2020 Offseason

[krsmith17 7,191]

10 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

Not only would Brisebois match. Sergachev wouldn't even sign it. That's why it's retarded. And therefore you as well.

Sergachev just won a Cup, has a relationship with Yzerman, knows the Wings are an up and coming team with a rich history, especially with Russian players, Tampa can't afford to offer close to the money the Wings are... But yeah, there's no way Sergachev would ever consider signing it... Offer sheets are almost always signed, even if it's just a way to get their team to match. The question is, would Brisebois match? We already established that by how much better Sergachev is than a 1st round pick, which was your point of contention to begin with...

15 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

Wrong. The only decent RHD on this team is Hronek. Seider is a rookie this coming season and the rest of our RHD are all trash. We could absolutely use one.

We're a rebuilding team. I'd rather see what Lindstrom can do, over giving huge money and assets for Cernak.

16 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

Cernak is absolutely worth a 2nd rounder

In a trade, yes. Offersheet, no.

16 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

You overpay in salary on offersheets. That's the idea.

If you're going to overpay in an offersheet and piss off another GM, make it worth it. Cernak wouldn't be worth that. You don't mind overpaying your top players by a mil or two. It's when you overpay your depth players, you get in trouble.

18 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

A 23 year old top4 Dman is well worth a 2nd pick if not more.

Again, in a trade, sure. Not overpaying on an offersheet.

[marcaractac 3,962]

1 hour ago, CatBoyRossi said:

Glad you manned up

Your offersheet does suck and wouldn't go anywhere. Doubt Sergachev even signs it.

In what way is it dumb sweetheart?

This is also very likely true. Maybe he signs it in Tampa with f*** all for taxes, but not in Michigan. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

10 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

You know this how?

I guess the same way you "know" Sergachev wouldn't sign it...

Offer sheets are rarely given out, but when they are, they are usually signed, and when they are signed, they are usually matched... Common knowledge. 

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

2 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I guess the same way you "know" Sergachev wouldn't sign it...

Offer sheets are rarely given out, but when they are, they are usually signed, and when they are signed, they are usually matched... Common knowledge. 

Then why the *** are you guys even talking about offer sheets in the first place? 

[krsmith17 7,191]

17 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Then why the *** are you guys even talking about offer sheets in the first place? 

Because it's a tool that should probably be used more often to acquire elite talent from cap strapped teams. As I admitted, my original offer sheet proposal probably would be matched, but I'd be willing to up that to a level they probably wouldn't be able to match. It might be an overpayment, but for top end talent, I think it's worth it. I don't think it's ever worth it to overpay for middling talent.

15 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

Oh really? So where do I go to read about un-signed offersheets?

Are you serious? Ever hear of Google?

You're acting as if offer sheets are done in secret or something... When Bergevin sent Aho an offer sheet last year, we all knew about it. We also knew when Aho signed it, and when Waddell matched it...

[krsmith17 7,191]

13 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

That's a signed offer sheet. Where do I find out about un-signed offer sheets? You seem to be aware of them, but I almost never see un-signed offer sheets reported.

Maybe you should re-read what I just said... 

16 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

You're acting as if offer sheets are done in secret or something... When Bergevin sent Aho an offer sheet last year, we all knew about it. We also knew when Aho signed it, and when Waddell matched it...

This was before Aho signed it.

[marcaractac 3,962]

Unfortunately rejected offer sheets may or may not ever be known about. It's said Marner rejected a few. But without anything being signed, anyone can claim or deny an offering or offer of an offer sheet. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

11 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

Unfortunately rejected offer sheets may or may not ever be known about. It's said Marner rejected a few. But without anything being signed, anyone can claim or deny an offering or offer of an offer sheet. 

First I've heard of this...

9 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

Because Waddell and Dundon were outraged and chose to make it public. Where do you read about other un-signed offer sheets. Or are you wrongfully assuming every declined offer sheet is reported?

Yes. This was (I guess) my wrongful assumption... I guess it makes sense that they wouldn't all be reported, much like trades that never get finalized, but for whatever reason, I did assume offer sheets were different.

Either way, Cernak offer sheet would be dumb. Sergachev offer sheet probably wouldn't ever happen, but would be smart as s***.

[marcaractac 3,962]

1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

First I've heard of this...

Yes. This was (I guess) my wrongful assumption... I guess it makes sense that they wouldn't all be reported, much like trades that never get finalized, but for whatever reason, I did assume offer sheets were different.

Either way, Cernak offer sheet would be dumb. Sergachev offer sheet probably wouldn't ever happen, but would be smart as s***.

That's just it. Any news of a rejected offer sheet will always be a he said/she said sort of deal. Most offered contracts we never know about. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

3 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

Guy who doesn't understand offer sheets tells everyone their offer sheet proposals are dumb.

More at 10.

I don't understand offer sheets because I assumed they were all reported? I don't tell "everyone" their offer sheet proposals are dumb, just yours. Because it was dumb.

3 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

That's just it. Any news of a rejected offer sheet will always be a he said/she said sort of deal. Most offered contracts we never know about. 

I don't get this. Why would someone not admit to an offer sheet? Bergevin had no problem admitting his Aho offer sheet, even though it was extremely low...

[marcaractac 3,962]

1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

I don't understand offer sheets because I assumed they were all reported? I don't tell "everyone" their offer sheet proposals are dumb, just yours. Because it was dumb.

I don't get this. Why would someone not admit to an offer sheet? Bergevin had no problem admitting his Aho offer sheet, even though it was extremely low...

Because Aho signed Bergevin's offer sheet! No contract offer has to be reported if not signed. That includes offer sheets. If it's signed it's reported. If un-signed, all we have is rumours and speculation. 

[marcaractac 3,962]

1 minute ago, CatBoyRossi said:

He still won't get it

Meh, context gets lost in text and people interpret things differently. It happens.

Have you ever heard of the bible?

[krsmith17 7,191]

8 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

Because Aho signed Bergevin's offer sheet! No contract offer has to be reported if not signed. That includes offer sheets. If it's signed it's reported. If un-signed, all we have is rumours and speculation. 

Yes, I understand that, but in the case of Aho, it was reported (or leaked) before he ever signed it.

[marcaractac 3,962]

Just now, krsmith17 said:

Yes, I understand that, but in the case of Aho, it was reported (or leaked) before he ever signed it.

Word got out from a reliable source is all. that'll always get reported on. But any rejected offer sheet may never see the light of day. Bergevin could have denied it until the moment Aho signed it if he wanted to. But the cat got out fo the bag, so f*** it. 

Odds are Marner received one or two himself and rejected them. But nobody can get any concrete evidence on those. 

[Akakabuto 1,749]

3 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

I only study the Quran

Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei? Das Kapital?

[Akakabuto 1,749]

Just now, CatBoyRossi said:

I don't speak kraut. My struggle?

Thats a whole other book. But the ideology behind it is quite the same.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

2 hours ago, CatBoyRossi said:

I only study the Quran

Then you should understand his point even moreso.

[martyrme19 73]

On 10/4/2020 at 11:59 AM, mackel said:

If the cap was fair, it would be adjusted based on the income tax in each jurisdiction... so if the cap is 10M for teams in Florida with no income-tax it would be 11M in a state with 10% income tax, thus eliminating an unintended advantage for low tax jurisdictions. 

Don't forget about the conversions from US dollars to Canadian!

 

 

On 10/4/2020 at 6:37 PM, CatBoyRossi said:

Nice straw man

Of course a front office staff has to perform...that has nothing to do with the amount of money being spent within the cap. Original 6 teams will always be able to spend to the cap... and sunbelt teams will have to suffer through internal caps unless an owner is willing to shell out big dough. That's not fair. Profits should be redistributed so that all teams can afford to spend to the league wide cap. That's a fair playing field.

How did I straw man? I don't think you understand the word you just used. In addition to the front office, I mentioned the owner specifically. I'll try to reword what I said. If you still don't get it, I'll type in caps lock for you to see if it helps.

The NHL, like all major sports, is a competitive sport. Meaning teams will always look to create and exploit advantages they have. If we happen to have an owner who has a better cash flow than another owner, that's an advantage. People accept that in sports. Any owner in the NHL, NFL, NBA etc is well aware of these advantages or disadvantages when buying a team. No one questions it.

In any case, there are already measures that help hedge this. The salary cap serves two purposes. One is to save the owners money, the other is to narrow the gap between what a heavy spender can pay, and what a low spender can't to create parity. Nobody except for you for some sad reason cares or thinks it should be completely even. 
If something drastic happened to the Illitch family's empire tomorrow - would you expect the NHL to stop and say, "hey guys, we all have to spend 25mil less so that the Illitch family can catch up and it's all fair." I sure hope not.

Teams have inherent advantages and disadvantages. That is all a part of pro sports. Key word, pro. Not commy. There's nothing you can do about that. Some players might only want to play in warm weather year round. How can Detroit compete with that? Florida doesn't have a State income tax, how do we compete with that? Some players love the spot light and media attention like New York, Toronto, Montreal. How do we compete with that? Some players like anonymity and don't want to be recognized when they go out to eat. So how do we compete with Arizona? Some players want to play in big thriving cities. How do we compete with NY, Chicago and LA?

The point is, you can't go around life worrying about every little thing trying to make it fair because whatever you try to correct today, someone will just move the goal post tomorrow and say something else isn't fair. Professional sports was never made to be fair. There's youth hockey for a reason. go cheer on some peewees.

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

10 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

You're straw manning this into a buncha garbage about the front office and ownership. A point I've already stated I don't disagree with. You're doing this to avoid actually addressing the topic at hand: the salary cap plus actual spending dollars and equity therewith.

We don't have to accept these archaic modes of running a sports league. Question it. I am.

The league should not be about how much money you can spend. It should be about how you spend your money. If - as reported, much of the league can only spend to around $70 million - then the salary cap should be dropped to $70 million. Keeping it at $80 is just gifting the big market teams an unfair advantage.

As you say we've already started down the road to parity and a more fair league. Please explain to me how its sad that I want to plug the remaining holes and make the league totally fair...

If something catastrophic happens to the Little Caesars empire then the Illitch family either needs to sell their team... or simply continue to run The Wings (The Detroit market turns profit).

More irrelevant points to distract from the matter at hand... some players want to play for original 6 franchises, how can the rest of the league compete??? I'm not talking about weather, media attention, or franchise history... I'm talking about THE CAP and ACTUAL SPENDING DOLLARS. Although the tax loopholes should be shored up and funds redistributed so that certain states/provinces don't have unfair advantage their.

If Taylor Hall gets offered identical contracts from Detroit and Arizona... then it's no problem to me if Hall makes his decision based on limelight, weather, which club is more respected, which club has a better roster, if his friends are on that team, where he wants to live, etc. But it does bother me if Arizona can't offer an identical contract to Detroit simply because the cap is higher than the earnings Arizona can generate.

What a defeatist attitude. Everything is unfair, why bother?

We can always make things better. Good people try to do that.

That means available:

Stamkos, Palat Gourde, Johnson, Killorn, Coleman, Paquette, McDonagh, Coburn

Wish we could see all their faces when they read this .... available? Oh hell no  , ntc you french m*****f***** , throws plate cross the room

 

hey tyler johnson rememeber when i convinced you to take 5 per cause off less taxes? How you feel about long island? Helllo ? Hello?

hey gourde! How you feel about montreal? Hello hello?

stamkos! Buddy! You know who’s got their eyes set on you! The hurricanes stevieee .. hello? Hello? f***kkkkkkkk , proceeds to swear in french

 

tampa bay are royally screwed

[Akakabuto 1,749]

 

[marcaractac 3,962]

14 hours ago, martyrme19 said:

Don't forget about the conversions from US dollars to Canadian!

All the player contracts are based on USD, so the conversion rate is never an issue. 

[marcaractac 3,962]

33 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

The league should not be about how much money you can spend. It should be about how you spend your money. If - as reported, much of the league can only spend to around $70 million - then the salary cap should be dropped to $70 million. Keeping it at $80 is just gifting the big market teams an unfair advantage.

Enjoy the player strike if the league were to ever push for such a thing. It would be taking money from the players and putting it into owners pockets. The cap is based on how much money the league makes. The league has revenue sharing to help smaller market teams. Their fault if they don't utilize that to make their team as competitive as possible. 

[LeftWinger 4,951]

You do have to wonder if Yzerman's connection to these players could hold any water to be included on their lists....

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

38 minutes ago, CatBoyRossi said:

It's hilarious the amount of NTCs and NMCs Yzerman handed out. The only big money player they can move is Killorn, and even he has a modified NTC, unless they convince guys to start waiving stuff.

Can't figure out if Yzerman knew he was going to Detroit and is a genius for using these to get deals done and hamstring TBL for the future guy. Or he's Holland-esque and got lucky to be out of there.

Hope he doesnt give out ntc’s like candy f***

well apparently johnson gave a list lmao would have loved to hear that convo , tylerrrrr we dont f***en want you anymore! Cant you see that kid! Get lost lmao  i cant imagine he caved in easily man and id love to see his list , he must have included teams he knows will likely say no. Tampa will have to throw in a 1st

i already know hes coming here , unless hes too pissed at steve ... you said if i signed a ntc id be able to stay!

14 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

You do have to wonder if Yzerman's connection to these players could hold any water to be included on their lists....

The only way i take johnson is for a 1st + , his production’s gone down and i dont care that “his numbers might go up with more minutes here” . He’s got 4 yrs left i think? You wanna move him so badly give us s*** . No? I basically handed you the stanley cup , hang up and wait for him to crawl back

[LeftWinger 4,951]

2 minutes ago, nyqvististhefuture said:

The only way i take johnson is for a 1st + , his production’s gone down and i dont care that “his numbers might go up with more minutes here” . He’s got 4 yrs left i think? You wanna move him so badly give us s*** . No? I basically handed you the stanley cup , hang up and wait for him to crawl back

Yes, I was just about to comment similarly.  Johnson has 4 years left at $5M per. It's not not we'd be just taking a salary dump UFA to be. If they want someone to take that, they'd really have to sweetin the pot! But, I would help them out with one (or two) of Johnson, Palat or Kilhorn. Each one would cost a 1st or a HIGH prospect (both in Johnson's case.) Same would be with Gourde. 5 years left over $5M in cap, I need a 1st and a HIGH prospect.