Simplistic but interesting take on cap structure

[HKSR]

So I was curious about building a team around cap ranges for specific roles on a team, and this is what I came up with.  Feedback encouraged and appreciated.

 

This is a very simplistic approach, but interesting nonetheless. 

 

1.  Used $83.5M as the base upper cap limit for all calculations.

2.  Setup cap dollar ranges for each category of player (ie. Generational, Superstar, Top 4D, Bottom Pair D, etc).

3.  Calculated the average Cap Dollars and Cap Hit % for those ranges.

4.  Input the positions onto a 22 player roster (13 forwards, 7 D, 2 goalies)

 

 

Notes:

1.  Notice the Top 6F structure is really 4 top 6 level forwards combined with 2 middle 6 forwards because it's rare that a team has 6 true top 6 forwards in their top 2 lines.

2.  Did not include any generational talents on this roster.  Only 1 superstar level forward, and a star level defenceman and forward. 

3.  I find goalie cap hits for high performing goaltenders are usually much lower than their forward/defence counterparts.  So I just used a Starting Goalie salary range.

 

Conclustion:  What does this tell us?

1.  A nearly perfectly built structure for a highly competitive roster (assuming all these players are playing at the level they are paid at) would be over the cap limit by nearly 6% (or $5M in this scenario).

2.  Generational talents need to really make up a significant difference.  They need to absolutely make a middle 6 forward produce like a top 6 or even star forward to make it worthwhile.

3.  ELCs for players that are highly effective (ie. in top 4D or top 6F roles) are EXTREMELY valuable.  Imagine if Lekkerimaki was playing like a Top 6 at under $1M?  That's a +$6M value!

4.  Likewise, having players play above their pay grade category provides huge advantages.  That is why the cap game is all about finding players that provide value above their pay.  Miller and Hughes are perfect examples -- Miller is likely between a Star and Superstar, but is being paid between a Top 6F and Star.  Hughes is playing like a Superstar, but is being paid between a Top 2D and a 1D.

 

TLDR:  Finding contracts that provide value over and above their cost is the absolutely key to building a top tier contender.  Stay tuned and I'll work on my assessment of the current Canucks roster and how I think their value is vs the cap hits.

[Jess]

Neat analysis. I do think part of the reason we're doing so well is that a ton of our players are playing way better than their contracts. Myers might be the only contract that looks explicity overpaid right now, with the possible exceptions of Kuzmenko and Garland, though those two guys are at least close to their contract value.

[HKSR]

21 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Neat analysis. I do think part of the reason we're doing so well is that a ton of our players are playing way better than their contracts. Myers might be the only contract that looks explicity overpaid right now, with the possible exceptions of Kuzmenko and Garland, though those two guys are at least close to their contract value.

 

Glad you mentioned this.  Here's my analysis of the Canucks.

 

The approach I took was assigning a category to each player based on how they have been performing recently.  Then I provided their actual cap dollars and cap hit % compared to the calculated ranges from the analysis above to see what the net value we are getting for each player based on their category of performance.

 

For example, JT Miller is currently performing like a Superstar and should be paid around $11M.  He is being paid an actual $8M, so has a net positive of $3M in value or 3.59% of the cap hit.

 

As you work down the roster, you get a sense of where the value is on this roster, and areas where we could possibly improve.

 

Net total shows that our roster is way over performing.  A big part of that is our Lotto Line, Quinn Hughes, and of course the 3rd line.  However, interesting that Garland is showing as negative value, but I think the collective sum of the 3rd line makes up for it.  Kuzmenko and Myers are clearly still negative value.

 

I also ranked our defence group quite high which may skew the numbers.  However, I couldn't justify calling any of Zadorov, Cole, Soucy, or Myers as bottom pair D.  They're all legitimately playing like top 4 D at the moment.

 

 

TLDR:  This roster is currently playing at the level of a team that should have a cap hit of $83,500,000 + $18,320,000 = $101,820,000.  A big reason why this team is doing so well.

Edited January 10 by HKSR

[Jess]

3 minutes ago, HKSR said:

 

Glad you mentioned this.  Here's my analysis of the Canucks.

 

The approach I took was assigning a category to each player based on how they have been performing recently.  Then I provided their actual cap dollars and cap hit % compared to the calculated ranges from the analysis above to see what the net value we are getting for each player based on their category of performance.

 

For example, JT Miller is currently performing like a Superstar and should be paid around $11M.  He is being paid an actual $8M, so has a net positive of $3M in value or 3.59% of the cap hit.

 

As you work down the roster, you get a sense of where the value is on this roster, and areas where we could possibly improve.

 

Net total shows that our roster is way over performing.  A big part of that is our Lotto Line, Quinn Hughes, and of course the 3rd line.  However, interesting that Garland is showing as negative value, but I think the collective sum of the 3rd line makes up for it.  Kuzmenko and Myers are clearly still negative value.

 

I also ranked our defence group quite high which may skew the numbers.  However, I couldn't justify calling any of Zadorov, Cole, Soucy, or Myers as bottom pair D.  They're all legitimately playing like top 4 D at the moment.

 

 

Yeah, at the end of the day, this is a pretty subjective analysis, but interesting nonetheless. I'd probably try to have at least one of those five defensemen as a bottom pairing guy, but you're right, it's hard to justify any of them at that level right now. Cole might be the closest. On the other end though, Demko might well be in a higher tier than "Starting Goalie" at $5M and could maybe better fit into your "Star" category or something else. He's a proper Vezina contender and I'd argue that's worth more than $5M.

[Alflives]

For cap allocation maybe we could simply take the points of a player and add their plus/minus to see their true value?

For example Dhalin has 32 + -16 = 16

Cap allocation should reflect that value.

Quinn Hughes is 51 + 32 = 83

Clearly he’s a steal at his current cap allocation. 

 

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, -AJ- said:

 

Yeah, at the end of the day, this is a pretty subjective analysis, but interesting nonetheless. I'd probably try to have at least one of those five defensemen as a bottom pairing guy, but you're right, it's hard to justify any of them at that level right now. Cole might be the closest. On the other end though, Demko might well be in a higher tier than "Starting Goalie" at $5M and could maybe better fit into your "Star" category or something else. He's a proper Vezina contender and I'd argue that's worth more than $5M.

 

Yeah, this analysis boils down to how much you think each category of player should be making (ie. how much does the true average 3rd liner maker?  Top 4 D? Top 6 F? etc).  Once you have those narrowed down, it's not too hard to compare them to what we currently have to see what kinda value we're getting.  I just used more formulas in mine so I can quickly check

[Strawbone]

42 minutes ago, HKSR said:

 

Glad you mentioned this.  Here's my analysis of the Canucks.

 

The approach I took was assigning a category to each player based on how they have been performing recently.  Then I provided their actual cap dollars and cap hit % compared to the calculated ranges from the analysis above to see what the net value we are getting for each player based on their category of performance.

 

For example, JT Miller is currently performing like a Superstar and should be paid around $11M.  He is being paid an actual $8M, so has a net positive of $3M in value or 3.59% of the cap hit.

 

As you work down the roster, you get a sense of where the value is on this roster, and areas where we could possibly improve.

 

Net total shows that our roster is way over performing.  A big part of that is our Lotto Line, Quinn Hughes, and of course the 3rd line.  However, interesting that Garland is showing as negative value, but I think the collective sum of the 3rd line makes up for it.  Kuzmenko and Myers are clearly still negative value.

 

I also ranked our defence group quite high which may skew the numbers.  However, I couldn't justify calling any of Zadorov, Cole, Soucy, or Myers as bottom pair D.  They're all legitimately playing like top 4 D at the moment.

 

 

TLDR:  This roster is currently playing at the level of a team that should have a cap hit of $83,500,000 + $18,320,000 = $101,820,000.  A big reason why this team is doing so well.

 

It sure feels like a $100M team right now!

[EdgarM]

2 hours ago, HKSR said:

 

Glad you mentioned this.  Here's my analysis of the Canucks.

 

The approach I took was assigning a category to each player based on how they have been performing recently.  Then I provided their actual cap dollars and cap hit % compared to the calculated ranges from the analysis above to see what the net value we are getting for each player based on their category of performance.

 

For example, JT Miller is currently performing like a Superstar and should be paid around $11M.  He is being paid an actual $8M, so has a net positive of $3M in value or 3.59% of the cap hit.

 

As you work down the roster, you get a sense of where the value is on this roster, and areas where we could possibly improve.

 

Net total shows that our roster is way over performing.  A big part of that is our Lotto Line, Quinn Hughes, and of course the 3rd line.  However, interesting that Garland is showing as negative value, but I think the collective sum of the 3rd line makes up for it.  Kuzmenko and Myers are clearly still negative value.

 

I also ranked our defence group quite high which may skew the numbers.  However, I couldn't justify calling any of Zadorov, Cole, Soucy, or Myers as bottom pair D.  They're all legitimately playing like top 4 D at the moment.

 

 

TLDR:  This roster is currently playing at the level of a team that should have a cap hit of $83,500,000 + $18,320,000 = $101,820,000.  A big reason why this team is doing so well.

 

This looks fine and dandy now but what is going to throw everything off is what Petey is going to demand for a raise. 

Yes Myers is going to take a pay cut, but that money saved is going to go to Hronek , as it should.

Now you look at giving Petey a 5-6 Million dollar raise? Well things are going to dramatically change on this roster for sure.

Our great roster, which has mostly come from sacrifices from players like Miller and Hughes, is going to have to make some serious decisions and where are they going to minus in the roster or who is going to take a pay cut. Anyone want to tell Joshua we aren't going to give him a raise because we can't afford it? 

If you are going to have a player represent the highest cap percentage on the team, I would hope you are going to get a lot of different things from that player, and then some.

[Tusk]

2 hours ago, HKSR said:

 

Yeah, this analysis boils down to how much you think each category of player should be making (ie. how much does the true average 3rd liner maker?  Top 4 D? Top 6 F? etc).  Once you have those narrowed down, it's not too hard to compare them to what we currently have to see what kinda value we're getting.  I just used more formulas in mine so I can quickly check

And your $ are based on a cap overage to begin with, I think the D core has too much money alloted in your model. I mean, what is the median for an NHL D and why are your numbers so high? I dont even think Quinn expects 11 mil

[HKSR]

4 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

 

This looks fine and dandy now but what is going to throw everything off is what Petey is going to demand for a raise. 

Yes Myers is going to take a pay cut, but that money saved is going to go to Hronek , as it should.

Now you look at giving Petey a 5-6 Million dollar raise? Well things are going to dramatically change on this roster for sure.

Our great roster, which has mostly come from sacrifices from players like Miller and Hughes, is going to have to make some serious decisions and where are they going to minus in the roster or who is going to take a pay cut. Anyone want to tell Joshua we aren't going to give him a raise because we can't afford it? 

If you are going to have a player represent the highest cap percentage on the team, I would hope you are going to get a lot of different things from that player, and then some.

I'll do a bit of projecting for next year and see what we get.  I think we'd still be net positive, but definitely not as much as it is now...

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, Tusk said:

And your $ are based on a cap overage to begin with, I think the D core has too much money alloted in your model. I mean, what is the median for an NHL D and why are your numbers so high? I dont even think Quinn expects 11 mil

It's showing what a reasonable cap hit we can expect based on the category of player we are talking about.  So for Quinn Hughes, he is playing like a superstar, so we would expect him to have a cap hit in the area of about $11M, but he doesn't, he makes way less, which means he has a net positive value based on his cap hit.  Get what I mean?

[EdgarM]

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I'll do a bit of projecting for next year and see what we get.  I think we'd still be net positive, but definitely not as much as it is now...

 

My thing is, if we are going to pay a guy "higher "superstar" to bottom "generational" money? Well that guy better be a ONE MAN SCORING MACHINE or something we just cannot function without. A Bure who can change a game in one break away, or a Lemieux who could stick handle through an entire team to score that winning goal. Other then McDavid, who else comes close to that? 

At the end of the day, you need to score more goals then your opponent. Does your best player need to score 100 points or 50 goals to be effective? Some think so.

You need to play with 22 other guys and play as a Unit. Some can score but EVERYONE on the team needs to play defense. Does the 100 point guy know how to play defense? Should we pay him the same as the guy who is a little more one dimensional? but can score 100 points? 

How about that 100 point guy that can take better face offs, or is more physical or has better leadership skills? 

Like I said, its a lot more then just money or how many points you can score. 

[Tusk]

28 minutes ago, HKSR said:

It's showing what a reasonable cap hit we can expect based on the category of player we are talking about.  So for Quinn Hughes, he is playing like a superstar, so we would expect him to have a cap hit in the area of about $11M, but he doesn't, he makes way less, which means he has a net positive value based on his cap hit.  Get what I mean?

There are alot of outliers on the teams. I think for your averages you should exclude the top 6 Cap hit teams and the bottom 6 Cap hit teams if you want real numbers.

 

At least your model would be cap compliant, to start with.

[Tusk]

I think this is a great project. I think it need some tuning to make the averages work, because there are teams overpaying for superstar forwards but they dont have a superstar defense, or even a NHL level goalie.

[Tusk]

1 minute ago, Tusk said:

I think this is a great project. I think it need some tuning to make the averages work, because there are teams overpaying for superstar forwards but they dont have a superstar defense, or even a NHL level goalie.

Also need to figure out a way to include CAP average buyouts, or penalties/retentions because that will help for next year and the following. Crap, you could sell this if you get it better than DRANCE would.

[HKSR]

29 minutes ago, Tusk said:

I think this is a great project. I think it need some tuning to make the averages work, because there are teams overpaying for superstar forwards but they dont have a superstar defense, or even a NHL level goalie.

I just put up some ranges to work with as reasonable estimates of what current players would typically cost.  The more accurate approach would be to take the entire league and sort the forwards, defencemen, and goalies, then classify every single player by their category, and then reviewing their cap hit %s as an average.  Not sure I'm up to doing that right now lol

[Tusk]

6 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I just put up some ranges to work with as reasonable estimates of what current players would typically cost.  The more accurate approach would be to take the entire league and sort the forwards, defencemen, and goalies, then classify every single player by their category, and then reviewing their cap hit %s as an average.  Not sure I'm up to doing that right now lol

Well maybe just base the ranges on the NY Rangers because they have ranges... I mean they have a median cap hit in the league but are also a high performing team.

I think Canucks current cap is too high, even if we are outperforming some teams with higher cap.

[Coconuts]

4 hours ago, -AJ- said:

Neat analysis. I do think part of the reason we're doing so well is that a ton of our players are playing way better than their contracts. Myers might be the only contract that looks explicity overpaid right now, with the possible exceptions of Kuzmenko and Garland, though those two guys are at least close to their contract value.

 

Agreed, and if the Canucks regress a bit next season this could be part of the why. The cost of success without a championship is having to pay your players more anyway, we should see guys like Joshua, Lafferty, and maybe Bluegar get raises in the bottom six, respectable raises. Myers will go, maybe Cole too, some of this cap will be reallocated.

 

Hronek and Zadorov will need raises, Zadorov's shouldn't be huge but Hronek is more of a wildcard imo. Could see him going up to 8M, one could argue he shouldn't make more than Hughes but Hughes's deal was also signed back in 2021 and doesn't reflect today's reality, or the prospect of a sizeable cap jump. Hellebyk just signed an 8.5M deal as an elite starter, if Demko keeps it up he'll likely get more than that when you factor in three offseason's worth of cap increases. 

 

All in all it's an interesting chart but I do think the numbers and cap percentages allocated to top players will be larger. One significant wrinkle is RFA's getting paid much sooner than they used to be, which likely skews cap comparisons a bit. 

 

As players in Pettersson, Boeser, Hughes, and Demko get their next deals sooner than later more pressure will be put on management's ability to integrate RFA's and cost effective players on ELC's. Consistently getting surplus value out of a player in regards to their cap hit isn't an easy thing for any management group to do. 

[Tusk]

6 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Agreed, and if the Canucks regress a bit next season this could be part of the why. The cost of success without a championship is having to pay your players more anyway, we should see guys like Joshua, Lafferty, and maybe Bluegar get raises in the bottom six, respectable raises. Myers will go, maybe Cole too, some of this cap will be reallocated.

 

Hronek and Zadorov will need raises, Zadorov's shouldn't be huge but Hronek is more of a wildcard imo. Could see him going up to 8M, one could argue he shouldn't make more than Hughes but Hughes's deal was also signed back in 2021 and doesn't reflect today's reality, or the prospect of a sizeable cap jump. Hellebyk just signed an 8.5M deal as an elite starter, if Demko keeps it up he'll likely get more than that when you factor in three offseason's worth of cap increases. 

 

All in all it's an interesting chart but I do think the numbers and cap percentages allocated to top players will be larger. One significant wrinkle is RFA's getting paid much sooner than they used to be, which likely skews cap comparisons a bit. 

 

As players in Pettersson, Boeser, Hughes, and Demko get their next deals sooner than later more pressure will be put on management's ability to integrate RFA's and cost effective players on ELC's. Consistently getting surplus value out of a player in regards to their cap hit isn't an easy thing for any management group to do. 

I think when Canucks fans are talking contract salaries, they should look at teams like Vegas or NY rangers as cap examples. Because i think thats the sweet spot Alvin wants to be in.

If we start over paying for players they will be moved for players and contracts that fit a median cap space, so there is room to be a "buyer" at TDL.

 

[Coconuts]

18 minutes ago, Tusk said:

I think when Canucks fans are talking contract salaries, they should look at teams like Vegas or NY rangers as cap examples. Because i think thats the sweet spot Alvin wants to be in.

If we start over paying for players they will be moved for players and contracts that fit a median cap space, so there is room to be a "buyer" at TDL.

 

 

Vegas is a bit of a wildcard in that they've been a contender since their inception, and they just won a cup, that sells guys on taking less. Not only that, but they have a tax advantage the Canucks don't. Vegas has also demonstrated a willingness to be more ruthless, which isn't something we've really seen from Canucks management in years past. The closest one could point to is paying to dump Dickinson after one season (a mistake imo) and our selling from a position of strength when trading Horvat. 

 

Rangers are in a similar scenario, New York is a destination that also sells itself. Not only that, but one can disappear in New York as a player and live a relatively normal life even with the athlete spotlight, hockey is big there but it's not the biggest sport. Rangers also benefitted from timing, signing Kreider to his current deal on Feb 20th, 2020, before he went on be more than the 30's-high 40's point producer he had been. Zibanejad as a tidy piece of work, they signed him to his current deal on October 10th, 2021, after 74 and 75 point seasons and then a 50 in 56 season. Before he went on to put up 81 and 91 point seasons. 

 

Canucks are a bit of a different animal, playing in hockey rabid Vancouver where there's a spotlight on you at all times. We don't get the tax benefits of Vegas, Dallas, Florida, and Tampa and we don't have the selling power of New York. I don't think it's farfetched to say that most NHL players would rather play for the Rangers in New York than for the Canucks in Vancouver given a choice, being able to step away from the game and just live life is huge. The one thing that has gone well for the Canucks is they've shown this season that they can compete, that should draw some interest from players. 

 

I don't necessarily think it's about overpaying, it's that teams aren't always going to get away with paying less than market value for their players. Most top end guys do not take discounts, and I think the fans across the league who expect their stars to do so set themselves up for disappointment. Both Hughes and Pettersson sat out last time they negotiated their deals, neither player took a discount, I don't expect Pettersson or Hughes will next go round either. 

 

Every team wants to have an advantageous cap scenario, but it's not necessarily an easy thing to accomplish. Allvin and co have done well to slot guys who fit capwise thus far, but they're competing with every other management group and every move or signing isn't going to be a win. 

Edited January 10 by Coconuts

[HKSR]

41 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Agreed, and if the Canucks regress a bit next season this could be part of the why. The cost of success without a championship is having to pay your players more anyway, we should see guys like Joshua, Lafferty, and maybe Bluegar get raises in the bottom six, respectable raises. Myers will go, maybe Cole too, some of this cap will be reallocated.

 

Hronek and Zadorov will need raises, Zadorov's shouldn't be huge but Hronek is more of a wildcard imo. Could see him going up to 8M, one could argue he shouldn't make more than Hughes but Hughes's deal was also signed back in 2021 and doesn't reflect today's reality, or the prospect of a sizeable cap jump. Hellebyk just signed an 8.5M deal as an elite starter, if Demko keeps it up he'll likely get more than that when you factor in three offseason's worth of cap increases. 

 

All in all it's an interesting chart but I do think the numbers and cap percentages allocated to top players will be larger. One significant wrinkle is RFA's getting paid much sooner than they used to be, which likely skews cap comparisons a bit. 

 

As players in Pettersson, Boeser, Hughes, and Demko get their next deals sooner than later more pressure will be put on management's ability to integrate RFA's and cost effective players on ELC's. Consistently getting surplus value out of a player in regards to their cap hit isn't an easy thing for any management group to do. 

 

31 minutes ago, Tusk said:

I think when Canucks fans are talking contract salaries, they should look at teams like Vegas or NY rangers as cap examples. Because i think thats the sweet spot Alvin wants to be in.

If we start over paying for players they will be moved for players and contracts that fit a median cap space, so there is room to be a "buyer" at TDL.

 

 

So did a bit of projecting, and the interesting thing is that because of the increase in the overall cap limit, the ranges should realistically scale with the new upper limit.  We actually see this pretty nicely with guys like Matthews and Nylander that both have new deals kicking in next year that are right within these ranges. 

 

So we have updated ranges and averages that look like this:

 

 

So then I projected some increases to the Canucks roster along with some player movement:

 

Still looking like a solid roster that is producing value well over the cap hit.

 

Some notes to this projection:

1.  Upper cap limit changed to $87.5M

2.  Petey with $12M and Hronek with $7M new cap AAV

3.  Blueger is gone, can't afford him and Joshua both getting big increases.  Kept Joshua, but he's now at $2.75M.  However, the line is now back down to Earth playing like 3rd line guys so not providing any positive value anymore.  In fact, Garland is now a major liability in terms of negative value.

4.  Zadorov gets an increase to $4.25M.  Myers and Cole are gone, replaced by a bottom pair D, and a top 4D, both providing close to flat value.

5.  Hoglander becomes a bonafide middle 6 guy, providing lots of value.

6.  Kuzmenko I'm saying will bounce back from his sophomore slump and play like a true top 6 forward bringing new found value.

 

Overall, another year where the team looks to be able to perform like a $100M cap hit team for the cost of an $87.3M cap hit.

 

Of course this is hugely predicated on the fact everybody performs at a similar level to how they have been this year.  Not unreasonable, but also not guaranteed (Exhibit A:  Kuzmenko).

 

Edited January 10 by HKSR

[Coconuts]

15 minutes ago, HKSR said:

 

 

So did a bit of projecting, and the interesting thing is that because of the increase in the overall cap limit, the ranges should realistically scale with the new upper limit.  We actually see this pretty nicely with guys like Matthews and Nylander that both have new deals kicking in next year that are right within these ranges. 

 

So we have updated ranges and averages that look like this:

 

 

So then I projected some increases to the Canucks roster along with some player movement:

 

Still looking like a solid roster that is producing value well over the cap hit.

 

Some notes to this projection:

1.  Upper cap limit changed to $87.5M

2.  Petey with $12M and Hronek with $7M new cap AAV

3.  Blueger is gone, can't afford him and Joshua both getting big increases.  Kept Joshua, but he's now at $2.75M.  However, the line is now back down to Earth playing like 3rd line guys so not providing any positive value anymore.  In fact, Garland is now a major liability in terms of negative value.

4.  Zadorov gets an increase to $4.25M.  Myers and Cole are gone, replaced by a bottom pair D, and a top 4D, both providing close to flat value.

5.  Hoglander becomes a bonafide middle 6 guy, providing lots of value.

6.  Kuzmenko I'm saying will bounce back from his sophomore slump and play like a true top 6 forward bringing new found value.

 

Overall, another year where the team looks to be able to perform like a $100M cap hit team for the cost of an $87.3M cap hit.

 

Of course this is hugely predicated on the fact everybody performs at a similar level to how they have been this year.  Not unreasonable, but also not guaranteed (Exhibit A:  Kuzmenko).

 

 

I'd be pleased with Hronek at 7, but if he puts up 50-60+ points alongside Hughes I could see it being more, 34 points in 41 right now so I wouldn't be surprised if him and his agent wait til the offseason for the dust to settle 

 

Particularly if he wants more of a longer term deal 

 

Is he a benefactor of playing with Hughes? Absolutely, but if he produces he'll get paid, one could argue that Hughes is also benefitting as well 

 

I'm less sold on Kuzmenko because he was always due for some regression given his shooting percentage last season, I think what we've seen is probably closer to what we should expect but I'm open to being wrong, I think there's a good chance he's traded 

 

The rest I agree with 

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

 

I'd be pleased with Hronek at 7, but if he puts up 50-60+ points alongside Hughes I could see it being more, 34 points in 41 right now so I wouldn't be surprised if him and his agent wait til the offseason for the dust to settle 

 

Particularly if he wants more of a longer term deal 

 

Is he a benefactor of playing with Hughes? Absolutely, but if he produces he'll get paid, one could argue that Hughes is also benefitting as well 

 

I'm less sold on Kuzmenko because he was always due for some regression given his shooting percentage last season, I think what we've seen is probably closer to what we should expect but I'm open to being wrong, I think there's a good chance he's traded 

 

The rest I agree with 

I think the high end will be $7.5M for Hronek.  His comparables would be around Lindholm and Dunn.  Add in a cap increase, I can see it land at $7.5M x 8.  That'd be a great deal for all parties involved.