Playing GM - What's your ultimate CAP allocation strategy?

[YzermansLegacy]

Been thinking about this for a while, and considering we've got a flat cap for a while, seemed like an ideal time to ask the community their thoughts.

Curious, if YOU were the GM building a team, how would you choose to allocate your salary cap?

Here's the 'level up' challenge part though - if you're going to say "I'm only spending 2M on 2 goalies"... then it would be great to offer some examples and a bit of an explanation how you might maintain that if relying on ELC's.

Obviously we'd all love to sign a burgeoning 1C to a Mackinnon-level deal... but that's rare... and unsustainable. For realism sake let's say if you want a "Mack-level talent" you'll need to at least be in the ballpark of market prices.

For ease of reading, feel free to copy/paste the following format when submitting your roster makeup (you can just submit by overall line rather than per position if you prefer):

LW1 (4.5M)	C1 (10M)	RW1 (7.5M)	Total: 22M
LW2 (4M)	C2 (6M)	RW2 (3M)	Total: 13M
LW3 (1M)	C3 (3M)	RW3 (2M)	Total: 6M
LW4 (1M)	C4 (2M)	RW4 (1M)	Total: 4M
			Sub-total: 45M
LD1 (3M)	RD1 (9M)		Total: 12M
LD2 (5M)	RD2 (5M)		Total: 10M
LD3 (1.5M)	RD3 (2.5M)		Total: 4M
			Sub-total: 26M
G1 (6M)			Total: 6M
G2 (1M)			Total: 1M
			Sub-total: 7M
Bench1 (1M)	Bench2 (1M)	Bench3 (1M)	Total: 3M
			Sub-total: 3M
			FINAL CAP: 81M

Reasoning:
L1: Elite C with an Elite W and complementary 3rd W (who can handle L1 duties)
L2: Solid 2-way C with middle-six W's (could be a 4.5/2.5 spread too)
L3: At least one ELC and/or bridge deal with a vet/middle-sixer on a fair deal
L4: Give me an NHL-level C and then fill out the W's with what's needed (grit, PK-specialist, PP-specialist, whatever)

D1: One "elite" D alongside a top 4 guy who can complement/keep up
D2: Two top-4 D - neither 'elite' but both solid
D3: One ELC-level and one long-in-the-tooth vet

G1: With more time-shares happening, give me an average (.917) starter for 50 games who I hope gets hot. Also find some non-salary cap dollars to bribe Mitch Korn (or even Ian Clark) to come work their magic!
G2: So many decent backups/former starters out there (imo)... no need to over pay here

Bench: ELC's, vets, show-me, minors guys... bottom-six fillers for the most part (and ideally a minors kid who could plug into the top 6 in an injury pinch)

Mock Sample lineup: (attempting to be realistic/fair - not necessarily my 'fave/optimal' guys)

L1: K.Connor - Kopitar - V.Arvidsson
L2: M.Foligno - W.Karlsson - D.Kubalik
L3: C.Jarnkrok - A.Lowry - J.Puljujarvi
L4: T.Frederic - J.Roslovic - K.Stenlund

D1: R.Lindgren - A.Pietrangelo
D2: M.Rielly - R.Pulock
D3: A.Sekera - P.Myers

G1: J.Markstrom
G2: C.Delia

Ok that's my brain dump... have at it if you're interested!

[The Comish]

Nice work on this. I can't argue with your funds allocation. I would attempt to build the Defence first, then the top 6 forwards and a couple of legit goalies, one experienced, one young up and comer.

Awesome post dude!

[ericdaoust]

My personal rules:

-Stars are worth the money
-Find great cap bargains to compensate
-Be careful when investing into D. They're more difficult to project in fantasy. Stars are worth it but I tend to go the cheaper route on D.
-All goalies suck

[The Comish]

All goalies suck

Says the Habs fan (Carey Price!?)

[Axeman33]

Interesting post. Are we talking real life building or fantasy team building?

[YzermansLegacy]

I had "real life" in mind for the concept (and for the examples I gave).

Don't personally play in any cap leagues, but I can imagine there'd be some fascinating salary strategies used to construct fantasy squads.

If there's more interest to respond in a fantasy set-up, I'm just as curious to see that!

[roenick27]

I took this as a real life tool as well. I can't argue with the examples you selected. I think the only variable (and honestly, I'm not sure how to compensate for this) is that this needs to be fluid. So as a 1 year set sample, it looks great. But as contracts expire, players transfer from ELC to rfa to ufa, things will constantly change year over year. So I don't know a way to realistically project that outside of a specific actual team example.

[Daydream Nation]

It all starts with the blue line. A Cup contender must have a couple ass-kicking, minute-munching dmen to anchor your first 2 pairings. You need competent partners for each pairing and a 3rd pairing that doesn't need to sheltered. I'm spending somewhere in the 5-7 million range for my goalie and another 2-3 for the backup. I am not spending much over 9 million for any forward paying more for centers than wingers. I want a balanced team but definitely want 2 scoring lines. Any Cup contenders is going to get major contributions from players on ELCs and a veteran or 2 making the league minimum.

LW1 (5 M) C1 (9M) RW1 (6 M) Total: 20M
LW2 (4M) C2 (7M) RW2 (3M) Total: 13M
LW3 (1M) C3 (4M) RW3 (2M) Total: 7M
LW4 (1M) C4 (3M) RW4 (1M) Total: 5M
Sub-total: 45M
LD1 (3M) RD1 (9M) Total: 12M
LD2 (3M) RD2 (6M) Total: 9 M
LD3 (1M) RD3 (3M) Total: 4 M
Sub-total: 25M
G1 (6M) Total: 6M
G2 (3M) Total: 3M
Sub-total: 9M
Bench1 (1M) Bench2 (1M) Total: 2M
Sub-total: 2M
FINAL CAP: 81M

[Eskimo Brother]

I took this as a real life tool as well. I can't argue with the examples you selected. I think the only variable (and honestly, I'm not sure how to compensate for this) is that this needs to be fluid. So as a 1 year set sample, it looks great. But as contracts expire, players transfer from ELC to rfa to ufa, things will constantly change year over year. So I don't know a way to realistically project that outside of a specific actual team example.

This was the basis of my thinking as well. It's all well and good if you can lay this out as an optimal setup, but what if you have a team like Tampa where you need to pay your goalie over 9M to keep him, but you're able to get your top C under $7M for a few years before he breaks the bank too? Having a plan is great, and having guidelines like not overpaying to keep replaceable players, not spending much more than league minimum on a backup, and leaving spots open for filler ELCs is probably closer to how you want to make it all work. The more rigid of a structure you try to put together to make it perfect, the more that the team is going to miss opportunities to improve just based on being flexible and adding talent where it wasn't expected to be available.

Playing in multiple cap leagues, and watching the successful GMs at the NHL level, the ones that give themselves that opportunity to be flexible, that don't overpay anyone just to try and hit some internal target, those are the ones that find the most success.

Generally, it seems as though you do need to pay the top defencemen and centres most, with wings being where you can find more bargains, and goalies being somewhere that you don't want to overpay, ESPECIALLY on long term deals. Giving chances to the guys like Jason Spezza, Carter Veraheghe, Yanni Gourde, Zach Bogosian and others that will play for less to get themselves into the right situations, those are the guys you have you need to have at least one or two of to fill out a roster, because not all of the cheap contracts can be rookies.

[Invictus]

Maintain cap room to bring in extra guys at trade deadline to bolster lineup with 'over cap' team. Bit of a risk.

[YzermansLegacy]

Excellent points on the need for fluidity and the realities of a particular player requiring an "off-strategy" salary lads.

Admittedly I was trying to somewhat circumvent the outlier situations (e.g. Vasy, TB state taxes, Mack deal, etc.) buyt in reality I fully appreciate that's not feasible.

For sure the optimal strategy is one that can converge and diverge as needed, while maybe (to EB's point), ensuring you're not over-spending on a long-term deal in an area you want/need flexibility in.

Really dig DD's take on prioritizing D-men. Perhaps that's the better way to frame this.

In general, where are you spending your big-money/long-term? Stud goalie? Multiple elite D or balanced 6? Elite C that drive points or a bunch of 2-way guys with playmakeres/shooters on the wings?

Appreciate the thoughts so far - was really curious if any armchair GM out there had an innovative approach to managing the cap.

[Bubba55]

Great discussion! One thing I will add is that your leagues scoring cats can be a significant driver in how you need to allocate your CAP. As an example, in a league where goalie stats are numerous and thus critical, I'm inclined to spend some $$ on one goalie I consider worth the money (ya, I know, wishful thinking) and then try and fill in a couple more goalies on the cheap. In a league where goalie cats are fewer and not as important, I'm inclined to throw my money at players that will fill the other scoring cats and roll the dice with those cheaper goalie options.

Like many, I like to build from the blueline out. I want to try and establish two strong pairings if I can. I also want to establish 2 strong scoring forward lines and ideally a third. I'm spending money on those first two and then digging hard for lesser contracts that will still provide nice offensive return for that third line and having a multi cat guy or two on that third line is gold, but tough to do. In a banger league the fourth line is, well, the bangers, and this can be done on the cheap if you do your homework. I try and target younger guys here, guys like Trent Fredrick as an example.

[Daydream Nation]

This was the basis of my thinking as well. It's all well and good if you can lay this out as an optimal setup, but what if you have a team like Tampa where you need to pay your goalie over 9M to keep him, but you're able to get your top C under $7M for a few years before he breaks the bank too? Having a plan is great, and having guidelines like not overpaying to keep replaceable players, not spending much more than league minimum on a backup, and leaving spots open for filler ELCs is probably closer to how you want to make it all work. The more rigid of a structure you try to put together to make it perfect, the more that the team is going to miss opportunities to improve just based on being flexible and adding talent where it wasn't expected to be available.

Playing in multiple cap leagues, and watching the successful GMs at the NHL level, the ones that give themselves that opportunity to be flexible, that don't overpay anyone just to try and hit some internal target, those are the ones that find the most success.

Generally, it seems as though you do need to pay the top defencemen and centres most, with wings being where you can find more bargains, and goalies being somewhere that you don't want to overpay, ESPECIALLY on long term deals. Giving chances to the guys like Jason Spezza, Carter Veraheghe, Yanni Gourde, Zach Bogosian and others that will play for less to get themselves into the right situations, those are the guys you have you need to have at least one or two of to fill out a roster, because not all of the cheap contracts can be rookies.

Agreed. When I was thinking of my allocations I thought about Vasi and how you spend the $9 mil or so since he is so valuable if you have the option. And I completely agree with your thoughts on staying flexible. I think it will be fascinating to see what Sakic does with Landeskog this offseason. Everything says to NOT sign him to some 8 * 9 contract especially when Mac and Makar are going to be due soon but will he be able to walk away from their captain? And I love what Carolina is doing with Hamilton. While I think their owner being cheap has a lot to do with it, from a cap standpoint it is the wise thing to do. Find out what the market is before signing him. I saw firsthand in Chicago how NOT to deal with resigning veterans.