to the cap... which means there's a load of them who did spend to the the cap and didn't make the playoffs.. not good enough, and since they are up to the cap, they don't have that much flexibility to get better at times.

Not long ago we were that team too! We sucked and were against the cap, even played down one man cause we were so fvcked with the cap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spending to the cap doesn’t guarantee success, but “cap hell” doesn’t really exist. Everyone figures it out and nobody ever loses their main pieces, unless they are so injured or have become otherwise ineffective so that they aren’t worth keeping. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

Spending to the cap doesn’t guarantee success, but “cap hell” doesn’t really exist. Everyone figures it out and nobody ever loses their main pieces, unless they are so injured or have become otherwise ineffective so that they aren’t worth keeping. 

Of course it does.   Not necessarily the main pieces but the ability to surround them with competent talent.    That is why Chicago had to jettison players every offseason in a cap crunch.  They haven't won anything since the Kane and Toews contracts kicked in.  It's why some people were so upset about the Kucherov LTIR because it delayed the purge thats coming this offseason.   Do you think the Lightning would have looked a little different if they couldn't have afforded to fill out their bottom 6 with guys like Gourde, Coleman, Goodrow, Maroon etc?   The 3rd and 4th line did most of the scoring in the finals.    

There's a big difference between letting some mythical "future cap hell" paralyze you from making moves to improve the team and just making irresponsible moves just because you have cap space.  Before anyone says they'll be happy to lose players to the cap if it means winning the cup, the risk is that you cap out and start losing player before you ever get to the Chicago or Tampa level.  Spending 11 million on Landekog to me would be more like the Toronto situation where you bring in the high priced guy too early and then everyone around them compares themselves to him in contract negotiations.  Before you know it, you're capped out with guys who have never accomplished sh!t and now you're looking at an off season where you can't even afford to keep one of the few guys with the one trait (grit) you lack the most in Josh Hyman.  Another good example is Buffalo when they first got that super rich owner.  They just spent for the sake of spending and it never lead to anything.      

I'm all for going big game hunting if we're talking about a 1D.   That moves the needle.   Landeskog is barely a PPG player on a line with MacKinnon and Rantenen.   He would be an 11 million dollar 55 pt wing in NJ.  Basically the rich mans version of Dustin Brown or Nick Foligno here.   If we need more veteran leadership, there are cheaper ways to get it.              

Edited by Lateralous
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Lateralous said:

That is why Chicago had to jettison players every offseason in a cap crunch.     

Exactly, they took care of it. The Keith trade is the latest example. 

20 minutes ago, Lateralous said:

It's why some people were so upset about the Kucherov LTIR because it delayed the purge thats coming this offseason.   Do you think the Lightning would have looked a little different if they couldn't have afforded to fill out their bottom 6 with guys like Gourde, Coleman, Goodrow, Maroon etc?   The 3rd and 4th line did most of the scoring in the finals.    

Back to back Stanley Cups. Such cap hell. I would hate to win two Cups. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

Exactly, they took care of it. The Keith trade is the latest example. 

Back to back Stanley Cups. Such cap hell. I would hate to win two Cups. 

These responses are exactly why I put the second paragraph in there.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

Exactly, they took care of it. The Keith trade is the latest example. 

Back to back Stanley Cups. Such cap hell. I would hate to win two Cups. 

They took care of it to the point that they even made a joke out of it and wore these Kucherov shirts at their cup parade. I'm with you guys, I don't give two sh!ts about cap hell. Sure beats 1 measly fvcking playoff win and appearance in 9 seasons. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You referenced Toronto. 2-3 off seasons ago, there was “no way” they could keep Nylander and Marner, we were going to offer sheet Marner because there was no way they could afford to match it. 

Now they have Marner, Matthews, Tavares and Nylander. You can argue “they still haven’t won” until you are blue in the face, that’s irrelevant to this conversation. They found a way to keep them all.

But, if you wouldn’t want those 4 guys on your team, and don’t think having those guys makes your team better, then I don’t know what to tell you. I would trade our top 4 forwards for those guys immediately. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

You referenced Toronto. 2-3 off seasons ago, there was “no way” they could keep Nylander and Marner, we were going to offer sheet Marner because there was no way they could afford to match it. 

Now they have Marner, Matthews, Tavares and Nylander. You can argue “they still haven’t won” until you are blue in the face, that’s irrelevant to this conversation. They found a way to keep them all.

But, if you wouldn’t want those 4 guys on your team, and don’t think having those guys makes your team better, then I don’t know what to tell you. I would trade our top 4 forwards for those guys immediately. 

I think you're missing the point.   The Leafs signed Tavares at which point every other forward on their team decided to compare themselves to that contract and ask for max value.   No one questions the quality of those 4 and yes, they are better than our top four.  They still can't win sh!t because they can't properly fill out the roster.  After those 4 the rest of their forward group is sh!t and getting worse because they can't afford Hyman and apparently want to lose Kerfoot and his 3.5ish million in salary to expansion.   I reference Tampa because the Kucherov LTIR allowed them to keep their depth.  No one seemed to notice that Point didn't score a goal in the finals and Stamkos was basically invisible in the playoffs because Coleman, Colton, Cirelli and Johnson were scoring timely goals.  Imagine if that were Matthews, he would have been killed because Toronto has no one to pick up the slack.   Tampa will have similar issues going forward when they lose 3 or 4 or those quality depth pieces this offseason.   

The teams that have gone top heavy in salary for their stars at the expense of the rest of the roster hasn't not proven to work.   See Toronto, Edmonton and Chicago post Kane and Toews contracts.   I don't see that spending 11 million on Landeskog is going to break that mold.           

Edited by Lateralous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lateralous said:

I think you're missing the point.   The Leafs signed Tavares at which point every other forward on their team decided to compare themselves to that contract and ask for max value.   No one questions the quality of those 4 and yes, they are better than our top four.  They still can't win sh!t because they can't properly fill out the roster.  After those 4 the rest of their forward group is sh!t and getting worse because they can't afford Hyman and apparently want to lose Kerfoot and his 3.5ish million in salary to expansion.   I reference Tampa because the Kucherov LTIR allowed them to keep their depth.  No one seemed to notice that Point didn't score a goal in the finals and Stamkos was basically invisible in the playoffs because Coleman, Colton, Cirelli and Johnson were scoring timely goals.  Imagine if that were Matthews, he would have been killed because Toronto has no one to pick up the slack.   Tampa will have similar issues going forward when they lose 3 or 4 or those quality depth pieces this offseason.   

The teams that have gone top heavy in salary for their stars at the expense of the rest of the roster hasn't not proven to work.   See Toronto, Edmonton and Chicago post Kane and Toews contracts.   I don't see that spending 11 million on Landeskog is going to break that mold.           

The point in bringing in guys like Landeskog (and I’m not saying he is the guy to do it with) is that you show potential free agents, people with a NMC, etc. that you are actually trying. Perhaps then you can make your team a better destination. 

On top of that, you show people you are actually willing to spend money. Having cap space and saying “we can afford to pay XYZ more than anyone else can” is meaningless unless you actually crack open the piggy bank. Again, not saying Landeskog at $11m for 7 years is the way to do it, but overpaying a guy a little and people knowing that you have the means to pay these guys and are willing to do it would go a long way. 

I’m not saying spend to the cap. I’m saying you could bring in 2 guys right now, overpay them, and it’ll not present any problem with your cap down the road. We have plenty of room. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, on top of that, you’re pivoting from a team being in “cap hell” to saying that spending money on expensive players doesn’t mean you’ll win. That’s not my definition of “cap hell”, to me it means not being able to afford everyone you need to afford, which rarely happens and when it does, you trade Marcus Johansson and keep all of the good players. 

Perhaps you are working from a different understanding of the term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

The point in bringing in guys like Landeskog (and I’m not saying he is the guy to do it with) is that you show potential free agents, people with a NMC, etc. that you are actually trying. Perhaps then you can make your team a better destination. 

On top of that, you show people you are actually willing to spend money. Having cap space and saying “we can afford to pay XYZ more than anyone else can” is meaningless unless you actually crack open the piggy bank. Again, not saying Landeskog at $11m for 7 years is the way to do it, but overpaying a guy a little and people knowing that you have the means to pay these guys and are willing to do it would go a long way. 

I’m not saying spend to the cap. I’m saying you could bring in 2 guys right now, overpay them, and it’ll not present any problem with your cap down the road. We have plenty of room. 

Okay but I said in the first post I was willing to spend to go after a 1D because I think that makes sense for many of the reasons you stated.  I think anyone on the team understands that a adding a 1D is one of the most important roster building things our GM could do and given where we are, UFA is probably our only short term vehicle to do it.     

Spending 11 million on a winger who scores 75ish points when paired with MacKinnon and Rantanen doesn't make as much sense to me.   I think it sets up problems when people like Jack who will probably outperform him come up for a new contract.   It's like following the Toronto or Edmonton model with our top salary guys being Landeskog and Hughes instead of McDavid/Drai, Matthews/Tavares, Kane/Toews, Point/Kuch or whatever  

It took a lot of patience but one of the best moves Yzerman made as Tampa GM IMO was holding firm on the Stamkos contract demands.   He got Stammer locked in at a number he wanted and everyone else for a long period of time feel in line behind him on their salary asks.  In some ways they still do.  Kucherov makes more, but he could have rightly asked for significantly more.  They have a culture where guys are not looking to absolutely break the bank.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

Also, on top of that, you’re pivoting from a team being in “cap hell” to saying that spending money on expensive players doesn’t mean you’ll win. That’s not my definition of “cap hell”, to me it means not being able to afford everyone you need to afford, which rarely happens and when it does, you trade Marcus Johansson and keep all of the good players. 

Perhaps you are working from a different understanding of the term. 

I agree with this sentence but included in that are depth players.  We see time and time again the deepest teams are the ones advancing in the playoffs while the top heavy teams are not doing as well.   I don't mind paying for talent but when you over pay your top guys, which is exactly what Landeskog at 11 million would be, its the quickest way to find yourself losing useful players a few years out due to a cap crunch.   

Edited by Lateralous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Lateralous said:

Spending 11 million on a winger who scores 75ish points when paired with MacKinnon and Rantanen doesn't make as much sense to me.   I think it sets up problems when people like Jack who will probably outperform him come up for a new contract.   It's like following the Toronto or Edmonton model with our top salary guys being Landeskog and Hughes instead of McDavid/Drai, Matthews/Tavares, Kane/Toews, Point/Kuch or whatever  

Like I mentioned, I am not sure if that's the guy to overpay and/or if $11m is the right number. I get the concept. If your argument is to save it for a 1D, I would argue that you could do both. 

What Jack will be paid is a whole other argument and I believe, a topic for another thread...which I will start. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

Like I mentioned, I am not sure if that's the guy to overpay and/or if $11m is the right number. I get the concept. If your argument is to save it for a 1D, I would argue that you could do both. 

 

I feel like our offense is right where it should be at this point in our rebuild.   I would prefer to see how it develops over the next year or two before I worry about plugging holes with expensive UFAs.   Does Nico become more Bergeron than Nugent Hopkins? Is Zacha a really good 65ish point LW or does he go back to an enigma who bounces around the lineup? Can Bratt be responsible and consistant enough to be a top 6 wing or is he more of a third liner?  What do Holtz and Mercer become?   If necessary, two years from now I think you will see some really good wingers become available like Forsberg and Patsa as their teams windows start to close.    

The D on the other hand needs help now regardless of who we land with the 4th overall.   Given the slower development rate of defenseman, I don't think we can solely draft our way out of that mess in the back.    

Edited by Lateralous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lateralous said:

I feel like our offense is right where it should be at this point in our rebuild.   I would prefer to see how it develops over the next year or two before I worry about plugging holes with expensive UFAs.   Does Nico become more Bergeron than Nugent Hopkins? Is Zacha a really good 65ish point LW or does he go back to an enigma who bounces around the lineup? Can Bratt be responsible and consistant enough to be a top 6 wing or is he more of a third liner?  What do Holtz and Mercer become?   If necessary, two years from now I think you will see some really good wingers become available like Forsberg and Patsa as their teams windows start to close.    

The D on the other hand needs help now regardless of who we land with the 4th overall.   Given the slower development rate of defenseman, I don't think we can solely draft our way out of that mess in the back.    

Agreed, we need to think about the D nonstop until we get it. 

;) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Satans Hockey said:

They took care of it to the point that they even made a joke out of it and wore these Kucherov shirts at their cup parade. I'm with you guys, I don't give two sh!ts about cap hell. Sure beats 1 measly fvcking playoff win and appearance in 9 seasons. 

If all goes according to plan, there's plenty of Devils that will be due significant raises in the next couple of years.  That being said, let me actually SEE things go "according to plan".  

The Devils are going to have an insane amount of cap space...the bigger contracts just continue to keep coming off (PK is next, after this season).  And yeah, these teams that seem like they're in cap hell and oh look at them it's all going to go to sh!t continually find their ways out of it...and find a way to hang on to the players that they REALLY want to hang on to.

Yeah, in time you may become top-heavy, but that's what the draft is for...you need to sprinkle in cheap talent.  Blow your drafts, and it will eventually catch up with you.  But I'll worry about "cap hell" when the Devils are actually showing signs of being in it.  

 

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
  • Like 1
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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.