No it applies to the year in which the bonus was attained. His cap hit is $3.775M.

So you're still saying trading Hall for Larsson was a bad trade when it's obvious the team is better?
- NugentHallberle

Trading Hall for Larsson was so bad it's almost hard to comprehend. Perhaps the worst one for one trade in NHL history.


I have two sources - Cap Friendly and this site - which list McDavid's cap hit as 900K. If that is supposed to include bonuses, that ain't on me.

The Oilers, no one wants to acknowledge, played zero games last year with their optimum lineup. Then they tore their team apart without ever having seen it play a single game.

English league soccer does this. Each team plays each other twice...once home and once away. Whoever has the most points is champ. You lose the drama and iconic moments of the playoffs and sometimes the ending can be anti-climactic, but this truly makes it that the "best team" wins. You'd opt for this system over playoffs?
- wolphnuts12

I wouldn't necessarily. I think that system does a way better job avoiding luck and giving the trophy to who deserves far more often, but aren't we all just here to have fun?

Playoffs are more fun, so I have no problem with how we do it, I just think you can still acknowledge the problems of our current system while still enjoying it.

No it applies to the year in which the bonus was attained. His cap hit is $3.775M.

So you're still saying trading Hall for Larsson was a bad trade when it's obvious the team is better?
- NugentHallberle

If I'm homeless then buy a trailer house for 2 millions, is it a good deal? Hey, I'm living a lot better than before!

That's of course a gross exaggeration, but it show you can't say it's a good trade just because the team is better after, because it ignore the better things you could get instead for the same price.

A truly terrible blog
Your whole system relys on a bunch of 20 year olds being the nucleus of the team and then mortgaging the future to win with those young kids as your core. And if you fall short. As you mentioned. Even a cup final appearance will be forgotten. And then we suck again.
I also dislike how you claim nhl teams don't know how to manipulate the system. But you do. Pretty sure every team has multiple capologists. Which team do you work for?
Remember that pros vs joes show. Normal guys come on claiming they are better than pros and could have been all stars. Kinda reminds me of your blogs
- Trevrrrgavo

Three is ample evidence every single day that NHL teams constantly make horrible mistakes. I am 100% confident I would be a better GM than Peter Chiarelli, Bob Murray, Brian Burke, Anyone who's ever run Ottawa or Buffalo, Dave Nonis.........I could go all day.

Being an NHL GM is as simple as a) being born into an NHL family b) playing in the NHL c) being a player agent (which first requires being a lawyer) c) starting your own stats company.

I think that covers 100% of the NHL's GMs.

What I lack in hockey experience first hand, I make for by being one of the only people on this earth capable of an original thought, having been to college, and being an expert in critical thinking.

I dunno, I think I could hack it, no problems. Also, I should probably point out (before you pull something trying to respoind) that I am only giving the answer this question deserves, I'm not entirely serious.

This.
- NugentHallberle

All y'all whiners should just stick to reading game recaps and previews. Sorry for attempting to entertain you.

Three is ample evidence every single day that NHL teams constantly make horrible mistakes. I am 100% confident I would be a better GM than Peter Chiarelli, Bob Murray, Brian Burke, Anyone who's ever run Ottawa or Buffalo, Dave Nonis.........I could go all day.

Being an NHL GM is as simple as a) being born into an NHL family b) playing in the NHL c) being a player agent (which first requires being a lawyer) c) starting your own stats company.

I think that covers 100% of the NHL's GMs.

What I lack in hockey experience first hand, I make for by being one of the only people on this earth capable of an original thought, having been to college, and being an expert in critical thinking.

I dunno, I think I could hack it, no problems. Also, I should probably point out (before you pull something trying to respoind) that I am only giving the answer this question deserves, I'm not entirely serious.
- James_Tanner

Not gonna lie this blog really does ring out like a Pro's vs. Joe's episode.

Nope.

So that means the whole concept of your blog doesn't work.
- WaterBoy

f you have room for performance bonuses, they count in the current year but only at the end of the year.

if performance bonuses put you over the cap, you can push up to $5.5M to the next year.

- tumbleweed

Oh calm down. It's fun to discuss. Doesn't have to be completely serious all of the time.

Remember that episode of Pros vs. Joes where they had all of those NFL players who had played college basketball compete with NBA players? That was awesome.
- SolidGoldBricks

That's your analogy for this blog?

Sometimes I laugh, sometimes I nod and agree (rarely), sometimes I just shake my head.....this would be one of the later.
- LeftCoaster

Yep. Same.

If I'm homeless then buy a trailer house for 2 millions, is it a good deal? Hey, I'm living a lot better than before!

That's of course a gross exaggeration, but it show you can't say it's a good trade just because the team is better after, because it ignore the better things you could get instead for the same price.
- Popofjc

Yep, I mean there were lots of reports Chia was offered Doughty, Burns, Ekblad and a bunch of other mansions. He just chose the trailer house for 2M because he is a low key kinda guy, doesn't wanna draw a lot of attention...

f you have room for performance bonuses, they count in the current year but only at the end of the year.

if performance bonuses put you over the cap, you can push up to $5.5M to the next year.

- tumbleweed
- James_Tanner

I expect you'll be hiring me to be your cap guy once you land your gm job.

I expect you'll be hiring me yo be your cap guy once you land your gm job.
- Tumbleweed

Sure man, but only if you go by your internet name and never reveal your actual identity.

Sure man, but only if you go by your internet name and never reveal your actual identity.
- James_Tanner

deal

Three is ample evidence every single day that NHL teams constantly make horrible mistakes. I am 100% confident I would be a better GM than Peter Chiarelli, Bob Murray, Brian Burke, Anyone who's ever run Ottawa or Buffalo, Dave Nonis.........I could go all day.

Being an NHL GM is as simple as a) being born into an NHL family b) playing in the NHL c) being a player agent (which first requires being a lawyer) c) starting your own stats company.

I think that covers 100% of the NHL's GMs.

What I lack in hockey experience first hand, I make for by being one of the only people on this earth capable of an original thought, having been to college, and being an expert in critical thinking.

I dunno, I think I could hack it, no problems. Also, I should probably point out (before you pull something trying to respoind) that I am only giving the answer this question deserves, I'm not entirely serious.
- James_Tanner

My training in critical thinking that I received in college (I remember one course that was basically devoted to this) suggests you are full of poop.


If luck plays such a strong role in deciding the Stanley cup winner each year, then it seems your "strategy" you have "created" would be the opposite of what should be done.

If you need luck to win it all, then you just want to actually be good enough to make the playoffs year after year so you have a chance to be "lucky enough to win."

Unless of course you believe that using your brilliant strategy of trading all your future draft picks is somehow going to make your team so amazeballs that they transcend the normal rules and no longer need to worry about luck.

If I'm homeless then buy a trailer house for 2 millions, is it a good deal? Hey, I'm living a lot better than before!

That's of course a gross exaggeration, but it show you can't say it's a good trade just because the team is better after, because it ignore the better things you could get instead for the same price.
- Popofjc

Your analogy is fine, except when you realize that that trailer is in Vancouver and that happens to be the going price for double-wides in that area.

Sure man, but only if you go by your internet name and never reveal your actual identity.
- James_Tanner

He'll be the Eklund of the salary cap world.
Wait, what do you mean Eklund's identity is no longer secret?

James, I think the basis of your blog is very logical. Its basic premise is to maximize the roster talent capability by taking advantage of the fact that your best players will be the least paid players. In a salary cap league, this strategy is brilliant, and serves to put any team that would use this concept in position for immediate and short term success (The ultimate goal of the Stanley Cup not guaranteed, however... due to the luck reasons you mentioned).

The only thing I disagree with you on is not in your blog, but your response to the comment regarding the follow-up success of the 2010 Blackhawks Cup. You stated that if they had kept that team together, they may have won 5 more championships (paraphrasing).... but the dismantling of that team was attributed to the Salary Cap, something that becomes inevitable based on monetary numbers. That is one reason mathematics is known as the ultimate truth. In calculation, there is only one right answer. Yes there are ways to defer money, hide money (see Pronger and Datsyuk), but in essence, once a team becomes too successful, the increase in player compensation factor shrinks a GM's ability to structure a team within the Cap parameters, and the window of opportunity disappears very quickly. I personally feel very lucky as a fan that the Blackhawks were able to re-load and reel off 2 more Cups so quickly.

I suppose that is where the luck you speak of comes into play, and those are the teams that are fortunate enough win a Stanley Cup - or even multiple ones.

Interesting topic

Is Jake Gardiner top-10 or just top-11?

James, I think the basis of your blog is very logical. Its basic premise is to maximize the roster talent capability by taking advantage of the fact that your best players will be the least paid players. In a salary cap league, this strategy is brilliant, and serves to put any team that would use this concept in position for immediate and short term success (The ultimate goal of the Stanley Cup not guaranteed, however... due to the luck reasons you mentioned).

The only thing I disagree with you on is not in your blog, but your response to the comment regarding the follow-up success of the 2010 Blackhawks Cup. You stated that if they had kept that team together, they may have won 5 more championships (paraphrasing).... but the dismantling of that team was attributed to the Salary Cap, something that becomes inevitable based on monetary numbers. That is one reason mathematics is known as the ultimate truth. In calculation, there is only one right answer. Yes there are ways to defer money, hide money (see Pronger and Datsyuk), but in essence, once a team becomes too successful, the increase in player compensation factor shrinks a GM's ability to structure a team within the Cap parameters, and the window of opportunity disappears very quickly. I personally feel very lucky as a fan that the Blackhawks were able to re-load and reel off 2 more Cups so quickly.

I suppose that is where the luck you speak of comes into play, and those are the teams that are fortunate enough win a Stanley Cup - or even multiple ones.

Interesting topic
- Katana777

Those same Hawks also didnt trade 3 firsts and 4 seconds for their players.

The best part is that after seeing what it took to get a good young defenseman (Taylor Hall) and saying how bad of a trade it was (worst in nhl history right?)...you went on to say the defense fix is simple...just trade a couple of these draft pick thingys for good young defensemen! THIS IS EASY

James, I think the basis of your blog is very logical. Its basic premise is to maximize the roster talent capability by taking advantage of the fact that your best players will be the least paid players. In a salary cap league, this strategy is brilliant, and serves to put any team that would use this concept in position for immediate and short term success (The ultimate goal of the Stanley Cup not guaranteed, however... due to the luck reasons you mentioned).

The only thing I disagree with you on is not in your blog, but your response to the comment regarding the follow-up success of the 2010 Blackhawks Cup. You stated that if they had kept that team together, they may have won 5 more championships (paraphrasing).... but the dismantling of that team was attributed to the Salary Cap, something that becomes inevitable based on monetary numbers. That is one reason mathematics is known as the ultimate truth. In calculation, there is only one right answer. Yes there are ways to defer money, hide money (see Pronger and Datsyuk), but in essence, once a team becomes too successful, the increase in player compensation factor shrinks a GM's ability to structure a team within the Cap parameters, and the window of opportunity disappears very quickly. I personally feel very lucky as a fan that the Blackhawks were able to re-load and reel off 2 more Cups so quickly.

I suppose that is where the luck you speak of comes into play, and those are the teams that are fortunate enough win a Stanley Cup - or even multiple ones.

Interesting topic
- Katana777

There are always ways to fit a dynasty under the salary cap as long as you have players under contracts that are no longer legal!

James your theory is... well...

What recent Stanley Cup Winner has been built around players that are still on their Entry-Level deals?
- nucks_94

Um...let's see.

Pitt, Chicago?

I believe I said they could "approximate another Larsson."

But couldn't we have had a nice amicable conversation? Wasn't it pretty immature to start off by calling me 'not very bright' ??

For the record, I am very comfortable with my current level of luminescence.
- James_Tanner

Somebody found their old thesaurus!

The best part is that after seeing what it took to get a good young defenseman (Taylor Hall) and saying how bad of a trade it was (worst in nhl history right?)...you went on to say the defense fix is simple...just trade a couple of these draft pick thingys for good young defensemen! THIS IS EASY
- YuenglingJagr

Yep...