It's almost like having a garbage back-up and riding your starter for all he's worth has consequences. Whodathunkit?
I'm suggesting a better team, a team with a legit back-up, and Holtby isn't required to put up those numbers to begin with. He put up those numbers in part because they had no trusted alternative even if they wanted to rest him when the schedule allowed. That he performed in spite of that is another chip in his favor.Are you suggesting that you would have preferred Holtby to have a worse year last year so that we wouldn't have to pay him as much this year? If so I'd have to say thats dumb.
I'm suggesting a better team, a team with a legit back-up, and Holtby isn't required to put up those numbers to begin with. He put up those numbers in part because they had no trusted alternative even if they wanted to rest him when the schedule allowed. That he performed in spite of that is another chip in his favor.
I'm suggesting a better team, a team with a legit back-up, and Holtby isn't required to put up those numbers to begin with. He put up those numbers in part because they had no trusted alternative even if they wanted to rest him when the schedule allowed. That he performed in spite of that is another chip in his favor.
It's puzzling how they could reportedly reach consensus on the UFA years but not RFA.
I don't assume but as long as they make the playoffs it doesn't really matter. There's ample evidence suggesting that many regular season games impacts playoff performance. While the Caps weren't hurt by it, aside from maybe Game 6 vs. NYR, it's not good practice generally. Teams don't ride goaltenders like they did after the lockout for good reason.I call shenanigans and hindsight here.
You just assume Holtby would have performed just as well if he had to share the net and not get the same workload. There are alot of goalies that thrive playing 65-70+ games per year and perform worse playing less. Kolzig and Brodeur come to mind.
I'm suggesting a better team, a team with a legit back-up, and Holtby isn't required to put up those numbers to begin with. He put up those numbers in part because they had no trusted alternative even if they wanted to rest him when the schedule allowed. That he performed in spite of that is another chip in his favor.
It's puzzling how they could reportedly reach consensus on the UFA years but not RFA.
Like I've been saying: probably backloaded deal with term. Gmbm is hoarding his nuts for after that 2 year window expires and all those contracts are up or due.
I don't assume but as long as they make the playoffs it doesn't really matter. There's ample evidence suggesting that many regular season games impacts playoff performance. While the Caps weren't hurt by it, aside from maybe Game 6 vs. NYR, it's not good practice generally. Teams don't ride goaltenders like they did after the lockout for good reason.
What Holtby did was pretty phenomenal, in part due to these circumstances, and he's prepared to cash in on it. IMO they were less afraid to go away from Holtby than they had no trusted alternative. It wasn't about breaking his rhythm. Again, Holtby putting up those numbers in that many starts strengthens his case in being comparable to Bobrovsky or Price rather than the salary bracket the Caps are seemingly putting him in for his RFA seasons. He was drastically underpaid last year. No longer.
I know how to save $8-8.5 million over the next 2 years without hurting the team at all.
My point is good long-term planning involves smart short-term planning. This isn't about the player...it's about building a good team that can do damage in the playoffs. (See my earlier point.)So the message that you are broadcasting here is to find ways to dilute a players stats so as the team will have a better bargaining position when his contract comes up??
I would rest Holtby as needed so that he's rested for the playoffs to better position them as a team, yes. Who cares about individual awards?If Holtby (assume a 1 year deal this year) is neck and neck for the Vezina next year down the stretch (and we have a competent backup in Grubauer) you would endorse playing Holtby LESS so we could get a better deal since he'd less likely get the hardware??
$4,769,037 from what I have.Back to seriousness, where does Holtby at $6.5 leave the remaining cap space?
$4,769,037 from what I have.
That includes Galiev with the forwards. Grubi/No Peters. No Mojo.
Well the calls ups are going to be pretty small cap hits. Brown, Sill, Mitchell, O'Brien, Stephenson, Vrana, Carrick, Bowey, and whoever are all under 895k (with Vrana being that high end salary).How much cushion do we need to have for call ups and crap like that?
If Holtby gets 6.5 and MJ 3.75 that leaves us with about 1 million then right? Won't that entire amount need to be reserved for call ups?
Well the calls ups are going to be pretty small cap hits. Brown, Sill, Mitchell, O'Brien, Stephenson, Vrana, Carrick, Bowey, and whoever are all under 895k (with Vrana being that high end salary).
That being said....if they do pay Mojo $3.75....you're looking at 22 man roster with $1,019,037 left.
Doesnt leave much wiggle room to bring in a 3C, but its doable if they really want to.