The Avs "salary structure"

[IceRat]

I don't think that's the case any more if Toews and Kane set the price of an elite player at $10m-$12m per season.

Kane and Toews will only (re)set the bar for a bad GM not an elite player

 

[CB Joe]

Kane and Toews will only (re)set the bar for a bad GM not an elite player

An elite player asking for ~14.3% of the salary cap isn't way off base. The number is a lot higher than people expect because GM's were skirting the salary cap by offering "false" years on contracts in order to bring down the caphit of the player. The deals Getzlaf and Perry signed last season were each worth ~$13.4% of the salary cap. The Ducks are still a competitive team despite having two large contracts. The Ducks GM, Murray, just won GM of the year too.

 

[ABasin]

So we give in to O'Reilly, then give in to EJ, Varly, Duchene, Mac...uh oh, here comes a top line making 9M each

Paying players their market value is not 'giving in'.

 

[Punished ROR]

Good thread topic.

I completely understand the fear: the better part of the last decade we heard about how we were scraping the salary cap floor because we were rebuilding, and not to fear, when it comes time to compete, management will open the pocketbook.

Now we're getting ready to compete, and ... the nebulous "salary cap structure" strikes.

Hopefully management/ownership realize the difference between having a solid salary cap strategy, and being obstinately cheap.

To put it another way: I have no problem with a salary cap structure. I'd much rather be a fan of a team that has a balanced approach to contracts than a team like the Flyers which seems to take on a horrible contract as soon as they shed one.

But you won't be able to sign every player to a healthy, hometown discount, leaving $1M+ on the table, "for the good of the team." And that's fine. You let some, probably most, of those guys walk. But some of those guys you invest in, because they are worth it.

Avs likely could've had ROR locked up long-term last go-round for the rumored $5M figure, but their salary cap structure meant that his last offer was the same deal as Duchene's, $3.5M. Now it looks like the going rate is $6.5M for a ROR long term deal -- as even some of the posters who have called ROR greedy/selfish are now admitting they'd be OK with him signed at this figure.

The point is, if you lock yourself into such a rigid salary cap structure that you can't even see a good long term investment, you're going to cost yourself money and/or talent in the future. It becomes counter-productive at that point.

I would bet that Roy/Sakic understand this perfectly. I am thus far impressed with the job they're doing. I'm still not sold on how much the Kroenkes are willing to invest in the Avs, though. So after the big front office shuffle, the one thing that stayed the same was ownership. OK, we went from Stan to Josh -- and so far we have yet to see what kind of a difference that move will make.

(My personal feeling: they get a long term deal with ROR done and let Staz walk.)

 

[Ceremony]

If they're planning on not paying anyone more than Duchene then they are very, very naïve.

 

[Bonzai12]

I'd rather pay ROR $6.6M than Stastny.

If they paid ROR $6.6M, that's more than Duchene and I think a fair deal.

 

[avs1dacup]

I'd rather pay ROR $6.6M than Stastny.

If they paid ROR $6.6M, that's more than Duchene and I think a fair deal.

Depends on the term. 6.6M for 7 years? Sure. 6.6M for 2 years? Not a chance in hell. I hope they lock him up long term, but i just can't shake the feeling that he wants a 2 year contract no matter what. And yes, paying him 6.5-7 for 2 years would be 'giving in' when he's currently not worth that.

 

[LaCarriere]

I don't think you can say they're just being cheap unless they let Stastny walk and don't bring anyone else in to replace him.

Who are they going to bring in to replace him though? He's considered one of the top free agents this year.

Heatley (wouldn't want), Vanek and Richards are all presumably out of the question, because they will all likely be in the 6+ million range. Cammalleri? I'd rather they do what they have to do to keep Stastny. Iginla is 36, and Alfredsson is 41. As I go down the list of free agents I don't see a lot of potential to replace a 60 point scorer.

 

[LaCarriere]

My worrie is that they lose Stastny to whomever for 6.5, then go out and give 6-6.5 per season to someone like Iginla or Vanek.

And I really don't think going up to 6.25 would be overpaying either Stastny or O'Reilly.

exactly. Stastny is probably the top forwards on the market, other than maybe Vanek, but he could easily be offered 7+ million by somebody on a short term deal. He made 7.1 last year, and is only 30. There's probably a team out there desperate enough to give him 3-5 years at 6.5+... I just hope it's not the Avs if they lose out of Stastny.

 

[JoemAvs]

Many people IMO have a problem grasping how scarce the UFA market of the future will be and has already become.
Teams are willing to pay more just to keep their players (atleast those who are worth it) because you simply can not get a similar talent in UFA. And if one is available odds are that he will cost even more than your guy or does not want to join you because there are more attractive teams also wanting him.

So future salary capspace essentially decreases in value. Or flexibility if you want to call it.
Elite or very good (top line and top pairing) players will increase in value because they are simply not available. And if one is available he will re-set the market. That means the top end of players will see their salaries increase heavily. Or atleast their cap figures increase. Thanks to retirement contracts many of them already got way more real money. It just does not show yet.


Losing Stastny over 500k would be pure idiocy.
We are not having trouble re-signing anyone right now. We are not going to be able to replace his talent level. We are not strapped for capspace at all
He does not prevent us from getting an upgrade on D.

Why are we even on the verge of losing him?
Because we could afford to lose him and because of an imaginary salarystructure that will be blown to pieces the moment EJ and Mac will get their next contracts?

That is just not smart.
Playing hardball with ROR is OK. RFAs are under control and you can afford to play hardball with them.
Top-UFAs like Stastny?
They have all the leverage in the world and are highly coveted.
There is a reason why all the good teams with good management that are not totally set at C are in for him (CHI, STL, DAL, maybe even TBL). He simply is worth it.

Players of his caliber do not hit UFA often. And if you get the chance to grab a valuable commodity like him at a reasonable price (under 7M), you do not hesitate because of good center depth and a stupid structure......

 

[AslanRH]

Looking around the league at the more consistent teams, they seem to have around 8 guys that can be viewed as core or maybe more aptly primary players. They seem to breakdown as either 5-2-1 or 4-3-1 (FWD-DEF-GOAL) and cost around 43-48m.

If the Avs were to be built the same way around 8 players
4 FWDs : Duchene, ROR, Landeskog, Stastny (MacKinnon left off due to 2 remaining ELC years)
3 DEF: EJ, ADDED Top Pairing Player, Barrie (likely on a bridge next 2 years)
1 Goal: Varlamov

If they can average the above to 5.5-6m AAV then they will fall in that 44-48m range. By the time MacK, EJ, and likely Barrie are due for raises, some of the larger contracts (Hejda, Tanguay, PAP, etc) will be gone and the cap will likely rise which should allow for EJ, MacK, and Barrie to re-sign as well.

The Avs just need to rebuild the contributing complementary pool of players (like LA did this season with Pearson, Taffoli, Muzin, Martinez, etc)

They need to hit with a few prospects (Bigras, Siemens, Hishon, Elliott, Bleakley, etc) and make smart and cheaper signings (Holden, Mitchell, and the like).

If they do, keeping the above core intact should be reasonable.

 

[Bubba Thudd]

Man, I just hope the 6M (or whatever the structure is) isn't carved in stone, and they're flexible enough to go 200 or 300K over...

 

[umdieecke*]

As much as I think it's stupid that 6.0 is the ceiling, I kind of feel like he was overpaid at 6.6 and he definitely is at 7.0. So it doesn't bother me if they didn't budge off of the 6.0 for him. I actually don't blame them for not budging for Stastny. I was hoping Paul would be the one who wanted to take what they offered.

It kind of feels like they have a little more flexibility now with the moves they made. Now Blues fans can judge if he's worth the salary cap he's tying up.

 

[umdieecke*]

Looking around the league at the more consistent teams, they seem to have around 8 guys that can be viewed as core or maybe more aptly primary players. They seem to breakdown as either 5-2-1 or 4-3-1 (FWD-DEF-GOAL) and cost around 43-48m.

If the Avs were to be built the same way around 8 players
4 FWDs : Duchene, ROR, Landeskog, Stastny (MacKinnon left off due to 2 remaining ELC years)
3 DEF: EJ, ADDED Top Pairing Player, Barrie (likely on a bridge next 2 years)
1 Goal: Varlamov

If they can average the above to 5.5-6m AAV then they will fall in that 44-48m range. By the time MacK, EJ, and likely Barrie are due for raises, some of the larger contracts (Hejda, Tanguay, PAP, etc) will be gone and the cap will likely rise which should allow for EJ, MacK, and Barrie to re-sign as well.

The Avs just need to rebuild the contributing complementary pool of players (like LA did this season with Pearson, Taffoli, Muzin, Martinez, etc)

They need to hit with a few prospects (Bigras, Siemens, Hishon, Elliott, Bleakley, etc) and make smart and cheaper signings (Holden, Mitchell, and the like).

If they do, keeping the above core intact should be reasonable.

Yeah, that's what it clearly is. They seem to want to stopgap while they build up their prospect pool and give them time to develop.

But I will say, Ehrhoff at 1 year 4 million should not have conflicted with what the Avs are doing. But this is why theyre going after older stop gaps. I know it's not what everyone wanted but it probably made the most sense under the circumstances.

 

[umdieecke*]

Yeah, that's what it clearly is. They seem to want to stopgap while they build up their prospect pool and give them time to develop.

But I will say, Ehrhoff at 1 year 4 million should not have conflicted with what the Avs are doing. But this is why theyre going after older stop gaps. I know it's not what everyone wanted but it probably made the most sense under the circumstances.

Ill also conced that building up the prospect is a challenge when you're trading away draft picks as readily as they have been.

 

[AslanRH]

Sadly I think instead of "averaging" 5.5-6m they are capping it at 6m (at least until EJ and MacK come due.

Agree that the trading of picks goes against all that Sakic and Roy said about building through the draft and is concerning considering they have also said they have a plan.

I'm now on the "take what the FO says with a grain of salt" train again which I had hoped ended with the Lacroixs

 

[freeboy]

I'm having daytime nightmares of Staz and company scoring against us...
Ok
The jury is not out as the case for losing Staz and getting Iginla seems ok, but will we spend some money on D?
No money on D and I'm disappointed. Please pick up a defensive d man, please!
Ok
So who is ufa in d dreamland?