DeepFrickinValue
Formally Ruffus
- May 14, 2015
- 5,341
- 4,259
Many budget teams(preds..... OK maybe only preds) are perennial playoff teams. Just need a good draft and develop strategy.
Many budget teams(preds..... OK maybe only preds) are perennial playoff teams. Just need a good draft and develop strategy.
The jets have spent alot of money on upgrades to the MTS Center and Iceplex. That money came from profits earned from the team, which could of been spent on players if they chose. This tells us that the money was there to spend if need be. A situational budget
I heard Chipman say this too. Who cares about the building, people are there to watch games not admire the building, I'd rather see that money being spent on the roster.
The jets have spent alot of money on upgrades to the MTS Center and Iceplex. That money came from profits earned from the team, which could of been spent on players if they chose. This tells us that the money was there to spend if need be. A situational budget
I heard Chipman say this too. Who cares about the building, people are there to watch games not admire the building, I'd rather see that money being spent on the roster.
You can go over a budget line, but not a cap. Jets player budget might be mid-cap in most seasons until they have a roster that warrants a budget close to or at the cap.
Budget is a much more accurate word than cap. If a business doesn't follow a budget for all of their budget lines (major and minor) it doesn't stay in business long. Hockey also has the added complexity of the league cap so that teams have to manage that budgetary expenditure to stay under a league wide line and overspending in one year, regardless of current and projected revenues, could set up a situation in which personnel decisions could be limited in the future. Both of those financial restraints need to be planned for years into the future and they each afect the other.
I heard Chipman say this too. Who cares about the building, people are there to watch games not admire the building, I'd rather see that money being spent on the roster.
Budget, cap, same difference. Just terminology for media and fans to chat about. Cap?, no way, we don't have a cap. Budget, of course, every business has a budget.
To say that TSNE could decide to spend over the budget if the timing is right, but not a 'cap' is just semantics. This is not a publicly traded company. It's the same decision from a TSNE perspective. So if it makes you feel good, call it a budget instead of a cap. It's the same difference.
There is a reason. In the salary cap environment a team can't just choose to spend over the cap. The upper limit of the CBA salary cap is a hard limit. An internal budget can be exceeded without penalty from the league.
However, that has nothing to do with this thread. This thread is about a Jets internal cap. The Jets can chose to exceed the Jets internal 'cap' or 'budget' whenever they want to. It's just a management / business decision that would be made at that time.
Unless your argument is that the original poster is saying that the Jets internal cap = the CBA salary cap.
No I pointed out earlier that chipman responded "no" when asked if the team had an internal cap
OK. Then I don't understand your previous post where you counter argue mine.
Something I'll just toss out there: who really cares at this point whether or not the Jets have an internal cap? How are the Jets being handicapped by an inability to spend?
Let's start with UFAs. For the most part, useful UFAs don't really have Winnipeg on their radar. So that leaves a lot of marginally effective to completely useless UFAs (probably 60-75% of the UFA class in any given year) that we wouldn't be signing as the result of an internal cap. The most effective UFAs we've signed or had the chance to sign have been the bargain basement guys like Montoya, Stempniak and Wellwood.
So what does that leave. Taking on salary by trading our prospects/picks for roster players? No indication that Chevy wants to do that, save for the worthless Setoguchi deal. Retaining core vets heading to UFA? Struck out on Frolik (though it's not entirely clear that was budget-driven) and managed to retain Buff. Ability to sign all our cost-controlled players that will demand top dollar? Still remains to be seen.
The very blunt and tl;dr version is that I don't think budget consciousness is the biggest threat to success with this management group. Ability (or lack thereof) to identify effective NHL players may very well be.
Anaheim is a budget team
... and traded away our captain because he wanted something close to market value (Remember when we were going to build our team around character players who wanted to be here??) ...
What were you prepared to offer him? If the Jets had re-signed him for $6x6 (as was rumoured his ask to be), would you have been content with that contract?
Something I'll just toss out there: who really cares at this point whether or not the Jets have an internal cap? How are the Jets being handicapped by an inability to spend?
Let's start with UFAs. For the most part, useful UFAs don't really have Winnipeg on their radar. So that leaves a lot of marginally effective to completely useless UFAs (probably 60-75% of the UFA class in any given year) that we wouldn't be signing as the result of an internal cap. The most effective UFAs we've signed or had the chance to sign have been the bargain basement guys like Montoya, Stempniak and Wellwood.
So what does that leave. Taking on salary by trading our prospects/picks for roster players? No indication that Chevy wants to do that, save for the worthless Setoguchi deal. Retaining core vets heading to UFA? Struck out on Frolik (though it's not entirely clear that was budget-driven) and managed to retain Buff. Ability to sign all our cost-controlled players that will demand top dollar? Still remains to be seen.
The very blunt and tl;dr version is that I don't think budget consciousness is the biggest threat to success with this management group. Ability (or lack thereof) to identify effective NHL players may very well be.