Any Idiot Can Start A Budget Thread--Melnyk and Team Finances III

Status
Not open for further replies.

Smash88

Registered User
Mar 15, 2012
3,484
344
Ottawa
It's really unfortunate how insufferable these boards were because of Melnyk hate (mostly budget related).

We're seeing the plan pay off now with an abundance of young players trending upwards and a realistic shot at being able to keep most of them in the long run. I hope the posters who spent months and months dwelling in "worst case scenario" and the "sky is falling" mentalities can look back and objectively see how obnoxious they were and that they could have enjoyed the ride with the rest of us instead of *****ing and moaning non stop like entitled children.

I'd love to see an apology letter written to Melnyk from the poster who felt strongly enough in speculation and conspiracy theories to call on the man to give up the franchise he saved because he wasn't worthy or capable of being the owner.

That's all the ranting I'll do on this subject. Now I'm looking forward to the next few years from this young and promising roster that I have really enjoyed seeing develop together. Hopefully we can all agree to be grateful for what we have and to remember that we watch hockey for fun!

Well said. Agreed on all points.

Here's to a great 2015-16 season!
 

StefanW

Registered User
Mar 13, 2013
6,286
0
Ottawa
www.storiesnumberstell.com
It's really unfortunate how insufferable these boards were because of Melnyk hate (mostly budget related).

We're seeing the plan pay off now with an abundance of young players trending upwards and a realistic shot at being able to keep most of them in the long run. I hope the posters who spent months and months dwelling in "worst case scenario" and the "sky is falling" mentalities can look back and objectively see how obnoxious they were and that they could have enjoyed the ride with the rest of us instead of *****ing and moaning non stop like entitled children.

I'd love to see an apology letter written to Melnyk from the poster who felt strongly enough in speculation and conspiracy theories to call on the man to give up the franchise he saved because he wasn't worthy or capable of being the owner.

That's all the ranting I'll do on this subject. Now I'm looking forward to the next few years from this young and promising roster that I have really enjoyed seeing develop together. Hopefully we can all agree to be grateful for what we have and to remember that we watch hockey for fun!

Oh for ****'s sake, it is like your IQ drops 25 points just by opening this thread.

a. We signed 2 RFAs today, which is great, but no contracts have been moved out yet. All we know about next year's budget is that BM confirmed, in these words, that we are not spending to the cap.

b. From the very start of the budget threads posters argued that in light of the revenue we should be a middle spending team. The past 3 years we have been at or near the bottom, this year coming up we look to be a middle spending team. The "entitlement" bull**** is simply deflecting the fact, which you can check on any of the salary cap sites now in operation, that we were not spending where we should have.
 

jason2020

Registered User
Sep 24, 2014
5,596
1
Oh for ****'s sake, it is like your IQ drops 25 points just by opening this thread.

a. We signed 2 RFAs today, which is great, but no contracts have been moved out yet. All we know about next year's budget is that BM confirmed, in these words, that we are not spending to the cap.

b. From the very start of the budget threads posters argued that in light of the revenue we should be a middle spending team. The past 3 years we have been at or near the bottom, this year coming up we look to be a middle spending team. The "entitlement" bull**** is simply deflecting the fact, which you can check on any of the salary cap sites now in operation, that we were not spending where we should have.

You don't need to spend to the cap sometime I think people want just to spend to the cap for the sake of it.
 

Smash88

Registered User
Mar 15, 2012
3,484
344
Ottawa
Oh for ****'s sake, it is like your IQ drops 25 points just by opening this thread.

a. We signed 2 RFAs today, which is great, but no contracts have been moved out yet. All we know about next year's budget is that BM confirmed, in these words, that we are not spending to the cap.

b. From the very start of the budget threads posters argued that in light of the revenue we should be a middle spending team. The past 3 years we have been at or near the bottom, this year coming up we look to be a middle spending team. The "entitlement" bull**** is simply deflecting the fact, which you can check on any of the salary cap sites now in operation, that we were not spending where we should have.

Why do we need to spend an X amount? I have never understood this point. It literally makes no sense to run a team that way.
 

Busboy

Registered User
Jul 29, 2011
2,014
0
Oh for ****'s sake, it is like your IQ drops 25 points just by opening this thread.

a. We signed 2 RFAs today, which is great, but no contracts have been moved out yet. All we know about next year's budget is that BM confirmed, in these words, that we are not spending to the cap.

b. From the very start of the budget threads posters argued that in light of the revenue we should be a middle spending team. The past 3 years we have been at or near the bottom, this year coming up we look to be a middle spending team. The "entitlement" bull**** is simply deflecting the fact, which you can check on any of the salary cap sites now in operation, that we were not spending where we should have.

You still don't get it. I don't care about how much we're spending. None of us have the necessary information for making a realistic evaluation of how the team is managing their finances.

Maybe it's because budgeting is a huge part of my job but I have a big appreciation for how difficult it is to manage employees and projects with a lot of uncertainty (like hockey). Sometimes I get people coming to me asking why I didn't make more money available in certain areas and I want to bang my head against the wall because the people criticizing my decisions have no clue what my allocated budget was and have no right to undermine my decisions.

You say "we were not spending where we should have" but you must understand that you are not qualified to make this decision! You're making this decision relative to other teams in the league, not relative to the financial state of the organization and this is what's so damn frustrating.

The plan was always to keep spending as low as possible during the rebuild years and I don't see any relevant information that would lead me to believe this was a bad decision. We're now coming out of these years having had some great success without spending beyond our needs.

If you would like to provide me with a detailed analysis of the financial state of the organization, spending from the past three years and projections for the next few then I'll listen to what you have to say.

We are not entitled to a team that spends as much as other teams. That's like saying "we should buy a bigger house because the Joneses have a nicer one and we deserve the same as them!"

We're a small market team. Spending for the sake of keeping up with other teams is a recipe for disaster. Spending to keep up with development and growth is what is necessary and today proves that Melnyk is willing to do that and that Murray has a solid plan in place for managing our budget according to the talent on our team, not the wants of ignorant fans.
 

Real Smart Sens Fan

Registered User
Jun 14, 2014
4,760
4
Oh for ****'s sake, it is like your IQ drops 25 points just by opening this thread.

a. We signed 2 RFAs today, which is great, but no contracts have been moved out yet. All we know about next year's budget is that BM confirmed, in these words, that we are not spending to the cap.

b. From the very start of the budget threads posters argued that in light of the revenue we should be a middle spending team. The past 3 years we have been at or near the bottom, this year coming up we look to be a middle spending team. The "entitlement" bull**** is simply deflecting the fact, which you can check on any of the salary cap sites now in operation, that we were not spending where we should have.

I mean, I agree with that after reading your post...

Melnyk was struggling financially, so he budgeted. We're a middle spending team this next year? I sure hope so, because it would mean we clear a TON of dead weight and make us a better team.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,708
9,651
Montreal, Canada
Every godamn company on this planet is on a budget, or at least should be. If not, then you are not managing your business correctly... Or you just don't care about throwing money away, but businessmen are not like that in the first place anyway. Sens were rebuilding and it was the perfect timing to have a tight budget and pay debt loans as much as possible.
 

Busboy

Registered User
Jul 29, 2011
2,014
0
Every godamn company on this planet is on a budget, or at least should be. If not, then you are not managing your business correctly... Or you just don't care about throwing money away, but businessmen are not like that in the first place anyway. Sens were rebuilding and it was the perfect timing to have a tight budget and pay debt loans as much as possible.

Yup, what also gets neglected in this "should have been middle of the pack spending" argument is that if we had been spending more, then this summer we would have been forced to try and shed salary to re-sign our RFAs. Not an easy thing to do at any time, and this summer would be especially difficult considering the amount of teams who find themselves in this exact position.

Thats also not taking into consideration that our young players may not have had the opportunities to excel and develop had we gone out and spent money on veterans via UFA or trades.

But most people like to double down on their delusions when they've been proven wrong. They get too caught up in wanting to be the "smart" one, or the one who was "right" instead of being the person who learns from their mistakes.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,708
9,651
Montreal, Canada
Yup, what also gets neglected in this "should have been middle of the pack spending" argument is that if we had been spending more, then this summer we would have been forced to try and shed salary to re-sign our RFAs. Not an easy thing to do at any time, and this summer would be especially difficult considering the amount of teams who find themselves in this exact position.

Thats also not taking into consideration that our young players may not have had the opportunities to excel and develop had we gone out and spent money on veterans via UFA or trades.

But most people like to double down on their delusions when they've been proven wrong. They get too caught up in wanting to be the "smart" one, or the one who was "right" instead of being the person who learns from their mistakes.

:handclap:

You are doing nothing in life if you don't do that.
 

Sens Rule

Registered User
Sep 22, 2005
21,251
73
So far Pageau, Stone and Zibby signed for far, far less then I thought.

Murray and the team are having a brilliant off season. A+ so far!!!
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,288
8,100
Victoria
Oh for ****'s sake, it is like your IQ drops 25 points just by opening this thread.

a. We signed 2 RFAs today, which is great, but no contracts have been moved out yet. All we know about next year's budget is that BM confirmed, in these words, that we are not spending to the cap.

b. From the very start of the budget threads posters argued that in light of the revenue we should be a middle spending team. The past 3 years we have been at or near the bottom, this year coming up we look to be a middle spending team. The "entitlement" bull**** is simply deflecting the fact, which you can check on any of the salary cap sites now in operation, that we were not spending where we should have.

Dude, you still don't get it. The amount that is spent on the team is not tied to how much revenue the team has, it's tied to where the team is in it's competitive cycle. Jesus, it's common friggin' sense!

Murray and Melnyk had a growth plan and have been following it. As our young players grow and prove to be worth better contracts we have paid them, since we have made it a priority to have money to do so. Just as management said they would.

All of our "bad" contracts are players filling gaps while our youngsters mature and take their places.

The rest of you post, along with all of the other whining and complaining was just noise. This was never about that we should be spending based on revenue, this was management following a rebuild plan that included finances, while many complained that Melnyk was hoarding money, and that we should be a cap team because grrrrr.

More moving of the goal posts, as predicted.
 

Busboy

Registered User
Jul 29, 2011
2,014
0
The Ryan deal made me happy regarding our willingness to spend on our own players.

And the Methot deal, and the Anderson deal! We could even include Hamburglar in that list too.

Only ones left are Hoffman and Chiasson. Hopefully Murray can work out a nice 1 year deal with Hoffman and to be honest I don't really care about Chiasson...

Condra would be nice to retain but we probably just don't have the room for him unless we're committed to playing Lazar, Prince and Puempel in the AHL for most of the season.

Of course this could all change if Murray can get rid of some deadweight this weekend.
 

starling

Registered User
Nov 7, 2010
10,858
2,758
Ottawa
Interesting article about teams spending in salary cap era: http://www.japersrink.com/2015/7/15/8920179/washington-capitals-spending-in-the-salary-cap-era

Basically for Sens spending has no effect on success. For all other teams (except Rangers) there is usually pretty strong correlation.
0713dDivGuEvzCGmTVgiaBfk56NvFEF4QpeYLU27OnM


cap_vs_wins_by_team_reg.0.png
 
Last edited:

StefanW

Registered User
Mar 13, 2013
6,286
0
Ottawa
www.storiesnumberstell.com
Interesting article about teams spending in salary cap era: http://www.japersrink.com/2015/7/15/8920179/washington-capitals-spending-in-the-salary-cap-era

Basically for Sens spending has no effect on success. For all other teams (except Rangers) there is usually pretty strong correlation.

Yeah, it basically matches the numbers when I ran them although I measured success a bit differently. I think drilling down to a team level is what people want here, but normally the sample sizes make the team numbers prone to error. For example, the Sens have been around 25 years, and any regression line built on 25 points should be taken with a grain of salt.
 

Nac Mac Feegle

wee & free
Jun 10, 2011
34,829
9,252
Every godamn company on this planet is on a budget, or at least should be. If not, then you are not managing your business correctly... Or you just don't care about throwing money away, but businessmen are not like that in the first place anyway. Sens were rebuilding and it was the perfect timing to have a tight budget and pay debt loans as much as possible.

So........did the Sens actually do that? Or did the extra savings go into a deep set of pockets?

There have been many points int eh past to pay off a lot of debts, instead the team restructured and piled on more debt.
 

TeamRenzo

Registered User
Jul 20, 2009
3,161
1,064
You still don't get it. I don't care about how much we're spending. None of us have the necessary information for making a realistic evaluation of how the team is managing their finances.

Maybe it's because budgeting is a huge part of my job but I have a big appreciation for how difficult it is to manage employees and projects with a lot of uncertainty (like hockey). Sometimes I get people coming to me asking why I didn't make more money available in certain areas and I want to bang my head against the wall because the people criticizing my decisions have no clue what my allocated budget was and have no right to undermine my decisions.

You say "we were not spending where we should have" but you must understand that you are not qualified to make this decision! You're making this decision relative to other teams in the league, not relative to the financial state of the organization and this is what's so damn frustrating.

The plan was always to keep spending as low as possible during the rebuild years and I don't see any relevant information that would lead me to believe this was a bad decision. We're now coming out of these years having had some great success without spending beyond our needs.

If you would like to provide me with a detailed analysis of the financial state of the organization, spending from the past three years and projections for the next few then I'll listen to what you have to say.

We are not entitled to a team that spends as much as other teams. That's like saying "we should buy a bigger house because the Joneses have a nicer one and we deserve the same as them!"

We're a small market team. Spending for the sake of keeping up with other teams is a recipe for disaster. Spending to keep up with development and growth is what is necessary and today proves that Melnyk is willing to do that and that Murray has a solid plan in place for managing our budget according to the talent on our team, not the wants of ignorant fans.

I agree with your posts

I think it is a clear case of people not having a clue of what they are talking about but acting like they are knowledgeable.
 

Filatov2Kovalev2Bonk

Effortless sexy.
Jul 13, 2006
12,719
1,049
Cumberland
I agree with your posts

I think it is a clear case of people not having a clue of what they are talking about but acting like they are knowledgeable.

It's more the owner and team speaking at cross-purposes.
You can't claim to be a budget team while squandering close to $10,000,000 on Neil, Phillips, Greening, Michalek. That's wasted money on a team that purports to be spending wisely. That's the issue.
Without Phillips on the team we allocate that money to Hoffman. Without Neil on the team we allocate that cash (or less) to Chiasson.

There is still too much dead money on our cap. That's plain to see no matter what kind of inside info you have.
 

Busboy

Registered User
Jul 29, 2011
2,014
0
It's more the owner and team speaking at cross-purposes.
You can't claim to be a budget team while squandering close to $10,000,000 on Neil, Phillips, Greening, Michalek. That's wasted money on a team that purports to be spending wisely. That's the issue.
Without Phillips on the team we allocate that money to Hoffman. Without Neil on the team we allocate that cash (or less) to Chiasson.

There is still too much dead money on our cap. That's plain to see no matter what kind of inside info you have.

Easy to say with hindsight. I'm sure management felt they were spending wisely when they signed those contracts.

When you look at the overall picture (budget vs. results) I think it's fair to say management has spent wisely, especially when you consider most of the contracts you mentioned were short term and will expire soon. You're cherry picking contracts that support your argument and ignoring ones that don't (Turris, Karlsson, Anderson).
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,288
8,100
Victoria
Easy to say with hindsight. I'm sure management felt they were spending wisely when they signed those contracts.

When you look at the overall picture (budget vs. results) I think it's fair to say management has spent wisely, especially when you consider most of the contracts you mentioned were short term and will expire soon. You're cherry picking contracts that support your argument and ignoring ones that don't (Turris, Karlsson, Anderson).

Add MacT, Zib, Stone, Hammond, Pageau to the list of great contracts
 

Karl Cowensson

I has cheezburger
Oct 27, 2008
2,214
0
Northern Ontario
I wonder if Redden's contract was factored in, even if it was buried in the AHL, and that's why its so negative for the Rangers.

Sens overspent to try and get back to the finals and massively underachieved, while recently we've underspent and overachieved so I can see why there's no real correlation.

The big picture is, teams that spend do better, its a reality of the NHL, but as much as this is brought up, at no point has the team not shelled out the money for players. Alfredsson probably would have gotten the money he wanted had discussions continued but he took a final shot at the cup with Detroit, and that's just the nature of a competitive person. Anderson, Ryan, Michalek, Hammond, all the RFAs have shown that we are capable of being more than a budget team. BM just committed to developing talent from within, and as a smaller market that isn't as attractive to UFAs, that was probably the smartest thing. Be patient and spend when your core hits their prime.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->