@Blazingbat11
**Long post alert**
In every scenario there is risk. You have to gauge it and decide from there. You mentioned Toronto but that is really an unfair example. Shanahan came in 14-15 and so far is in year 3 of his tear down rebuild and they are playoff capable yes but no one is taking them to win the cup this year over teams like TB. Plus you are also cherry picking a team that won one of the best lottery picks in recent history. Matthews automatically jump started that rebuild an extra year minimum. That easily could of been Nugent-Hopkins, would they be where they are now with Nuge? If the Habs were lucky enough to land a generational talent within 2 years of the rebuild, yeah I think we can move things forward a little but that is wishful thinking and one I'll gladly deal with if it should arise. Assuming the law of averages, it won't be as fast for the Habs. Plus making the playoffs in a rebuild is simply a bonus. Leafs didnt' sit Matthews last year because they wanted to tank cuz they were in a playoff spot because they are technically in a rebuild. They went with it but they didn't lose track of the main goal which is to continue to surround the core with better players each year. That takes time. MTL was a playoff team for years but not even us Habs fans were confident of the teams ability to compete and win in any given year. We just were hoping for the best and hoping for Price pulling miracles out his arse.
Unfortunately CF only goes so far into the future on the AGM's so I can't show you how it would be possible but for all the worst case scenarios you mentioned, how many of them are "workable"? How workable is it to get top end talent, let alone top end centers? MTL has been trying for what 20+ years now....... Taking risks lends its hand to getting smacked in the face but its also has the chance to completely change a teams destiny. The only difference is this isn't a roll of the dice in a casino game. This is a calculated risk where you are given multiple shots to correct any future wrong doings and get things where they need to be as they progress.
The part that needs to be clarified though is what the return for Price would be with no retention vs with up to 50% retention. Until that is clear, we're only assuming but we may have different assumptions on that, which is causing such major differing opinions on the matter between us two. Yeah if it only gets us a 2nd rounder and a decent prospect more, than I am fully against it also. What if it brought back an extra 1st rounder and a top notch center prospect? (on top of what we would get for him without retention) Than frankly there is no excuse to not take it. We're more worried about pinching pennies than actually icing a team capable of winning the cup. Let the manager worry about the cap. Thats what's he's paid for and has an arsenal of analysts at his side to help do. To find solutions. The solutions to adding top end talent is simple but extremely hard to do. Rebuilding isn't about adding through free agency. Its about cultivating your own top end players and that takes time. Simply from draft to RFA status is 3 years right there and that would only apply to instant superstars.
I've also went into depth a lot about how long players take to get to 6M+ type contracts generally. The players you're drafting this year 17-18, most times won't be 6M+ worthy for another 5-7 years MINIMUM. Barring the occasional superstar. So not being able to afford these prospects isn't the problem. Its not being able to add that "one piece" in free agency like a Marleau in any one given year that has you up in arms. Is Marleau really going to make the Leafs win a cup? I actually think he is more of a detriment to their cap than a benefit. 6.6M for 3 years when their more pressing need was on defense and the big raises their core players are going to be getting was unwise IMO. As for the Beleskey and Hagelin comment, I simply meant not to delve into free agency unwisely or frankly on any player more than 2M a year. Always keeping in mind that we won't have that luxury of 5M in cap space in the final 3 years, of my example, of Price's contract. So maybe rather than risking on a UFA, ere on the side of caution. Of course bad signings happen! Whats harder to do though? Get rid of Beleskeys contract or get a #1 center? Contracts can be moved/bought out/ etc. TALENT CANNOT JUST BE ADDED AT WILL. Thats why I say, make the difficult decision about how are we going to stay under the cap and NOT how are we going to acquire top end talent. There are plenty of tools at a GM's disposal to "get rid" of cap. There is no magic potion to have a #1 center drop into your lap.
Good teams don't add core pieces through free agency. They draft them or trade for them while they're still young. All I'm saying is sacrifice not being able to add that "one piece" in free agency for 8 years (5 of which are mostly rebuilding anyway) if the return potentially gets you an extra 1st and a top notch center prospect on top of what we would get for him without retention. A team like Nashville was able to get to the cup final without needing to spend every dollar they had and made almost no major free agent signings within the 2-3 years previous to last year either. So whats the problem?
It
can be done. It just needs to be done with precision and calculated risks. Something a guy like MB doesn't seem to understand. Can it not work too? Absolutely. Who knows maybe all those picks never pan out and are all garbage players......but then you won't have to be worrying about cap now will you and frankly will the Habs be realistically capable of winning a cup while Prices contract is at 10.5M and no potential #1 in sight? I honestly don't think so.
The only MAJOR downfall that you are pointing out is that we'll get to year 5,6,7,8 of Price's contract and not have enough cap to sign someone, right? So sacrifice someone then!!!! Brendan Gallagher gone for draft picks. Other 3-5M cap hit players who are on the semi-decline but still hold decent value get moved if necessary. See the difference between having the power to choose who you HAVE to get rid of to make the cap work? This logic can't be applied to talent. Not to mention that forcing these Gallagher type trades means restocking your cupboards with more picks and prospects. You need as many shots at landing young talent as possible and the best way to do that is to draft and trade for young prospects. Trading Price for a bounty of picks and prospects only increases those odds.
Finally, this is a rebuild. Not a retool/restart. Retools/Restarts can take as little as 1 year to fully do. All depends on what you can do in that year. Rebuilds tend to take a long time regardless of whether the team was able to overacheive and make the playoffs or not. Just making the playoffs isn't good enough. You need to have a team that makes the playoffs in whichever position they finish in but once there, inspires confidence that they can ACTUALLY win. The latter takes years to achieve. Any playoff births in between are just gravy. MTL's playoffs these past 5 years have for the most part been smoke and mirrors.
Either way Blazing, we've been at this for a while now. I know your opinion on it and you know mine. You are the one who is saying
definitively that it makes zero sense. Im saying that its simply a possibility that could work and that the potential reward could outweigh the negative risk as MTL tends to not be able to spend that money on top end talent in places like free agency anyway. Might as well sacrifice it now for future gain.