budget allocation

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
15,984
9,547
So lots of chatter about too much money spent here or there. Interesting to see how guys would allocate money. Presume a 70M budget just to make the math easy. How do you allocate the cap?

1st line = 22% = 15.4M
2nd line = 20% = 14.0M
3rd line = 10% = 7M
4th line = 4%= 2.8M

forward total = 56%

1st pair = 20% = 14M
2nd pair = 10% = 7M
3rd pair = 4% = 2.8 M

D total = 34%

goal= 10% = 7M


So that's 70 M. Obviously not fully realistic because you have to some reserve and account for 7D and 13F types but I left that out on purpose to make it easy.

Curious to see how everyone else would allocate budget
 

Nac Mac Feegle

wee & free
Jun 10, 2011
34,828
9,251
Not sure if I'd break it up that way. I'd expect a 1C to make more than either first liner wingers. Same with the second line. Bottom 6 can be a bit of a mish-mash when you take into account possible ELCs taking up a slot (or two) on the third line, while slightly more expensive vets likely filling up the 4th line.

Defense and goaltending percentages seem to be pretty on target.

Edit: the wild card are the ELCs. Damned hard to predict costs per line when the kids tend to move around quite a bit on the lines over the course of a season to find their fit.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
15,984
9,547
Not sure if I'd break it up that way. I'd expect a 1C to make more than either first liner wingers. Same with the second line. Bottom 6 can be a bit of a mish-mash when you take into account possible ELCs taking up a slot (or two) on the third line, while slightly more expensive vets likely filling up the 4th line.

Defense and goaltending percentages seem to be pretty on target.

Edit: the wild card are the ELCs. Damned hard to predict costs per line when the kids tend to move around quite a bit on the lines over the course of a season to find their fit.

Absolutely you need some high end ELCS. you cannot pay someone 10+ without getting some productivity out of ELCS.
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
7.5 on a guy who plays in the top six but only puts up 30 points.
2.5 on a backup goalie
2.5 on a 4th liner that is washed up and can’t really play anymore

Money well spent.
In 50 games...He needs to have a healthy season ,and while he will never be worth what he is paid...It would be far less painful....My bet is he will go on LTIR soon after he next injury we all know is coming
 

tony d

Registered User
Jun 23, 2007
76,589
4,548
Behind A Tree
70 million budget;

1st line: 16 million
2nd line: 10 million
3rd line: 8 million
4th line: 5 million

1st pairing: 12 million
2nd pairing: 6 million
3rd pairing: 3 million

Goalies: 8 million

Incidentals: 2 million
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
70 million budget;

1st line: 16 million
2nd line: 10 million
3rd line: 8 million
4th line: 5 million

1st pairing: 12 million
2nd pairing: 6 million
3rd pairing: 3 million

Goalies: 8 million

Incidentals: 2 million
EM needs to spend to the cap next season,there just isnt any other way...We dont need to bleed more assets to move dead money...We need to ride out some of the contracts,Burrows,Anderson are guys that will be off the books the following season,and maybe Ryan could rebound and make moving him easier....

EM,has too look at what is best for his investment for the future...And deal with what us fans have had to deal with this season ,short term pain for long term gain
 

danielpalfredsson

youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
Aug 14, 2013
16,575
9,269
In a perfect world, we allocate most of our money to stars (Karlsson, Duchene, Stone) and trickle down from there. Budget and dead money on the books IMO will prevent us from building our team that way and having a chance to be successful.

I think there's a line of thinking where if your 3C is making more than X, or 4C is making more than X, you are overpaying them, but at the same time I think it's way to hard to make a generalized theory that a 1st line should cost X, 2nd line X, etc, because most teams are built differently. Some teams have a elite 1C, some teams an elite 1G, some teams an elite 1RD.

I don't think the hockey world could make a true chart showing how a team should be built money wise, because so much relies on ELC/RFA talent being underpaid, and then each team's cap situation is very different and unique which makes it very hard to make generalized rules about spending.

Because of ELC/RFA contracts being so important, teams are cyclical as well. We're at the end of the cycle, where almost all of our key players are now entering either their arbitration or their UFA years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Micklebot

pzeeman

Registered User
May 15, 2013
1,227
669
Aylmer
I'm curious

I haven't seen a breakdown of what happens if EM wakes up tomorrow and declares "I don't care! I'm spending to the cap!"

Does that extra 10M(?) mean that all dead money, buy outs and raises are done, a really good team is iced, and we as a fan base can start worrying about other stuff? Can anyone break it down?
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
I'm curious

I haven't seen a breakdown of what happens if EM wakes up tomorrow and declares "I don't care! I'm spending to the cap!"

Does that extra 10M(?) mean that all dead money, buy outs and raises are done, a really good team is iced, and we as a fan base can start worrying about other stuff? Can anyone break it down?
Unsure,but we cant through away anymore assets to save the "Budget"...EM has to be able to deal with living with a bad contact or two ,without resorting to not spending ....
 

danielpalfredsson

youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
Aug 14, 2013
16,575
9,269
I'm curious

I haven't seen a breakdown of what happens if EM wakes up tomorrow and declares "I don't care! I'm spending to the cap!"

Does that extra 10M(?) mean that all dead money, buy outs and raises are done, a really good team is iced, and we as a fan base can start worrying about other stuff? Can anyone break it down?

We have about a 59M cap hit next year, we only will have Stone+Ceci+Claesson (12M-14M combined?) to sign, and will need one extra body that will cost in the 800k range.

That would put us at about 73M out of 80M before we make any additions at all. Keep in mind, if we can potentially bank as much as 4.65M in additional cap space if we exceed the 80M cap by placing Mac on LTIR.

In 19-20, with the aforementioned 13M put towards Stone+Ceci+Claesson, we'd have spent 52M on 14 players. Duchene might cost 8, Karlsson might cost 12.5, so we'd then be at 72M on 16 players. A very conservative estimate for the cap in 19-20 would be 82M. So we'd have an additional 10M (14.65M with full LTIR) to spend on Dzingel (4M?), White (2M?), Wolanin (No idea at this point, way too early, could swing anywhere from 1M-4M), and 4 800k type bodies.

This is before even considering buying out Ryan or Gaborik, or trading away players like Smith in order to clear further cap.

If we continue to spend in the 68M range, that shows you how severely it handicaps this team, our ability to retain stars, and our ability to compete.

A major issue being a budget team, we cannot make mistakes. Even minor mistakes contract wise completely bury us. Many people disagree with me, but I think it's the reason why we're in a situation where a Karlsson trade is even a worthwhile consideration. We just have too much bad money that when you combine it with our already suffocating player salary budget, it makes the plausibility of icing a competitive team with Karlsson at market value (10.5-12.5M+) impossible. If we could spend to the cap, there'd be no doubt in my mind as long as he wanted to stay, we'd re-sign Karlsson.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,113
30,328
I'm curious

I haven't seen a breakdown of what happens if EM wakes up tomorrow and declares "I don't care! I'm spending to the cap!"

Does that extra 10M(?) mean that all dead money, buy outs and raises are done, a really good team is iced, and we as a fan base can start worrying about other stuff? Can anyone break it down?
We have ~59 mil committed to next season for 19 players. We need to re-sign Stone and Ceci, so if we estimate 12 mil for them combined to be safe, that puts us at ~71 mil. The cap is projected to be ~80 mil, so we could theoretically add 9 mil for that season thought that's not really realistic with Duchene and Karlsson needing new deals a year later. I suppose if we could find a deal like when Mtl signed Radulov for a year, that could make for a pretty competitive team;

Hoffman-Duchene-Dzingel
Kovalchuk-Brown-Stone
Smith-Pageau-White
Formenton-Chlapik-Pyatt

Chabot-Karlsson
Harpur-Ceci
Wolanin-Boro

Anderson
Condon

Still has a suspect D, and goaltending could break the team. Alternatively, we could look for a Dman or two; Carlsson and Green are UFA, though I doubt they sign here, J.Johnson isn't what he used to be but could be an option. Emelin is UFA and while I'm not a fan of him in a top 4 role, he could be a really good 3rd pair guy.

Chabot-Karlsson
J.Johnson-Ceci
Emelin-Wolanin/Boro/Harpur

Not sure that's much better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pzeeman

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,113
30,328
We have about a 59M cap hit next year, we only will have Stone+Ceci+Claesson (12M-14M combined?) to sign, and will need one extra body that will cost in the 800k range.

That would put us at about 73M out of 80M before we make any additions at all. Keep in mind, if we can potentially bank as much as 4.65M in additional cap space if we exceed the 80M cap by placing Mac on LTIR.

I'd forgotten that MacA's hit is still included in capfriendly's numbers, good point. Having said that, we currently have 12 forwards and 5 D signed, so we already have that one extra body if Stone, Ceci and Claesson get signed. We might not keep McCormick (on a one way deal btw), Wolanin and Chlapik up, but they might get replaced by other guys on similar cost deals (Brown, Formenton, Batherson, Englund, Jaros for example)
 

branch

#GirlBoss #Vibes
Jan 12, 2008
8,837
7,233
I think if we want to be competitive next year we should not use Anderson or Condon.
 

danielpalfredsson

youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
Aug 14, 2013
16,575
9,269
I think if we want to be competitive next year we should not use Anderson or Condon.

I'm confident Anderson can bounce back if he has a more consistent team in front of him. Getting rid of Boucher, or Boucher altering his system to something more player friendly might go a long way towards accomplishing that.

I don't think it's a given that Anderson is done. He's shown an ability to still play high level hockey this year. Anderson has had a lot of good games in 2018, so if it was a case where he has regressed due to age, I don't think he would have been capable of having those kind of highs this season.
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
We have about a 59M cap hit next year, we only will have Stone+Ceci+Claesson (12M-14M combined?) to sign, and will need one extra body that will cost in the 800k range.

That would put us at about 73M out of 80M before we make any additions at all. Keep in mind, if we can potentially bank as much as 4.65M in additional cap space if we exceed the 80M cap by placing Mac on LTIR.

In 19-20, with the aforementioned 13M put towards Stone+Ceci+Claesson, we'd have spent 52M on 14 players. Duchene might cost 8, Karlsson might cost 12.5, so we'd then be at 72M on 16 players. A very conservative estimate for the cap in 19-20 would be 82M. So we'd have an additional 10M (14.65M with full LTIR) to spend on Dzingel (4M?), White (2M?), Wolanin (No idea at this point, way too early, could swing anywhere from 1M-4M), and 4 800k type bodies.

This is before even considering buying out Ryan or Gaborik, or trading away players like Smith in order to clear further cap.

If we continue to spend in the 68M range, that shows you how severely it handicaps this team, our ability to retain stars, and our ability to compete.

A major issue being a budget team, we cannot make mistakes. Even minor mistakes contract wise completely bury us. Many people disagree with me, but I think it's the reason why we're in a situation where a Karlsson trade is even a worthwhile consideration. We just have too much bad money that when you combine it with our already suffocating player salary budget, it makes the plausibility of icing a competitive team with Karlsson at market value (10.5-12.5M+) impossible. If we could spend to the cap, there'd be no doubt in my mind as long as he wanted to stay, we'd re-sign Karlsson.
Yep the biggest issue as to why this team has had little nhl capable players to fill holes in the lineup,playing in Bing/Belle..Whenever injuries come up ,we keep trading away picks to save money,it has been very damaging
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,113
30,328
I think if we want to be competitive next year we should not use Anderson or Condon.

Maybe Gustavson beats out Anderson and Condon, Condon get's burried (a cap saving roughly equivalent to the cost of paying Gus).

Anderson has a tendency to follow up a bad year with a great one, though this year is easily the worst I've seen of him since he last year in Colorado.
 

branch

#GirlBoss #Vibes
Jan 12, 2008
8,837
7,233
Maybe Gustavson beats out Anderson and Condon, Condon get's burried (a cap saving roughly equivalent to the cost of paying Gus).

Anderson has a tendency to follow up a bad year with a great one, though this year is easily the worst I've seen of him since he last year in Colorado.

That's fair. However it's hard to have confidence in them after their atrocious play this year.
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
That's fair. However it's hard to have confidence in them after their atrocious play this year.
For me early it was the forwards ,the couldnt find the net at all....There was quite a few winnable games in which the goaltending was decent...And the forwards let the team down ,we need to score more and do it on a far far more consistent level...The forcheck and possession game our forwards lack, has caused all sorts of issues
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix

Upgrayedd

Earn'em and Burn'em
Oct 14, 2010
5,306
1,610
Ottawa
We have about a 59M cap hit next year, we only will have Stone+Ceci+Claesson (12M-14M combined?) to sign, and will need one extra body that will cost in the 800k range.

That would put us at about 73M out of 80M before we make any additions at all. Keep in mind, if we can potentially bank as much as 4.65M in additional cap space if we exceed the 80M cap by placing Mac on LTIR.

In 19-20, with the aforementioned 13M put towards Stone+Ceci+Claesson, we'd have spent 52M on 14 players. Duchene might cost 8, Karlsson might cost 12.5, so we'd then be at 72M on 16 players. A very conservative estimate for the cap in 19-20 would be 82M. So we'd have an additional 10M (14.65M with full LTIR) to spend on Dzingel (4M?), White (2M?), Wolanin (No idea at this point, way too early, could swing anywhere from 1M-4M), and 4 800k type bodies.

This is before even considering buying out Ryan or Gaborik, or trading away players like Smith in order to clear further cap.

If we continue to spend in the 68M range, that shows you how severely it handicaps this team, our ability to retain stars, and our ability to compete.

A major issue being a budget team, we cannot make mistakes. Even minor mistakes contract wise completely bury us. Many people disagree with me, but I think it's the reason why we're in a situation where a Karlsson trade is even a worthwhile consideration. We just have too much bad money that when you combine it with our already suffocating player salary budget, it makes the plausibility of icing a competitive team with Karlsson at market value (10.5-12.5M+) impossible. If we could spend to the cap, there'd be no doubt in my mind as long as he wanted to stay, we'd re-sign Karlsson.

Nailed it! We have zero wiggle room for error which is unacceptable imo in pro sports.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,113
30,328
That's fair. However it's hard to have confidence in them after their atrocious play this year.

So have confidence in Gus!

Seriously though, Anderson and Condon's play 5 months after the end of last season is night and day. They are both capable of bouncing back though I get the hesitance in relying on it. Look at Niemi as an example of a guy that bounced back. Hellebyuck is a bit younger, but he bounced back in a big way too.
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
Nailed it! We have zero wiggle room for error which is unacceptable imo in pro sports.
Yep the Greening,Cowen fiasco was the first indication...Hammond ,The Zibby trade etc.etc....

EM needs to spend to the cap ,keep all of our best players and ride out some of the dead money next season
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,703
9,650
Montreal, Canada
7.5 on a guy who plays in the top six but only puts up 30 points.
2.5 on a backup goalie
2.5 on a 4th liner that is washed up and can’t really play anymore

Money well spent.

Every team has bad contracts but it's true that some are hurting a budget team

- Ryan is close to a 50 pts pace though (which is easily top-6 forward production), problem with him is to stay healthy and keep the rhythm. It is also important to note that putting numbers on a Boucher's system is not the easiest thing to do. Elite players like Karlsson and Stone can do that, and Duchene and Hoffman to an extent too because they are close to Elite but outside of them, nobody had "good" numbers under Boucher. Look at Brassard, 60 pts pace for 2 straight years with the Rangers, goes to Ottawa and puts 39 pts. If Ryan can produce at a 50-60 pts pace, then he is just an overpaid top-6 forward, and not a huge problem like many seem to imply. But on a budget poor ass team like Ottawa, every freaking dollar counts. Hard to play "in the big leagues" with such financial constraints.

- Condon was a big mistake as soon as it happened. I have no idea why Dorion gave him so much money and term right away. He was good when Andy had to leave but overall, he had an average season. You could find many better backups and they are not paid like that.

- Burrows was also a mistake as soon as it happened. He would have been fine as a rental (and not paying Dahlen then) but he probably didn't want to come to Ottawa without an extension in place. In that case, Dorion should have realized that it implied too much commitment (money, term and asset given) and just explore another (cheaper) option

- Gaborik is a dead cap. He can still produce 3rd line numbers when he is healthy but at some point, considering his age and injury history, there's so much abuse a body can take. He is a lesser financial commitment than Phaneuf, but even if Dion is too slow, he has many other qualities and can still contribute to a hockey team, which is what he seems to do well in LA. Phaneuf was overpaid but not dead money like Gaborik is.

- Anderson is the only arguable other one but at the time of the signing, 2 years at 4.75 seemed reasonable. However, considering his age, I thought it was too soon to extend him and now we are stuck with another uncertain contract going forward.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,703
9,650
Montreal, Canada
I'm curious

I haven't seen a breakdown of what happens if EM wakes up tomorrow and declares "I don't care! I'm spending to the cap!"

Does that extra 10M(?) mean that all dead money, buy outs and raises are done, a really good team is iced, and we as a fan base can start worrying about other stuff? Can anyone break it down?

Here's what I am doing if spending money is not an issue

- Sign Stone 8 x $7,500,000
- Sign Ceci 5 x $4,200,000
- Sign Wideman 2 x $1,200,000
- Sign Paul 2 x $900,000
- Draft Svechnikov (?) and sign him 3 x $925,000
- Trade Smith and Condon for picks (retain a bit IF needed)
- Buy out Gaborik
- Buy out Burrows

My line-up :

Hoffman-Duchene-Svechnikov (?)
Ryan-Brown-Stone
Dzingel-Pageau-White
Paul-Chlapik-Pyatt
McCormick

Chabot-Karlsson
Wolanin-Ceci
Borowiecki-Wideman
Harpur

???????
Anderson


That line up cap hit is ~63 M$ with Phaneuf retention and Gaborik + Burrows buyouts. Salary expenditure is probably a bit over that but not by a ton (won't calculate) and my biggest need is a goalie. Get the best one you can on the UFA market. I am keeping Andy to have him retiring with the Sens and we all know he can rebound next year, but he's not my N.1 anymore, he is the vet to help out the younger goalie.

I'm leaving space in the budget because the following year you have Karlsson and Duchene extensions. I might trade Dzingel depending on ready prospects and how much he will be asking. Salary cap is going to be over 80 M$ so seriously I'm not too worried. PLUS, I am one year closer to a new arena downtown, which will make finances of the team much better.

I am investing in COACHING though.

=======================================

2019-20 :

Sign Karlsson 8 x $11,500,000
Sign Duchene 8 x $7,500,000
Sign Dzingel 3 x $3,000,000
Sign White 2 x $1,200,000
Sign Wolanin 2 x $1,200,000

My line-up :

Hoffman-Duchene-Svechnikov (?) (crazy talent line)
Ryan-Brown-Stone (crazy IQ line)
Formenton-Pageau-Dzingel (crazy speed line)
Paul-Chlapik-White
Batherson

Chabot-Karlsson
Wolanin-Ceci
Borowiecki-Wideman
Harpur-Jaros

Gustavsson
Anderson


That line-up cap hit is ~71.4, even with Duchene, Karlsson, Stone, Ceci, Dzingel extensions AND keeping Ryan. Bobby will only have 2 years left, easier to trade and his salary coming off the books will make it easy to extend some of the young players that progress the most (Chabot, Brown, etc)

We could even invest in the best LD possible to solidify the team's defense but that's a concept that all the team needs to buy in. And at this point, they need a new coaching staff.

This team is in a fantastic position going forward with a lot of young talent. If they can't do anything with that, it would be a real shame.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: topshelf15

YouGotAStuGoing

Registered User
Mar 26, 2010
19,339
4,913
Ottawa, Ontario
I'm curious

I haven't seen a breakdown of what happens if EM wakes up tomorrow and declares "I don't care! I'm spending to the cap!"
A commitment from Melnyk to spend would go beyond the player roster. With the cap in place, the real place where teams gain advantage is through scouting and the investment made there. We have one of the thinnest scouting staffs as is. The short-term benefit, sure, could be something like what Xspyrit suggests. But the long-term benefit would become more and more apparent with each passing year.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->