Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Jelly wrote:.
Ballard is a great 2nd pairing dman, for those saying 4.2 is too much, the cap ceiling is at 59.4, he's at 7.07% of the total cap. When Willie was signed at 3.5, the cap was at 50.3, 6.96%.
Pretty much the same amount, and considering Willie took a home town discount, the current deal for Ballard isn't that bad, and the cap is only going to go up from now anyways.
We need to take a step back, and realize that we got a very good defensemen who played on a very poor team and still manage to produce. Erhroff was said to be a total bust and look at what happened this year!
I have enough faith in GM MG, and this deal will be proven to be the 3rd deal we have ripped the Panthers off in a row.
Mitchell signed on July 1st 2006. The Salary cap had just moved from 39 million to 44 million for the 06/07 season. You can do the math from here
Jelly wrote:and this is going to further support my view of a % of cap ceiling based salary contract.
The cap% based contract may work for the Canucks, because the owner is willing to spend to the cap every year and still make profit. There are teams that could afford to spend 100% of the cap when it was $39M but not when it's close to $60M.
Jelly wrote:We haven't had a team needing to sign an insane contract to meet the cap floor, but watch, it will happen in the net 5-10 years.
And of course, that will be the team that can least afford a contract like that.
Meanwhile, it's looking more and more like Hamhuis will be testing free agency. I also read that agents can go shopping their clients for Offer Sheets - as long as arbitration is not involved.
Jelly wrote:But the cap floor rises and lowers along with the cap.
So the cap would be at 100%, and cap floor at whatever % it is at.
the owners can set their budget the same way and contracts can be signed the same way.
but it would allow players to make more money when cap goes up, and owners gets relief when cap goes down.
we haven't had a team needing to sign an insane contract to meet the cap floor, but watch, it will happen in the net 5-10 years.
But there are many parties involved in the hockey business other than the players and they won't accept amount defined to be a percentage of the cap. The TV station is not going to agree to pay an unknown amount of money for broadcasting rights, because the TV commercial rate is not based on the cap. The hotels and charter flights demand real dollar figures. It would make life a lot more complicated for the business side of things. And it won't help the GMs that much either, because a team still have to stay under the cap. In fact, teams would have less cap room to change their lineup if all contracts are percentage based, assuming the overall trend is that the cap goes up over time.
Jelly wrote:We haven't had a team needing to sign an insane contract to meet the cap floor, but watch, it will happen in the net 5-10 years.
And of course, that will be the team that can least afford a contract like that.
Meanwhile, it's looking more and more like Hamhuis will be testing free agency. I also read that agents can go shopping their clients for Offer Sheets - as long as arbitration is not involved.
I don't get the hate for the Ballard contract. $4.2M is pretty much on par with other players like him, and when it was signed just over a year ago everyone was talking about how it was a steal. He's a comparable player to Hamhuis who'll likely get $5M on the open market due to fierce bidding. Ballard is a garauntee if all of the top UFA defenceman price themselves out of the market.
The more I think about this trade the more I like it. Ballard is a comparable age to Ehrhoff, and comes in in a fairly similar situation. Ehrhoff was underutilized in SJ and Ballard has wiled away his time on a number of very awful teams. If he can be the 20 minute, 30pt plus player he can be our defence will be one of the deepest in the league. People forget that Edler could very well grow into a true #1 this year, he was spectacular in the first round of the playoffs and was hitting his stride late in the year. Gillis is going for it now, how often have we complained about the team never snagging the type of player that could push us over the edge? We are closer to a cup than we've ever been. If we hadn't had to play Chicago this year we very well could've been the West's representative in the finals. We're easily among the top 5 or 6 teams in the league and our prospect pool isn't half bad for once (regardless of what you may think) so why not trade some youngsters for a real shot at the cup?
levelheaded wrote:Ballard is a comparable age to Ehrhoff, and comes in in a fairly similar situation. Ehrhoff was underutilized in SJ and Ballard has wiled away his time on a number of very awful teams.
I like the trade too, and Ehrhoff came to the Canucks after leading the Sharks in ice time in the playoffs, even though it was only a first round exit against the Ducks. The GM didn't like him enough but apparently the coach did like him during the playoffs in spring 2009. I believe Ballard was the Panthers' ice time leader (or close to it) last season too.
