Is contract management our biggest issue?

[HockeyGuruPitka]

Can Lou's methods of handling contracts be detrimental to the long term health of the Leafs?

We are currently sitting at 48 contracts with Ramo soon to take up the 49th. This leaves us with little manoeuvrability as seen with the inability to trade Holland.

We currently have 4 players on LTIR (Robidas, Lupul, Horton, Leivo), and our AHL team features Laich, Michalek, Greening, and Enroth. Add Corrado and Cowan to that mix and we have a total of 11 contract spots being wasted on useless players that have little to no positive impact on the future of this team.

Because of our lack of contract flexibility we were unable to sign Adam Brooks resulting in him being sent back to junior. We are also unable to offer Jeremy Bracco, (arguably our most skilled prospect) a contract. Both of these players probably would have benefited more from AHL seasoning rather then heading back to junior (IMO).

I also have suspicions that our contract issues had influences on our first 5 selections in the 2016 draft with all picks coming from Europe or College.

As a rebuilding organisation growth and development should be held in the highest regard.

The way we are set up now and the way we have handled players is not conducive to successful trade deadlines and successful free agency.

Click to read more...

 

[SprDaVE]

no...

Bracco's contract wouldn't have counted since he would have been considered a slide contract. We had plenty of contract space to add Brooks if we was seen as someone that should have been on the Marlies when you wanted.

Consider short-term pain for the long-term gain. We're at 48 contracts. Why is this considered our "biggest" concern? Some people find some of the weirdest thing to have an issue with. It's not a problem.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

We got 5 players on the Leafs currently who´s contracts run out after this season and who will be replaced from within. And then we might trade away a contract or two on top of that. So no, I am not worried.

 

[Menzinger]

It has the potential to be - things got pretty tight this season.

But there will be a lot of contracts flushed out of the organization over the next couple years, and then things will be fine.

 

[ACC1224]

Has contract limit ever been an issue for any Team ever?

 

[SprDaVE]

Has contract limit ever been an issue for any Team ever?

Nope.

 

[waingr0]

Has contract limit ever been an issue for any Team ever?

Nothing Grabner can't fix.

 

[HockeyGuruPitka]

no...

Bracco's contract wouldn't have counted since he would have been considered a slide contract. We had plenty of contract space to add Brooks if we was seen as someone that should have been on the Marlies when you wanted.

Consider short-term pain for the long-term gain. We're at 48 contracts. Why is this considered our "biggest" concern? Some people find some of the weirdest thing to have an issue with. It's not a problem.

i kinda got into a ramble, but i also meant to include the handling of these said contracts. Doesnt it have some potential to reduce the allure of coming to Toronto in free agency?

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Lou inherited a mess and has done a great job of cleaning it up well gaining some assets along the way.

Michalek, Greening and Cowen are gone after this year. Lou deserves praise for unloading Phaneuf for guys with only 1 year left.

Taking on Laich helped us gain an amazing return well only giving up Winnik. Lou deserves praise for that trade also.

Lupul, Horton, Robidas he inherited. All 3 of these guys are sitting at home so they don't really effect our youngsters. Cowen is also sitting at home.

Korshkov, Grundstrom, Woll and Greenway have all shown very good potential to one day be NHLers since being drafted so maybe just maybe they were the best player available according to our scouts. The team drafted 5 guys from the CHL also (including Brooks).

Holland not being dealt because of contract slots is purely a guess on your part. It likely has more to do with Lou not knowing how much cap space he has to work with because of the pending Cowen decision.

 

[egd27]

Wanted Dion gone without retention.....cost short term contract spots
Wanted Bernier gone.....necessitated a back up goalie
Wanted Robidias & Lupul gone......LTIR
Wanted Clarkson gone......Horton

Part of the tear down involved making decisions that were going to cause problems in the short term.To my knowledge, it has not caused us to miss out on anything that should affect us long term.

 

[Barilko14]

Can Lou's methods of handling contracts be detrimental to the long term health of the Leafs?

We are currently sitting at 48 contracts with Ramo soon to take up the 49th. This leaves us with little manoeuvrability as seen with the inability to trade Holland.

We currently have 4 players on LTIR (Robidas, Lupul, Horton, Leivo), and our AHL team features Laich, Michalek, Greening, and Enroth. Add Corrado and Cowan to that mix and we have a total of 11 contract spots being wasted on useless players that have little to no positive impact on the future of this team.

Because of our lack of contract flexibility we were unable to sign Adam Brooks resulting in him being sent back to junior. We are also unable to offer Jeremy Bracco, (arguably our most skilled prospect) a contract. Both of these players probably would have benefited more from AHL seasoning rather then heading back to junior (IMO).

I also have suspicions that our contract issues had influences on our first 5 selections in the 2016 draft with all picks coming from Europe or College.

As a rebuilding organisation growth and development should be held in the highest regard.

The way we are set up now and the way we have handled players is not conducive to successful trade deadlines and successful free agency.

I'm thinking this is probably an attempt at trolling, because I can't fathom anyone actually being worried about this, but I'll bite.

1. Our lack of contract space does little to effect pawning off Holland, no matter what our contract space looks like, we aren't taking back multiple players for Holland. It would not alleviate current roster issue.

2. All of the guys you mentioned are on IR - Lou had nothing to do with how they were acquired, and he can not control injuries - not sure why this has any relevance to your point. p.s. would you rather we still have Clarkson?

3. Would you rather we still have Phaneuf and Winnik?

4. What does Corrado have to do with anything??? Teams carry extra fwds/dmen, you do realize that teams have injuries?

5. As was pointed out, easily could have signed Brooks if we wanted to. Bracco - there are dozens of 1st rounders from his draft still playing CHL - why should we have rushed Bracco to turn pro when he obviously still had some defencies to his all around game?

6. Our contract issues this summer, led to us not taking CHLers that would typically need to be signed to ELCs in 2 years? If this was such a big issue, why in the world would we take Brooks and Walker who could have been signed this summer? That would make absolutely no sense, right?

In summary, IMO you are completely out to lunch with your perceived problem and it being a huge issue going forward, and I don't believe it will have any impact on our trade deadline, and especially not on our FA going forward, especially considering we have $30M+ coming off the books in next 2 years.

 

[Audi*]

leafs biggest issue is the lack of defensive depth in the organization.... not contract management

 

[HoweHullOrr]

We currently have 4 players on LTIR (Robidas, Lupul, Horton, Leivo)

LTIR? Not sure that is correct. Don't think so. There's some important differences between IR and LTIR.

http://theleafsnation.com/2016/5/7/...and-the-leafs-need-to-be-cautious-in-using-it

Excerpt from article is included below.

THE PROBLEM WITH TAGGING ROOM
Tagging room, or "Section 50.5(e)(iv)(C)(2)" as the CBA succinctly calls it, is one of the more arcane salary cap rules in the NHL. The basic premise is relatively simple: a team can not have more money in cap hits on the books for any subsequent season than the upper limit in the current season (the rule is slightly more complicated, but that's close enough for this discussion).

So, for example, if the salary cap upper limit next season (2016-17) is $74M, no team can commit more than $74M in cap hits to the following season (2017-18). That includes players who may be eligible for LTIR as well as performance bonuses. If a team like the Leafs has an unusually large amount of money tied up in LTIR in one season, that money counts against their potential tagging room for the next season. That limits the team's ability to sign contract extensions or acquire new players in trades.

The tagging room is not necessarily a problem as long as there is a sufficient amount of money coming off the books in the form of expiring contracts, which is why the rule almost never comes into play. However, if a team were to have many big money deals like Horton and Lupul on LTIR for multiple seasons, the prospect of running into the tagging room rule is significantly increased.

Stephane Robidas's contract expires after this season, so it doesn't need to be taken into account for tagging room. Joffrey Lupul and Nathan Horton, though, would. Since their combined cap hits are $10.55M, that means the most the Leafs could commit to the 2017-18 salary cap before the end of the 2016-17 season would be (assuming they intend to keep both players on LTIR) $63.45M. That's a problem if they intend to be a team that spends right up to the cap.

 

[Stephen]

Can Lou's methods of handling contracts be detrimental to the long term health of the Leafs?

We are currently sitting at 48 contracts with Ramo soon to take up the 49th. This leaves us with little manoeuvrability as seen with the inability to trade Holland.

We currently have 4 players on LTIR (Robidas, Lupul, Horton, Leivo), and our AHL team features Laich, Michalek, Greening, and Enroth. Add Corrado and Cowan to that mix and we have a total of 11 contract spots being wasted on useless players that have little to no positive impact on the future of this team.

Considering Laich, Enroth, Greening, Robidas, Michalek and Cowen are all UFAs after this year, why would this be a long term problem?

 

[-DeMo-]

Considering Laich, Enroth, Greening, Robidas, Michalek and Cowen are all UFAs after this year, why would this be a long term problem?

Smith/Hunwick/Polak aswell probably wont be brought back.

 

[Macallan18]

leafs biggest issue is the lack of defensive depth in the organization.... not contract management

this. And ideally a no. 1 rhd

 

[Kingstonian84*]

Smith/Hunwick/Polak aswell probably wont be brought back.

eh..... i could see hunwick being back.

 

[hobarth]

TO traded Phanny for Lindberg, Cowen and Michalek. That's 3 contracts and unless TO can create contract space trades of this nature isn't going to be possible.

Let's say team wants to grab Polak again for the playoffs but they need to dump players/contracts to slip him under the cap and they're willing to include draft choices as an incentive, TO might not be able to do it because of the 50 contract limit, so, yes it could be a problem.

 

[moon111]

leafs biggest issue is the lack of defensive depth in the organization.... not contract management

But by doing so, it's going to be real easy to protect all the assets in the Expansion draft. By fixing that problem right now, would be a waste, as it would only be a temporary fix until someone of value were signed by L.V.

 

[Dustin]

I'm thinking this is probably an attempt at trolling, because I can't fathom anyone actually being worried about this, but I'll bite.

1. Our lack of contract space does little to effect pawning off Holland, no matter what our contract space looks like, we aren't taking back multiple players for Holland. It would not alleviate current roster issue.

2. All of the guys you mentioned are on IR - Lou had nothing to do with how they were acquired, and he can not control injuries - not sure why this has any relevance to your point. p.s. would you rather we still have Clarkson?

3. Would you rather we still have Phaneuf and Winnik?

4. What does Corrado have to do with anything??? Teams carry extra fwds/dmen, you do realize that teams have injuries?

5. As was pointed out, easily could have signed Brooks if we wanted to. Bracco - there are dozens of 1st rounders from his draft still playing CHL - why should we have rushed Bracco to turn pro when he obviously still had some defencies to his all around game?

6. Our contract issues this summer, led to us not taking CHLers that would typically need to be signed to ELCs in 2 years? If this was such a big issue, why in the world would we take Brooks and Walker who could have been signed this summer? That would make absolutely no sense, right?

In summary, IMO you are completely out to lunch with your perceived problem and it being a huge issue going forward, and I don't believe it will have any impact on our trade deadline, and especially not on our FA going forward, especially considering we have $30M+ coming off the books in next 2 years.

Agree completely. This is the post you need to read. Contract limit has absolutely no bearing on this team.

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

If anything, leafs contract management is as intentional and planned out than it has ever been. Many very subtle moves to create opportunities that haven't been made in previous regimes. The leafs current contract status was done purposefully and is not "in a mess". Calculated risks and value were taken into consideration and leafs are in a better spot contract/cap wise as soon as next year as they would have been otherwise.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Aren't we the team that made a 6 for 1 deal?

 

[GBLeaf]

We can't discount some of the reasons why we are close to the contract limit.

It's not at 48 for fun, it's because we made decisions that benefitted the club now and going forward, such as taking on Greening, Michalek... etc to rid ourselves of an awful contract.

So maybe we miss out on an opportunity this time round to take on some deadwood for an incentive, but only because we've already done it.

If this is our biggest issue then we truly are heading in the right direction, because it wont even be an issue come the summer.

 

[Warden of the North]

No. Not even close. No one should ever worry about contract limits.

Our biggest organizational problem is lack of defensive depth followed by lack of goaltender depth.

 

[HockeyGuruPitka]

I'm thinking this is probably an attempt at trolling, because I can't fathom anyone actually being worried about this, but I'll bite.

1. Our lack of contract space does little to effect pawning off Holland, no matter what our contract space looks like, we aren't taking back multiple players for Holland. It would not alleviate current roster issue.

2. All of the guys you mentioned are on IR - Lou had nothing to do with how they were acquired, and he can not control injuries - not sure why this has any relevance to your point. p.s. would you rather we still have Clarkson?

3. Would you rather we still have Phaneuf and Winnik?

4. What does Corrado have to do with anything??? Teams carry extra fwds/dmen, you do realize that teams have injuries?

5. As was pointed out, easily could have signed Brooks if we wanted to. Bracco - there are dozens of 1st rounders from his draft still playing CHL - why should we have rushed Bracco to turn pro when he obviously still had some defencies to his all around game?

6. Our contract issues this summer, led to us not taking CHLers that would typically need to be signed to ELCs in 2 years? If this was such a big issue, why in the world would we take Brooks and Walker who could have been signed this summer? That would make absolutely no sense, right?

In summary, IMO you are completely out to lunch with your perceived problem and it being a huge issue going forward, and I don't believe it will have any impact on our trade deadline, and especially not on our FA going forward, especially considering we have $30M+ coming off the books in next 2 years.

Firstly thanks for taking the time to post.

Now to address some of your comments. I probably didnt portray my concern properly as its not so much a focus on the number of contracts however how these contracts are being handled.

Its hard not to like the direction this team is headed. However Lou is obviously treating these people and players like they are simply numbers. Obviously this is a business and he is treating it as such, however there needs to be a level of humanity when approaching any job. By having so many NHL players demoted to our farm system (laich, greening, enroth, michalek) and constant contract/job disputes (Holland, Corrado, Lupul, Robidas, Cowan etc) one cant believe this makes Toronto seem like an alluring destination for any type of free agent. Not to mention players that are required to waive their NMC in order to accept a trade to Toronto.

in response to your 5th point, yes there are a lot of players from 2015 still playing in the CHL however most of these players have no other choice. its either CHL or NHL. Its the same problem we would have been facing with Marner had he not came to camp and played well. Where as players like Bracco and Brooks have AHL options. In my opinion when you have players that are clearly more skilled then their peers, and adjusting to a more physical style game is the most needed area of development then they should be playing in the Marlies.