Bang for the Buck

[Micklebot]

Looking at it from another perspective, this team is currently paying $67.45 mil in cap hit, 5th lowest in the NHL. Take away MacArthur who hasn't played a game, and we drop down to 62.803 Mil, which would be 2nd lowest in the league. We're 9th in the league in pts %.

Seems like a pretty good bang for our buck, and doesn't account for things like the rangers picking up 2 mil of Brassard's salary.

Also, how is Turris at 4 mil on pace for 55 pts and 27 goals not outperforming his salary? Hoffman playing at a 62 pts pace for 3.8 isn't outperforming his salary? Stone at a 64 pts pace for 3.5 isn't outperforming his salary?

I mean, unless your dentition of outperforming his salary playing on an entry level contract or equivalent while putting up top 6 numbers, that's pretty insane.

 

[Tundraman]

Certain players are seen as more valuable in a long playoff series. One aspect that has little or no maximum effect in the regular season is hits meant to soften up a team. We have 3 pretty hard hitting left D but it rarely benefits the team. If anything the bumps and bruises that are inflicted might advantage the next team they play. Not so in a playoff series every hit can accumulate and make some players back off. Having hard nosed D can pay off big time playing the same team in the playoffs but this won't show on a regular season score sheet.

Similarly with vets like Kelly and Pyatt, guys like that usually shine in the playoffs not just by scoring but by controlling the play. As long as the team gets there we'll get to see their true worth.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

He's been Mr. Fix-it for Boucher so far and he's done well with that role. He plays the toughest minutes up front and somehow ends up being a positive player.

I think he's been good to excellent most nights. Given his role he is hard-pressed to put up a lot of points but he'll end the season with ~30 points while taking tons of DZ deployment and being probably our best penalty killing forward.

I'll take that from a 3C all day. If we get healthy his point production might go up too. If he ends up with a healthy Mac on his line I could see him ending with 35-40 points.

What do you mean by Mr fix it?

 

[JD1]

Looking at it from another perspective, this team is currently paying $67.45 mil in cap hit, 5th lowest in the NHL. Take away MacArthur who hasn't played a game, and we drop down to 62.803 Mil, which would be 2nd lowest in the league. We're 9th in the league in pts %.

Seems like a pretty good bang for our buck, and doesn't account for things like the rangers picking up 2 mil of Brassard's salary.

Also, how is Turris at 4 mil on pace for 55 pts and 27 goals not outperforming his salary? Hoffman playing at a 62 pts pace for 3.8 isn't outperforming his salary? Stone at a 64 pts pace for 3.5 isn't outperforming his salary?

I mean, unless your dentition of outperforming his salary playing on an entry level contract or equivalent while putting up top 6 numbers, that's pretty insane.

here's your answer. any other way of looking at it is flawed IMO.

it's a team game with team results and this team is getting great results / bang for it's payroll buck

 

[Boud]

Looking at it from another perspective, this team is currently paying $67.45 mil in cap hit, 5th lowest in the NHL. Take away MacArthur who hasn't played a game, and we drop down to 62.803 Mil, which would be 2nd lowest in the league. We're 9th in the league in pts %.

Seems like a pretty good bang for our buck, and doesn't account for things like the rangers picking up 2 mil of Brassard's salary.

Also, how is Turris at 4 mil on pace for 55 pts and 27 goals not outperforming his salary? Hoffman playing at a 62 pts pace for 3.8 isn't outperforming his salary? Stone at a 64 pts pace for 3.5 isn't outperforming his salary?

I mean, unless your dentition of outperforming his salary playing on an entry level contract or equivalent while putting up top 6 numbers, that's pretty insane.

Absolutely.

Hence why 90% of our players bring a greater value per dollar than what's on the market or are pretty much on par with what's the average out there. Only a few select players have not so good bang for your buck.

That being said it IS important to look at players individually since in a couple years we'll have to re-sign Turris(3.5M to 6-7), Stone (3.5 to 7-7.5) , Karlsson (6.5 to 10+), Brassard (may not be signed but will make more money also), Pageau (900k to 3m??), Smith will also need a raise.

That's basically all of our core players. We'll somehow have to find a way to keep the guys that do bring a lot of value to the team while managing financially with some players that do not bring as much and are getting paid the big dollars. All in all we'll have a lot more players getting paid what they should in 2 years so having guys not performing up to their salary could hurt us.

As of now as a team we are amongst the best for bang for your buck, I don't think there was ever a doubt about that.

And I'm not sure who you were responding to but I clearly put Turris and Hoffman in positive bang for your buck..... Would help if you quoted a post.

 

[Micklebot]

Absolutely.

Hence why 90% of our players bring a greater value per dollar than what's on the market or are pretty much on par with what's the average out there. Only a few select players have not so good bang for your buck.

That being said it IS important to look at players individually since in a couple years we'll have to re-sign Turris(3.5M to 6-7), Stone (3.5 to 7-7.5) , Karlsson (6.5 to 10+), Brassard (may not be signed but will make more money also), Pageau (900k to 3m??), Smith will also need a raise.

That's basically all of our core players. We'll somehow have to find a way to keep the guys that do bring a lot of value to the team while managing financially with some players that do not bring as much and are getting paid the big dollars. All in all we'll have a lot more players getting paid what they should in 2 years so having guys not performing up to their salary could hurt us.

As of now as a team we are amongst the best for bang for your buck, I don't think there was ever a doubt about that.

And I'm not sure who you were responding to but I clearly put Turris and Hoffman in positive bang for your buck..... Would help if you quoted a post.

Was responding to the OP who suggested Dzingel was the only one outperforming his contract.

 

[Boud]

Was responding to the OP who suggested Dzingel was the only one outperforming his contract.

Oh I see. Wasn't sure since it was after my post.

But I agree overall this season we're in great shape in this department.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

The OP is not out performing his salary

 

[thinkwild]

I remember when the Hawks won their first Cup, with Huet as a $5mil back up goalie and Campbell as a $7mil bottom pairing dman. I imagine the complaints were loud about terrible asset management and awful contracts. And yet, they won the Cup.

The real world doesn’t grant us the luxury to satiate this bang for buck accounting fetish of the perfect world. If a ufa we wanted was available, and we valued him $5mil max, but the player was sure to get $6mil and an NMC elsewhere, but we really wanted this player, would you choose bang for buck as the over-riding principle and decline to sign him?

By having many players that are giving great bang for buck, we can overpay for other ufa’s when they are due to be overpaid. We will surely need some players that are overpaid in order to win a Cup.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

I remember when the Hawks won their first Cup, with Huet as a $5mil back up goalie and Campbell as a $7mil bottom pairing dman. I imagine the complaints were loud about terrible asset management and awful contracts. And yet, they won the Cup.

They had a great roster.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

They had a great roster.

They had a pretty good roster with a few guys on great value contracts, mostly entry-level, a few guys pulling their weight and a few over-value contracts that hurt their cap flexibility.

Take out the bit about entry-level and that's basically us.

 

[Beville]

What exactly do you class as good value for money?

Like, 5 points for every million? Kind of hard to gauge.

 

[dumbdick]

Real salary dollars is all that matters for the sens. Everyone knows that.

 

[Zorf]

...

We are wasting millions of dollars on no offense.
Ryan, Neil, Lazar, Phanuef, Methot, Ceci and Boro make a combined:

25.489 million
For
15 Goals

That's terrible

Because apparently the only way to judge a player's value is on how many goals he scores.

C'mon man. Do I really need to explain to you that there is more to hockey than just goals and assists?

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

Because apparently the only way to judge a player's value is on how many goals he scores.

C'mon man. Do I really need to explain to you that there is more to hockey than just goals and assists?

I honestly don't think Neil and especially Boro bring much to the table.

 

[NyQuil]

Realistically, contending teams are that based on their top 3 lines and top 4 defencemen.

Chicago won a Cup with Rundblad on the bottom pairing.

I don't like everything that Neil and Boro do but their impact has to measured against their usage.

 

[Zorf]

I honestly don't think Neil and especially Boro bring much to the table.

I would argue in Neil's case that he brings more to the table in terms of leadership, compete level, showing young guys how it's done, etc. Plus there is some value in the legacy that he has. I'm not saying he should be guaranteed a roster spot because of his tenure with the franchise, but it does hold value, especially with the fans.


Boro should be deployed as a 6/7 D. The fact that Ottawa has no depth to challenge for his playing time more problematic that his usage right now. There's no one else to replace him. Maybe Claesson, but I don't know what's going on with him. Is he still hurt? He was going pretty hard at the skills comp.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

I would argue in Neil's case that he brings more to the table in terms of leadership, compete level, showing young guys how it's done, etc. Plus there is some value in the legacy that he has. I'm not saying he should be guaranteed a roster spot because of his tenure with the franchise, but it does hold value, especially with the fans.


Boro should be deployed as a 6/7 D. The fact that Ottawa has no depth to challenge for his playing time more problematic that his usage right now. There's no one else to replace him. Maybe Claesson, but I don't know what's going on with him. Is he still hurt? He was going pretty hard at the skills comp.

What do you mean by how it's done? I don't get that line of thinking and I've seen it tossed around here a few times. I think winning holds more value than sentiments at this point.

 

[Alex1234]

Lazar is baaaaad bang 4 our buck

Neil and Kelly provide leadership at least

Lazar is young

He should be flying all over the place creating tons of chances and burying a couple every now and then

But ... no....nope....nada....niet ... nothing

 

[swiftwin]

Jesus Christ. We have a negative thread for this kind of garbage.

Face it, we have one of the lowest payrolls, and are 5th in the conference. We have one of the best bangs for the buck in the league.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

If you think the Sens aren't getting great bang for their buck from a majority of their roster you're insanely negative.

Every team in the league has bad contracts. Overpaying Ryan doesn't negate the fact that the Sens have a top 6 filled with underpaid guys. Hoffman, Brassard, Turris, Stone, Dzingel round out the top 6. What is their average real money salary this season? Add Ryan, the bad contract, and their salary average is still pretty decent.

Ceci who is playing big minutes makes like 2M. Karlsson who is the best defender in the league is at something like 7M.

Anderson is somewhere between the 20th-30th goalie in the salary rankings.

Methot makes less than 5M despite playing top pairing minutes.

Even our bottom 6 guys like Smith and Pageau are dirt cheap.

Your argument is so poorly put together. Combine a bunch of players, they get us x amount of goals for this amount of money. Well what does that mean? One of those players is Lazar....he makes 894k. So you're basically suggesting because he makes about 300k above league minimum we're not getting a bang for our buck? How can we pay the guy less he's basically at league minimum and we have to play 18 players? Should we just start 17 skaters in the game? That makes no sense.

I could just as easily combine Hoffman, Turris, Stone, and Dzingel and say OMG WE ARE GETTING X amount of points for X amount of dollars we are such a great budget team and it would have the same weight as your argument.

Phaneuf and Ryan are maybe like 3M overpaid combined versus what they should bring. The Sens have so many great contracts that as a whole their salary outlook is still pretty good. If the Sens weren't a budget team, they'd have one of the best cap situations in the entire league because we'd be looking at guys like Stone/Turris/Karlsson/etc locked in at their cap rate and not at their salary where they are getting raises each season (but still are good deals just not as great deals as their hits).

 

[Zorf]

What do you mean by how it's done? I don't get that line of thinking and I've seen it tossed around here a few times. I think winning holds more value than sentiments at this point.

how it's done, in my mind, means that a guy like Neil trains his balls off every summer because that's what he needs to do to keep his spot in the NHL. Plus, with his style of play, he's likely had to do all sorts of things to maintain his health and prevent his body from breaking down. I'm sure he's careful with his nutrition as well.

There's also the community presence. When guys see the current longest serving Senator player still out and about in the community, volunteering, working with charities, and whatever else, then that sets a good example for what is expected of the players here.

These are all valuable things that he can teach to young players. I'm sure there's more.


Additionally, for a guy playing limited ice time on the 4th line, I'm not going to complain about what Neil brings to the table. Can you honestly say that any single player called up from Bingo has done more on the ice than Neil? I can't. Neil is one of the players that I would not really complain about this season.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

how it's done, in my mind, means that a guy like Neil trains his balls off every summer because that's what he needs to do to keep his spot in the NHL. Plus, with his style of play, he's likely had to do all sorts of things to maintain his health and prevent his body from breaking down. I'm sure he's careful with his nutrition as well.

There's also the community presence. When guys see the current longest serving Senator player still out and about in the community, volunteering, working with charities, and whatever else, then that sets a good example for what is expected of the players here.

These are all valuable things that he can teach to young players. I'm sure there's more.


Additionally, for a guy playing limited ice time on the 4th line, I'm not going to complain about what Neil brings to the table. Can you honestly say that any single player called up from Bingo has done more on the ice than Neil? I can't. Neil is one of the players that I would not really complain about this season.

His style of play has deteriorated over the past few seasons. He plays limited minutes and still has to work extra hard to maintain himself.

Community/charity work get's overblown when it comes to "leading as example" on the team. This is all done outside of a game anyways. I'm sure most guys on the team are involved in some sort of charity as well. Plenty of players to lead by example in this department.

Neil isn't so much part of the problem but he isn't part of the solution for our bottom 6 either. When was the last time that Neil fought where it wasn't staged or threw a huge hit? Or where the opposition was willing to participate in a scrap with him due to him sticking up for a team mate? Does his presence really deter other players from going after our guys? Doesn't seem like it to me.

I am a Neil fan as well however he shouldn't play as much as he as and as frequently as he has.

 

[DrEasy]

I am a Neil fan as well however he shouldn't play as much as he as and as frequently as he has.

Unfortunately I don't see much in the way of an alternative right now. Back when we had a guy like Condra riding the bench it was easier to ask for Neil to sit. We just don't have much forward depth right now, and so I'm ok with him playing.

 

[Micklebot]

Unfortunately I don't see much in the way of an alternative right now. Back when we had a guy like Condra riding the bench it was easier to ask for Neil to sit. We just don't have much forward depth right now, and so I'm ok with him playing.

Agreed. Our RW depth is pretty poor, with nobody in Bingo that looks any better than Neil imo. It's Neil, Blunden, Robinson or Bailey. Maybe Varone, but he's not an ideal 4th liner imo. I could see Lazar as a replacement for Neil too, but where just shuffling the deck, not really improving anything.