Speculation: Roster Building Thread I (2019/2020) - A Day in the Life

[NYR Viper]

The average salary in the NHL is $3m. Namestnikov should be at it above that just due to his versatility. $3.25m or so is right. Gorton paid him accordingly with the info they had. I’m sure Namestnikov wanted a longer deal for bigger money but they ended up at 2x$4m.

This team isn’t in cap trouble because they overpaid Namestnikov by $750k.

 

[SA16]

The average salary in the NHL is $3m. Namestnikov should be at it above that just due to his versatility. $3.25m or so is right. Gorton paid him accordingly with the info they had. I’m sure Namestnikov wanted a longer deal for bigger money but they ended up at 2x$4m.

This team isn’t in cap trouble because they overpaid Namestnikov by $750k.

What is the median salary - excluding ELCs? (Average should exclude ELC also or it is misleading)

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

What is the median salary - excluding ELCs? (Average should exclude ELC also or it is misleading)

Don't know how accurate this is but says last season average salary around $3MM but looks like that includes ELCs.


Average NHL salary by team 2018/19 | Statista

 

[doomscroll]

Don't know how accurate this is but says last season average salary was $3.54MM but looks like that includes ELCs.


Average NHL salary by team 2018/19 | Statista

That source says the Kings’ average salary was the highest at $3.54m, the league average was around $3m

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

That source says the Kings’ average salary was the highest at $3.54m, the league average was around $3m

That's what I get for not reading it fully!

 

[Anzi]

The average salary in the NHL is $3m. Namestnikov should be at it above that just due to his versatility. $3.25m or so is right. Gorton paid him accordingly with the info they had. I’m sure Namestnikov wanted a longer deal for bigger money but they ended up at 2x$4m.

This team isn’t in cap trouble because they overpaid Namestnikov by $750k.

Not the right way to think about it imo. That extra $750k makes him significantly less desirable as a trade target to other teams. Would need to retain nearly 20% of his salary just to get it to $3.25m if that's what we're considering is the right value for him (which is debatable to begin with). And I keep hearing people say stuff like, "paying Trouba $500k-1m more than he is worth isn't a big deal" which is probably true in the grand scheme of things but when you start saying that about even guys further down your depth chart, you're going to start having problems. Our ELC guys and Zibanejad are currently on bargain contracts but once they start looking for raises in about 2-3 years, cap space will get tight.

 

[Richter35]

Not the right way to think about it imo. That extra $750k makes him significantly less desirable as a trade target to other teams. Would need to retain nearly 20% of his salary just to get it to $3.25m if that's what we're considering is the right value for him (which is debatable to begin with). And I keep hearing people say stuff like, "paying Trouba $500k-1m more than he is worth isn't a big deal" which is probably true in the grand scheme of things but when you start saying that about even guys further down your depth chart, you're going to start having problems. Our ELC guys and Zibanejad are currently on bargain contracts but once they start looking for raises in about 2-3 years, cap space will get tight.

Good thing we have 25m in contracts and dead money off the books in 21. It’ll be fine

 

[NYR Viper]

Not the right way to think about it imo. That extra $750k makes him significantly less desirable as a trade target to other teams. Would need to retain nearly 20% of his salary just to get it to $3.25m if that's what we're considering is the right value for him (which is debatable to begin with). And I keep hearing people say stuff like, "paying Trouba $500k-1m more than he is worth isn't a big deal" which is probably true in the grand scheme of things but when you start saying that about even guys further down your depth chart, you're going to start having problems. Our ELC guys and Zibanejad are currently on bargain contracts but once they start looking for raises in about 2-3 years, cap space will get tight.

What I said is accurate. Namestnikov overpaid by $750k is not the reason this team is in a cap crunch. Staal. Smith. Hank. Girardi’s buyout. Shattenkirk’s buyout.

It’s like buying a house and realizing the foundation is shit, you have termites, the windows don’t close and the electrical has been gnawed on by rats but complaining that the front door is the wrong color.

 

[RangerBoy]

The team is in cap trouble because they had so much money committed and they add nearly $20M in commitments to two players. Their only way out of the cap trouble was buying out Shattenkirk. The cap issues haven't gone away with Shattenkirk being bought out. Smith is still here and good luck to the Rangers navigating with that contract on their books in the next two years.

The Shattenkirk buyout gave them a little bit of breathing room but it's very tight. The Rangers better hope they don't have many injuries this season. The Rangers have over nearly $5M in performance bonuses and they don't have much room to absorb those bonuses in their cap for this season. The money would be rolled over into the 20-21 cap which only exacerbate the cap issues. Kakko is the guy to watch for the bonuses.

The cap situation for the next two seasons will be very tight.

 

[wafflepadsave]

The team is in cap trouble because they had so much money committed and they add nearly $20M in commitments to two players. Their only way out of the cap trouble was buying out Shattenkirk. The cap issues haven't gone away with Shattenkirk being bought out. Smith is still here and good luck to the Rangers navigating with that contract on their books in the next two years.

The Shattenkirk buyout gave them a little bit of breathing room but it's very tight. The Rangers better hope they don't have many injuries this season. The Rangers have over nearly $5M in performance bonuses and they don't have much room to absorb those bonuses in their cap for this season. The money would be rolled over into the 20-21 cap which only exacerbate the cap issues. Kakko is the guy to watch for the bonuses.

The cap situation for the next two seasons will be very tight.

If the season goes as many here think, some fun hockey to watch but in the end, not enough quality defense sinks the ship. Another partial sale at the deadline might be enough get through next season with more Hartford guys being promoted up to the big club..

 

[DutchShamrock]

Namestnikov isn't overpaid because he's average and paid close to it, he's overpaid because we have too many forwards and we can replace him with a guy for $1m. $4m for a replaceable forward is crippling.

 

[Anzi]

What I said is accurate. Namestnikov overpaid by $750k is not the reason this team is in a cap crunch. Staal. Smith. Hank. Girardi’s buyout. Shattenkirk’s buyout.

It’s like buying a house and realizing the foundation is ****, you have termites, the windows don’t close and the electrical has been gnawed on by rats but complaining that the front door is the wrong color.

You're right about it not being the biggest problem but it's a problem regardless. We're only allowed a certain amount of mistakes before we get capsized and if Namestnikov was paid slightly less, maybe there's a team willing to trade for him which would have made resolving the cap crunch much easier without having to resort to buying out Shattenkirk. Anyways, we just need to survive the next 2 seasons and then we can start off on a clean slate. Just need to make sure that we don't proceed to screw that up as well if the plan is to be competitive throughout the 2020s.

 

[Riche16]

What I said is accurate. Namestnikov overpaid by $750k is not the reason this team is in a cap crunch. Staal. Smith. Hank. Girardi’s buyout. Shattenkirk’s buyout.

It’s like buying a house and realizing the foundation is ****, you have termites, the windows don’t close and the electrical has been gnawed on by rats but complaining that the front door is the wrong color.

In this analogy Hank is the front door and the rest are the reason the house has issues.

 

[Mikos87]

Some of you want the 5 year tank rebuild.

Because of just how poorly Gorts and co managed their contract negotiations, you just might get that.

Not because they're doing a poor job of accumulating young assets, but because they cap crippled themselves.

I said it when it was signed- 2 Years for Names and Spooner?

Why?

Why? Take them to arbitration and get the 1 year deal.

Hopefully you get something for Names as a rental- but that signing- that extra year... guess what that cripples you next year cause of what you had to do to get around it.

The Spooner deal? Thank the lucky stars for Chiarelli.

How inept is your pro scouting to not see that guy wasn't worth a 2 year commitment? The 3+ seasons of play in Boston?

Do you keep track of what your athletes do off the ice?

These are structural issues you have to fix as an organization. The ship was a loosy-goosy under AV, but during the Torts days- we're going back to 2010-2012 where the focus was on building a culture of winning. You have to go back to that template. Not in terms of how you build the talent pool.

But in terms of how you manage their growth. Where you help the kids that you are drafting to become men.

That will help you avoid having to give multi-year, multi-million dollar deals to guys who are bound to be journeymen.

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

Namestnikov isn't overpaid because he's average and paid close to it, he's overpaid because we have too many forwards and we can replace him with a guy for $1m. $4m for a replaceable forward is crippling.

We have a lot of forwards but how many of them are under 21? Unless they all look great in camp I don't see the point of penciling all of them in for 82 games. The way Howden was playing after he tapered off, I don't think it would have been worse for him to be in the AHL with Peter Holland or some waiver fodder on the Rangers, unless they just thought Hartford was so radioactive last year

 

[Mikos87]

The Nashville Predators had a fundamental shift in their contract management after Shea Weber signed the offer sheet with Philly.

At the time they were negotiating with Suter as a UFA and all of their focus was there. Some would say that Suter and his agent were using Nashville as leverage to get that 13 year deal and drive the price up.

When they lost out on Suter, Shea Weber signed a bigger deal. Nashville had to match- despite that contract single-handedly affecting their profit lines for the nearly a decade to come due to the structure of the contract.

So what does Poile do?

He makes a promise to himself and the organization that, what happened with Weber, will never happen again.

Since then, when they have a player that they want to keep, and identify as a guy that they can win with, they will give them term.

Thats why guys like Scissons, Jarnkork, Johannson, Forsberg, Duchene, Ellis, Josi, Ekholm, Turris... all got 6 plus years on their contracts.

They will go to 7-8 years.

Once they started to go down this route- it gave them incredible value for some guys and allowed them to fill out the rest of their roster without getting top heavy.

Different teams manage their contracts in different ways.

I think the Rangers can benefit from shifting away from their current philosophy... which clearly... is not effective at cap management.

 

[kovazub94]

Namestnikov is pretty much a 3rd liner. Tampa stuck him with Stamkos and Kucherov to give a line a little bit more of a defensive conscience. It's not unheard of for teams to do that. The main guys were Stamkos and Kucherov though--and because of them Vladdy was just picking up extra garbage points from all the opportunities the other two created. That helped him to score the bigger contract.

He's overpaid--$2.5 would be more like it. Honestly he's comparable to Jesper Fast though Jesper's better defensively--same size, skill level, expect about the same point production. Fast a bit more of a North South player.

I don't see the Rangers giving him another $4 mil deal and if he's not signed at the deadline I expect they'll move him. A 2nd would be great--I'm not sure we'll get it. If somehow the Rangers are in the playoff hunt though they might hang on to him and likely we'll end up losing him next year in free agency for nothing.

Namestnikov is the same type of a player as Fast but has a better game, especially on the offensive side.

I agree with @NYR Viper that he’s overpaid by about $750k. That’s not little for his role but should not be a significant detriment either if not compounded by other cap mistakes.

 

[kovazub94]

Some of you want the 5 year tank rebuild.

Because of just how poorly Gorts and co managed their contract negotiations, you just might get that.

Not because they're doing a poor job of accumulating young assets, but because they cap crippled themselves.

I said it when it was signed- 2 Years for Names and Spooner?

Why?

Why? Take them to arbitration and get the 1 year deal.

Hopefully you get something for Names as a rental- but that signing- that extra year... guess what that cripples you next year cause of what you had to do to get around it.

The Spooner deal? Thank the lucky stars for Chiarelli.

How inept is your pro scouting to not see that guy wasn't worth a 2 year commitment? The 3+ seasons of play in Boston?

Do you keep track of what your athletes do off the ice?

These are structural issues you have to fix as an organization. The ship was a loosy-goosy under AV, but during the Torts days- we're going back to 2010-2012 where the focus was on building a culture of winning. You have to go back to that template. Not in terms of how you build the talent pool.

But in terms of how you manage their growth. Where you help the kids that you are drafting to become men.

That will help you avoid having to give multi-year, multi-million dollar deals to guys who are bound to be journeymen.

I agree that a one year contract would be better in retrospect for both Namestnikov and Spooner.

Why two years? The thinking was that with more term they’d be more desirable in a trade, will give more time to evaluate if they might be added to the future core, and let the team deal with trading Hayes and Zuke with less distractions.

 

[Ola]

The Nashville Predators had a fundamental shift in their contract management after Shea Weber signed the offer sheet with Philly.

At the time they were negotiating with Suter as a UFA and all of their focus was there. Some would say that Suter and his agent were using Nashville as leverage to get that 13 year deal and drive the price up.

When they lost out on Suter, Shea Weber signed a bigger deal. Nashville had to match- despite that contract single-handedly affecting their profit lines for the nearly a decade to come due to the structure of the contract.

So what does Poile do?

He makes a promise to himself and the organization that, what happened with Weber, will never happen again.

Since then, when they have a player that they want to keep, and identify as a guy that they can win with, they will give them term.

Thats why guys like Scissons, Jarnkork, Johannson, Forsberg, Duchene, Ellis, Josi, Ekholm, Turris... all got 6 plus years on their contracts.

They will go to 7-8 years.

Once they started to go down this route- it gave them incredible value for some guys and allowed them to fill out the rest of their roster without getting top heavy.

Different teams manage their contracts in different ways.

I think the Rangers can benefit from shifting away from their current philosophy... which clearly... is not effective at cap management.

Couldn’t agree more.

I don’t think people realize how much our current contract strategy is costing us. We have pissed away value equal if many many 1st round picks — easily — over the year.

Our rebuild is in good shape for three reasons; we got Kakko and we drafted Kravy and K’Andre. Sure nothing is a done deal, but that is three home runs by my book, at a batting average much much higher than you can count on.

And the worst thing of not forcing young players to take long contracts — is that you will eventually end up giving core vets long-term deals way into their 30s.

 

[eco's bones]

Namestnikov is the same type of a player as Fast but has a better game, especially on the offensive side.

I agree with @NYR Viper that he’s overpaid by about $750k. That’s not little for his role but should not be a significant detriment either if not compounded by other cap mistakes.

I really don't agree. He might be a little better offensively than Fast but Jesper's better defensively, a more heads up player, a smarter forechecker. Jesper plays a more North South game and if I'm in the last minute of a game protecting a lead I'm feeling a lot more comfortable putting Jesper out on the ice. To get a goal in the last minute I wouldn't want either. On the penalty kill I'm choosing Jesper over Vlad every time. And there's a reason why Jesper wins players player award all the time--his other teammates like to play with him--always good effort--very rarely does anything dumb and he's consistent.

 

[kovazub94]

I really don't agree. He might be a little better offensively than Fast but Jesper's better defensively, a more heads up player, a smarter forechecker. Jesper plays a more North South game and if I'm in the last minute of a game protecting a lead I'm feeling a lot more comfortable putting Jesper out on the ice. To get a goal in the last minute I wouldn't want either. On the penalty kill I'm choosing Jesper over Vlad every time. And there's a reason why Jesper wins players player award all the time--his other teammates like to play with him--always good effort--very rarely does anything dumb and he's consistent.

Yeah, we disagree here. I will surely give you the last point about the players player point but otherwise I think Namestnikov is either on the same level or better than Fast. Even if Namestnikov is a $3m player - it still a lot more than Fast for a reason (IMHO).

 

[Leetch3]

The Nashville Predators had a fundamental shift in their contract management after Shea Weber signed the offer sheet with Philly.

At the time they were negotiating with Suter as a UFA and all of their focus was there. Some would say that Suter and his agent were using Nashville as leverage to get that 13 year deal and drive the price up.

When they lost out on Suter, Shea Weber signed a bigger deal. Nashville had to match- despite that contract single-handedly affecting their profit lines for the nearly a decade to come due to the structure of the contract.

So what does Poile do?

He makes a promise to himself and the organization that, what happened with Weber, will never happen again.

Since then, when they have a player that they want to keep, and identify as a guy that they can win with, they will give them term.

Thats why guys like Scissons, Jarnkork, Johannson, Forsberg, Duchene, Ellis, Josi, Ekholm, Turris... all got 6 plus years on their contracts.

They will go to 7-8 years.

Once they started to go down this route- it gave them incredible value for some guys and allowed them to fill out the rest of their roster without getting top heavy.

Different teams manage their contracts in different ways.

I think the Rangers can benefit from shifting away from their current philosophy... which clearly... is not effective at cap management.

and nashville just had to give away pk subban for nothing because they are stuck paying kyle turris $6 mil per year for the next 5 years to be their 3rd line center. how is that a better strategy than giving names a 2 year deal?

people always talk about the benefits of signing guys to long term deals and then point out to the contracts that worked out in the teams favor as if 1) there aren't long term deals that turned out bad and 2)the players don't know that the deal could turn bad for them and therefore wants a shorter deal

 

[Riche16]

So by that thinking we were right to sign Skjei to his term and $

(Drops grenade and then leaves room)

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

So by that thinking we were right to sign Skjei to his term and $

(Drops grenade and then leaves room)

Hey that contract could be a bargain if he ever plays better than his rookie season!

 

[Mac n Gs]

So by that thinking we were right to sign Skjei to his term and $

(Drops grenade and then leaves room)

I was in favor of that signing at the time, and I still am, but the counter-arguments centered around overpaying him for an inflated secondary assist rate were very valid. I'm saying this in hindsight, but the more prescient move may have been to go long-term on Hayes and bridge Skjei. His powerplay time has significantly dropped each season since then also.