Waived: Kenny Agostino, Kevin Graval, Nic Petan, Garrett Wilson

Antropovsky

Registered User
Jun 2, 2007
13,984
4,965
Just a miscellaneous post Timashov speaks Russian. Mikeyahev does not speak English. It may have been a small factor. Flame away.

Good observation...but I dont think it has anything to do with it. Babcock made Timashov one of the last cuts last season, and has been vocal about how much he likes Timashov's game.

If he is waived, the Leafs could lose him to waivers. Leafs didnt draft and develop him all these years to lose him for nothing...without even seeing what he has got at the NHL level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keon1963

biotk

Registered User
Jan 3, 2017
7,091
5,520
Buffalo
Essentially the closer we were to the 81.5 number without Clarkson, Horton, Hyman, Dermott the better. Meaning the lower the already calculated 10,840 number the better. If we demoted Sandin, Liljegren for Bracco, and Engvall that number becomes 840. You open with 0 in cap space. If the current roster is your actual roster then reverse those paper transactions on Wednesday and now you have 10k in space.

I was just saying if CapFriendly's numbers were correct and they got within 10,840 of perfect, they could have been closer, so either something is up transaction wise, the Leafs didn't maximize their relief or CapFriendly's numbers are wrong? And I'm pretty sure it's not 2 as Pridham helped write the CBA, and I don't think it's 3 either.

I was going to post about this a couple days ago but I didn't because I am not certain this is the case and didn't feel like verifying it. Still don't feel like verifying this, so take it with a grain of salt - it has to do with cap space coverage for performance bonuses if Liljegren happens to get called up during the season.

If Liljegren is on the roster on day one before the LTIR then his performance bonus of 400K doesn't count against the cap and if he happens to earn any of those performance bonuses they would be transferred to the next season.

If Liljegren is not on the roster on day one for the LTIR cap event then if he does get called up at any point in time the Leafs have to have extra cap space for that 400K potential performance bonus (even though there is extremely little chance he will reach those bonuses - doesn't matter -they must still be covered if they are possible).

Now when he is sent down they have the option of recalling him for the 863K AAV cap hit and not the 1263K that it would have been. I doubt that he gets called up, but (assuming this is the case with the performance bonuses) I would imagine that the club feels that it is worth losing 10K of potential cap to be able to potentially recall a first round pick if it puts it together, they run into injury problems etc.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LoovTrain

Canada4Gold

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
42,973
9,179
I was going to post about this a couple days ago but I didn't because I am not certain this is the case and didn't feel like verifying it. Still don't feel like verifying this, so take it with a grain of salt - it has to do with cap space coverage for performance bonuses if Liljegren happens to get called up during the season.

If Liljegren is on the roster on day one before the LTIR then his performance bonus of 400K doesn't count against the cap and if he happens to earn any of those performance bonuses they would be transferred to the next season.

If Liljegren is not on the roster on day one for the LTIR cap event then if he does get called up at any point in time the Leafs have to have extra cap space for that 400K potential performance bonus (even though there is extremely little chance he will reach those bonuses - doesn't matter - even if it was a call up so late in the season that it would not physically be possible to earn those bonuses - doesn't matter - they must still be covered).

Now when he is sent down they have the option of recalling him for the 863K AAV cap hit and not the 1263K that it would have been. I doubt that he gets called up, but (assuming this is the case with the performance bonuses) I would imagine that the club feels that it is worth losing 10K of potential cap to be able to potentially recall a first round pick if it puts it together, they run into injury problems etc.

The performance bonus thing is even a deeper dark hole of impossible to understand than LTIR is, however I've never heard of being on the roster day 1 v. not being on the roster day 1 having any impact. The common easy to explain performance bonus thing is that a team that doesn't have any room can carry them over to the following year once they're met. However there is indeed some convoluted rules regarding specifics around current year cap numbers that allow you to do that that I've never been able to figure out. However I've never heard of the day 1 thing you're referring to.
 

biotk

Registered User
Jan 3, 2017
7,091
5,520
Buffalo
The performance bonus thing is even a deeper dark hole of impossible to understand than LTIR is, however I've never heard of being on the roster day 1 v. not being on the roster day 1 having any impact. The common easy to explain performance bonus thing is that a team that doesn't have any room can carry them over to the following year once they're met. However there is indeed some convoluted rules regarding specifics around current year cap numbers that allow you to do that that I've never been able to figure out. However I've never heard of the day 1 thing you're referring to.


Here's why I believe that it is most likely to be correct - Let's say you have a team that is close to the cap, with 3 young players who have significant potential performance bonuses (a lot like the Leafs over the previous 3 seasons) but within the "Performance Bonus Cushion" of no more than 7.5%. They are free to not worry about the potential cap of those performance bonuses and if they incur then they can't pushed to the cap for the next season. But half way through the season a player gets a major injury. In this case you would not be able to put the player on LTIR because at that time you would need to account for the performance bonuses cap-wise and that would probably take up far more cap room than whatever the potential LTIR relief would be. So LTIR can't require a team to have the cap space to cover performance bonuses for players already on the roster - only new ones.

But wouldn't Liljegren count as a new player on the roster if he is sent down after the LTIR placement and then recalled? I don't think so because then the same would be the case for my above scenario if say a team put a player on LTIR and then one of players with significant performance bonuses got put on IR and then was brought back.
 

Canada4Gold

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
42,973
9,179
Here's why I believe that it is most likely to be correct - Let's say you have a team that is close to the cap, with 3 young players who have significant potential performance bonuses (a lot like the Leafs over the previous 3 seasons) but within the "Performance Bonus Cushion" of no more than 7.5%. They are free to not worry about the potential cap of those performance bonuses and if they incur then they can't pushed to the cap for the next season. But half way through the season a player gets a major injury. In this case you would not be able to put the player on LTIR because at that time you would need to account for the performance bonuses cap-wise and that would probably take up far more cap room than whatever the potential LTIR relief would be. So LTIR can't require a team to have the cap space to cover performance bonuses for players already on the roster - only new ones.

But wouldn't Liljegren count as a new player on the roster if he is sent down after the LTIR placement and then recalled? I don't think so because then the same would be the case for my above scenario if say a team put a player on LTIR and then one of players with significant performance bonuses got put on IR and then was brought back.

You don't need to have to room to cover bonuses, they can carryover to the next year if met. The CBA isn't actually as convoluted as the last time I recall reading that section.

(ii) A Club shall be permitted to have an Averaged Club Salary in excess of the Upper Limit resulting from Performance Bonuses solely to the extent that such excess results from the inclusion in Averaged Club Salary of: (i) Exhibit 5 Individual "A" Performance Bonuses and "B" Performance Bonuses paid by the Club that may be earned by Players in the Entry Level System and (ii) Performance Bonuses that may be earned by Players pursuant to Section 50.2(b)(i)(C) above, provided that under no circumstances may a Club's Averaged Club Salary so exceed the Upper Limit by an amount greater than the result of seven-and-one-half (7.5) percent multiplied by the Upper Limit (the "Performance Bonus Cushion").

(iii) At the conclusion of each League Year, the amount of Performance Bonuses actually earned, including, without limitation, and for purposes of clarity, (i) Exhibit 5 Individual "A" Performance Bonuses and "B" Performance Bonuses paid by the Club that may be earned by Players in the Entry Level System and (ii) Performance Bonuses that may be earned by Players pursuant to Section 50.2(b)(i)(C) above, shall be determined and shall be charged against the Club's Upper Limit and Averaged Club Salary for such League Year. To the extent a Club's Averaged Club Salary exceeds its Upper Limit as a result of: (i) Exhibit 5 Individual "A" Performance Bonuses and "B" Performance Bonuses paid by the Club that may be earned by Players in the Entry Level System and (ii) Performance Bonuses that may be earned by Players pursuant to Section 50.2(b)(i)(C) above, then the Club's Upper Limit for the next League Year shall be reduced by an amount equal to such excess.

In laymens terms you can only go over the cap by performance bonuses for ELC or section 50.2biC which I believe is 35+ and/or guys who were injured the prior season. Up to 7.5% of the current cap. Any overage that you can't cover this year gets subtracted off next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheGoldenJet

Leafsdude7

Stand-Up Philosopher
Mar 26, 2011
23,135
1,213
Ontario
For example when Horton is placed on LTIR the Leafs will receive a 5.3 mil salary pool that they can use after they go past their 81.4 mill salary cap (5.3 mil over the 81.5 cap). They can now afford a player worth 5.2 million.

This is the part that confuses me. The rest makes sense, but this just...my mind is jelly.

Is this saying that, with LTIR, our cap, when looking at AAV, is actually 86.6M? Cause everything I've ever heard is that just isn't allowed. The 81.5M cap is still a hard cap throughout the season based on AAV, so it just doesn't make sense that we could, as you say, "afford a player worth [5.2M]" when we're already at 81.4M (or whatever the number ends up being) on the cap.
 

biotk

Registered User
Jan 3, 2017
7,091
5,520
Buffalo
You don't need to have to room to cover bonuses, they can carryover to the next year if met. The CBA isn't actually as convoluted as the last time I recall reading that section.

Yes, but I don't think that is the case for LTIR situations. I have been through the CBA and don't see what I am looking for there.

However, looking at the cap friendly LTIR FAQ at the bottom (LTIR Operations Example) it appears as though the placing of these four players would create a salary pool of 13.66M but no performance bonus pool. Which means when any player is brought up if they have a potential performance bonus it would have to come out of the salary pool. So for instance - bringing up Bracco would cost 842.5K plus 82.5K in performance bonus = 925K against the salary pool.

However, in this case when Liljegren is reassigned in a day or two he doesn't just open up 863K in the salary pool for the Leafs to use - he also opens up 400K in the performance bonus pool (see the "player reassigned" table in the LTIR Operations Example). So that would allow the Leafs to in the future bring up Bracco with his salary now only costing 842.5K against the salary pool, with the other 82.5K going against the performance bonus pool.

Seems like quite a little ingenious manoeuvre.

So if Liljegren had not been on the roster today, if he was to get called up later he would cost 1,263K against the salary pool. But now he would only cost 863K against the salary bonus pool and 400K against the performance pool that he himself created. It is not free money (because if he actually earned a bonus it would go against the cap next year), but it avoids the loss of money (as otherwise those unlikely to be earned performance bonuses would count against the salary pool part of the cap.)
 
Last edited:

Canada4Gold

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
42,973
9,179
Yes, but I don't think that is the case for LTIR situations. I have been through the CBA and don't see what I am looking for there.

However, looking at the cap friendly LTIR FAQ at the bottom (LTIR Operations Example) it appears as though the placing of these four players would create a salary pool of 13.66M but no performance bonus pool. Which means when any player is brought up if they have a potential performance bonus it would have to come out of the salary pool. So for instance - bringing up Bracco would cost 842.5K plus 82.5K in performance bonus = 925K against the salary pool.

However, in this case when Liljegren is reassigned in a day or two he doesn't just open up 863K in the salary pool for the Leafs to use - he also opens up 400K in the performance bonus pool (see the "player reassigned" table in the LTIR Operations Example). So that would allow the Leafs to in the future bring up Bracco with his salary now only costing 842.5K against the salary pool, with the other 82.5K going against the performance bonus pool.

Seems like quite a little ingenious manoeuvre.

So if Liljegren had not been on the roster today, if he was to get called up later he would cost 1,263K against the salary pool. But now he would only cost 863K against the salary bonus pool and 400K against the performance pool that he himself created. It is not free money (because if he actually earned a bonus it would go against the cap next year), but it avoids the loss of money (as otherwise those unlikely to be earned performance bonuses would count against the salary pool part of the cap.)

I would assume the performance bonus pool they're referring to is the 7.5% of the cap that is the maximum allowable which I referred tpo in my previous post, which the Leafs have tonnes of as they have very few performance bonuses to deal with this year. They can fit Liljegren's 863,333 under the salary cap and his 400k bonuses under the maximum 0.075x81.5 = 6.1125 million bonus cap.

If you require an example that's very flimsy as I don't want to bother going through the reasearch but Soshnikov wasn't on the opening day roster 2 years ago when we were over the cap using LTIR. He had bonuses but we recalled him for 3 games just fine.
 

biotk

Registered User
Jan 3, 2017
7,091
5,520
Buffalo
I would assume the performance bonus pool they're referring to is the 7.5% of the cap that is the maximum allowable which I referred tpo in my previous post,

No - as you can see from the LTIR FAQ at the link above in the LTIR Operations Example, the first player brought up has a performance bonus and that came out of the salary pool because there was performance bonus pool at the time.

If you require an example that's very flimsy as I don't want to bother going through the reasearch but Soshnikov wasn't on the opening day roster 2 years ago when we were over the cap using LTIR. He had bonuses but we recalled him for 3 games just fine.

I have looked it up and this is not true. Because there was no performance bonus pool created when the Leafs LTIRed in 2017/2018 any potential performance bonuses had to be included in the AAV that went against the salary pool (increasing Sosh's AAV from 737K to 862K. This article explains it for that season - including that the normal bonus cushion no longer applies for bringing up players after LTIR is being used.

So for this season the performances bonuses of Liljegren and Timashov don't count towards the cap because they are included in that bonus cushion of up to 7.5%. However, once LTIR is applied then any additions to the line up with performance bonuses count towards the salary pool unless there is a performance bonus pool (and any subtractions from the lineup of players who had a performance bonus adds that performance bonus amount to the performance bonus pool). Because none of the 4 LTIR players had a performance bonus there would be no performance bonus pool, but the Leafs' have created one by having Liljegren on the roster before the LTIR is applied - assuming Liljegren is sent down - it would create a 400K performance bonus pool. Any players brought up with a performance bonus (Bracco, Kivi, Liljegren, Marchment) would not have that performance bonus count towards the salary pool unless the performance bonus pool is exhausted in which case it would come out of the salary pool.

As Liljegren has by far the biggest performance bonus, putting him on the initial roster and thereby creating that 400K performance bonus pool outweighs the 10K extra cap space they could have received by replacing Lily and Sandin with Bracco and Engvall (Bracco being the initial roster and then being sent down would have created a 82.5 PB pool) by a large margin.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GermanLeaf

Battle Lin

Registered User
Dec 18, 2015
4,412
744
man what preseason were you guys watching, timashov had a great camp and looked much better than these scrubs, he made a big jump this summer

liljegren also looked better and better as camp went on, especially his defense, which is what coaches wanna see...and when we have guys like marincin and holl, these guys aint hard to bet out, liljegren could pass them any week of the season
 

Canada4Gold

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
42,973
9,179
No - as you can see from the LTIR FAQ at the link above in the LTIR Operations Example, the first player brought up has a performance bonus and that came out of the salary pool because there was performance bonus pool at the time.



I have looked it up and this is not true. Because there was no performance bonus pool created when the Leafs LTIRed in 2017/2018 any potential performance bonuses had to be included in the AAV that went against the salary pool (increasing Sosh's AAV from 737K to 862K. This article explains it for that season - including that the normal bonus cushion no longer applies for bringing up players after LTIR is being used.

So for this season the performances bonuses of Liljegren and Timashov don't count towards the cap because they are included in that bonus cushion of up to 7.5%. However, once LTIR is applied then any additions to the line up with performance bonuses count towards the salary pool unless there is a performance bonus pool (and any subtractions from the lineup of players who had a performance bonus adds that performance bonus amount to the performance bonus pool). Because none of the 4 LTIR players had a performance bonus there would be no performance bonus pool, but the Leafs' have created one by having Liljegren on the roster before the LTIR is applied - assuming Liljegren is sent down - it would create a 400K performance bonus pool. Any players brought up with a performance bonus (Bracco, Kivi, Liljegren, Marchment) would not have that performance bonus count towards the salary pool unless the performance bonus pool is exhausted in which case it would come out of the salary pool.

As Liljegren has by far the biggest performance bonus, putting him on the initial roster and thereby creating that 400K performance bonus pool outweighs the 10K extra cap space they could have received by replacing Lily and Sandin with Bracco and Engvall (Bracco being the initial roster and then being sent down would have created a 82.5 PB pool) by a large margin.

Ok, I think I sort of get it. That would explain why they perhaps forgone the extra 10k increase to the ACSL they could have had by having Bracco, and Engvall instead of Lil and Sandin because they would have lost the 400k bonus pool from Lil. Interestingly though they didn't want to use Bracco or Scott instead of Sandin and lose the extra 51k/88k in ACSL maximizing to gain 82k/182k respectively in bonus pool. The only way they would prefer that option is if they had Liljegren and another bonus guy up at the same time. The only likely one would perhaps be Bracco, maybe Kivihalme or Brooks. So it doesn't bode well for them perhaps looking towards a mid-season callup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: biotk

biotk

Registered User
Jan 3, 2017
7,091
5,520
Buffalo
Ok, I think I sort of get it. That would explain why they perhaps forgone the extra 10k increase to the ACSL they could have had by having Bracco, and Engvall instead of Lil and Sandin because they would have lost the 400k bonus pool from Lil. Interestingly though they didn't want to use Bracco or Scott instead of Sandin and lose the extra 51k/88k in ACSL maximizing to gain 82k/182k respectively in bonus pool. The only way they would prefer that option is if they had Liljegren and another bonus guy up at the same time. The only likely one would perhaps be Bracco, maybe Kivihalme or Brooks. So it doesn't bode well for them perhaps looking towards a mid-season callup.

Yup - it is definitely confusing. The idea of using Bracco instead of Sandin I am sure would have occurred if Bracco’s salary was a little closer to Sandin’s.
 

18leafsfan18

Registered User
Jul 28, 2012
3,056
1,831
Ontario
This is the part that confuses me. The rest makes sense, but this just...my mind is jelly.

Is this saying that, with LTIR, our cap, when looking at AAV, is actually 86.6M? Cause everything I've ever heard is that just isn't allowed. The 81.5M cap is still a hard cap throughout the season based on AAV, so it just doesn't make sense that we could, as you say, "afford a player worth [5.2M]" when we're already at 81.4M (or whatever the number ends up being) on the cap.

Horton's contract would go into a pool of money the team can use to go over the cap (Actually 81.4 for the Leafs based on the ACSL).

So, with the salary of the team where it stands, they get to 81.4 million with whatever players, then Horton, Clarkson, Hyman, Dermott contracts go into LTIR and create a "pool" of money that the team can use to spend above the cap (Again, in Leafs situation their cap is 81.4).

I'm not 100% sure on this next point, I assume that since the cap of a team is accruing daily, the "pool" of money is also accruing daily.

Example:
Leafs actually have $95,152,493 in salaries to be paid.

So they start the season with a ACSL of 81.4 (Their ACSL will never change because they will never have no one on LTIR this season)

As soon as they send in their roster with LTIR players they are given $13,663,333 (Accruing) in a "Pool" that they can use to go over their 81.4 Cap Ceiling.

The Leafs actually need that pool to pay some of their players.
 

The Iceman

Registered User
Sep 22, 2007
5,069
3,707
When do we hear if Agostino and Gravel cleared?

2 nice depth pieces for the team.
 

BlueForever75

Registered User
Oct 4, 2017
5,691
2,303
Hope Augustino clears. I honestly believe that he is the heir apparent to Hyman when we trade him. Same size, more speed, more skill, can PK for a third of what Hyman makes. Augustino has skill and has never had an opportunity to play with top line players in his career with Montreal and NJ. Put him in Hyman's spot next to Tavares and Marner, watch out. The other player I hope clears is Petan, he has a spot in the future Leafs lineup on the 3rd line. Kapanen to me becomes expendable for the same results. The only other I am on the fence with is Johnsson and this depends on Micheyev's play. If he is the real deal Johnsson also becomes expendable. Trading Hyman, Kapanen and Johnsson clears almost 9 million on the books. Future lines I would love to see:

Micheyev-Matthews-Nylander
Augustino-Tavares-Marner
Petan-Kerfoot-Moore
Timashov-Gauthier-Spezza

More size and skill in the overall top 6. Gives Matthews a winger that actually has size, speed and skill to compliment him. Give Tavares and Marner the same size element, grittiness on the wing but with more skill.

But most important, frees up cap space to bolster at deadline with rentals and go into next off season with money to resign both Barrie and Muzzin which is a must.
 

NoTouchIcing

Registered User
Feb 3, 2010
3,273
157
Guelph, ON
I do think Chris Johnsson is mistaken here, I guess we'll find out in a couple of days and whether Liljegren stays with the big club or not.
The Marlies don't play until October 5th. My guess is he's on the team, practicing and will be a healthy scratch tomorrow.
He'll be sent down on the 3rd or 4th.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->