Salary Cap: Leafs' 2014-2015 Cap Situation and Strategy

[knorthern knight]

There will probably be lots of references to the CBA in this thread so I'll pre-emptively point to the download link for the CBA http://cdn.agilitycms.com/nhlpacom/PDF/NHL_NHLPA_2013_CBA.pdf Warning; it's an 11.1 megabyte PDF file.

Basically, a rash of short-term injuries could put the Leafs in cap trouble. Here's the situation.

• Cap Geek shows the Leafs with 23 players signed and only $360,000 cap room
• Teams must ice at least 20 players for each game.
• If 4 players are short-term injured simultaneously, Toronto would have to call up somebody to make the limit.
• Did I mention that the league minimum salary is $550,000? OOPS

There is a "Roster Emergency Exception" (CBA Section 50.10(e)) and a "Goaltender Exemption" (CBA Section 16.13), but neither one allows signing a really good player. And I'm sure that the league will carefully monitor any declarations of LTIR (10 games / 24 days threshold). Assuming sanity on the part of Leafs management, they need to act to give themselves breathing room. Possible options include "salary dump" trades and playing most of the season with a 21-man roster. E.g. send down Orr, and even if he's claimed on waivers, nothing of value will have been lost.

Click to read more...

 

[crump]

Yep. We are screwed for a few games until it becomes long term. Here is the emergency provision.

Article 50.10 (e) of the new collective bargaining agreement includes a provision for cap-exempt recalls during roster emergencies in which injuries and/or suspensions result in insufficient cap room and a shortage of skaters for more than one game.
The following provisions apply:
Cap room must be less than the minimum salary plus $100,000, ie. $650,000 in 2013-14.
The club must be unable to add a player with a cap hit equal to the minimum NHL salary plus $100,000, ie. $650,000 in 2013-14, using long-term injury exception.
The team must have fewer than 18 skaters and two goaltenders on its roster for at least one game before the recall(s) can occur.
The recalled player(s) must each earn less than the NHL's minimum salary plus $100,000, ie. $650,000 in 2013-14, and can only remain on the roster during the roster-emergency period.

So guys on entry level deals like...

G Gibson, Chris » EL $650,000
F Carrick, Sam ». EL $631,667
F Rupert, Ryan » EL $631,667
F Broll, David » EL $590,833
F Devane, Jamie » $575,000
D Marshall, Kevin » $562,500
F Smith, Trevor » $550,000
F Kozun, Brandon » $550,000

 

[Swervin81]

With the very little cap space we have, if Rielly has a great year next year and hits a bunch of bonuses that kick in, we are going to lose a TON of cap space for the following year in bonus overages.

 

[seanlinden]

I fail to see why this is a problem...

The Leafs have 23 players signed right now, but 15 of them are forwards. Obviously, they're going to have to drop one at some point and bring up a Dman. The Dman will likely make less than the forward, creating additional room.

Furthermore, if you look at who's going to be called up, Smith and Broll both saw NHL time last year. They'd be amongst the first players called up.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

We could also see some trades go down. Franson for Kindl+ would save 900k. Lupul and his 5.25 mill cap hit could also be moved for good assets. I'm actually thinking a trade like a 2nd in 2015 and a 1st in 2016 could even be the price if packaged with a prospect. Reimer and his 2.3 cap hit is also available in favour of a backup like Vokoun, Bryz, etc. whose cap hit may be low enough to save at least 1 mill in cap. That would give us ~7.5 mill in cap space with 13 forwards and 7 defensemen. Technically, we'd only have to move Orr and trade Franson to give us enough cap to survive without overages. We then can do the Reimer and Lupul thing when their values may increase during the season so we can sell high on them and/or in order to get additional cap to use.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

The strategy seems to be to lock up as many mediocre hockey players to long term contracts so we can keep this hit and miss playoff team together for the next 5-7 years.

If Kadri and Bernier are added to the long term signings we currently have, it will mark 11 players signed long term. If Franson is signed, make that 12. And we have used our 2 buyouts already.

Ridiculous, when LA, a team that has won 2 cups, has only 7 long term contracts.

 

[Joey Hoser]

We can go with a 22 man roster if we want. Eventually somebody making significant money will get hurt and replaced with a cheaper player.

There are ways to deal with this and no real problems to come of it. Nothing to see here.

 

[Mess]

Ridiculous, when LA, a team that has won 2 cups, has only 7 long term contracts.

The real issue with the cap is that LA who have won 2 of the last 3 Cups have brought back their entire cup winning team (except aging Willie Mitchell) and also had room to lockup Gaborik long term.

While the Leafs a team that finished 8th last overall couldn't even afford to bring back their team even if they wanted and let players go for more money and signed a bunch of <$1.5 mil just to comply with the salary cap ceiling.

Now both teams are in a similar cap situation with <$500k free space. However 1/2 the league are in a similar situation to the Leafs and some are even over the cap at present.

Leafs have already fired Loiselle their capologist and this current cap situation likely something Shanahan recognized as poor cap management.

 

[MakeTheIronSing]

While it's not surprising the Leafs are up against the cap because of the wealth they have, it seems kind of ridiculous that they are SO close to the cap limit.

When you look at the team, on paper, and on the ice, they should not really be anywhere near the cap limit. They are nowhere near talented enough to need to be soo close to the ceiling.

 

[theIceWookie]

The strategy seems to be to lock up as many mediocre hockey players to long term contracts so we can keep this hit and miss playoff team together for the next 5-7 years.

If Kadri and Bernier are added to the long term signings we currently have, it will mark 11 players signed long term. If Franson is signed, make that 12. And we have used our 2 buyouts already.

Ridiculous, when LA, a team that has won 2 cups, has only 7 long term contracts.

What's long term to you? You said 7 so I'm going to assume that's Voynov, Quick, Gaborik, Carter, Richards, Brown and Matt Greene? Greene being the shortest at 4 years.

Which means we have 8 long term contracts. Gardiner, Phaneuf, Komarov, Bozak, JVR, Clarkson, Kessel, Lupul.

Things are only true when they happen. We only have 8 currently, not 11 (which is bad math FYI. IF and ONLY IF Kadri/Bernier sign, it would be ten and we all know Franson is going to UFA with open arms). If LA signs Kopitar and Williams, they have 9.

 

[theIceWookie]

Meh this happens every year. People freak out and every year little actually happens where it's an issue. People say "well what if this happens, or what if that were to occur" and blah blah blah. LTIR will happen, cap space will be banked, players will be sent down to the minors (like Orr when we call up a 7th cheaper dman), trades will happen (Reimer for cheaper backup, Lupul if he hits up to par, any number of the 1 year UFA's we have who have good seasons) and everything will be a-ok.

Like someone already said, nothing to see here

 

[Mess]

While it's not surprising the Leafs are up against the cap because of the wealth they have, it seems kind of ridiculous that they are SO close to the cap limit.

When you look at the team, on paper, and on the ice, they should not really be anywhere near the cap limit. They are nowhere near talented enough to need to be soo close to the ceiling.

What is more concerning is that Leafs will be in the same position next year..

The cap goes up by $5 mil .. .Kadri and Bernier become RFA's and each get raises on next contracts using up the majority if not all that new cap space.

Gleason buyout goes up by $1 mil extra from $833k to $1.83k and Rielly bonuses earned on a good season could easily cost the Leafs another $1.mil. Leafs are carrying over $512,500 this year already based on bonus carried forward.

Which means regardless how all the bargain bin <$1.5 mil players do this year they will essentially all be UFAs next year with little room to sign and keep them if they have good years ie Raymond last season.

So the following year Leafs will need to go bargain shopping again to fill out the roster or promote from within. (baring dumping a big contract ie Lupul for pick etc.)

So Leafs are perpetually trapped in this cap hole they created through poor cap management and are struggling to even make the playoffs with this roster.

 

[SprDaVE]

It's definitely tight. I never thought in a million years we'd be keeping both of Reimer and Franson. Also signing Gardiner long term put more money upfront.

I would definitely trade Franson in order to free up at least around 500k to 1M in cap space.

Next season though we'll have to shuffle some salary around in order to regain some of that flexibility. Players like Lupul and Reimer will need to be traded with minimal money coming back. By then, we'll have a good feel of where the young players are in their development like Leivo, Nylander, Percy, etc

 

[Parkdale]

What is more concerning is that Leafs will be in the same position next year..

The cap goes up by $5 mil .. .Kadri and Bernier become RFA's and each get raises on next contracts using up the majority if not all that new cap space.

Gleason buyout goes up by $1 mil extra from $833k to $1.83k and Rielly bonuses earned on a good season could easily cost the Leafs another $1.mil. Leafs are carrying over $512,500 this year already based on bonus carried forward.

Which means regardless how all the bargain bin <$1.5 mil players do this year they will essentially all be UFAs next year with little room to sign and keep them if they have good years ie Raymond last season.

So the following year Leafs will need to go bargain shopping again to fill out the roster or promote from within. (baring dumping a big contract ie Lupul for pick etc.)

So Leafs are perpetually trapped in this cap hole they created through poor cap management and are struggling to even make the playoffs with this roster.

The Leaf problem stems from unmovable (or hard to move) contracts for under-performing players. We can all have our own opinions who they are; just hope they don't give out more of these contracts going forward. Bolland @ 5X5 would have been one....whether we dodged a bullet depends on whether such a contract was actually offered.

 

[buttman*]

Orr and Bodie will be sent down. They won't risk losing Holland on waivers. It's also likely you'll see Ashton stay if he is not waiver exempt. I also expect Holzner to stay with the big club leaving them with only a couple hundred thousand. Which is perfectly manageable.

 

[BertCorbeau]

The strategy seems to be to lock up as many mediocre hockey players to long term contracts so we can keep this hit and miss playoff team together for the next 5-7 years.

If Kadri and Bernier are added to the long term signings we currently have, it will mark 11 players signed long term. If Franson is signed, make that 12. And we have used our 2 buyouts already.

Ridiculous, when LA, a team that has won 2 cups, has only 7 long term contracts.

Pretty big assumption there ... Not a chance that I can see Franson being resigned next season unless he learns to actually play defense

 

[Daisy Jane]

The strategy seems to be to lock up as many mediocre hockey players to long term contracts so we can keep this hit and miss playoff team together for the next 5-7 years.

If Kadri and Bernier are added to the long term signings we currently have, it will mark 11 players signed long term. If Franson is signed, make that 12. And we have used our 2 buyouts already.

Ridiculous, when LA, a team that has won 2 cups, has only 7 long term contracts.

as this was the last summer to use the buy outs on any contrats signed under the OLD cba it's moot that we "used our two buy outs already."

 

[Daisy Jane]

Pretty big assumption there ... Not a chance that I can see Franson being resigned next season unless he learns to actually play defense

or for that matter any of the 9 contracts that currently signed will remain with the team.

 

[Mess]

The Leaf problem stems from unmovable (or hard to move) contracts for under-performing players. We can all have our own opinions who they are; just hope they don't give out more of these contracts going forward. Bolland @ 5X5 would have been one....whether we dodged a bullet depends on whether such a contract was actually offered.

Well Bolland said it came down the Leafs offer and Florida offers.
&
TSN insiders Dreger/Bobby Mac reported 5-6 years at $4.95 mil was on the table at one point for Bolland and that might have gone up for final offer for Bolland in an attempt to keep him.

Had the Leafs re-signed Bolland they would be in even more cap hell then they are now. Instead of Bolland they signed (Santorelli, Winnik, Booth, & Kontiola) for $5 mil instead.

How can a perpetual bottom 10 team finishing team (in full seasons) be capped maxed out, that should be the question on the table?

How does that team become a competitor if they can't add top players or improve their talent level and are considered to have among the weakest prospect systems?

 

[theIceWookie]

Well Bolland said it came down the Leafs offer and Florida offers.
&
TSN insiders Dreger/Bobby Mac reported 5-6 years at $4.95 mil was on the table at one point for Bolland and that might have gone up for final offer for Bolland in an attempt to keep him.

Had the Leafs re-signed Bolland they would be in even more cap hell then they are now. Instead of Bolland they signed (Santorelli, Winnik, Booth, & Kontiola) for $5 mil instead.

How can a perpetual bottom 10 team finishing team be capped maxed out, that should be the question on the table?

How does that team become a competitor if they can't add top players or improve their talent level and are considered to have among the weakest prospect systems?

I'm not sure how a team that finished in the playoffs one short season ago is considered a perpetual bottom ten team...

 

[Daisy Jane]

I'm not sure how a team that finished in the playoffs one short season ago is considered a perpetual bottom ten team...

Because it doesn't count because it was the lockout shortened season and all of this other nonsense. (it only doesn't count for us, though. Chicago winning the cup totally counts, because they're Chicago).

 

[hotpaws]

I'm not sure how a team that finished in the playoffs one short season ago is considered a perpetual bottom ten team...

what would you call a team that finished bottom ten 6 of the last 7 seasons ?

 

[Mess]

I'm not sure how a team that finished in the playoffs one short season ago is considered a perpetual bottom ten team...

Leafs have been in the bottom 10 overall in 6 of the past 7 years. That is how we have players like Schenn (now JVR) Kadri, Rielly and Nylander.

What would you call 7th, 7th, 2nd, 9th, 5th & 8th last overall in the last 7 years?.

There is an exception to every rule and a 48 game season the only exception from being a bottom 10 team. Team returned to bottom 10 status again last year, and they have a $500k carryover cap hit from last year to finish 8th last. How do we know Leafs wouldn't have missed the playoffs in a full season, as last year should have taught us that collapses happen near the end.

Leafs cap management directly responsible for the outcomes because of who they invested their money in and for how much.

 

[theIceWookie]

what would you call a team that finished bottom ten 6 of the last 7 seasons ?

Not perpetual lol.

Today's english lesson.

Perpetual: occurring repeatedly; so frequent as to seem endless and uninterrupted.

Placing in the playoffs in one of the last two seasons, is not what I would call "uninterrupted".

But I know how much you and Mess and a hundred other posters can't help but preach only of criticisms and negatives and never ever look at a single positive. So continue.

 

[theIceWookie]

Leafs have been in the bottom 10 overall in 6 of the past 7 years. That is how we have players like Schenn (now JVR) Kadri, Rielly and Nylander.

What would you call 7th, 7th, 2nd, 9th, 5th & 8th last overall in the last 7 years?.

There is an exception to every rule and a 48 game season the only exception from being a bottom 10 team. Team returned to bottom 10 status again last year, and they have a $500k carryover cap hit from last year to finish 8th last. How do we know Leafs wouldn't have missed the playoffs in a full season, as last year should have taught us that collapses happen near the end.
\

By the same reason you can ask that, I can ask how we don't know the Leafs would've continued their strong play. Both outcomes are equally possible.

It's a moot point. What happened was the Leafs made the playoffs. Nothing changes that. It's the same reason that the Hawks have a Cup from that year. It counts and no matter what you say, nothing will change that.

And if I wanted to argue against you're very wrong viewpoint, the Leafs had 6 more points at 48 in the lockout season than in this past season at 48 games. Those 6 points put them out of the bottom ten this season.