Now, they're letting their young players actually develop, and when they're brought up, they're more prepared for it.
- jmatchett383

Couturier being the obvious exception. He has developed well in the NHL, even with his tough second season.

I really, really, really wish the darn season would start already so we can all stop talking about the frankin salary cap!!

- BiggE

are you kidding me? the cap will get discussed every single day of the season. it can not be extricated from the conversation because it impacts every single f'ng thing. and that's why i hate it. the game has become about money and accountants. i have zero interest in thge equivalent plot of how a team makes maneuvers based on financial constraints to get through the season. i despise it. almost as much as bettman.

No, my analogy is not flawed.. You are defining problem differently than me. To me.. if I attempt to get $10,000 and I can't, I have a problem. I need a solution.

I don't care about all that other stuff.

prob·lem (prblm)
n.
1. A question to be considered, solved, or answered: math problems; the problem of how to arrange transportation.

**The problem of how to get X player when dealing with a salary cap.
- mikel33

Yes it is flawed, because they can get the 10M or whatever number you want to use for the Upper Limit in the analogy. And that number is the same for every team. And every team needs to decide how to spend it. Including how much of the 10M to spend, and how much they want to save. Some teams can't afford to spend it all. You're analogy does not equate to the Salary Cap.

Couturier being the obvious exception. He has developed well in the NHL, even with his tough second season.
- Feanor

Couturier played so well that it was impossible to cut him. But what they didn't do was pencil him in. In fact, they apparent;y really WANTED to send him back to juniors, and he didn't let them.

So are we done arguing about the cap problems/issue whatever finally?

Yes, your penis is bigger than his penis, and you know more than he does, and he's wrong and you're right and blah blah blah let's all go have some cake!

They haven't missed on any of their first rounders over the past 10 years:
Jeff Carter
Mike Richards
Steve Downie
Claude Giroux
JvR
Luca Sbisa
Sean Couturier
Scott Laughton (?)
Samuel Morin (?)

But you could argue they were very impatient. Sbisa was brought right into the NHL, and the Flyers were apparently angry with JvR for playing an extra season. Downie would have been brought srraight into the NHL had he not killed Dean McAmmond. Outside of the 1st round, they have drafted:

Bartulis (3)
Kalinski (6)
MAB (3)
Rinaldo (6)
Wellwood (5)
Lauridsen (7)
McGinn (4)
Cousins (3)
Noebels (4)

That's not bad value drafting, as most late round picks (3+) are considered long-shots to ever crack the NHL lineup, let alone to be full-time players. Since the time when they brought Downie straight in and gave Giroux a guaranateed spot as a rookie, they seem to have wisened up. Now, they're letting their young players actually develop, and when they're brought up, they're more prepared for it.
- jmatchett383

Excellent points.
The Flyers 1st rounders have been excellent under Holmgren. Richards and especially Giroux were fantastic picks at their respective draft positions. When you consider that most of their firsts have been in the 2nd half of the first round, you have to like their body of work.

Anytime you have any 5th, 6th or 7th round picks on your roster, its a plus.
Also you have to take into consideration undrafted players that were signed as free agents such as Read and Gustafsson; those were both (especially Read) excellent signings.

The Flyers are a club that will spend to the limit and do anything possible to try and win. While that can occasionally backfire, I would much rather be a fan of a team like the Flyers, than one who refuses to spend money and is only concerned with turning a profit.

I really, really, really wish the darn season would start already so we can all stop talking about the frankin salary cap!!

- BiggE

I'll raise a glass to that thought!

So, once again we are (well some of us anyway) are arguing the mythical "cap problem" again. A big part of this issue appears to me to be that a few posters have a much different definition of "cap problem" than the majority.

I would like to propose the following definition of cap mismanagement:

Cap mismanagement will be deemed to have occurred if, in order to make a roster move that the team wishes or needs to make, they have to first make another move they would not have otherwise made, and in that move they lose a significant asset.

Under this definition, trading Rosehill for a prospect (just an example - I know nobody would give up a prospect for Rosehill) to clear cap space would not count, as the overwhelming majority would not consider Rosehill to be a significant asset. He is easily replaced.

However, things like losing Metropolit to waiver claims, or moving Upshall for Carcillo, or trading Gange for Walker would count, as Gagne, Metro and Upshall were/are significant assets, and those moves were all made for the primary purpose of shedding cap space to allow other moves.

I realize the definition of "significant asset" somewhat subjective, but I think this is the gist of what most people mean when they refer to cap mismanagement or cap issues/problems. Yes, all these moves were choices the team willingly made. So we can't really say they were "forced" to make them. But to my mind, the team being literally forced to make the move is not really part of the definition. All the moves are voluntary, and driven by what the team thinks is best for it at that time. But in the cases where those moves result in the loss of other significant assets, I think it is fair to include the loss of those assets in any evaluation of how the team manages its cap space. I think it is an oversimplification to say that simply because they weren't literally forced to make the move, that said move is not the result of, or impacted by cap mismanagement.
- BringBack25

That's like saying trading in your older model Car to get an upgrade is mismanaging your funds. Because that's what you're doing when you trade Gagne, or waive Metropolit. You're doing it to upgrade your team. That's not mismanagement. In the same way that trading a quality assset in a player, to fill a need in a trade isn't mismanagement. None of those moves are cap mismanagement in my opinion. That's the mindset that you have to have in a Cap environment. And that's how you operate as a team that maximizes it's cap assets. Determining which assets are expendable to build a better team. And what is the perception of the end result of the moves. The Flyers and most people felt that the moves made, resulted in the Flyers putting a better team on the ice. Most notably by adding Giroux to the lineup. How could that possibly be considered mismanagement on any level?

are you kidding me? the cap will get discussed every single day of the season. it can not be extricated from the conversation because it impacts every single f'ng thing. and that's why i hate it. the game has become about money and accountants. i have zero interest in thge equivalent plot of how a team makes maneuvers based on financial constraints to get through the season. i despise it. almost as much as bettman.
- hammarby31

Yeah, I hear ya, I can't stand the cap or Bettman either. I would actually rather see a 24 team league consisting of healthy franchises that spend whatever they can afford and choose to spend but you and I both know that is never going to happen.

I'm just sick of the everyday back and forth about the Flyers being over the cap, LTIR, waiving this guy or that guy yadda yadda yadda. Its the same stuff every friggin day. We all know they will do what it takes to get cap compliant, so can we just move on and talk about hockey?!?!

In sheer numbers of players to make the NHL, since 2007 the Flyers have had 12 drafted players reach the NHL.

In that same time span, Detroit has had 7, New York Rangers have had 8 and the Devils have had 10.

That's pretty solid drafting

If we use this definition, it doesn't seem like we could apply it to future situation since we don't know what the move(s) would be. I think you can only assess this in context of a specific move. You can't say something like, "well, they'll be in trouble next year if x, y. or z happens". Those things may not happen. Or even if the do, the team could find a way to address the situation without losing a significant asset. IMO, this sort of analysis only works if you are discussing a specific move. It doesn't really work as a forward looking projection of what might happen.
- BringBack25

You make a case for exactly why moves such as waiving Metropolit, or trading Upshall isn't cap mismanagement. Because they didn't know what the future situation would be. They take it one day at a time.

In sheer numbers of players to make the NHL, since 2007 the Flyers have had 12 drafted players reach the NHL.

In that same time span, Detroit has had 7, New York Rangers have had 8 and the Devils have had 10.

That's pretty solid drafting
- Jsaquella

Haven't you learned by now, facts and logic have no place in this discussion?

Yeah, I hear ya, I can't stand the cap or Bettman either. I would actually rather see a 24 team league consisting of healthy franchises that spend whatever they can afford and choose to spend but you and I both know that is never going to happen.

I'm just sick of the everyday back and forth about the Flyers being over the cap, LTIR, waiving this guy or that guy yadda yadda yadda. Its the same stuff every friggin day. We all know they will do what it takes to get cap compliant, so can we just move on and talk about hockey?!?!
- BiggE

I'd prefer a luxury tax over a cap. Set the luxury tax at 90% of what the cap would be (i.e. player's share is $50M, tax starts above $45M) and divide that tax up as you see fit (i.e. give it all to Phoenix).

I could give examples like the Upshall trade and Metropolit waiving, but the main thing is they always seem to need to give back salary in any trade at the trade deadline.
- PhillySportsGuy

Flyers have made a lot of in Season trades, and trades at the deadline for draft picks.

You make a case for exactly why moves such as waiving Metropolit, or trading Upshall isn't cap mismanagement. Because they didn't know what the future situation would be. They take it one day at a time.
- MJL

By that rationale, a team will never have cap mismanagement issues because they can't predict the future. Again, since the cap was instituted, can has there been a team that had cap issues and, if so, can you name what it was?

Yeah, I hear ya, I can't stand the cap or Bettman either. I would actually rather see a 24 team league consisting of healthy franchises that spend whatever they can afford and choose to spend but you and I both know that is never going to happen.

I'm just sick of the everyday back and forth about the Flyers being over the cap, LTIR, waiving this guy or that guy yadda yadda yadda. Its the same stuff every friggin day. We all know they will do what it takes to get cap compliant, so can we just move on and talk about hockey?!?!
- BiggE

Unfortunately, the business of hockey makes that kind of stuff very relevant.

Fans now have to weigh performance vs cost against the salary cap, when years ago, nobody but the player, his agent and the team owner gave a rat's left testicle what a player made.

By that rationale, a team will never have cap mismanagement issues because they can't predict the future. Again, since the cap was instituted, can has there been a team that had cap issues and, if so, can you name what it was?
- jmatchett383

Nope. New Jersey felt they were a better team dressing 16 skaters for those handful of games, and Detroit really needed an injured defenseman a lot more than a second line winger.

And the way I see it, the fact that they are putting themsleves into a tight corner is a problem.

It's like living paycheck to paycheck. Sure right now, you have enough money to get by every week, but you cant save any money... So do you have a problem right now? No, but in 2 weeks when your car breaks down and you need to replace the clutch.... and you dont have money saved up..... now you have a problem. So IMO it was a problem to being with that they don't give themselves enough room to plan for issues.
- youarewrong

You can't ignore that there is a market place to sell products for money to put in the bank. And the Flyers are going to have room for issues under the Cap. Even more so if they trade a defenseman at some point.

Yeah, I hear ya, I can't stand the cap or Bettman either. I would actually rather see a 24 team league consisting of healthy franchises that spend whatever they can afford and choose to spend but you and I both know that is never going to happen.

I'm just sick of the everyday back and forth about the Flyers being over the cap, LTIR, waiving this guy or that guy yadda yadda yadda. Its the same stuff every friggin day. We all know they will do what it takes to get cap compliant, so can we just move on and talk about hockey?!?!
- BiggE

it infuriates me. they just can't make the best move possible for the team and the player in question..not deciding to keep a guy based on how that effects his ELC, and worrying that when a guy hits his (frank)ing performance bonus - it has ramifications for future cap space. it's a never ending moving target. this isn't about the flyers. it's about the league and the game. it's destroyed it in my opinion.

Nope. New Jersey felt they were a better team dressing 16 skaters for those handful of games, and Detroit really needed an injured defenseman a lot more than a second line winger.
- Jsaquella

Exactly; they didn't know at the time that the team was constructed that they'd be in that spot, so it wasn't their fault. Also, they had other options, like trading player's with high salaries for players with lower salaries, but they instead chose to dress 17 skaters.

Actually they're a pretty solid drafting team over the past decade or so. Considering their track record in the first round, they should never trade another pick unless its for a bona fide star.

The biggest issue they have had is dealing away picks and missing in round two when they have had picks.
- Jsaquella

I agree with missing in round two, when he wasn't giving them away, but I wouldn't consider Homer's drafting solid over the past ten years when, with the exception of G, Coots (8th pick), JVR (2nd pick), Rinaldo (8th round), Downie (1st round), Sbisa (1st round), he has nothing to show but fringe players who made no mark whatsoever in the league.

Again, the last two years remains to be seen but there are some definite hopefuls there. And if a few from the likes of Morin, Haag, Laughton, Stolarz, Ghost, Leier, Cousins, do step up, it would definitely reduce the need to shop for shelling out lengthy contracts for aged free agents.

Exactly; they didn't know at the time that the team was constructed that they'd be in that spot, so it wasn't their fault. Also, they had other options, like trading player's with high salaries for players with lower salaries, but they instead chose to dress 17 skaters.
- jmatchett383

Yep. And trading a player for less than his value because you don't have enough cap room isn't a problem, it's just a series of decision and choices.

Just like it wasn't a problem when my neighbor banged the other neighbor's wife. It's no problem that he lives in a poop apartment and has to give 70% of his check to his ex-wife...no problem at all.

By that rationale, a team will never have cap mismanagement issues because they can't predict the future. Again, since the cap was instituted, can has there been a team that had cap issues and, if so, can you name what it was?
- jmatchett383

Off hand, I can't remember a team that had issues of Cap mismanagement. I'd be glad to discuss any examples of cap management that you want to bring up. You have to look at each example and take into account all of the factors involved.

For example, after the Black Hawks won the Cup in 2010, they had to let go of a number of players from that team, because they couldn't afford them all. Did Tallon mismanage the Cap in that situation?

Off hand, I can't remember a team that had issues of Cap mismanagement. I'd be glad to discuss any examples of cap management that you want to bring up. You have to look at each example and take into account all of the factors involved.

For example, after the Black Hawks won the Cup in 2010, they had to let go of a number of players from that team, because they couldn't afford them all. Did Tallon mismanage the Cap in that situation?
- MJL

Considering he was late in tendering offer sheets to several key RFAs, driving up their salary cap hits heading into the off season after the Cup yeah, he (frank)ing mismanaged the cap situation, rather badly

In sheer numbers of players to make the NHL, since 2007 the Flyers have had 12 drafted players reach the NHL.

In that same time span, Detroit has had 7, New York Rangers have had 8 and the Devils have had 10.

That's pretty solid drafting
- Jsaquella

Of those 12, with the exception of G, Coots (8th overall selection), JVR (2nd overall selection), and Sbisa, who has made any impact whatsoever?

Edit: you seem to be waging a more interesting war on another front so I'm begging out of this one for maybe another day