Dreger: Canes and Jordan Staal at an impasse.

[Curufinwe]

The hell
Is Crosby's the last cap circumventing contract left?

I think so, yeah.

 

[Hisch13r]

The hell
Is Crosby's the last cap circumventing contract left?

It's only cap circumvention if the Devils do it.

 

[CBJx614]

Habs would take him for his leadership. We aren’t contending but would welcome him to the team.

Basically how I feel as a CBJ fan. We likely aren't contending while he'd be here, but he'd make an excellent vet for our young team.

If he's chasing cups we don't have a chance though.

 

[McSuper]

Going to be a crazy summer if 1/2 these rumours are true.

Calgary 1/2 the team wants out.
Boston cap crunch
Canes
Winnipeg

 

[Svechhammer]

Basically how I feel as a CBJ fan. We likely aren't contending while he'd be here, but he'd make an excellent vet for our young team.

If he's chasing cups we don't have a chance though.

lets be honest, if he's chasing cups, then we're not at this situation right now where he's having trouble re-upping in Raleigh

 

[Hisch13r]

lets be honest, if he's chasing cups, then we're not at this situation right now where he's having trouble re-upping in Raleigh

Could be he just wants a reasonable wage and to play for a contending team but the Canes are lowballing him.

 

[Svechhammer]

Could be he just wants a reasonable wage and to play for a contending team but the Canes are lowballing him.

Canes aren't going to pay more than he's worth and if they have to move on they have multiple options they can go to which will at the very least continue their run of contention, if not improve upon it.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

I think that many NHL teams and fanbases are not familiar with the idea of "creative" or controlled destruction, which is why most teams have cap problems and the Canes usually do not. It'll be tough to replace Staal and Pesce if it has to come to that conclusion for the Canes, but I'm sure that they can find a way. They've done so for just about every other player that they've allowed to pursue huge paydays elsewhere.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Randomly remembered this and found the tweets.





Literally everything is a grind with this management group.

 

[bleedgreen]

We shouldn’t get defensive if someone suggests we’re lowballing him. We lowball pretty much everyone.

I’m sure we’re lowballing him.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

We shouldn’t get defensive if someone suggests we’re lowballing him. We lowball pretty much everyone.

I’m sure we’re lowballing him.

They lowball certain players but not every player. They certainly didn't lowball Svechnikov, Kotkaniemi, or Kochetkov.

 

[PensandCaps]

Come back to Pittsburgh. Perfect 3C for what we need. Still an elite one too.

 

[Tufted Titmouse]

I don't get it, are they arguing between 780k and 1m?

 

[KeyserSoze81]

All 3 Staals are UFAs just saying

I, uhh, take Pride in that.

 

[bleedgreen]

They lowball certain players but not every player. They certainly didn't lowball Svechnikov, Kotkaniemi, or Kochetkov.

Well I said “pretty much” which allows some space for the obvious exceptions in my mind!

I also disagree about Koochie, there was no true idea on value and at the time Koochie was hot. I think the Borg thought he was a starter and took advantage of a guy who wanted money now vs betting on himself. They thought he’d be a steal, and maybe he still will be. We also have no idea the way Koko really went, we paid the cost of acquiring and got him to take a pay cut on what was his qualifying offer. There was clearly some negotiations there, we don’t know how that went but a lot of folks thought we were going to give him the six.

I think Svech is the only true one where they didn’t seem to fight it too hard.

We lowball. It’s our thing.

 

[Stickpucker]

We absolutely have an internal cap

It just happens to be above the NHL's salary cap, with us being willing to stash players on LTIR or literally buy draft picks from other teams in terms of a cold hard cash buyout that others aren't willing to do.

If the Canes would triple their LTIR cap they could've won a cup or two by now.

 

[Justicebork]

This is just factually wrong. They’ve been a cap team consistently since 19-20.

The organization is rigid about its player valuations. That is all. If you disagree with that approach, a criticism of arrogance or being headstrong is more fitting. Cheap is an inaccurate label.

No bad contracts. Incredibly risk averse. Ruthless in their decision making and willingness to throw bodies overboard when they seek more than their internal valuation. This creates great flexibility but also creates systemic risk on its own.

 

[ManofSteel55]

He's going to be 35 next season and seems to want term. Not sure how many teams will be interested in outbidding Carlolina on this one.

Yeah, this seems like an older player just holding out for as long of a contract as he can get. This is the art of negotiation, that's all. If he signs with another team, I wager that team has overpaid him significantly, either in cap ($5M or more) or in term (4+ years).

 

[sheriff bart]

Staal has been a good soldier. But anything more than 2 years at $4M is too much at this point, and that’s an overpayment for his on ice contributions. He’s good defensively and on face offs, but there is a reason I’ve called him “Hands of Stone” for quite a while. I like the guy, but it’s a business

 

[AhosDatsyukian]

Literally what you’re describing is being unwilling to spend what guys like Hamilton, Pesce, Staal think they can get elsewhere.

No need to get bent out of shape about the descriptor, if their value system undersells the market and they keep letting key cogs walk, that puts a lot of pressure on finding “cheaper” alternatives with the same on-ice contribution. That’s a walking on a tightrope methodology.

Like I said, so far they’ve been able to do that with guys like DeAngelo for Hamilton etc., I just question how many times consecutively you can thread that needle. It’s a lot easier said than done replacing guys like Pesce and Staal at a lower pay-tier.

Lol, no, it would be cheap if there was no limit on spending. But there is a hard salary cap and tough decisions have to be made. They’ve spent plenty on players they felt are worth it and will continue to do so. Not overpaying players (relative to internal valuations) does not equate to cheap. You could say they are off base with their valuations of players/positions/skill sets and that could maybe be a valid argument (yet to be seen in my view, Slavin and Aho will be telling) but in no way are the Canes cheap

 

[Svechhammer]

Lol, no, it would be cheap if there was no limit on spending. But there is a hard salary cap and tough decisions have to be made. They’ve spent plenty on players they felt are worth it and will continue to do so. Not overpaying players (relative to internal valuations) does not equate to cheap. You could say they are off base with their valuations of players/positions/skill sets and that could maybe be a valid argument (yet to be seen in my view, Slavin and Aho will be telling) but in no way are the Canes cheap

Don't bother. They're confusing being cheap with being cutthroat.

The Canes aren't cheap. They will spend as much money as the league allows in order to compete. Their goal is to spend to or (using LTIR) above the cap every year to maximize talent. But they're also not going to just throw money around to everyone who asks, they're not going to overpay for individual players and very much are willing to walk away from anyone the moment they price themselves out of the market.

 

[bleedgreen]

Lol, no, it would be cheap if there was no limit on spending. But there is a hard salary cap and tough decisions have to be made. They’ve spent plenty on players they felt are worth it and will continue to do so. Not overpaying players (relative to internal valuations) does not equate to cheap. You could say they are off base with their valuations of players/positions/skill sets and that could maybe be a valid argument (yet to be seen in my view, Slavin and Aho will be telling) but in no way are the Canes cheap

The post you responded to was right. We take chances when we continually let players go with the assumption we’ll find replacements for cheaper. It’s easy to think it’s a matter of time before we fail doing it.

I agree with Staal moving on if it’s too much money, having said that.

 

[AhosDatsyukian]

The post you responded to was right. We take chances when we continually let players go with the assumption we’ll find replacements for cheaper. It’s easy to think it’s a matter of time before we fail doing it.

I agree with Staal moving on if it’s too much money, having said that.

Not really, dude said we "keep letting core cogs walk" when in reality we haven't let a single core cog walk. If that starts happening, yes we'd be taking significant chances, but I made that point in my post with the Aho and Slavin situations being telling when we see how it plays out with them.

Also we aren't trying to find "cheaper alternatives with the same on-ice contribution," they will be different players/positions possibly to fit in our cap structure consistent with our valuations of players/positions and we'll do our best to maximize the output of a cap roster. He mentioned it being "easier said than done replacing Pesce/Staal at a lower pay-tier." (1) Staal was on a $6M cap hit and we can easily spend that money to improve on Staal. And (2) Pesce won't be easy to replace if we let him go but we can take the money that would've been allocated towards him and use it to spend on forwards/scoring, goaltending, etc., doesn't have to be directly replacing him.

Every team "takes chances" with every single decision they make. It would be taking even more of a chance to give Dougie the contract NJ gave him (i.e. a chance his play falls off significantly halfway through the contract and we wind up not being able to keep a Necas or Jarvis because of it). None of it is black and white, there are no single right answers upfront. We take chances that our player valuations could end up being wrong but so does every team. I don't think the Canes have any assumption that we'll find replacements for cheaper, that doesn't need to be the case for letting someone walk be a correct decision.

In addition so many fans are caught up in the short term, the Canes moves suggest that this front office wants to be set up for significantly sustained success and playoff appearances for decades straight. People can debate whether that's the best strategy, sure, but that seems to be what they're committed to. And if letting Pesce walk hurts us in the short term that doesn't mean it's a bad move. Cap flexibility down the road is huge in having sustained success. One can certainly argue that you'd rather have a cup win and then suck for 5 years and rebuild, personally I'd prefer to make the playoffs and win playoff games for 20 straight years with a chance at winning the Cup even if it doesn't ultimately happen than to win 1 Cup in 20 years but miss the playoffs over half the time.

We'll see how it plays out, Canes haven't won the Cup yet so they still need to accomplish that to really backup the team-building strategy, but it's really really hard to argue the results of the past 5 years, being the only team to win at least one playoff series every one of those years...

 

[bleedgreen]

Not really, dude said we "keep letting core cogs walk" when in reality we haven't let a single core cog walk. If that starts happening, yes we'd be taking significant chances, but I made that point in my post with the Aho and Slavin situations being telling when we see how it plays out with them.

Also we aren't trying to find "cheaper alternatives with the same on-ice contribution," they will be different players/positions possibly to fit in our cap structure consistent with our valuations of players/positions and we'll do our best to maximize the output of a cap roster. He mentioned it being "easier said than done replacing Pesce/Staal at a lower pay-tier." (1) Staal was on a $6M cap hit and we can easily spend that money to improve on Staal. And (2) Pesce won't be easy to replace if we let him go but we can take the money that would've been allocated towards him and use it to spend on forwards/scoring, goaltending, etc., doesn't have to be directly replacing him.

Every team "takes chances" with every single decision they make. It would be taking even more of a chance to give Dougie the contract NJ gave him (i.e. a chance his play falls off significantly halfway through the contract and we wind up not being able to keep a Necas or Jarvis because of it). None of it is black and white, there are no single right answers upfront. We take chances that our player valuations could end up being wrong but so does every team. I don't think the Canes have any assumption that we'll find replacements for cheaper, that doesn't need to be the case for letting someone walk be a correct decision.

In addition so many fans are caught up in the short term, the Canes moves suggest that this front office wants to be set up for significantly sustained success and playoff appearances for decades straight. People can debate whether that's the best strategy, sure, but that seems to be what they're committed to. And if letting Pesce walk hurts us in the short term that doesn't mean it's a bad move. Cap flexibility down the road is huge in having sustained success. One can certainly argue that you'd rather have a cup win and then suck for 5 years and rebuild, personally I'd prefer to make the playoffs and win playoff games for 20 straight years with a chance at winning the Cup even if it doesn't ultimately happen than to win 1 Cup in 20 years but miss the playoffs over half the time.

We'll see how it plays out, Canes haven't won the Cup yet so they still need to accomplish that to really backup the team-building strategy, but it's really really hard to argue the results of the past 5 years, being the only team to win at least one playoff series every one of those years...

He didn’t say core he said key. We’ve let multiple key cogs walk and are preparing to say goodbye to more of them as we speak.

We’re absolutely trying to find cheaper alternatives for the same contribution. That’s the TDA and Burns moves vs paying Hamilton all day. Koko instead of one of Trocheck/Staal. If Chatfield slides into Pesce’s spot there’s another.

We do things different. We’re taking chances that way. It can absolutely backfire, but it hasn’t yet. I don’t agree with all the moves myself. We’re winning a lot of games and that allows them to keep trying doing it the way we are.

The direct post you responded to, that you and I are talking about didn’t mention cheap in your quote. Obviously we aren’t cheap, we’re a cap team. I question if our obsession with getting the right value on just about every single move is keeping our eye on the ball….which is winning the cup. You don’t actually get anything for winning the transaction article on the Athletic because you didn’t overpay anyone in their eyes.

 

[Ole Gil]

Could be he just wants a reasonable wage and to play for a contending team but the Canes are lowballing him.

There's two numbers. What someone is worth as it relates to caphit.

And what someone can get paid as a free agent.

In Carolina, you get to win every year. It's got a great head coach. A great lockerroom, a great place to live. But you're going to get paid what you're worth as it relates to the cap, not free agency.,

If they start handing out contracts with free agency pricing, they're going to stop winning, the coach will be fired, and next thing you know, it's an 78 point team with John Tortorella as your coach, and everyone is demanding a trade.