Salary Cap: 2019-20 - Leafs Salary Cap issues and adjustments?

[4thline]

An arbitration eligible RFA getting offersheeted?

I may be mistaken but I don't think AJ made enough for 1st window club elected, and the filing deadline for player elected is July 5th so he'll have a chance to hear what other teams have to say and pick his best course of action

 

[Rielly]

What? They didn’t. The point is. The leafs are on a better trajectory NOW. They didn’t win the cup. These teams are on the down swing with their stars.

They are staring down the barrel of a rebuild and the last time this happened they were both in disastrous states for a decade.

That’s a way worse position now
And probably for the next decade.

Unless what you want to go back in time and trade our roster for the hawks in 2008? Is that what you are saying? Time travel doesn’t exist.

Why someone would trade a young core for an old core with less chance to win is bizarre

Not winning a cup the last 2 years while paying elc doesnt give us better tragectory .. all it means is we are highly unlikely to win as man cups as they did.

The question was never trading a young core for an old core, the question was winning with a young core before they get paid.

Chicago -1 Toronto -0

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

I may be mistaken but I don't think AJ made enough for 1st window club elected, and the filing deadline for player elected is July 5th so he'll have a chance to hear what other teams have to say and pick his best course of action

I highly doubt teams are scrambling to offersheet him in the first 4 days of UFA. Seems highly unlikely, given how rare offersheets happen in general, that it’s going to happen to an arbitration eligible player. I think we can assume Johnsson rejected the offer as he wants arbitration like many other RFAs do, and potentially go to UFA if the Leafs can’t or refuse to pay up.

 

[Legion34]

Not winning a cup the last 2 years while paying elc doesnt give us better tragectory .. all it means is we are highly unlikely to win as man cups as they did.

The question was never trading a young core for an old core, the question was winning with a young core before they get paid.

Chicago -1 Toronto -0

What. How is that a question?
Would you rather your team win the Stanley cup this year or not?

Huh? That’s the dumbest thing of all time. People are mad because our team didn’t do something that a team 10 years ago did?With contracts that would not be allowed in the league?


People just look for something to complain about.

 

[4thline]

I highly doubt teams are scrambling to offersheet him in the first 4 days of UFA. Seems highly unlikely, given how rare offersheets happen in general, that it’s going to happen to an arbitration eligible player. I think we can assume Johnsson rejected the offer as he wants arbitration like many other RFAs do, and potentially go to UFA if the Leafs can’t or refuse to pay up.

No offense but this is back asswards thinking. Players go to arbitration because they can't get the contract they want. If someone offers a contract he wants he's not going to turn it down for the chance at ruling or being a UFA and getting the contract he wants.

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

Quote me where I said a team with a 10mil player will never win a cup. I'll wait.

This is easy:

Post-Game Talk: - Bob Cole Farewell!

Good forward thinking argument, worthy of bringing up in a team cap argument for sure....

You're the one who told me the canes were lacking skill and that's why they weren't producing.

This was a bit harder. I think you started the discussion around Canes being bad and end up getting mixed in with the crowd that followed into the thread on this:

Nylander is getting too much hate, but the love might be returning!

Apologies on that.

But the fact that they are weak on proven skill (I stand by that), but were better than their early season results (still stand by that), was an opinion I held since then, possibly said in that thread, but at least here:

Leafs lead the league in PDO

I haven't been following much hockey or stats since the Leafs were knocked out, but they've been doing better than I had expected in the playoffs. Do you think they're a perennial contender like the Leafs? Or another Edmonton/NYI riding unsustainable success? I suspect the former.

 

[Stamkos4life]

This is easy:

Post-Game Talk: - Bob Cole Farewell!

Good forward thinking argument, worthy of bringing up in a team cap argument for sure....



This was a bit harder. I think you started the discussion around Canes being bad and end up getting mixed in with the crowd that followed into the thread on this:

Nylander is getting too much hate, but the love might be returning!

Apologies on that.

But the fact that they are weak on proven skill (I stand by that), but were better than their early season results (still stand by that), was an opinion I held since then, possibly said in that thread, but at least here:

Leafs lead the league in PDO

I haven't been following much hockey or stats since the Leafs were knocked out, but they've been doing better than I had expected in the playoffs. Do you think they're a perennial contender like the Leafs? Or another Edmonton/NYI riding unsustainable success? I suspect the former.

Last reply.

I'll repost the message that you think proves I said a team with a 10mil player will never win a cup.

"To be clear the only team I envy is Tampa. Imo we have more talent than any other team.

Maybe the islanders just have a really good defensive structure? Something the leafs are dearly lacking.

They did this with barzal having 23 less points than last year. And eberle having the worst season of his career.

I don't know why you think they are going to be in for some rough years ahead. Have they given out multiple 10+mil contracts?

You do know that not one team has won a cup with even 1 player making over 10mil right?"

Where in that message did I say a team will never win with a 10mil player?

"This is easy" lol

Now stop messaging me, you went from trolling me, to trying to be a therapist and now you are lying about what I posted.

Maybe it is you who needs to mature.

Good day

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Hard to say without knowing exactly what you were looking at and what details on CF changed between the times you looked. The 2019-20 projected cap won’t simply change by date outside of the actual 2019-20 season. There were probably some changes or assumptions made by CF.

The 2018-19 projected space could still change during the regular season after the trade deadline if players are moved back and forth from the AHL. Right now CF shows projected 2018-19 final space of $3.88m, however I don’t think this includes the performance bonuses yet.

It was "Projected Cap Space" that I was looking at each time. It went from $3.x m to $5.x m a (approx) month later. Every time I looked during this period of time (at about a 5-6 day intervals), it went up a little.

I guess it could be because CF was still doing calculations based on (AHL to big club & vice-versa) player movement like you said.

It just seemed interesting/odd.

Thanks for your response. You are good resource on this topic which I greatly appreciate. We/I look at CapFriendly very frequently in here because of our current cap woes, so its good to know the inner workings of CF. Again, thanks.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Anybody see the tweet from Friedman that said that the Cap may go up less than what was anticipated? Evidently its because the big market teams have been eliminated from the playoffs.

Nothing on this topic. Seems pretty relevant and important to our situation.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Because our stars are 21’ and theirs are 31Is that strange?

Proof read to avoid garble?

 

[HoweHullOrr]

contenders? what are they contending for, winning a round in the playoffs?

Agreed!

How can we assume what will happen in later rounds? Will we automatically win the next round (or more rounds) simply because we beat Boston in Round 1?

It seems awfully presumptuous of us, unless folks have some widely different definitions of the word "contend".

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

Last reply.

I'll repost the message that you think proves I said a team with a 10mil player will never win a cup.

"To be clear the only team I envy is Tampa. Imo we have more talent than any other team.

Maybe the islanders just have a really good defensive structure? Something the leafs are dearly lacking.

They did this with barzal having 23 less points than last year. And eberle having the worst season of his career.

I don't know why you think they are going to be in for some rough years ahead. Have they given out multiple 10+mil contracts?

You do know that not one team has won a cup with even 1 player making over 10mil right?"

Where in that message did I say a team will never win with a 10mil player?

"This is easy" lol

Now stop messaging me, you went from trolling me, to trying to be a therapist and now you are lying about what I posted.

Maybe it is you who needs to mature.

Good day

Cool, I guess Leafs having 2 and maybe 3 then is an irrelevant point of discussion

 

[hockeywiz542]

Mailbag: How Nathan Horton’s contract factors into Leafs’ cap | The Star

Here’s the question: We often hear reference to the Nathan Horton contract and the LTIR. I’m not sure exactly how it works, but are we not able to simply move the Horton contract to the LTIR at the start of the season, thereby effectively adding $5.3 million to the cap? And could this amount not be allocated to addressing the need for a top-four or possibly top-pair right-handed D (the issue of moving assets/contracts aside)? Problem solved?

ANSWER: I’ll count you among the optimists. It should be a growing base even with setbacks against Boston … LTIR is a funny animal and the Leafs will use Horton’s $5.3 million this year (they didn’t last year) because they’ll have to, their cap situation is so tight. They’ll need to sign Mitch Marner and other RFAs, more so than sign a RHD free agent.

The Leafs won’t necessarily get all $5.3 million. They’ll get only the portion they need on the day they need it and then only that much for the rest of the season (or as long as Horton is on LTIR). So if the cap is $83 million and on opening night, the Leafs have $80 million in AAV (including Horton), they won’t need to put Horton on LTIR. If the cap is $83 million and the Leafs have $85 million in AAV, then they would put Horton on LTIR and get cap grace of $2 million. So in essence, if the cap is $83 million, the Leafs can start the season with a roster (including Horton) with an $88.3 million AAV and by putting Horton on LTIR they will be cap friendly.

There are other factors, a lot more minutiae, and penalties if performance bonuses are a factor if a team goes over the cap, but those are the basics.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

This thread seems to have died. I guess we've figured out that our cap issues aren't a mirage?

Toronto Maple Leafs - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

We have $8.8 m of cap space available ($8,790,301 to be exact) and lots of RFA's to sign. Even with Horton's LTIR, we now have just $14.1 m (at best with the way LTIR works) total cap space remaining.

We can sign Marner, fill in a couple of departed defender slots with low-cost ELC rookies and maybe have about $2 m left over to sign one of the other RFAs. This is one of many alternatives of course, but any big addition other than Marner will require additional subtractions/trades.

 

[Notsince67]

started when Ballad/Smyth Jr/Basset bought the team and continues to this day.

Kind of feels like Zion in the Matrix getting destroyed over and over.

 

[hockeywiz542]

 

[Sypher04]

"You do know that not one team has won a cup with even 1 player making over 10mil right?"

This is a pretty weird argument to bring up at all imo. There are only 9 players in the entire NHL that make 10+ million and 7 of them have signed those deals in the last 2 years. Only 2 teams have even won a cup in that time. The only 2 players before July 2017 were Kane and Toews in 2014 and I think most people concede those contracts stunk and would hurt the Blackhawks for a long time. I just don't think there's much here to really draw a conclusion from either way.

Also, Ovechkin makes over 9.5m and has won the cup (Ditto Malkin). That doesn't feel like a huge difference to 10m when we're talking about players of this caliber.

Especially when you consider, as the cap rises 10m essentially becomes the new 8m

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Less than $83m. Hmmm..... Oddly, this topic isn't getting much attention on HF.

Looks like we can't always be assured that there will be big increases every year and the cap will shoot up like a rocket.

Also, I wonder about the theory of the cap shooting up big time because of the Seattle expansion. Is that even considered to be "hockey related revenue"? Or is it money that the owners just divide up and split amongst themselves with no impact on the "hockey related revenue (HRR)". Its the HRR which drives the total cap number.

IDK - just asking a question, but I did find this on the interweb: "The previous list of revenues is missing a couple potentially significant revenue streams: relocation and expansion fees. The CBA says all revenue generated from player assignment (waivers), relocation, expansion, operation of teams others than NHL clubs (AHL/CHL clubs), financial maneuverings (loans, interest income, investment activities, etc.), and league-imposed fines will not count as HRR. The two big ones are obviously relocation and expansion though.

Hockey Related Revenue then is a simple idea when you get past the legalese. It's the net operating revenue of the league plus Barter minus Direct Costs with the notable exclusions of relocation and expansion fees removed from the money pool."

2012 NHL CBA: Exploring Hockey Related Revenue

 

[HoweHullOrr]

I’ve been wondering this for a couple of weeks.

Yes, oddly, the topic of the cap being potentially being less than $83 m isn't getting much attention on HF.

Looks like we can't always be assured that there will be big increases every year and the cap will shoot up like a rocket.

Also, I wonder about the theory of the cap shooting up big time because of the Seattle expansion. Is that even considered to be "hockey related revenue"? Or is it money that the owners just divide up and split amongst themselves with no impact on the "hockey related revenue (HRR)". Its the HRR which drives the total cap number.

IDK - just asking a question, but I did find this on the interweb: "The previous list of revenues is missing a couple potentially significant revenue streams: relocation and expansion fees. The CBA says all revenue generated from player assignment (waivers), relocation, expansion, operation of teams others than NHL clubs (AHL/CHL clubs), financial maneuverings (loans, interest income, investment activities, etc.), and league-imposed fines will not count as HRR. The two big ones are obviously relocation and expansion though.

Hockey Related Revenue then is a simple idea when you get past the legalese. It's the net operating revenue of the league plus Barter minus Direct Costs with the notable exclusions of relocation and expansion fees removed from the money pool."

2012 NHL CBA: Exploring Hockey Related Revenue

 

[Trapper]

Agreed!

How can we assume what will happen in later rounds? Will we automatically win the next round (or more rounds) simply because we beat Boston in Round 1?

It seems awfully presumptuous of us, unless folks have some widely different definitions of the word "contend".

It took 10 + years for Washington to get out of the 2nd round.
There are no guarantees. Can people handle that? St. Louis was probably a better team 6-7 years ago.

 

[4thline]

Yes, oddly, the topic of the cap being potentially being less than $83 m isn't getting much attention on HF.

Looks like we can't always be assured that there will be big increases every year and the cap will shoot up like a rocket.

Also, I wonder about the theory of the cap shooting up big time because of the Seattle expansion. Is that even considered to be "hockey related revenue"? Or is it money that the owners just divide up and split amongst themselves with no impact on the "hockey related revenue (HRR)". Its the HRR which drives the total cap number.

Expansion related cap increases aren't because of the fees, it's because of the extra gate and merchandise revenue.

 

[Trapper]

This is a pretty weird argument to bring up at all imo. There are only 9 players in the entire NHL that make 10+ million and 7 of them have signed those deals in the last 2 years. Only 2 teams have even won a cup in that time. The only 2 players before July 2017 were Kane and Toews in 2014 and I think most people concede those contracts stunk and would hurt the Blackhawks for a long time. I just don't think there's much here to really draw a conclusion from either way.

Also, Ovechkin makes over 9.5m and has won the cup (Ditto Malkin). That doesn't feel like a huge difference to 10m when we're talking about players of this caliber.

Especially when you consider, as the cap rises 10m essentially becomes the new 8m

Ovi won the Cup but there were a lot of player,coach and GM change on the way.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Expansion related cap increases aren't because of the fees, it's because of the extra gate and merchandise revenue.

OK, that's a good point.

So by adding another team, about 3% of additional HRR is added, assuming all other HRR contributing factors remain the same (i.e., don't go down). Reasonable?

What's happening now? HRR growth seems to slowing down given recent news.

 

[Nineteen67]

Yes, oddly, the topic of the cap being potentially being less than $83 m isn't getting much attention on HF.

Looks like we can't always be assured that there will be big increases every year and the cap will shoot up like a rocket.

Also, I wonder about the theory of the cap shooting up big time because of the Seattle expansion. Is that even considered to be "hockey related revenue"? Or is it money that the owners just divide up and split amongst themselves with no impact on the "hockey related revenue (HRR)". Its the HRR which drives the total cap number.

IDK - just asking a question, but I did find this on the interweb: "The previous list of revenues is missing a couple potentially significant revenue streams: relocation and expansion fees. The CBA says all revenue generated from player assignment (waivers), relocation, expansion, operation of teams others than NHL clubs (AHL/CHL clubs), financial maneuverings (loans, interest income, investment activities, etc.), and league-imposed fines will not count as HRR. The two big ones are obviously relocation and expansion though.

Hockey Related Revenue then is a simple idea when you get past the legalese. It's the net operating revenue of the league plus Barter minus Direct Costs with the notable exclusions of relocation and expansion fees removed from the money pool."

2012 NHL CBA: Exploring Hockey Related Revenue

A few weeks back Gord Miller ( I think) on Leafs Lunch mentioned the cap would likely be under 83 million and some teams were budgeting around 81 to 82 million.

Hopefully Mariner signs a decent deal and the Leafs can get some value for Nylander.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

A few weeks back Gord Miller ( I think) on Leafs Lunch mentioned the cap would likely be under 83 million and some teams were budgeting around 81 to 82 million.

Hopefully Mariner signs a decent deal and the Leafs can get some value for Nylander.

I also wonder and think about why this is happening?

Is there a trend here, or is it just a one-year phenomena? Is HRR growth slowing down?

Will HRR keep increasing year after year forever, or is HRR like the stock market where you can expect some downward cycles sooner or later and especially after several years of nice growth?