The Trouble With Tampa

[Kin]

So I brought this up on another site but I thought it might be worth discussing here.

Basically, when a team wins a championship it's instructive to look at how they did it and how a team might try to recreate their success. Now, in Tampa's case, there are a lot of examples of them being a smart and well managed team that seem to fit that. There's finding Kucherov in the 2nd round, there's the Drouin-Sergachev trade, there's investing a high draft pick in the right goalie, finding good undrafted players...

But let's be real, if you were trying to put together an approximation of Tampa's roster, really your first step would have to be "Find several world class players and convince them all to take drastically below market deals" and...ok, how? How is that repeatable?

But beyond that, I think you have to notice a trend here. When you look at most of the recent cup winners, you're going to find that a huge chunk of their performance can, at least in part, be chalked up to world class players on contracts that they're outplaying by a great deal. Whether that's young guys on cheap 2nd contracts(Chicago with Toews/Kane, LA) or it's players on contracts that are no longer legal(Pittsburgh, Washington, Chicago with Hossa/Keith).

So where does that leave teams now that it looks like those cheap 2nd deals are a thing of the past and backdiving deals can't be signed? Are the champion teams of tomorrow going to be teams that have the sort of inherent advantages Tampa has? Or is it just going to be teams who have the good fortune to have their players not be the type to maximize their deals(or, in Colorado's case, a weird Mackinnon like development pattern?)

Because I really don't think it's good for the league if a chief lesson to take away right now is that it's very hard to build a championship team around star players paid appropriately.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

So where does that leave teams now that it looks like those cheap 2nd deals are a thing of the past and backdiving deals can't be signed? Are the champion teams of tomorrow going to be teams that have the sort of inherent advantages Tampa has? Or is it just going to be teams who have the good fortune to have their players not be the type to maximize their deals(or, in Colorado's case, a weird Mackinnon like development pattern?)

Because I really don't think it's good for the league if a chief lesson to take away right now is that it's very hard to build a championship team around star players paid appropriately.

I feel like this is basically the finalization of the NHL's goal to have total parity in the league. We're going to see more teams like St. Louis (or Dallas or Vegas or the Islanders if Tampa had a last minute choke job) winning Cups as opposed to the dominant/dynasty-lite teams like Chicago/LA/Boston.

 

[Kin]

I feel like this is basically the finalization of the NHL's goal to have total parity in the league. We're going to see more teams like St. Louis (or Dallas or Vegas or the Islanders if Tampa had a last minute choke job) winning Cups as opposed to the dominant/dynasty-lite teams like Chicago/LA/Boston.

That's probably a good reading of it. Another is that it's going to be the way they continue to drive salaries down("Sure, you could get paid a reasonable amount...if you never want to win")

But over and above the prospect of more teams like the Islanders being enough to scare anyone, I think the bigger concern there is they, as well as Dallas, are examples of Teams getting huge contributions from the third kind of player exceeding their contract, namely guys on ELCs. If you make those guys the most valuable pieces in the game, you're just increasing the tanking incentive.

 

[L K]

I feel like this is basically the finalization of the NHL's goal to have total parity in the league. We're going to see more teams like St. Louis (or Dallas or Vegas or the Islanders if Tampa had a last minute choke job) winning Cups as opposed to the dominant/dynasty-lite teams like Chicago/LA/Boston.

That's probably a good reading of it. Another is that it's going to be the way they continue to drive salaries down("Sure, you could get paid a reasonable amount...if you never want to win")

But over and above the prospect of more teams like the Islanders being enough to scare anyone, I think the bigger concern there is they, as well as Dallas, are examples of Teams getting huge contributions from the third kind of player exceeding their contract, namely guys on ELCs. If you make those guys the most valuable pieces in the game, you're just increasing the tanking incentive.

I don't think complaining about the cap is a new problem but I really hate the cap.

I'm fine with some sort of component of a cap but I really wish there was a luxury tax for keeping internal players more like the NBA cap for precisely this reason.

Heck, even the current Cup champions are going to have to break up parts of their team just after winning because they have 5.9M in cap space and have to re-sign two prominent defensemen and one good young forward along with filling holes in their lineup.    The reward for winning is to make it harder to win again and this is on a team that has players signing team friendly deals as it is.

I'm guilty of it myself, but it's interesting how pre-cap we would be yelling at the Leafs for not throwing 10 million dollars at Bobby Holik in free agency but how Mitch Marner is a jerk for wanting to be paid a lot of money.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

But over and above the prospect of more teams like the Islanders being enough to scare anyone, I think the bigger concern there is they, as well as Dallas, are examples of Teams getting huge contributions from the third kind of player exceeding their contract, namely guys on ELCs. If you make those guys the most valuable pieces in the game, you're just increasing the tanking incentive.

One thought I got from this is I wonder if teams start to hold off on getting their top prospects into the NHL more. Because it's not just tanking that teams would need to do, it's then getting their team into a competitive shape in that 3 year ELC window to take advantage of those savings. That's a lot tougher to do if you finish bottom 5 one year and the clock on the ELC starts to click the very next season.

 

[Bender]

But over and above the prospect of more teams like the Islanders being enough to scare anyone, I think the bigger concern there is they, as well as Dallas, are examples of Teams getting huge contributions from the third kind of player exceeding their contract, namely guys on ELCs. If you make those guys the most valuable pieces in the game, you're just increasing the tanking incentive.

One thought I got from this is I wonder if teams start to hold off on getting their top prospects into the NHL more. Because it's not just tanking that teams would need to do, it's then getting their team into a competitive shape in that 3 year ELC window to take advantage of those savings. That's a lot tougher to do if you finish bottom 5 one year and the clock on the ELC starts to click the very next season.

Right, I mean I for sure think this will lead to artificially lengthening out the ELC. We were hearing about it with Rasmus Sandin earlier this year. If everything is about cost control why wouldn't you continue to tank and suppress your stars? I guess the upshot is the player will recognize the team is acting in bad faith? I don't know, this is a really stupid place to be in.

 

[herman]

So I brought this up on another site but I thought it might be worth discussing here.

Who are you cheating on us with, and what makes that site so good, huh?

 

[Kin]

One thought I got from this is I wonder if teams start to hold off on getting their top prospects into the NHL more. Because it's not just tanking that teams would need to do, it's then getting their team into a competitive shape in that 3 year ELC window to take advantage of those savings. That's a lot tougher to do if you finish bottom 5 one year and the clock on the ELC starts to click the very next season.

Maybe, but I think that sort of ignores that parity makes "competitive shape" a lot easier to get into. I guess what I'm thinking of is a team that sees they're going to be somewhat middle of the pack trade everything but their core pieces at the deadline, do sort of a shadow tank in the second half(not call up guys who otherwise would, let guys take long times to heal), then use cap space and the assets from those trades to try and replace the non-essential guys dealt at the deadline.

Will you be able to build yourself up into a team like Tampa quickly after that sort of tank? No. But a decent team with a dice roll in a parity heavy league? I think so.

 

[Kin]

So I brought this up on another site but I thought it might be worth discussing here.

Who are you cheating on us with, and what makes that site so good, huh?

I need an outlet for swearing and all my hot political takes.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Heck, even the current Cup champions are going to have to break up parts of their team just after winning because they have 5.9M in cap space and have to re-sign two prominent defensemen and one good young forward along with filling holes in their lineup.    The reward for winning is to make it harder to win again and this is on a team that has players signing team friendly deals as it is.

I wonder how Tampa ends up handling their cap crunch. Capfriendly has them with about $5.3mil in cap space and that's with just 3 defencemen signed and like you said Cirelli, Sergachev, and Cernak as RFAs. Shattenkirk and Maroon are UFAs and probably priced themselves out of Tampa.

You can count on those RFAs to sign grossly discounted deals so let's just plug in Cirelli and Sergachev at $4mil each and Cernak at $2mil. Let's plug in Cal Foote on defence and add 2 forwards and 1 other defencemen for about $900k each to give them 13 forwards, 7 defencemen, and 2 goalies. That would put them about $8mil over the cap.

So obviously some moves need to happen but it's not really obvious where they're going to get relief. They've got at trio of $5mil-ish forwards in Palat, Gourde, and Johnson that you could maybe argue are somewhat expendable for those 3 all have full NTCs. Will any of them really do Tampa a solid by waiving them and going to a team that's worse or even much, much worse? I kinda find that tough to see especially if they feel like they gave Tampa a discount on their deals. Although both Palat and Johnson have their NTCs turn to modified ones in a year so if they don't waive them now they'll be trade (or expansion fodder) candidates next year.

Brayden Coburn has 1 year left on his $1.7mil AAV contract and that seems like an easy way to save $1mil but even he has a full NTC. I mean I wouldn't if I was in his position but who knows.

Killorn becomes the most likely guy to move. He has 3 years left on his $4.45mil AAV deal and his NTC just became a modified one where he has a 16 team no trade list. If he really wanted to try to stay in Tampa he could strategically create his list by only allowing trades to other cap-strapped teams but I think one way or another they'll get out of that contract.

Still trading him and replacing him with a league minimum guy still means they'll need to create about $4.5mil in cap space. The next most obvious move would be trading McElhinney and replacing him with someone making close to league minimum to save $500k.

That's a $4mil cap problem still. Could they convince one of those middle-6 forwards to waive their no trade clauses and give up a chance to repeat as champs? Could they convince those RFAs to take even bigger discounts on 1-year deals?

 

[Kin]

I've sort of given up on talking people out of the cap on any sort of ethical or political grounds because there's a lot of sports fans who just can't get past "Athletes want to be paid by market rates instead of my love and affection? Booo! Go Billionaire Owners! Hooray for Brands!"

But at the very least now I'm trying to get people to see that caps are bad for producing good, watchable sports. A team like Tampa having to dismantle is bad for the sport.

 

[L K]

I've sort of given up on talking people out of the cap on any sort of ethical or political grounds because there's a lot of sports fans who just can't get past "Athletes want to be paid by market rates instead of my love and affection? Booo! Go Billionaire Owners! Hooray for Brands!"

But at the very least now I'm trying to get people to see that caps are bad for producing good, watchable sports. A team like Tampa having to dismantle is bad for the sport.

It's odd because having the giant team (or player) is what the media wants to market.  They were thrilled when Detroit was bashing up against Colorado.  Everyone wants Jordan or LeBron in the NBA finals.  Chicago got marketed to the ends when Kane/Toews were great. 

Why we want Arizona to scrape by on a bottom of the cap fluke season over dynasties and juggernaut teams facing off against each other because of good management is beyond me. 

 

[Kin]

It's odd because having the giant team (or player) is what the media wants to market.  They were thrilled when Detroit was bashing up against Colorado.  Everyone wants Jordan or LeBron in the NBA finals.  Chicago got marketed to the ends when Kane/Toews were great. 

I think to some extent it's just the nature of hockey culture. People who touch themselves thinking about "it's about the name on the front of the jersey" and counting how many times players say "we" instead of "I" in press conferences. The notion of a team of hardworking scrubs winning a title fits a narrative they want to tell themselves about the game so they're fine with a system that renders every team unremarkable.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/TheFourthPeriod/status/1313499251666714627

Any team that gets Tampa out of their cap troubles AND pays full price (if not more than that) to do so will forever be my enemy.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/TheFourthPeriod/status/1313499251666714627

Any team that gets Tampa out of their cap troubles AND pays full price (if not more than that) to do so will forever be my enemy.

Teams should be asking for a 2021 1st/2nd for getting Tampa out of cap trouble by taking on Johnson/Killorn respectively.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Teams should be asking for a 2021 1st/2nd for getting Tampa out of cap trouble by taking on Johnson/Killorn respectively.

Seriously. It's actually insane to me that they would ask for a 1st. Surely the media will write stories about how other GMs are angry about BriseBois' ridiculous asking prices, right?

 

[Bender]

Teams should be asking for a 2021 1st/2nd for getting Tampa out of cap trouble by taking on Johnson/Killorn respectively.

Seriously. It's actually insane to me that they would ask for a 1st. Surely the media will write stories about how other GMs are angry about BriseBois' ridiculous asking prices, right?

God knows they've written enough on Dubas.

 

[herman]

Waiving Tyler Johnson, who played through the playoffs injured, because his cap hit was too high and his mNTC was not landing the right calls, is sooo harsh. Now is your chance, Jarmo.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Waiving Tyler Johnson, who played through the playoffs injured, because his cap hit was too high and his mNTC was not landing the right calls, is sooo harsh. Now is your chance, Jarmo.

https://twitter.com/CapFriendly/status/1314600163604869127

 

[herman]

Where are the articles about Tampa having to cull cap space from their core forward depth to ice a team properly next season?