Flo The Action wrote:
Flo The Action wrote:
Flo The Action wrote:
PTFlea wrote:Definitely. I think everyone's very pleased to move on from that one and now move into what could be a tougher one with Ceci after Dekeyser's Great Day.
Oh, crap, you're right. How much is mama's cooking worth to Cody, I wonder? Sens have $8.8M cap space left. If Ceci gets anywhere near $5M they will be just $4M under the cap. Last year only 13 teams in the league were under $5M in cap room. Toronto were almost exactly at $4M and were 10th highest (cap) in the league. Could be the Sens will be in the top-third or very close. What does that do to the "budget" talk?
OTT has done nothing but lock up all its key young players, year over year, since people starting talking about this. And you're right, I think Ceci earns at least a $3 mil / year deal, pushing our cap up to $68~ mil.
The problem is people say' budget' and they don't have a clear idea of what they're actually trying to communicate. I believe the Sens have an internal budget, under the cap but well over the floor. But if your budget is $70~ mil ish, which is what it's looking like at this point, and your cap is $73 mil, then it's a pretty minute point to insist on. Meaningless, really.
Anyway, we've been smart with our cap and salary commitments long term. Turris and Stone will need new contracts in 2 years, and so will Anderson (or we'll need a new goalie). Karlsson (and Methot, if he's still here) are up the year after that. The people who think the Sens don't spend on UFA day because they're cheap are myopic and just don't see the long term impact of stupid UFA spending. Do you think that, if NYI could go back in time, they would still give out $9 mil /yr to Grabo and Kulemin via UFA if they had realized it would cost them Okposo?
People can be so stubborn and short sighted on this question.
I think that's a crock of Dung. Yeah we all know the org operates under their own budget and you can't be counting players new contracts in 2 -3 years. You know what other teams do when they operate closer to the cap ceiling because of FA? They end up trading players and recuperating assets. So sorry if I don't buy into that scenario that we are holding off for future contracts. We could easily invest on a one or two year contract on a guy like Hudler for the third line and not have a problem with the cap.
And the isles had the space to resign okposo, they too operate under a self imposed budget. They were the masters of their own destiny and their own budget cost them. I wouldn't place the blame on just sayin they made bad decisions. Truth is this self imposed budget IS hampering us from putting he best competitive team out there.
It plays into how we handle making trades(like having to move out our bad contracts in one like the phaneuf trade) so don't start coming in here telling anyone that's got a problem with the budget mentality that they are day dreaming. That's bull
People think Dung average players like Hudler would suddenly propel us to some higher level?
Rooneypoo's post was 100% correct. A small market, retooling, Canadian team operating on a slight budget is 100% fair especially given the contracts we need to dish out soon.
I'm not saying it would propel the team but when your Gm comes out saying the team is in win now mode yet we aren't. Filling in spots with the best possible players I'm left thinking where the budget comes in. the third line RW spot is still wide open hoping someone takes it but that's just hoping. If we were really all in we'd try to fill that void with someone that could right now make us better. We should of went after someone like a Brower. Fact is we didn't. We could be more competitive if in fact we are in win now mode, but something is holding us back.... I wonder what it is...
Tell you what it isn't: money. Because $5 mil extra in salary isn't turning this team from playoff bubble team to instant playoff favourite.
We've spend a lot of time building a young core. They've gotta have the time to become something. You can argue that maybe we've built wrong -- your call, and legitimately debatable -- but not that it's a lack of spending holding us back. I'd be the livid if we'd paid $4 mil long term for a 3rd liner. Stupid, reactionary spending -- like spending $9 mil a year on Grabo and Kulemin.
Who's talking about spending long term? We could use our cap space to get a player with NHL experience and more success than a bunch of players that may or may not pan out fighting for a spot like this year. If you don't think making the playoff consistently and winning a round wouldn't actually help the core of this team become better than you're shutting your eyes.
And yes even giving a 3-4 years to a good player and maybe trading him by year two if someone is pushing for his spot isn't the worst idea ever. Plenty of teams do it and guess what, it creates assets coming back in the process.
This whole talk of just sitting on cap space for the sake of future contracts 2-3 years away is absolute crap. It's just playing ostrich to the fact that we could be making the team better. It's not a question of become a playoff bubble team to winning it all! There's plenty of steps in between and bringing in another player to help us along that way isn't ludicrous. But yes, being on an internal budget puts a socket in those cogs. C'mon!
Seriously, there's people that are freaking out about the budget thinking Melnyk is trying to put a cap floor team together and are scarred to death of retaining player and then there's you're argument where all is well because we resigned a few guys without really improving the team.
There is a grey area between the two!
My argument is most certainly not that "all is well." I just happen to think that 9 times out of 10, picking up players via UFA doesn't work. You over pay, in dollars and term, and those moves hurt you long term. I'd much rather see us building through the draft, development, and trade. And that is exactly what we've been doing for the last 3-4 years.
I can't even process what people are concerned about or are arguing for anymore when they talk about this team and spending. 'Ah, we're a budget team and it's killing us!'. Meanwhile, when the dust settles this year, we're probably going to be spending $68-69 mil with a $73 mil cap. Any sensible team leaves themselves some wiggle room ($2-3 million ish) for call ups and deadline acquisitions anyway. I could get behind a trade to acquire a 3rd liners or bottom pairing D man, but otherwise, I don't see a lot of obvious holes in the roster.
In the end, if you think this team just isn't good enough and is spinning its wheels, which it may well be, I don't think it has a lot to do with spending. It has to do with who we've spent on. And there might be something there. Ryan needs to be better, for instance, and MacArthur's health is concerning. The team's inability to respond to coaching, to tighten up things in the defensive zone, is also a concern: and I personally think that that is where Karlsson, as the team's leader, really needs to commit and set a good example. That pride of protecting your house just isn't in this team, and there's something to that. But I have to say, I do like the big two moves we've made since last March, adding a legit top 4 D and a 2C. I think this team is better today than it was in February, and that having a healthy roster will also instantly improve us.