News Article: Stamkos favours tweet linking him to the leafs

[Stephen]

Considering no one has ever got a max contract, you can't say for certain Stamkos will. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to offering it for him.

Stamkos is a top 5 player in the world IMO, it's very arguable Subban isn't even a top 5 defenseman in the league. He's not going to touch a max deal and if that's what it took to bring him here I'd gladly pass.

Max. money is probably counter productive for a player trying to win a cup, be it Toronto or Tampa Bay or Montreal, anywhere. Put together a huge package that still allows for a great supporting cast to be put around the star player in question. Maybe its a packaged deal for the two? In any case, I'd be marshaling Lieweke, Shanahan, Gary Roberts, Curtis Joseph, Joe Bowen, Don Meehan, parents, family, friends.

 

[King85Kong]

In an uncapped era, I'd agree, however since your team has only x amount of dollars to spend you should be very concerned how much is being spent on each individual player.

Weber's contract is way better than tbe other two and not just because he.makes a million more. Weber gets paid almost all of it upfront at the beginning of each season as a signing bonus. So he never would lose money on a strike lockout or work stoppage of any kind.

In a cap world actual salary doesn't matter to much. What matters more is the cap hit. Cap number is the limiting factor for teams signing players (for those teams without internal caps).

 

[Pinto]

In an uncapped era, I'd agree, however since your team has only x amount of dollars to spend you should be very concerned how much is being spent on each individual player.

While that is true for most teams, that shouldn't be an issue for the bottomless pit of money known as MLSE.

 

[Confucius]

In a cap world actual salary doesn't matter to much. What matters more is the cap hit. Cap number is the limiting factor for teams signing players.

While that is true for most teams, that shouldn't be an issue for the bottomless pit of money known as MLSE.

Bottomless pit who cares you can only spend to the cap limit, even if you have hundreds of billions.

Salary effects the caphit, so yes salary matters

 

[Stephen]

Are some really suggesting that we should ignore locking up our skilled young players for the slim chance we might get Stamkos or Subban? Terrible way to run a franchise.
Here are the Leaf players that are signed past 2015-16 season;

Roster size 9
Cap payroll $49 million
Bonuses $0
Cap space $23.7 million

Kessel $8 million 6 years remaining - can trade
Lupul $5.25 million 2 years remaining - Probably have to take salary back or retain money
Clarkson $5.25 million - 4 years remaining - Can we trick a GM in taking him
JVR $$4.25 - 2 years remaining - easily traded
Bozak $4.2 million - 2 years remaining - can trade
Komarov $2.95 million - 2 years remaining - can trade
Phaneuf $7 million - 6 years remaining - can trade, might have to take some money back
Gardiner $4.05 million - 3 years remaining - easily traded
Robidas $3 million - 1 year remaining - hard to say, haven't seen enough of him to judge. But sure we could trade at deadline. Not a huge deal with only 01 year reamining at that point.

Buyout
Gleason $1.83 million

So the only tough trades are Clarkson, Lupul and possibly Phaneuf. We could probably package Lupul off at that time in a trade deadline deal. People are making it out to be way worse then it is. It pays to lock up your young talent. When better options come along, you can trade them off.

Source: http://www.capgeek.com/mapleleafs/

Also, in a couple of years Clarkson's contract will be down to 4 years, and with salary inflation he could actually be a movable player if he rebounds.

Lupul could be a buyout candidate by 2016 if he can't be traded. He has a $1.5 million cap hit penalty for '17, '19 and '20... with $3.0 million in '18.

 

[Pinto]

Max. money is probably counter productive for a player trying to win a cup, be it Toronto or Tampa Bay or Montreal, anywhere. Put together a huge package that still allows for a great supporting cast to be put around the star player in question. Maybe its a packaged deal for the two? In any case, I'd be marshaling Lieweke, Shanahan, Gary Roberts, Curtis Joseph, Joe Bowen, Don Meehan, parents, family, friends.

I agree with you, I think that's why you don't see players asking for it. But if that's what it took to sign him I think I'd still do it.

 

[King85Kong]

Bottomless pit who cares you can only spend to the cap limit, even if you have hundreds of billions.

Salary effects the caphit, so yes salary matters

I think we're on the same page, just mixing words. The cap hit is what goes against a team.
If player X contract breaks down 5m-4m-3m - Cap hit is 4 million
If player Y contract breaks down 4m-4m-4m - Cap hit is 4 million

Both players are 4 million against a teams cap, even though player X makes 5 million the first year versus 4 million for player Y. So it makes no difference for the team whether the contract is done "X" way or "Y" way. They end up being the same.

 

[Pinto]

I think were on the same page, just mixing words. The cap hit is what goes against a team.
If player X contract breaks down 5m-4m-3m - Cap hit is 4 million
If player Y contract breaks down 4m-4m-4m - Cap hit is 4 million

Both players are 4 million against a teams cap, even though player X makes 5 million the first year versus 4 million for player Y. So it makes no difference for the team whether the contract is done "X" way or "Y" way. They end up being the same.

This is what I meant as well. Obviously salary affects the cap hit, but it doesn't make a difference to us how the money is spread out.

 

[Duke Silver]

In an uncapped era, I'd agree, however since your team has only x amount of dollars to spend you should be very concerned how much is being spent on each individual player.

On an internal budget basis, I would agree. But the Leafs don't really have one.

What I disagree with is fans saying things like "Phaneuf makes $8M this year, that's ridiculous" as a means of criticism. Well, no actually, the only thing that impacts this team's ability to operate under the salary cap is the AAV. The organization doesn't even think of that extra million.

 

[Confucius]

On an internal budget basis, I would agree. But the Leafs don't really have one.

What I disagree with is fans saying things like "Phaneuf makes $8M this year, that's ridiculous" as a means of criticism. Well, no actually, the only thing that impacts this team's ability to operate under the salary cap is the AAV. The organization doesn't even think of that extra million.

The league gives them one every year. What is it 71 million this year? Who cares that they could have spent a billion because the league won't let them.

 

[Confucius]

This is what I meant as well. Obviously salary affects the cap hit, but it doesn't make a difference to us how the money is spread out.

How it's spread makes no difference on that we can agree. The total amount is a concern, because if spent foolishly it leaves less for the rest.

We shouldn't care if Clarkson makes 20 million one season and 15 over the rest. We should care he is getting 35 million overall.

 

[Duke Silver]

The league gives them one every year. What is it 71 million this year? Who cares that they could have spent a billion because the league won't let them.

Don't think you're understanding me. By internal budget I mean something like what Nashville has dealt with before, where the owner gives them a maximum to spend that falls well beneath the actual cap ceiling. It's why some teams take on contracts with high AAVs but low actual salaries.

Toronto can afford to pay out $85M in actual salary in a $71M cap world. Other teams cannot.

The overarching point is that AAV should be used when comparing players in a cap world.

 

[King85Kong]

The league gives them one every year. What is it 71 million this year? Who cares that they could have spent a billion because the league won't let them.

It is not the yearly salary that goes against the $71 million. Its the contract average that does. A team can spend 79 million in actual salary this year with a 71 million cap, as long as the AAV's add up to less then the $71 million cap. I could care less how the contract is broken up, that is between the player and team. I care about the cap hit, the lower the better. That is what limits the team from signing other players.

 

[Pinto]

How it's spread makes no difference on that we can agree. The total amount is a concern, because if spent foolishly it leaves less for the rest.

We shouldn't care if Clarkson makes 20 million one season and 15 over the rest. We should care he is getting 35 million overall.

Absolutely, that's all I was trying to say originally.

 

[Confucius]

Don't think you're understanding me. By internal budget I mean something like what Nashville has dealt with before, where the owner gives them a maximum to spend that falls well beneath the actual cap ceiling. It's why some teams take on contracts with high AAVs but low actual salaries.

Toronto can afford to pay out $85M in actual salary in a $71M cap world. Other teams cannot.

The overarching point is that AAV should be used when comparing players in a cap world.

Oh I know what you meant by internal budget and I look at the league team cap as a budget even though it's not internal. Anyway yes the team can use its wealth to take on bad contracts. History has shown It hasn't helped much if all all. We still are out of the playoffs 90% of the time. There aren't too many players out there making more than their caphit that teams want to dump. I can think of Luongo, there are more for sure but their teams want to hold on to them. Eg. Nashville has no problem with Weber

Why I say that is, now you would be looking at teams which are having buyers remorse within a year or two of signing the player. I'd guess all contracts are front loaded or spread out equal over the years. There should be very very few players with backloaded deals.

 

[King85Kong]

Guess we don't have to worry about making room for Subban. He signed for 8 years with $9 million AAV. Not exactly league max, but still a solid deal for him. Now back to worrying about signing our own players.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=458569

 

[carko32]

Guess we don't have to worry about making room for Subban. He signed for 8 years with $9 million AAV. Not exactly league max, but still a solid deal for him. Now back to worrying about signing our own players.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=458569

I think he signed that contract because he saw Interactif post, where he stated that we won't have cap space to sign him and PK got scared that he won't have a team to play after 2016 summer.

Sarcasm off, a little bit high at the moment, but it could be good deal in future. It is fair at the moment, he is close to top10 D in the league.

 

[King85Kong]

I think he signed that contract because he saw Interactif post, where he stated that we won't have cap space to sign him and PK got scared that he won't have a team to play after 2016 summer.

Sarcasm off, a little bit high at the moment, but it could be good deal in future. It is fair at the moment, he is close to top10 D in the league.

That is great. Its a good deal for both sides if he keeps the play up.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I think he signed that contract because he saw Interactif post, where he stated that we won't have cap space to sign him and PK got scared that he won't have a team to play after 2016 summer.

Sarcasm off, a little bit high at the moment, but it could be good deal in future. It is fair at the moment, he is close to top10 D in the league.

More like Montreal came to their senses and finally paid him what he was worth. Bergevin challenged him with a bridge contract 2 years ago, and Subban responded to earn his contract. It's a win, win for player and team.

 

[AustonMitchWilly]

More like Montreal came to their senses and finally paid him what he was worth. Bergevin challenged him with a bridge contract 2 years ago, and Subban responded to earn his contract. It's a win, win for player and team.

Nope. Definitely what Carko said actually.

 

[gabeliscious]

so is everyone relieved that we only need to clear $12 million for stamkos instead of $24 million for stamkos and subban

 

[The Winter Soldier]

so is everyone relieved that we only need to clear $12 million for stamkos instead of $24 million for stamkos and subban

There are still some real good UFA possibilities in 2016, and not only Stamkos. Let's keep some space incase we need it. We still should not overpay for contracts, being fiscally responsible will pay off in a Cap world.

 

[Morbo]

There are still some real good UFA possibilities in 2016, and not only Stamkos. Let's keep some space incase we need it. We still should not overpay for contracts, being fiscally responsible will pay off in a Cap world.

Would be wiser for Leaf fans to focus on those. Stamkos ain't getting to UFA. Losing him would be a crippling blow for the Lightning, it's just not going to happen.

 

[Defense]

Stamkos should think about the money he'd earn here in endorsements. But im sure his hometown and family and friends will lure him in on being a Leaf.

However seeing Stamkos hit the free agent market is as likely as Crosby getting traded... not going to happen. I will run naked down my street if Stamkos signs with the Leafs.

 

[waingr0]

Also, in a couple of years Clarkson's contract will be down to 4 years, and with salary inflation he could actually be a movable player if he rebounds.

Lupul could be a buyout candidate by 2016 if he can't be traded. He has a $1.5 million cap hit penalty for '17, '19 and '20... with $3.0 million in '18.