Friday, February 01, 2008
Friday Baseball Standings
Let's look at the East for a change. Note that it's actually the Rangers, not Buffalo, sitting in the #8 seed for the moment, because the SE leader vaults up to #3. However, my point is not to laugh at the ol' South-Least again; it's to note that the SE teams are actually pretty close to the #8 seed. Even if the Caps were to go out 25-5 and run away with the SE title, Carolina is only half a game back of the Rangers. Also:
- Note the chasm below the Bruins. Like the Flames in November, the Canucks are presently demonstrating what kind of trouble a losing streak can get you into, but those top 6 teams are presently a pretty sound bet to make the second season.
- What was with all the morons over the All-Star break lumping Buffalo in with the Leafs, Bolts, and Kings? I'm not saying these are the guaranteed best kind of standings, but you have, have, have to pay attention to the GP column, not just the Pts column.
Here's a look at next year's cap situation based on the most common rumour of $40M/6yrs for Phaneuf. Some questions:1) Where does the roster look unbalanced (salary- and veteran-heavy) to you? If your answer is "At LW" or "too many effective well-paid forwards", uh, I gotta wonder about you.
2) Can we agree that it's likely that one or two of Aucoin, Warrener, and Eriksson will be moved by late June at the latest?
3) Can we agree that trade rumours involving more than one of Lombardi, Boyd, and Moss are ludicrous?
4) I didn't quite catch all the intricacies of "tagging" during the Niedermayer comeback, but am I right in saying that the Flames probably can't sign any more contract extensions until one of: (A) some salary is dumped, or (B) next year's cap is set? Even re-signing a player at a lower salary than he's making now (e.g. Conroy) would seem to be difficult, given how close next year's salaries are to this year's cap.
5) Can we agree that, barring a really good trade where Sutter dumps some salary on D without making the team worse, that the Flames roster is probably better this year than it will be next year?
# posted by Matt @ 11:59 am 
Comments:
Ugly, but not debilitating, unlike the McCabe/Tucker/Kubina issue in Toronto, for instance.
I agree with 2 through 4, but if the Flames go on a nice playoff run AND the cap goes up to $57 (as has been rumoured) AND Sutter accomplishes No. 2, it's possible that No. 5 won't come true.
So, in other words, No. 5 is highly likely.
I didn't quite catch all the intricacies of "tagging" during the Niedermayer comeback, but am I right in saying that the Flames probably can't sign any more contract extensions until one of: (A) some salary is dumped, or (B) next year's cap is set?
I'm not so sure, Matt. It's all about what contracts actually exist for next year's cap, and going by the numbers you've got there with actual names by it, it seems like it's just north of $40M. That seems like there's plenty of room for a Dion contract, unless you're leaving out a lot of names.
But really, I'm not that much of a tag expert myself, and won't be one unless someone seriously pays me to do it.
My guess is if nobody's brought it up, though, the Flames are probably in the clear.
Yes: more than enough room for Phaneuf's contract, but touch and go for any more.
Although... the bigger issue is probably the practical one, not the CBA/tagging one per se. Surely it's preferable to dump salary on a bit of your own schedule rather than ending up in a position with $3M in cap space left and 6 forward spots to fill.
If a salary-dumping or salary-shifting trade isn't possible AND the team revenue is high enough to afford this can they not create cap sapce by:
A) Having Warriner play out the final year of his contract in Quad City
OR
B) Buying out the final year of Aucoin's deal, which would spread out the cap hit.
Yes to both, and also either/or (Rhett bought out, Aucoin in the minors). All poor options relative to getting a 5th-round draft pick in return in a trade, though. (Or better yet, an NHL forward with a 2-way deal or an inexpensive 1-way deal).
Just have Warriner consider retirement for a while Niedermayer-style, then don't answer the phone when his Caller ID shows up.
I wonder if the Penguins would be willing to take on Warrener's contract around the deadline? They have a lot of cap room this year and next, and an aching need for bodies on the back-end (especially with Eaton on LTIR for the remainder of the season)...
There's probably a few teams for whom $2.3M for a competent blueline vet is suddenly seeming more and more reasonable. Problem is that Sutter is generally loathe to give away his D depth before the playoffs; June seems more plausible. (But, who knows).
Problem is that Sutter is generally loathe to give away his D depth before the playoffs; June seems more plausible.
True enough. I think my ideal scenario is Sutter picking up a top 4 dman around the deadline (bumping Eriksson down the depth chart) and then dealing Warrener for a bag of pucks to someone desperate for a veteran body on the back-end (Carolina and the aforementioned Pittsburgh for example). But, as you say, who knows.
Well, you might as well take Edmonton off the standings list. Although it was inevitable, it's just a bit earlier now.
Speaking of injuries, there is concern now that the shoulder trouble that sidelined Horcoff could be long-term.
"Lots of concern," said MacTavish.
—Edmonton Sun
I don't care what Kelly Hrudey says, Kiprusoff has to make that save.
Also, someone needs to kick the shit out of Steve Ott
Post a Comment
<< Home
Ugly, but not debilitating, unlike the McCabe/Tucker/Kubina issue in Toronto, for instance.
I agree with 2 through 4, but if the Flames go on a nice playoff run AND the cap goes up to $57 (as has been rumoured) AND Sutter accomplishes No. 2, it's possible that No. 5 won't come true.
So, in other words, No. 5 is highly likely.
# posted by 
: February 01, 2008 12:39 pm
: February 01, 2008 12:39 pm I didn't quite catch all the intricacies of "tagging" during the Niedermayer comeback, but am I right in saying that the Flames probably can't sign any more contract extensions until one of: (A) some salary is dumped, or (B) next year's cap is set?
I'm not so sure, Matt. It's all about what contracts actually exist for next year's cap, and going by the numbers you've got there with actual names by it, it seems like it's just north of $40M. That seems like there's plenty of room for a Dion contract, unless you're leaving out a lot of names.
But really, I'm not that much of a tag expert myself, and won't be one unless someone seriously pays me to do it.
My guess is if nobody's brought it up, though, the Flames are probably in the clear.
Yes: more than enough room for Phaneuf's contract, but touch and go for any more.
Although... the bigger issue is probably the practical one, not the CBA/tagging one per se. Surely it's preferable to dump salary on a bit of your own schedule rather than ending up in a position with $3M in cap space left and 6 forward spots to fill.
If a salary-dumping or salary-shifting trade isn't possible AND the team revenue is high enough to afford this can they not create cap sapce by:
A) Having Warriner play out the final year of his contract in Quad City
OR
B) Buying out the final year of Aucoin's deal, which would spread out the cap hit.
# posted by : February 01, 2008 1:07 pm
: February 01, 2008 1:07 pm Yes to both, and also either/or (Rhett bought out, Aucoin in the minors). All poor options relative to getting a 5th-round draft pick in return in a trade, though. (Or better yet, an NHL forward with a 2-way deal or an inexpensive 1-way deal).
Just have Warriner consider retirement for a while Niedermayer-style, then don't answer the phone when his Caller ID shows up.
I wonder if the Penguins would be willing to take on Warrener's contract around the deadline? They have a lot of cap room this year and next, and an aching need for bodies on the back-end (especially with Eaton on LTIR for the remainder of the season)...
There's probably a few teams for whom $2.3M for a competent blueline vet is suddenly seeming more and more reasonable. Problem is that Sutter is generally loathe to give away his D depth before the playoffs; June seems more plausible. (But, who knows).
Problem is that Sutter is generally loathe to give away his D depth before the playoffs; June seems more plausible.
True enough. I think my ideal scenario is Sutter picking up a top 4 dman around the deadline (bumping Eriksson down the depth chart) and then dealing Warrener for a bag of pucks to someone desperate for a veteran body on the back-end (Carolina and the aforementioned Pittsburgh for example). But, as you say, who knows.
Well, you might as well take Edmonton off the standings list. Although it was inevitable, it's just a bit earlier now.
Speaking of injuries, there is concern now that the shoulder trouble that sidelined Horcoff could be long-term.
"Lots of concern," said MacTavish.
—Edmonton Sun
# posted by : February 02, 2008 8:55 am
: February 02, 2008 8:55 am I don't care what Kelly Hrudey says, Kiprusoff has to make that save.
Also, someone needs to kick the shit out of Steve Ott
Post a Comment
<< Home
