Discussion in 'Montreal Canadiens' started by montreal, Mar 14, 2017.
If he retires, the contract is voided? We wouldn't be on the hook for his caphit
If a player signs a multi-year contract and is age 35 or older, the player's individual cap hit counts against the team's cap hit regardless of whether, or where, the player is active.
Pace of Markov this year: 49 points.
Those 36 points might not look as much but being 15th in ppg among d-men is pretty good.
Had he played 82 games he would have been at par with Josi and Klinsberg on 10th in points.
Anything under 6M is a good deal unless you expect him to decline.
But I read about this decline year after year and it does not come.
I am pretty sure that he is ready to sign for one year.
BTW, after 35, when you retire, you still count against the cap.
Gonchar is actually a very good comparable to Markov imo. He had 27 points in 45 games when he was 38 years old (49 point pace), and then went to score 22p in 76 games the next season, before ending his career with 14 points in 48g.
I'd say we should thread carefully with Markov and not make the same mistake Dallas did when they signed Gonchar to a 2 year contract at 5M per. At that age players can easily fall off a cliff very fast.
oh I didn't know that, is it only for players 35 and older?
Yes, the only thing that can stop cap from counting is injury reserve.
The only other cap penalties I know of are buyouts and cap recapture penalties.
What I'd like to know is if 35+ bonus deals are still allowed. I knew they used to be but that might solve the issue if there's a games played or points bonus on markov's deal.
- Trade Patch yes because his next contract will be a headache.
- Trade Weber no because their contract will not be hard to trade in the next 5 years. No sense giving up on our core now when we likely get more in value for Weber after his contract goes from $12M, $6M, $6M, $6M, $3M, $1M, $1M, $1M. Best time to trade Weber is a few years from now.
- Trade Price no because were not getting the value you think were getting. Lock him up for 5 or 6 years at $9M AAV and make him the highest paid goalie (Lundqvist is at $8.5M). Price and Weber is a great card to use to convince others to sign in Montreal. Lets use this card while having one of the best goalies in the world.
Looked at the Habs cap situation over the next 3 years a bit further:
2017-2018 ($77M Salary Cap): $4M (+/-) in cap space. This is with everybody back (increase in salaries to Galchenyuk and Radulov). This also includes both Pleky and Emelin (Last year of their current deals). Whoever we lose in the Expansion draft would have to be factored out. So if we acquire a top 2 center, Pleky or Emelin have to be off loaded obviously.
2018-2019 ($78.5M Salary Cap): $9M (+/-) in cap space. Price ($9M), Markov ($4M), Danault ($4M). McCarron, Davidson, and Jerabek get slight increases.
2019-2020 ($80M Salary Cap): $8M (+/-) in cap space. Markov is not re signed. Patch, Lehkonen, and Byron get new contracts.
This clearly shows we have room to acquire someone like Duchene and then have cap space to re sign him afterwards. That's it though! We have room to add one key piece IMO. This is why I try to trade Patch now for another top 2 center. His next contract will be a trap contract in his decline years while we can get value for him now and also acquire a top 2 center who can score 20-30 goals.
Keep in mind Gonchar was still an asset for us that last year. Even though the offence wasn't there he still gave us quality top-4 minutes. So if Markov has a similar points drop he'll likely still be able to play as a #4 guy.
So signing him to 1 or 2 years all depends on the cap hit. If we are giving 5-6m then I probably want a 1 year deal, if he's willing to drop down to 4.5m per then 2 years is probably a good deal for the team.
Signing Markov to a 2 year deal is not a smart move when it comes to managing a Cap. The only way I agree that a 2 year deal makes sense for the Habs is a 2 year deal at $3.5M (Markov won't do this). Otherwise, give Markov $5M (+/-) this year and reevaluate next off season. One season is a long time for a 38/39 year old. He will be 39/40 in year 2.
Also, what happens if Markov retires after one season. Then were screwed over with very valuable cap space. Unlikely Markov does this to us but it's possible. Why put the team and Markov in this situation?
1 year deal, 1 year at a time for Markov.
Well if Markov really wants a 2 year deal then he's not likely to retire after the 1st season so that's irrelevant. The real risk is if his play declines and he's no longer worth the cap hit.
If his play declines we are screwed cap hit or no cap hit because even with cap space our GM is probably incapable of acquiring a top pairing defenceman anyways.
It is relevant. How do you not understand that a NHL season at age 38/39 is a very long season and lots can happen and your priories might change? No offense but you can hold onto the 2 year deal all you want but that's not a smart way to manage your Cap. It's likely Markov makes $5M (+/-) this year and $4M (+/-) next year. So that's $4.5M AAV. You willing to take a risk at saving $0.5M or $1M (at best) cap space per year? The risk of Markov retiring and then your screwed over $4-5M of cap space in year two if he does retire for reasons we can't control today?
In truth, we not cap crunched in the next two season. It's the season after where Patch, Lehkonen, Byron have to be resigned. This is where we need to be careful with our Cap. Markov is age 40/41 heading into that year and likely retires.
Agreed for Pac and Price. Weber, I'd trade. His contract does look better when it drops to 6M$, but people are starting to wonder how many years he has left being one of the best Ds in the league with or without reason, this is not the debate. I would not wait until he has his 1st ''bad'' season to trade him because then his value would dramatically drop and the value that we'd get would greatly suffer. It's a bit of a gamble and it all depends on our respective profiles, but I'd rather trade him one year too early than one year too late.
I agree with this. It's also win-win for both Markov (more money/season) and the team (cap management in case of retirement or drastic drop in play)
IF the contract is signed when the guy is 35+, of course.
Salary Cap Is Staying Flat 73 Million +/-
That's great for the Habs actually. This puts a lot of other teams in hot water like Chicago, LA, Minnesota to name a few.
Yeah Chicago is screwed. 5 million over and a bunch of big contracts with NMC's.
Bergy go get Panarin or hjalmarsson
That's good for us, we have a ******** of cap space. I think MB is pretty good at managing it.
Didn't Caps' GM said if the cap went up to 77, he would try re-signing Oshie? I wonder if he's a priority now.
One of their beat writers reported that a core player is about to be traded for picks and/or prospects.... Someone other than toews.
He also said that Kruger is almost certainly done with the Hawks.
It sounds like the Hawks have been bracing for this.
This will make it harder to get rid of Plekanec and/or Emelin. Hopefully they already plan on taking one of them. But with all the rumors that they are going to get premiums to take bad contracts from desperate teams, I fail to see how one of them would be more attractive than Benn or one of our AHL guy.
It's really the best of a bad situation. Both 1 year left, they are not as bad as say Dustin Brown, Ryan Callahan, etc.
This is for from ideal but at least we're not in a Chicago type situation or Washington where they have a bunch of guys they have to re-sign.
I fully expect Chicago to move one of Seabrook or Hjalmarsson, off chance of Hossa but the recapture is too much of a risk.
No chance in hell we're unloading Plekanec AND Emelin, though. One if we're lucky.
Panarin just signed at a discount, no way he gets traded.
Hossa claims he intends to play out his contract but will he really at $1m per year for 4 more years? He is still playing well and could retire to get more in Europe screwing even more the Hawks.
Separate names with a comma.