If a coaches salary counted against the cap what's the most you would pay a coach

[shelf]

If all coaches salary counted against the cap how much would you pay the top coach of the NHL

Click to read more...

 

[DL44]

5% of the cap is what I would allocate..

 

[gump116]

How much do non-cap teams pay their coach? That's probably the market since they could spend that money on players instead.

 

[SotasicA]

I'd get the top 3 coaches in the game and pay them 10m each.

 

[Ryan Michaels]

I'd get the top 3 coaches in the game and pay them 10m each.

 

[tony d]

3.5 million per.

 

[bobholly39]

Voted 3-5.

1-3 is low. I'd probably try to get a coach for 2-3M, but if i could land a better coach (or even - a top coach) - i'd be willing to go to the 3-5 range. Paying more would be dumb if part of cap

 

[Hawkaholic]

league minimum

 

[Steerpike]

It's interesting how little coaching seems to matter in hockey.

In the NFL you probably spend 20% of the cap to get Belichick.

In the NHL you have Toronto continuously poaching the most highly regarded coaches and then... well as Townes Van Zandt would say:

Gather up the gold you've found
You fool, it's only moonlight
And if you try to take it home
Your hands will turn to butter
You better leave this dream alone
Try to find another

 

[HanSolo]

Misclicked. Meant to pick 7-9. Coaching is one of the most important positions in the organization imo. However there is a high chance of turnover so the 10+ million range is probably too much.

 

[North Cole]

Well considering coaches are currently paid in an unregulated market where you would expect salaries to be higher (similar to player salaries pre-cap)...and the average is like 3m now, I dont see why you would pay the same or more.

1-3m max. Support functions are always paid less. Like the difference between operations and HR, you need HR to hire people and ensure you have a workforce. But they dont inherently have an impact on the companies ability to generate revenue, even though the labour of the employees they hire, does.

 

[Chardo]

It's interesting how little coaching seems to matter in hockey.

Try telling that to the Islanders

 

[Steerpike]

Try telling that to the Islanders

Trotz seems to be a great coach. But it's worth noting that the Caps didn't think he was worth more than what ... 3 million? And they don't seem to be suffering from his absence.

I'll grant that a coach who has lost the locker room is a huge problem. However the difference between one coach who has the team playing hard and implementing modern systems and another coach who has the team playing hard and implementing modern systems .... is overstated.

All of the teams have access to the same video. They can all watch an endless amount of whatever breakout you have. You can't copywrite your forechecking system. Every team knows how to trap.

 

[DieSendungmitderMaus]

Misclicked. Meant to pick 7-9. Coaching is one of the most important positions in the organization imo. However there is a high chance of turnover so the 10+ million range is probably too much.

Imo the turnover suggests that coaching isn't really that important.

Also given that there's only 31 jobs to go around, I'd say the market would be less of a market for coaches than for centres or D-men since acquiring or paying a great #2 centre won't have much diminishing returns while spending a bunch of money on coaches who aren't #1 would (unless only the head coach counts against the cap and assistants don't, which would lead to all kinds of angle-shooting opportunities).

So I'd liken it to the goalie market- there may well be a few coaches that are worth paying top dollar for but unless you have one of those, it's probably better to try your luck in the bargain section unless you've got an immediate (and closing) cup window where security is more important than spending efficiency and you mostly just want to go for a sure thing that may be overpaid instead of a risk that will often be good but may sometimes fail spectacularly.

 

[Rogue Leader]

I can only say I am so glad Babcock is gone!!!

 

[Lebowski]

Considering the top coaches go around 5M right now without counting against the cap, I would think the average team would be willing to be pay significantly less than that if they were to be counted against the cap.

 

[HanSolo]

Imo the turnover suggests that coaching isn't really that important.

Also given that there's only 31 jobs to go around, I'd say the market would be less of a market for coaches than for centres or D-men since acquiring or paying a great #2 centre won't have much diminishing returns while spending a bunch of money on coaches who aren't #1 would (unless only the head coach counts against the cap and assistants don't, which would lead to all kinds of angle-shooting opportunities).

So I'd liken it to the goalie market- there may well be a few coaches that are worth paying top dollar for but unless you have one of those, it's probably better to try your luck in the bargain section unless you've got an immediate (and closing) cup window where security is more important than spending efficiency and you mostly just want to go for a sure thing that may be overpaid instead of a risk that will often be good but may sometimes fail spectacularly.

I think it's easier for a coach to lose the room but I don't think that means the position is unimportant. Seeing the disparity in the level of play just between Randy Carlyle and noted not a coach Bob Murray, it can have a big influence on a team's level of play. Game prep is everything.

It's my personal theory that when the Golden Knights entered the league, the team under Gallant had strict fitness requirements to allow them to be respectable and ended up making them one of the fastest, and thus, dominant teams in the league. Ever since that first season the team has gotten slower and slower and less and less capable of running their high quality forecheck, and personally I think there's been a policy shift towards letting players be responsible for their own fitness instead of running it in military fashion.