Playing armchair PHF GM

Stay plugged in with women’s sports
Get smart, reliable coverage delivered straight to your inbox — with the context that makes every game matter.

• Daily Updates Our headlines across every sport, delivered at 8:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday.
• Weekly Recap What matters most, curated by our editors, delivered every Sunday.
• Basketball Insider In-depth reporting and analysis about women’s basketball, delivered weekly by Howard Megdal.

Sign up free!

In the 2023-24 season, the PHF is doubling its salary cap to $1.5 million. That figure is twice as much as the $750,000 cap that the league’s seven teams are operating under this year. We don’t expect roster sizes to change much – the current cap is 25 players – and we haven’t heard if the minimum salary will be raised from $13,500. Front offices, agents, and players will be working with much bigger numbers in contract negotiations in the offseason. Historic numbers.

I thought it would be an interesting exercise to walk through one potential approach to building a team, specifically where the money goes and why.

Spread the Wealth

Let’s start things off with a bang by establishing an internal minimum salary of $50,000 for full-time players and a $30,000 minimum salary for those who can attend at least one practice a week and play weekend games. Why make that distinction? To remain adaptable and to attract as much established pro talent as possible. A player like Mallory Souliotis may not be able to attend three practices every week because of her other career but I know she’s going to make any group of blueliners better.

Just to have some numbers to play with, let’s say we will aim for a 23-player roster. That 23-player squad will have no more than three of those “part-time” pros on the roster. We do need enough bodies to run practices, after all. So, we’ll have 20 players making at least $50,000 and another three making at least $30,000. That’s $1,090,000 or 72.67% of the $1.5 million cap accounted for, which leaves us with $410,000 to play with. That’s plenty of money to spread out to players projected to fill key featured roles.

The reasoning behind this approach is straightforward. If everyone makes a living wage, everyone has the opportunity to be the best player they can be. Also, when those who make the least make enough to access a pro lifestyle, everyone on the team stands to benefit. It also establishes a culture where the team, as a whole, comes before any superstar. That’s not to say there’s no room for superstars.

Shine Bright

We know there will be players making six figures next season – it’s just a question of how many of them there will be. So, what’s the going rate for a superstar? This is where studying pro women’s hockey contracts can help us. Fortunately, I have done a lot of this work in the creation of CapBesties to provide a resource to players.

We already know that Daryl Watts’ $150,000 contract will take up 10% of the Toronto Six’s 2023-24 cap. Mikyla Grant-Mentis’ reported contract is taking up roughly 10.7% of Buffalo’s cap space this season. Turning the clock further back, Amanda Kessel and Kelli Stack had contracts that took up 9.63% of their team’s salary cap in 2016-17 (before salaries were cut). So, there’s definitely a ballpark here between 9.6-10.6% of the cap.

It’s also worth noting that, historically, forwards are the ones signing the biggest deals. However, there was a report that Kali Flanagan’s 2022-23 deal exceeded $80,000. Dominique Kremer’s $65,000 deal takes up 8.67% of the Beauts’ cap this season and her contract is the largest deal disclosed by a defender. There’s no more accomplished defender in the PHF than Kaleigh Fratkin, and her cap hit in 2022-23 was 7.67%. We have very limited data to work with here, but we can still look for patterns.

How many of those headline-grabbing six-figure contracts taking up around 10% of the cap can a GM  hand out? That all depends on how much money is set aside for bottom-six forwards, third-pair defenders, and backup goaltenders. If some of those players get the league minimum, you can have more money at the top. Our team won’t have room for more than two or three six-figure deals because of our internal minimum. I’m fine with that.

Let’s say a superstar forward ($145,000) and an elite defender ($115,000) will have a combined price tag of $260,000. Again, these are just estimates – these figures could prove to be inaccurate.

• Elite forward, ideally 1C: $145,000 (9.67% of cap)
• Elite top-pair defender, ideally two-way monster: $115,000 (7.67% of cap)

Goaltending

One of the biggest contracts on any team should go to the projected starting goaltender. There’s no more important position in the sport and the PHF’s schedule makes it possible to lean on a workhorse starter for the vast majority of a season.

The largest cap percentage for a disclosed goalie deal we know of is Brianne McLaughlin’s $22,000 deal with Buffalo in 2015-16. That contract was worth 8.15% of the Beauts’ cap space. For context, Amanda Leveille’s $50,000 deal with the Whitecaps this season – the highest contract value for a goalie we know of – is 6.67% of Minnesota’s cap. We’re willing to make our starter our third player making six figures because of how important this position is.

• Elite workhorse starter: $105,000 (7% of cap)

Just because we’re spending on our starter doesn’t mean I don’t want to pinch pennies for my other goalies. I’d want a 1B or backup who I would feel comfortable with as my starter in the playoffs in the event of an injury or my starter going cold. A solid example of someone who fits this bill is Carly Jackson, who has experience as a starter and has been a fantastic backup to Elaine Chuli in Toronto this season.

This PHF season has shown us just how important depth in the goal crease is. I’d sign a third goalie but likely aim to make that third keeper a part-time pro with a $30,000 cap hit.

When Opportunity Comes Knocking

Earlier in this story, I used the word “adaptability.” That’s because I think that is a key ingredient to successfully navigating free agency and building a roster.

It appears that the Boston Pride have had success out-bidding the Whitecaps in back-to-back offseasons to pilfer Amanda Boulier and then Allie Thunstrom. So, stars can be bought, especially if their previous teams aren’t willing to pay for them. I also think something can be learned from the Connecticut Whale’s adding Tori Sullivan and Souliotis late in the 2022 offseason when they became available. They may have even planned ahead and left cap space available just in case. That’s something I would look to imitate.

Opportunities are going to surface as you’re building a team and you will need to be open to deviating from your plan. As a PHF GM, I’d look for players who I suspect may be undervalued and ask what it would take to make them move to my market. With more money in play, GMs can make more robust offers to free agents that would make uprooting their lives more palatable in some cases. Or maybe you can offer a player waiting to break out an opportunity to play in a bigger role. There are a lot of factors in play.

The distribution of my remaining $195,000 would come down to projected roles. I’d keep my bottom-six forwards and third-pair defenders at my internal minimum. I’d spend money to complement my stars and have skill at the top of my roster. Something tells me I am going to run out of money for big names and will need to rely on team depth and finding players who fly under the radar in the open market. Yeah, I’ll definitely be hiring a couple of stats dorks to help me on hour one of day one.

Final Thoughts

Admittedly, this was a lot more fun to walk through than I thought it would be. I went out of my way to be vague and not to mention too many names because I think we can do real harm by saying, ‘Player X is underpaid’ at this stage of the pro women’s game. Everyone is underpaid. I hope that changes in my lifetime.

I have joked before about running a team and I will assuredly do so again, but I know that this is all a serious business. It’s stressful to put a dollar value on a player. This job cannot be easy and should never be easy. Above all else, I would remember that I’m talking about livelihoods and numbers that can influence someone’s quality of life. I’d challenge myself to be honest with players when I felt they could make more elsewhere, even if it hurt my team. I’d explain to players that I want to give them more, but I want everyone to make a living wage.

This is an exercise I will likely revisit. This is just one approach – a rather idealistic one – to build a team. Clearly, I have a lot of thoughts about roster construction, contracts, and this whole hockey thing.