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

[knorthern knight]

On the HF business forum, there's a thread about an extra $5 million present for each team...

NHL commissioner Gary Bettman made sure his owners would enjoy their summer this year.

Thanks to another run of prosperity after the NHL settled its labour problems 18 months ago, Bettman was able to tell the owners there will be a little extra in their piggy banks for the coming season. Each of the 30 teams will get an unexpected $5-million (all currency U.S.) thanks to the success of the league’s Stadium Series and the first payment by Rogers Communications Inc., on its $5.2-billion, 12-year broadcast deal. That is a total of $150-million in cheques mailed out this summer.

This will show up as $2.5 million in next season's cap. This is in addition to any other growth in HRR. So, hopefully, next year we won't be that close to the line.

 

[Faltorvo]

Let's not pretend that they didn't lose a significant cog from their offense last season. TB will go as far as Bishop will take em. They're actually in a similar situation as the Leafs are, with less depth, but a better superstar.

lose?

looks to me like they hold their own with Cali instead of stloo.

 

[Funk21]

On the HF business forum, there's a thread about an extra $5 million present for each team...


This will show up as $2.5 million in next season's cap. This is in addition to any other growth in HRR. So, hopefully, next year we won't be that close to the line.

If you look at the projections for the cap we are already a few years ahead of the totals that the globe and mail printed a short while back.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...lary-cap-could-hit-90-million/article7029575/

Add the TV deal plus other hockey revenue and the cap will very likely be going up a minimum of 5 million. I read/heard the NHL revue would facilitate a cap growth of about 8% per annum which is in line with a cap of approx 74 million. I certainly hope it does because if Ben Bishop got close to 6 million the TML are gonna be in tuff with Bernier's deal.

 

[Faltorvo]

On the HF business forum, there's a thread about an extra $5 million present for each team...


This will show up as $2.5 million in next season's cap. This is in addition to any other growth in HRR. So, hopefully, next year we won't be that close to the line.

don't hold your breath on that 75 million dollar figure

the last time bettmen let the media run away with projections it was 2.1 million in cap space lower.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

They finished 3rd in the east and they had this kid named Stamkos only play 37 games.

They have this kid on defence named Hedman who is gaining Norris recognition and some rook coming up named Druin and another named Palat.

Hrmm I wonder folks, what would the talk be around here if we had finished 3rd in the east with only 37 games of Kessel, a rook season like Palat just had, 23 year old hedman coming off a break out season and Druin still due to hit this roster.

Me thinks we would calling ourselves cup contenders.

Let's not pretend that they didn't lose a significant cog from their offense last season. TB will go as far as Bishop will take em. They're actually in a similar situation as the Leafs are, with less depth, but a better superstar.

Well, if we are talking about the future, I'm not sure how similar the situations are in one important aspect. Tampa's prospects are better than ours. They seem to rank around 4/5th best overall (based on whatever evaluations are out there), whereas Leafs more like 20th.

Buffalo, Islanders and Anaheim seem to be at the top of evaluators' lists. Plus, Buffalo has three first rounders in the 2015 summer draft.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

LMAO!

So you arbitrarily add a dollar amount limit for some unknown reason (in addition to your wild assertion that 3 years is long term, something which you have not backed up with reasoning at all) that takes off 2 LA players so that you can try and hide the fact that THERE ARE THE EXACT SAME NUMBER OF PLAYERS ON BOTH TEAMS, 9. You can't just make up arbitrary classifications to make sure King and Greene don't count, lol.

On top of that, why are you automatically assuming that our 2 RFAs and one UFA (who we have signed to multiple consecutive 1-year contracts) will sign long-term contracts (that fit inside your wacky criteria), yet you continuously fail to mention that LA has 6 RFAs next year. Why are they not signing all of them (and one UFA) to long-term contracts, like we apparently are?

I would disagree that LA is better positioned because of their "long-term contracts". I would say that they are better positioned because of their playoff experience and complimentary players, not these wacky assertions which you continuously fail to back up in any transparent way.

It's all here.

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

Your claim of Leafs not being in a cap crunch is a bad opinion, as I have illustrated in the post. They have less cap space then a great team as in LA. Toronto has 15.497M to sign 9 players that include Bernier, Kadri, and Franson. Want to address how they are going to do this?

The facts are laid out here under 2015-2016 Leafs Salary Chart: http://www.capgeek.com/mapleleafs/

Also explain to me how a 3 year multi year contract would not impact a run at Stamkos if he makes it to UFA status, this is a wild assertion? Seems plenty long to me.

I am willing to have a discussion with you, but only if you address the points we are discussing.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

They finished 3rd in the east and they had this kid named Stamkos only play 37 games.

They have this kid on defence named Hedman who is gaining Norris recognition and some rook coming up named Druin and another named Palat.

Hrmm I wonder folks, what would the talk be around here if we had finished 3rd in the east with only 37 games of Kessel, a rook season like Palat just had, 23 year old hedman coming off a break out season and Druin still due to hit this roster.

Me thinks we would calling ourselves cup contenders.

I agree that Tampa needs to be considered a legitimate contender in the East and isn't getting enough credit.

The poster who said Toronto has better depth couldn't be more wrong.

TB's biggest problem in the playoffs was their D corps. Take away old man Salo and replace him with good 2nd pairing Dman in Garrison + Stralman. Also Hedman + Gudas who are key cogs will be one year older in their development.

In the forward group enter Brian Boyle into their bottom 6. Recent 6th overall pick should be done his AHL appretinceship and start making an impact with the NHL club. Drouin probably makes the teams in a depth role because he has nothing more to learn in juniors.

Johnson, Palat, Kucherov, Killorn all started making their impacts felt last year and are between 22-24 well being signed to high upside deals for the next two years.

 

[seanlinden]

There's one thing very important to realize when we hear rumours of a $75m cap -- that's the cap for everyone.

If it is in fact $75m, Kadri & Bernier may cost us $6m+, each. Getting that #2 defenceman we've been looking for would certainly cost that as well.

 

[Northern Dancer]

There's one thing very important to realize when we hear rumours of a $75m cap -- that's the cap for everyone.

If it is in fact $75m, Kadri & Bernier may cost us $6m+, each. Getting that #2 defenceman we've been looking for would certainly cost that as well.

Phaneuf's and Kessel's contracts are looking better every day.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

There's one thing very important to realize when we hear rumours of a $75m cap -- that's the cap for everyone.

If it is in fact $75m, Kadri & Bernier may cost us $6m+, each. Getting that #2 defenceman we've been looking for would certainly cost that as well.

There are no guarantees the Cap will get that high, look at this year, it was projected to be 71M. If it does get that high, which I doubt, it will just inflate what Kadri, Bernier, and Franson will ask for.

It is a fact Leafs will have 9 players to sign with just over 15M in cap to work with next summer.

If this isn't a Cap crunch, I don't think people are being realistic. Sellling off players has proven expensive, we took back 200K for a good player and cap hit like Gunnar. Retaining salary is counterproductive to the cap also. I don't think people have thought this out.

Either scenario is not good.

 

[Funk21]

We are tight against the cap there is no other way to describe our situation but the projection of 8% growth is not outrageous. Were the projection a little high yes, and they were certainly higher than an 8% revenue growth so I'm fine with that going forward. If we use that number the cap goes up to 74 and change. Kadri will not get 6, Bernier on the other hand I can see the leafs brass wanting to lock up long term so 6 million per for a long term contract would be okay in my books.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

It's not hard to understand someone questioning what have these guys done to earn these huge paydays.

Actually it is. The only thing they had to do to earn those big paydays are be the players that they already are.

That is their current market worth. Either you pay that amount or you let them walk, and letting players walk is how you set franchises back years.

And then as time goes on, those "huge paydays" get smaller and smaller and you laugh at how stupid you would have been to let them walk for meaningless nickels and dimes that don't carry over.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

overall it's hard to see this team being quite good enough to contend down the line unless we tank, deal off assets for futures or just get lucky somehow and ideally a combination of all three. Like you've been saying for some time now - we need to be willing to take a step or two back in order to step forward later.

*Jeopardy music plays*

I'll take "things people said about LA, Chicago, Boston, etc. before their cup win, sometimes as close to the win as mid-season or mid-playoffs" for $500.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Seems like the cart before the horse in Toronto.

Toews and Kane win Chicago 2 X Stanley Cups and then get paid for past success, but they made the Hawks a lot of money and they are proven winners. The Hawks will have a much tougher time winning another Cup with the contracts of these star players now due to the talent level of the rest of the team surrounding them now being less with less cap room for the support players.

In Toronto its reversed as Kessel and Phaneuf are getting paid among the elite by position but the team hasn't gone anywhere

It's not the cart before the horse. It's the "you pay your star players when they come due and don't lose them for nothing for no reason" plan, a plan which every single team in the league follows.

Yay. Chicago got to win before their big contracts came due. Lucky them. How does that apply to us? Can we just tell our players to reverse aging for a few years so that we can pay them ELC money and get lucky?

No. You do what you have to do when it comes time. Does it mean we have a worse chance than the 1 year of prime Chicago in 2010, who had stars on ELCs and essentially every contract under the moon coming due the next summer? Yeah, probably. But so do 29 other teams, including current Chicago. And there is absolutely nothing that can be done about it. It's not a strategy to emulate because it's just dumb luck with timing.

For all we know, Rielly and Nylander are our Toews and Kane that we will be paying big money after the cup win, and the players we just signed will be the (more valuable now that they are signed) trading pieces that we will utilize to finish this team. Either way, it's better to have them signed at this price than signed for that price or more with another team we are competing against. It gives us options instead of other teams options.

You want to know what the difference is between locking up stars before a cup win and after a cup win? 8 million vs. 10.5 million.

Heck, you already have Subban getting paid 2 million more than Phaneuf and his team's won jack too.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Leafs now by paying Kessel and Phaneuf market value and among the highest by position missed their window when they were making less. Now they use more Cap and less room for the rest of the team which makes Leafs odds and chances less for success based on weakening their depth/support players surrounding them.

This may be true if there was an endless supply of Crosbys in the back room that you could just take and plop on your team if you have 8.7 mil in cap space.

In that world, yes, over the next year or two, we would be at a slight disadvantage as contracts catch up to the new market (which is already happening - and then some). Then in a couple years, we would be at an advantage again as new contracts are signed, opening up a new window of opportunity. A cycle that every team experiences.

Except we live in a world where moves are limited and it takes two different parties to change/add personnel. Unless we lose out on a beneficial move because of it, their cap hits give no disadvantage because it's just filling in empty cap space that would be wasted anyway.

There has been zero indication of any moves being affected by cap space this summer.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Your claim of Leafs not being in a cap crunch is a bad opinion, as I have illustrated in the post. They have less cap space then a great team as in LA. Toronto has 15.497M to sign 9 players that include Bernier, Kadri, and Franson. Want to address how they are going to do this?

Easily, as I mentioned earlier and you ignored. A shortened explanation would be:

5 mil cap increase. Now have over 20 mil.
Kadri and Bernier signed. Highly doubt more than 10 mil combined, even with amazing years from both.
Franson let walk because he is a liability.
We now have a 4th line, 13th forward, #6 and #7 D to sign with 10 million.
Some are filled in with prospects that make the team either this year or next year.
Others are filled in with the cheap contracts that are found every year in UFA.

We could even manage with a static cap, and this is assuming no trades or anything happening between now and then.

You keep saying that LA is in this awesome spot because they have 1 million more cap space next year, but you also fail to mention that they need to sign 11 players, many of which are getting their 2nd contracts after ELC, an often notable jump. And then they have Kopitar the year after next.

How exactly are they in a better position? They have essentially the same cap space, but 2 more players to sign, and more drastic increases to come.

Also explain to me how a 3 year multi year contract would not impact a run at Stamkos if he makes it to UFA status, this is a wild assertion? Seems plenty long to me.

Because no contract will ever be a barrier if, by some miniscule chance, Stamkos actually wants to come to Toronto.

 

[Gary Nylund]

*Jeopardy music plays*

I'll take "things people said about LA, Chicago, Boston, etc. before their cup win, sometimes as close to the win as mid-season or mid-playoffs" for $500.

I believe I've heard this optimistic stuff somewhere before.

*Jeopardy music plays*

I'll take "things Delicious Dangles said on March 9 2013".

"I think people are taking this the wrong way.

Defensive systems CAN be tightened. It is the main change we see from regular season to playoffs. Tighter defensive games, and less PPs. We have seen this year after year, even from teams where that is not their strong suit.

Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that a team that is already elite in offense and goaltending will improve MORE than other teams if defensive systems tightening are the main changes, since that is the area that is dragging them down. Other teams may have other areas that drag them down, which don't change as much from regular season to playoffs, so they won't get as big of a boost.

Basically, our offense and goaltending are so good, if our defense catches up or the style of games changes to a more defensive style like in the playoffs, watch out. The physicality of the playoffs will also probably play to our favour.

I think there is some truth to it. Our defensive personnel are pretty young, so I wouldn't expect the world, but expecting improvements in that area is definitely not unreasonable."

*Jeopardy music plays again*

I'll take "things Delicious Dangles said on March 10 2013".

"This is untrue. If you want to look at it like "bell curving" the defense, then weaker defensive teams DO get more of an advantage.

If theoretically you get 20% on a test, and that test is bell-curved so that you end up with a 60%, you have gotten a increase of 40% (which is actually a 200% increase from the original). If you get an 80% on the test, and the bell curve pushes you up to 90%, you have gotten an increase of 10% (increase of ~13% from the original). There is still that 30% gap between the two, but that gap is smaller than it would have been otherwise.

There are not infinite increases to defense that can be made. The better defense you have, the less the return is on increases.

If you can now make up that gap, and then some, in other areas (offense, goaltending), which you are already elite at, you come out ahead in the final grades."

*************************************

The above were 2 posts you made some thread titled "Watch how the Leafs tighten things up come playoff time...." which was closed as it became clear the playoffs were not in our future. According to you, we were about to tighten up defensively and because we were so bad defensively, our improvement was going to huge. How did that turn out?

You're an optimist, I get that and there's nothing wrong with that. But comparing us to teams like LA, Chicago and Boston is ridiculous. It was ridiculous when you were doing it last spring, and it's possibly more ridiculous now. Thanks for that bell curve post though, that might be my all-time favorite post here.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Actually it is. The only thing they had to do to earn those big paydays are be the players that they already are.

That is their current market worth. Either you pay that amount or you let them walk, and letting players walk is how you set franchises back years.

And then as time goes on, those "huge paydays" get smaller and smaller and you laugh at how stupid you would have been to let them walk for meaningless nickels and dimes that don't carry over.

Oh I agree, you pay people or lose them. It's understandable though for fans to be somewhat grumpy when we are up against the cap year after year and play worse than teams who spend less. And then of course there is the Clarkson contract, or are you going to defend that as a smart move?

It's not the cart before the horse. It's the "you pay your star players when they come due and don't lose them for nothing for no reason" plan, a plan which every single team in the league follows.

Yay. Chicago got to win before their big contracts came due. Lucky them. How does that apply to us? Can we just tell our players to reverse aging for a few years so that we can pay them ELC money and get lucky?

No. You do what you have to do when it comes time. Does it mean we have a worse chance than the 1 year of prime Chicago in 2010, who had stars on ELCs and essentially every contract under the moon coming due the next summer? Yeah, probably. But so do 29 other teams, including current Chicago. And there is absolutely nothing that can be done about it. It's not a strategy to emulate because it's just dumb luck with timing.

For all we know, Rielly and Nylander are our Toews and Kane that we will be paying big money after the cup win, and the players we just signed will be the (more valuable now that they are signed) trading pieces that we will utilize to finish this team. Either way, it's better to have them signed at this price than signed for that price or more with another team we are competing against. It gives us options instead of other teams options.

You want to know what the difference is between locking up stars before a cup win and after a cup win? 8 million vs. 10.5 million.

Heck, you already have Subban getting paid 2 million more than Phaneuf and his team's won jack too.

Well put. I couldn't agree more.

 

[calcal798]

Phaneuf's and Kessel's contracts are looking better every day.

What about Gardiners, Bozaks and JvRs?

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Just so people know Stamkos isn't a UFA till 2 full seasons from now after the 15-16 season.

Next off-season it's slim pickings in the UFA market already so where would we wisely spend a surplus of cap money if we had it? No decent players are taking a discount to play in Toronto like they will on contending teams.

A lot will change between now and two off-seasons from now. Just over 24 months ago we had no Rielly, no JVR, no Bernier and Kadri hadn't proven anything. But we did have Connolly, Komisraek, Grabo, Liles, Kulemin, CMac off the top of my head.

The cap will go up.

Some guys like Rielly, Gardiner, Nylander, Percy, Leivo, Gauthier wil start making the team and-or taking on more prominent roles.

Everyone and there dog know the Leafs won't be legitimate contender in 15-16.

If a lot of things go right this team could start to look like a legitimate contender in 16-17.

 

[Faltorvo]

What a delicious post by the dangles ahahahahahaha

I'll start with the premise that the cap goes up 4.5m, leaving us a nice round $20 million to spend.

Off the top $10 million of that goes to Berneir and Kadri.

Leaving us with $10 million and 7 guys to ink with a 1.4m average avv

Now this is where it gets fun, DD says ,ah just let franson walk

and, ehhhhhhh 7--- 1.4m scrubs added to the roster, no big deal

any team,EVERY team manages to fit under the cap, that has never been a great accomplishment. Maybe that's what DD thinks this whole "cap crunch" debate is about


The core of the debate is "what kind of team are you managing to ice" fitting under the cap.

Considering where i believe we will end up this year standings wise, having to let franson walk and having to add,,,, 7---1.4m scrubs screams cap crunched to me

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Easily, as I mentioned earlier and you ignored. A shortened explanation would be:

5 mil cap increase. Now have over 20 mil.
Kadri and Bernier signed. Highly doubt more than 10 mil combined, even with amazing years from both.
Franson let walk because he is a liability.
We now have a 4th line, 13th forward, #6 and #7 D to sign with 10 million.
Some are filled in with prospects that make the team either this year or next year.
Others are filled in with the cheap contracts that are found every year in UFA.

We could even manage with a static cap, and this is assuming no trades or anything happening between now and then.

You keep saying that LA is in this awesome spot because they have 1 million more cap space next year, but you also fail to mention that they need to sign 11 players, many of which are getting their 2nd contracts after ELC, an often notable jump. And then they have Kopitar the year after next.

How exactly are they in a better position? They have essentially the same cap space, but 2 more players to sign, and more drastic increases to come.


Because no contract will ever be a barrier if, by some miniscule chance, Stamkos actually wants to come to Toronto.

I'd rather deal in absolutes than speculate on what if's, we have just over 15 Million to sign 9 players by next summer. This is a fact, not sure how or why you think the cap will go up to 74M next summer.

The reality is it will take roughly 10M to sign Bernier and Kadri. This will leave us with 5M to sign 7 players including Franson. This is a cap crunch anyway you look at it. Moves will have to be made this is for certain.

As for having money to pursue Stamkos if he decides to go UFA 2016, unless there are more moves made, there is no money to take a run for him. This again is dealing with absolutes, not what ifs, or if the cap goes up 5M. Even then it would not be enough. This team is bloated with tied up money moving fwd for 3 years at least. This is a perfect illustration of tying up money on mediocrities, we are not LA or CHI but have less money to work with, this is my point.

This is where we differ, you may think this team is Stanley Cup bound, when you say LA or CHI did the same thing we did. However, I don't see any evidence this core is as good as either of these teams. Thus locking up so many mediocrities is a fundamental difference.

 

[Mess]

Leafs have been among the least successful teams in a Salary Cap era as they simply haven't figured out that strong drafting and developing is the key to success.

Spending harder instead of smarter the root of their downfall.

Hopefully Shanahan and Dubas can change Leafs fortune and understand the importance of the draft. Firing Loiselle the former capologist and trying to get a handle on spending a good first step as Leafs seemed to give out only short-term stop gap contracts for the most part since Shanny arrival.










.

 

[Pholus]

As for having money to pursue Stamkos if he decides to go UFA 2016, unless there are more moves made, there is no money to take a run for him. This again is dealing with absolutes, not what ifs, or if the cap goes up 5M. Even then it would not be enough. This team is bloated with tied up money moving fwd for 3 years at least. This is a perfect illustration of tying up money on mediocrities, we are not LA or CHI but have less money to work with, this is my point.

I see nothing absolute about the first bolded point. If you are allowed to make the assumption that Stamkos might be interested in signing here, why can't the people arguing with you make the assumption that cap space can be created to sign him?

 

[SnazzyNazzy]

That Claude Loiselle guy was pretty terrible at his job. How does he sleep at night after leaving this team in such a mess.