Salary Cap: 2019-2020 Salary Cap Crunch

[81Leafs50]

Couldn't find an existing thread, so lets discuss how we'll fit Matthews / Marner etc in 2019/2020.

I for one don't think we'll be unloading Marleau, so thats going to add an extra level of difficulties.... However the cap SHOULD go up again...

A scenerio I wouldn't mind right now:

2019/2020

Trade: Brown/Levio/Kapanen/Carrick for picks/futures

Lets say Salary Cap goes up to 82M

Grundstrom (925K) - Tavares (11M) - Marner (7M)
Marleau (6.25M) - Matthews (10M) - Nylander (6.5M)
Johnsson (1.425M) - Kadri (4.5M) - Hyman (2.25M)
Marchment (767.5K) - Lindholm (1.2M) - Korshkov (925K)
Gauthier (675K)

Gardiner (6.5M) - Rielly (5M)
Dermott (0.863K) - Zaitsev (4.5M)
Borgman (1M) - Liljegren (895K)
Hainsey (1M)
Ozhiganov (1.2M)

Andersen (5M)
Sparks (750K)

Buyouts: 1.2M
LTIR: Horton (

TOTAL SALARY == 81M == 1M in capspace.

the current season coming up is 2018-2019. The cap for the following season 2019-2020 is expected to be at 84-85 mill. The following season after that it could be as high as 90M with Seattle joining the NHL.

I'm pretty sure that Dubas and the boys know this and that is why they are not worried about cap space or a cap crunch.

 

[4thline]

If Marleau is still playing at or near last year's levels his contract is not a problem. If he isn't he likely isn't a Leaf, and the contract is not problem

 

[Gallagbi]

I wouldn’t worry about it too much, even if the leafs Do find themselves in a pinch, there are multiple ways to get out of it. For example even if Marleau refused to waive his NTC, the Leafs could always trade the Horton contract (with some futures attached as a sweetener).

Zaitsev may even be traded by the fall, which would also alleviate the issue.

Don't think the Horton contract matters much with his LTIR situation and the fact were paying it rather than insurance will make it tough to move.

 

[Nylanderthal]

Why in the wide wide world of sports would he retire after this season?

He came to TO to attempt to win a Cup and took a 3 year deal to switch away from his last team of 20 years (that was offer 2 years). Then Leafs add JT making them even stronger and Marleau suddenly decides to leave $4.25 mil on table to retire a year early and not fulfill his contract?
+
Then Leafs magically find a trading partner to take his contract off their hands.

If this is what your hoping for to actually happen to avoid a cap crunch then good luck with that.

If he retires after July 1 2019 when he gets his $3m bonus he’ll only be owed 1.25m in salary for the upcoming 19-20 season. So for two seasons he’ll of collected 17.5m from TML. The reason for adding the third year was to get the cap hit down from the 8-9m range to 6.25

 

[Nylanderthal]

Wrong he retires after his bonus on July 1st and forfeits 1.25m of a 18.75 contract. So 17.5 million for two years of play. 8.75m per year. That is why he came here.

You beat me to it

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

The NMC clause protected him from being sent down in case he really stunk it up. I believe the handshake agreement that had him agree to not be a Leaf in year 3 was made before he even signed. Why else would anyone structure a contract that way?
I thought everyone knew this.

Because he a plus 35 signing, his cap hit is still in effect. Yes if did retire, the Leafs could trade his contract to a cap deficient team. But really 2019/20 is his last chance of winning a Cup, no logical reason he would be retire.
Only Leaf fanatics truly believe they can rid themselves of Marleau NMC contract, but everyone know this.
Leafs have giving top loaded contracts to a number of players.

 

[diceman934]

Because he a plus 35 signing, his cap hit is still in effect. Yes if did retire, the Leafs could trade his contract to a cap deficient team. But really 2019/20 is his last chance of winning a Cup, no logical reason he would be retire.
Only Leaf fanatics truly believe they can rid themselves of Marleau NMC contract, but everyone know this.
Leafs have giving top loaded contracts to a number of players.

Leaf fanatics....what a joke.

If he was planing to play the last year his contract would have been structured different. He signed this contract after age 35 and unlike players who sign similar contacts it is used to make them buyout proof with most of the money in bonus money which can not be bought out.

All contracts signed when a player is 35 or older are buy out proof as they are not allowed to do so under the CBA.

I logically can not see him play the last year for 1.25 after getting 17.50 million the two years before. Calling people who do not share your opinion a name explains all I need to know about you.

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

Leaf fanatics....what a joke.

If he was planing to play the last year his contract would have been structured different. He signed this contract after age 35 and unlike players who sign similar contacts it is used to make them buyout proof with most of the money in bonus money which can not be bought out.

All contracts signed when a player is 35 or older are buy out proof as they are not allowed to do so under the CBA.

I logically can not see him play the last year for 1.25 after getting 17.50 million the two years before. Calling people who do not share your opinion a name explains all I need to know about you.

There are lots of players who players who get front loaded contracts, but they don't quit the sport just because they have most of their money. But Leafs fans who want cap space in 2019 think Marleau is different. How can you say that if was planning to play the last year his contract would have been structured different? There certainly isn't anymore proof of that.
Just about all pro athletes want to stay in the sport as long as they can, because they want to. Retirement is going to long time. If Marleau has any chance of winning a Cup in 2019/20 he will stay a Leaf even for just 1.25m and try to retire a champ. Marleau's contract was structured so if he wanted to retire after two years, he would have his money and the Leafs could trade his cap hit easily.
Hey, I have nothing against fanatics, it's would keeps sports alive. But c'mon lets look at Marleau' contract realistically for what it. I know Leafs fan would love to have that 6.25m in cap space, but it ain't happening. Let's have this discussion in October 2019.
Maybe Tavares sits out this season, since he already has been paid 10m upfront money and why play those 82 regular season games and hopefully 16 games for 1 m.

 

[diceman934]

There are lots of players who players who get front loaded contracts, but they don't quit the sport just because they have most of their money. But Leafs fans who want cap space in 2019 think Marleau is different. How can you say that if was planning to play the last year his contract would have been structured different? There certainly isn't anymore proof of that.
Just about all pro athletes want to stay in the sport as long as they can, because they want to. Retirement is going to long time. If Marleau has any chance of winning a Cup in 2019/20 he will stay a Leaf even for just 1.25m and try to retire a champ. Marleau's contract was structured so if he wanted to retire after two years, he would have his money and the Leafs could trade his cap hit easily.
Hey, I have nothing against fanatics, it's would keeps sports alive. But c'mon lets look at Marleau' contract realistically for what it. I know Leafs fan would love to have that 6.25m in cap space, but it ain't happening. Let's have this discussion in October 2019.
Maybe Tavares sits out this season, since he already has been paid 10m upfront money and why play those 82 regular season games and hopefully 16 games for 1 m.

I have looked at his contract for what it is logically, it is you that seems to struggle with his contract realistically is. It is a two year deal with a 3rd meanness year added on to reduce the cap hit and the average.

The fact that you call people names is no surprise as that is what individuals who. Present weak arguments do.

Time will tell who is right but to me it is pure logic to see just what this deal was and you calling me or others names does not change a thing.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Gardiner (6.5M)

expensive

 

[HamiltonNHL]

I think we are going to need to give up an asset to move Zaitsev.

he's a right D and not going anywhere.
plus let's hope we get a bounce back year from him. it's not easy playing with gardiner

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

I have looked at his contract for what it is logically, it is you that seems to struggle with his contract realistically is. It is a two year deal with a 3rd meanness year added on to reduce the cap hit and the average.

The fact that you call people names is no surprise as that is what individuals who. Present weak arguments do.

Time will tell who is right but to me it is pure logic to see just what this deal was and you calling me or others names does not change a thing.

Sorry the cap hit does not decrease in the third year. The actual pay does, but not the cap. Your argument is just not factual. Look at all aspects of the contract. The NMC, the plus 35 signing, and the fact that all NHL contracts when. signed have an equal cap hit throughout length of the cap regardless of signing bonuses and front loading.

No, I didn't call "people names". But when folks are factually wrong about the contract, they should be corrected. Not for to be rude or anything, but so they can appreciate the cap/pay implications of Marleau's contract.

But if folks don't want to look at the facts and go a tangent.....if calling them FANatics...if that is name calling..so be it.
Yea, Leafs fans who think Marleau's cap just disappear in the third year because they want cap space. yep that's being a FANatic by any definition. Not that being a fanatic is bad, just look at the definition.

 

[White Shadow]

Sorry the cap hit does not decrease in the third year. The actual pay does, but not the cap. Your argument is just not factual. Look at all aspects of the contract. The NMC, the plus 35 signing, and the fact that all NHL contracts when. signed have an equal cap hit throughout length of the cap regardless of signing bonuses and front loading.

No, I didn't call "people names". But when folks are factually wrong about the contract, they should be corrected. Not for to be rude or anything, but so they can appreciate the cap/pay implications of Marleau's contract.

But if folks don't want to look at the facts and go a tangent.....if calling them FANatics...if that is name calling..so be it.
Yea, Leafs fans who think Marleau's cap just disappear in the third year because they want cap space. yep that's being a FANatic by any definition. Not that being a fanatic is bad, just look at the definition.

1. Who said anything about retirement? Certainly not me.
2. No one with half a brain thinks his cap changes in year 3. That's not how the cap works. I think maybe you believe all Leaf fans are slightly stupid.

The Leafs added a third year to his contract when everyone else was offering 2 years. The upside of this for Marleau was the extra 5 - 6 million, a not insignificant amount. The bonus for the Leafs was that it lowered the cap hit across the board.

Since you can't quite visualize how it works, I will give you an example.

Lou: We can offer you $19M over 3 years
Marleau: Great! That's $6M more than anyone else
Lou: The catch is we only want you for 2 years so July 1 entering year 3 you will be traded
Marleau: Can i have some protection at least?
Lou: Sure. We'll give you a NMC for the purposes of the AHL but we will most likely be trading you to a team like Arizona which can barely reach the cap floor. You good?
Marleau: I'm good

Lou to Pridham: Set this guy up with a front loaded contract. I want to make him extremely valuable to a cash poor franchise in the summer of 2019.
Pridham: Done!

 

[diceman934]

Sorry the cap hit does not decrease in the third year. The actual pay does, but not the cap. Your argument is just not factual. Look at all aspects of the contract. The NMC, the plus 35 signing, and the fact that all NHL contracts when. signed have an equal cap hit throughout length of the cap regardless of signing bonuses and front loading.

No, I didn't call "people names". But when folks are factually wrong about the contract, they should be corrected. Not for to be rude or anything, but so they can appreciate the cap/pay implications of Marleau's contract.

But if folks don't want to look at the facts and go a tangent.....if calling them FANatics...if that is name calling..so be it.
Yea, Leafs fans who think Marleau's cap just disappear in the third year because they want cap space. yep that's being a FANatic by any definition. Not that being a fanatic is bad, just look at the definition.

Duh...are you for real. Most if not all know how a players cap hit works on here.

Stop calling people who disagree with you names as it is simply a fact that people use when faced with opposing opinions.

I believe I am correct in what will happen. Time will prove me right I believe. If not I will admit I was wrong. Doubt that you will do the same. Not going to respond further as there is literally no point.

 

[Mess]

Since you can't quite visualize how it works, I will give you an example.

Lou: We can offer you $19M over 3 years
Marleau: Great! That's $6M more than anyone else
Lou: The catch is we only want you for 2 years so July 1 entering year 3 you will be traded
Marleau: Can i have some protection at least?
Lou: Sure. We'll give you a NMC for the purposes of the AHL but we will most likely be trading you to a team like Arizona which can barely reach the cap floor. You good?
Marleau: I'm good

Lou to Pridham: Set this guy up with a front loaded contract. I want to make him extremely valuable to a cash poor franchise in the summer of 2019.
Pridham: Done!

As factious, tongue in cheek this is intended, it is exactly what some believe is realistically going to happen to solve our Cap problems next year, because that is what they're arguing in the thread.

Of course Leafs don't have Cap issues if this is how fictitiously and easily they can be solved.

 

[BillyD]

Couldn't find an existing thread, so lets discuss how we'll fit Matthews / Marner etc in 2019/2020.

I for one don't think we'll be unloading Marleau, so thats going to add an extra level of difficulties.... However the cap SHOULD go up again...

A scenerio I wouldn't mind right now:

2019/2020

Trade: Brown/Levio/Kapanen/Carrick for picks/futures

Lets say Salary Cap goes up to 82M

Grundstrom (925K) - Tavares (11M) - Marner (7M)
Marleau (6.25M) - Matthews (10M) - Nylander (6.5M)
Johnsson (1.425M) - Kadri (4.5M) - Hyman (2.25M)
Marchment (767.5K) - Lindholm (1.2M) - Korshkov (925K)
Gauthier (675K)

Gardiner (6.5M) - Rielly (5M)
Dermott (0.863K) - Zaitsev (4.5M)
Borgman (1M) - Liljegren (895K)
Hainsey (1M)
Ozhiganov (1.2M)

Andersen (5M)
Sparks (750K)

Buyouts: 1.2M
LTIR: Horton (

TOTAL SALARY == 81M == 1M in capspace.

at the time we signed Marleau, Lou said his contract was purposefully front loaded to make him movable in his third year, after his July 2019 bonus he's only owed 1.2M, no NTC, NMC ... it will be too tempting not to move his 6.25M cap hit to a team seeking to reach the cap floor, he should even net a decent return ... Marleau is a goner next summer, just like Pridham planed it at the time of the signing

 

[4thline]

Since you can't quite visualize how it works, I will give you an example.

Lou: We can offer you $19M over 3 years
Marleau: Great! That's $6M more than anyone else
Lou: The catch is we only want you for 2 years so July 1 entering year 3 you will be traded
Marleau: Can i have some protection at least?
Lou: Sure. We'll give you a NMC for the purposes of the AHL but we will most likely be trading you to a team like Arizona which can barely reach the cap floor. You good?
Marleau: I'm good

Lou to Pridham: Set this guy up with a front loaded contract. I want to make him extremely valuable to a cash poor franchise in the summer of 2019.
Pridham: Done!

Lou: We can offer you $19M over 3 years
Marleau: Great! That's $6M more than anyone else
Lou: The catch is that at your age and our likely cap structure at that time, any major decline in your play could make that contract a burden, we'd like to structure it so that it can be easily moved should we mutually agree that it is the best option for both of us.
Marleau: Can i have some protection at least? I understand where you're coming from, but I have a family to look out for and a legacy to protect. I'm coming here for a cup and I don't want to be discarded for your convenience when I can still contribute.
Lou: Sure. We'll give you a NMC. Nothing can happen without your agreement. We're not going to force you out, but we think it is prudent to have a contingency plan. You good?
Marleau: I'm good

The guys got an NMC, full-stop. Do you really think that if he has 20/20+ season, shows no sign of physical decline, and we lose in 7 in the conference finals he's waiving to go to a cash poor team?

 

[White Shadow]

Lou: We can offer you $19M over 3 years
Marleau: Great! That's $6M more than anyone else
Lou: The catch is that at your age and our likely cap structure at that time, any major decline in your play could make that contract a burden, we'd like to structure it so that it can be easily moved should we mutually agree that it is the best option for both of us.
Marleau: Can i have some protection at least? I understand where you're coming from, but I have a family to look out for and a legacy to protect. I'm coming here for a cup and I don't want to be discarded for your convenience when I can still contribute.
Lou: Sure. We'll give you a NMC. Nothing can happen without your agreement. We're not going to force you out, but we think it is prudent to have a contingency plan. You good?
Marleau: I'm good

The guys got an NMC, full-stop. Do you really think that if he has 20/20+ season, shows no sign of physical decline, and we lose in 7 in the conference finals he's waiving to go to a cash poor team?

I think the option lies with the Leafs as pointed out in my example. That was agreed upon in the original offer.

 

[4thline]

I think the option lies with the Leafs as pointed out in my example. That was agreed upon in the original offer.

A full NMC says it doesn't.

 

[White Shadow]

A full NMC says it doesn't.

You keep missing it.

Lou: We will give you a full NMC so you can be confident you won't be riding the bus in the AHL. But don't think for one second that it protects you from being traded. We will trade you.

 

[4thline]

You keep missing it.

Lou: We will give you a full NMC so you can be confident you won't be riding the bus in the AHL. But don't think for one second that it protects you from being traded. We will trade you.

It does exactly that. Marleau cannot be traded without giving his approval. His contract is buyout proof, and if they try to bully him he can just retire and lock in the cap hit. He holds the cards, the Leafs gave him the cards.

It's one thing to assume a handshake that gets rid of him if his game falls off/ they win the cup/ both. It's another to think that a guy like that in search of his 1st cup that can still contribute signing off on being shipped out like a goodwill donation to a low budget team with no hope of anything. Maybe a deal back to SJ or another contender, but they're going to have to send salary back most likely

 

[White Shadow]

It does exactly that. Marleau cannot be traded without giving his approval.

I'm not sure why you keep missing this.

Everyone understands what a NMC is.

You're assuming that everything in Marleau's contract is transparent ad agreed upon by both player and club. I am saying the opposite. There was a handshake agreement made PRIOR to signing and incumbent upon signing.

It's fine to disagree, but ask yourself this...is Lou known for being 100% transparent? I would submit Lou's best known for his contract shenanigans and that is exactly what I assume we're going to see with Marleau.

I.E. Marleau gave his approval upon signing

 

[4thline]

I'm not sure why you keep missing this.

Everyone understands what a NMC is.

You're assuming that everything in Marleau's contract is transparent ad agreed upon by both player and club. I am saying the opposite. There was a handshake agreement made PRIOR to signing and incumbent upon signing.

It's fine to disagree, but ask yourself this...is Lou known for being 100% transparent? I would submit Lou's best known for his contract shenanigans and that is exactly what I assume we're going to see with Marleau.

I.E. Marleau gave his approval upon signing

If Marleau provided a secret written waiver of the clause for 2019 that the Leafs are sitting on (not even sure if that's binding or legal under the CBA- else why to players have changes to there NTC's/NMC's in different years of contracts), sure good plan.

But sitting on a handshake while the other party has a contractually binding clause would be unbelievably stupid, and if he did it I'm glad Lou' sgone

 

[White Shadow]

If Marleau provided a secret written waiver of the clause for 2019 that the Leafs are sitting on (not even sure if that's binding or legal under the CBA- else why to players have changes to there NTC's/NMC's in different years of contracts), sure good plan.

But sitting on a handshake while the other party has a contractually binding clause would be unbelievably stupid, and if he did it I'm glad Lou' sgone

I think you're falling on the naive side of most fans if you think there are no undeclared binding agreements between both parties.

 

[colchar]

shouldn't we wait until 2019 to see what the cap is before we think there is a crunch?

But all the internet experts say they are screwed............and they're never wrong are they?