Salary Cap: 2019-2020 Salary Cap Crunch

[stickty111]

If people stopped and did and Bang for Salary Cap Buck analysis for a minute for Cup contenders they would see our Leafs ship heading straight into Cap Hell and the perfect storm once the 3 Amigo's contracts are all signed.

Compare Leafs top 3 most expensive player contracts to their direct competition of TB, Bos, Pitt, WAS etc and you will quickly see what I mean.

Leafs fans just see the bazillion points the Leaf players are expected to score and believe all is well.. The problem is other top teams also have players scoring tons of points and ending up in the top 20 scorers but the key point being that its costing them far less Cap hit to do so in the process.

I agree Tampa Bay is in huge trouble

 

[Liminality]

It doesn't matter what kind of excuses people come up with for trying to wash away actual cap hits as all teams still every year compete for the same Stanley Cup and they do so under the same Salary Cap ceiling of $79.5 mil this year.

The Yeah but defense (fill in the blank) doesn't help the Leafs situation in the present any, it actually hurts them because in fact they're overpaying their own players comparables vs better signed earlier contracts to get the similar production (best case scenario). As you wisely and rightfully pointed out that earlier contracts keep getting better and better for teams as CH% decreases with the rising annual Cap ceiling. It might help explain Leafs contract numbers and how the Leafs arrived at them, but it doesn't address team competitiveness/depth disadvantage it has created for the Leafs vs their opposition/contracts and cap spending.

It doesn't matter how one spins it Tavares cost the Leafs $11 mil against $79.5 max cap, whereas it costs OV @$9.5 mil or Malkin @ $9.5 mil or Crosby @$8.7 mil or Kucherov @ $9.5 mil etc etc. Just because the Leafs are paying JT the 2nd highest AAV doesn't mean they're also getting the 2nd highest scoring player for CH% invested in him simply because he signed his deal last. The opposite is true LIWO (last in worst out).

The Stanley Cup is not decided adjusting for better tax bracket markets, or earlier signed contracts be they UFA or RFA etc, as its always simply the actual AAV/player deducted free cap space remaining for all to ice a Cup competitive team.. But it becomes huge competitive advantages to Leafs opposition nonetheless because its the same hard cap ceiling for all. Level playing surface Team Cap spending wise BUT heavily screwed competitiveness advantage wise based on timing of signings and location of team and bargain contract deals etc.

Better bang for your Cap buck is the moral of the story here!!!.

Excuses? It's analyzing it logically Mess.
You're comparing Crosby's, Malkin's and Ovechkin's cap hit to Tavares? That's quite silly and quite dishonest.

It just sounds like you are complaining about the fact we couldn't sign Tavares, Marner, Matthews or Nylander 5 years ago. That's how the league works, cap goes up and so do the contracts, especially for the top end of talented players. You've been around long enough to notice the cap hit raises right?

I'm curious as to what your solution to all this is now. Not sign them?

 

[diceman934]

Signing bonus in 2017-2018: 7 million dollars; base salary is 1.5 million dollars; total salary is 8.5 million dollars.

Signing bonus in 2018-2019: 4.5 million dollars; base salary is 1.5 million dollars; total salary is 6 million dollars.

Signing bonus in 2019-2020: 3 million dollars; base salary is 1.25 million dollars; total salary is 4.25 million dollars.

His deal is the same through every season because he gets most of his salary from a signing bonus every season. His base salary is roughly the same through all 3 seasons of his deal.

That's how they are structured the same.

Duh

 

[IBeL34f]

Duh

So why did they structure all 3 seasons like that, if only the last season needed to be structured like that?

 

[4thline]

Marleau (providing his game does not fall off) is not an issue. The biggy is having Zaits return to form as a true 4. One of Dermott/Carrick/Oz/Lilj emerging as a top 4 would be huge as well.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Nothing about what you've said is difficult to understand - No one is confused about how much money he's playing for between July 2nd, 2019, and June 30th, 2020.

What I'm saying is that he played from July 2nd, 2017, to June 30th, 2018, for about the same amount of money, as well as from July 2nd, 2018, to June 30th, 2019.

This is true but it's also a little misleading. While he's playing for roughly the same salary in 17/18, 18/19, and 19/20 with future signing bonuses he had to play 17/18 if he wanted the future July 1st, 2018, and 2019 signing bonuses. He has to play 18/19 foot get the July 1st signing bonus. Once he gets that there only 1.25 left. Sure it's roughly the same salary, but there's no future signing bonuses to stick around for in 2019 like there was the first 2 years.

I'm not saying he's for sure leaving or retiring, and there certainly is some validity to the fact that the structure of the contract is relatively similar he entire way through but to say he's playing for roughly the same in the final year as the first 2 is misleading based on the fact if he did agree when signing that he would retire, the July 1st, 2019 signing bonus is essentially just bonus pay for years 17/18 and 18/19 that the Leafs gave him to keep the cap down.

I think it's possible he retires givenwn signed the Leafs said publicly that they couldn't give a defencemen money for 3 years, and then proceeded to give Marleau 6.25 for 3 years. Marleau said it was a "really difficult decision", agreeing that he only had 2 years left may have been part of that. Or maybe not. He seems like the type of guy who wouldn't want to hang them up. But it's tough for me to believe after publicly displaying foresight on not giving a defencemen the 3rd year they use 6.25 in year 3 of cap for Marleau.

 

[IBeL34f]

This is true but it's also a little misleading. While he's playing for roughly the same salary in 17/18, 18/19, and 19/20 with future signing bonuses he had to play 17/18 if he wanted the future July 1st, 2018, and 2019 signing bonuses. He has to play 18/19 foot get the July 1st signing bonus. Once he gets that there only 1.25 left. Sure it's roughly the same salary, but there's no future signing bonuses to stick around for in 2019 like there was the first 2 years.

But this is only because they gave him huge signing bonuses in those years - they didn't have to do that. He could've made all $8.5M in 2017/18 in actual salary, and all $6M in 2018/19 in actual salary, and then done the big signing bonus on just the last year.

 

[Canada4Gold]

But this is only because they gave him huge signing bonuses in those years - they didn't have to do that. He could've made all $8.5M in 2017/18 in actual salary, and all $6M in 2018/19 in actual salary, and then done the big signing bonus on just the last year.

Sure but he still would have had to play out 17/18 and 18/19 to get that big signing bonus in 2019. So he had that final year signing bonus to play for those years, he doesn't in the final year as he'll already have it.

I agree that the structure shouldn't point towards him retiring because it's similar throughout the contract. But to say that he has the same to play for the last year as the first 2 is misleading. After July 1st, 2017 he had 3 years left and 11.75 million left. After July 1st, 2018 he had 2 years and 5.75 million left. After July 1st 2019 there's no signing bonuses left so it's just 1 years and 1.25 million. The motivation will probably still be there(if a prior arrangement wasn't in place) but the money motivation is much less to play the last year as it was to play the 2nd and the first.

Its a weird way to look at it but for a player who could retire after getting a signing bonus(and again I'm not saying the structure indicates he will) looking at a signing bonus as a payout at the end of the prior year might make more sense. 7 million up front, the 1.5 salary and 4.5 bonus at the end of year 1. 1.5 million salary and 3 million bonus at the end of year 2, and he's gotten 17.5 million to play 2 years. Will he want to play the last year for 1.25 million? Probably, but wouldn't shock me if he didn't. There's more than 3 times the monetary motivation to play this year as opposed to last(1.5 + 3 v. Just 1.25), and the whole lack of foresight after having foresight not to give money to a D for 3 years would be strange.

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

hossa's skin disease was verified by doctors. even though you disagree with it, it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong when you say it his medical condition wasn't legit. he's been treating it for years and other players have acquired it before.

I agree with you that Hossa's medical condition made eligible for LTIR. The NHL really doesn't allow teams to bypass the cap by putting players on LTIR. The Hawks really had no reason to trade him since he was 99% sure he was going to stay on LTIR.
I gotta believe the Hawks traded him to Arizona for some sweeteners is "just in case" he was deemed medically fit in the future and then some team either the Hawks or Arizona would insure the 5.25m annual cap hit. Hawks traded him to a cap deficient team just in case came off LTIR, though 99% likely he would never play for Arizona.

 

[ImpartialNHLfan]

Excuses? It's analyzing it logically Mess.
You're comparing Crosby's, Malkin's and Ovechkin's cap hit to Tavares? That's quite silly and quite dishonest.

It just sounds like you are complaining about the fact we couldn't sign Tavares, Marner, Matthews or Nylander 5 years ago. That's how the league works, cap goes up and so do the contracts, especially for the top end of talented players. You've been around long enough to notice the cap hit raises right?

I'm curious as to what your solution to all this is now. Not sign them?

Exactly what they should do.. Leafs should go back to signing expensive 3rd liners and over the hill vets. Seems that was really working for us the last 20 years and was about to payoff until stupid management went out and drafted superstars.

 

[diceman934]

So why did they structure all 3 seasons like that, if only the last season needed to be structured like that?

lol the contract was structured the way it is so that he gets almost most of his money in the first two years like I have stated far to many times. It really is not that hard to follow. He will not retire until after reviving his last bonus of 3m which is not part of the 19/20 season but part of the 18/19 season. His last year salary is 1.25 and I have stated all along I do not believe he will be playing here for that sum of money.

 

[Mess]

I'm curious as to what your solution to all this is now. Not sign them?

Win the Cup this year while Auston and Mitch make less than $2 mil and not $20 mil combined thereafter.

 

[IBeL34f]

lol the contract was structured the way it is so that he gets almost most of his money in the first two years like I have stated far to many times. It really is not that hard to follow. He will not retire until after reviving his last bonus of 3m which is not part of the 19/20 season but part of the 18/19 season. His last year salary is 1.25 and I have stated all along I do not believe he will be playing here for that sum of money.

At this point I'm not sure if you're daft or just trolling...

No one's confused about why the contract is front-loaded - Everyone knows that the dollar amounts decrease in each year of the contract, culminating in one minor payment remaining following his July 1, 2019 signing bonus.

None of that is in question.

What I am asking is why the first two years have such heavy signing bonuses, with such minor salaries, when (assuming you're correct, and the only reason he's making such a minuscule salary in his final year is that he doesn't intend to play it) there is absolutely no reason for them to be structured that way.

Again, to clarify - I am NOT asking about the front-loading of the contract. No one is confused about the fact that the contract is front-loaded in order to make the final salary as small as possible. What I AM asking, is why the first two years of the deal feature heavy signing bonuses like the last year does, if they do not need to. In 2017/18, there could've been 0$ signing bonus and $8.5M in salary; In 2018/19 it could've been 0$ signing bonus. But they didn't do that - They structured the first 2 years of the contract exactly the same way as the 3rd year, with a heavy signing bonus and minuscule salary.

If the only reason for the final year being so small is that he could retire/leave early, then why do the first 2 years contain similar (yet, in this case, meaningless) signing bonuses?

 

[Liminality]

Win the Cup this year while Auston and Mitch make less than $2 mil and not $20 mil combined thereafter.

I'd be fine if they won the cup this year, would make things a lot easier.
Definitely agree that abusing their ELC's is a big window we should take advantage of, disagree that we'll be in trouble after we sign them to long term deals but to each their own.

When the team has this kind of talent, you can maneuver around pieces if need be. Much better problem to have too much talent than to have too little talent.

 

[Deebo]

So why did they structure all 3 seasons like that, if only the last season needed to be structured like that?

Because its always beneficial to the player to get as much money as soon as possible.

 

[ACC1224]

At this point I'm not sure if you're daft or just trolling...

No one's confused about why the contract is front-loaded - Everyone knows that the dollar amounts decrease in each year of the contract, culminating in one minor payment remaining following his July 1, 2019 signing bonus.

None of that is in question.

What I am asking is why the first two years have such heavy signing bonuses, with such minor salaries, when (assuming you're correct, and the only reason he's making such a minuscule salary in his final year is that he doesn't intend to play it) there is absolutely no reason for them to be structured that way.

Again, to clarify - I am NOT asking about the front-loading of the contract. No one is confused about the fact that the contract is front-loaded in order to make the final salary as small as possible. What I AM asking, is why the first two years of the deal feature heavy signing bonuses like the last year does, if they do not need to. In 2017/18, there could've been 0$ signing bonus and $8.5M in salary; In 2018/19 it could've been 0$ signing bonus. But they didn't do that - They structured the first 2 years of the contract exactly the same way as the 3rd year, with a heavy signing bonus and minuscule salary.

If the only reason for the final year being so small is that he could retire/leave early, then why do the first 2 years contain similar (yet, in this case, meaningless) signing bonuses?

Has nothing to do with leaving early. Money now is always better than money later.

 

[IBeL34f]

Because its always beneficial to the player to get as much money as soon as possible.

If this is the case, then there's nothing inherent about the last year that tells us explicitly that his intention is to retire or leave Toronto after July 1, 2019.

If Marleau simply enjoys getting a bulk of his pay early, then you can't read anything into that final year, because the only change in the contract is the depreciation of the money owed him in each subsequent year of that contract, which lines up nicely with his expected depreciation in on-ice value over that time.

 

[Raging Bull]

It's amazing that someone that's been around so long doesn't understand or want to understand how inflation works.

 

[Mess]

Bang for you Cap Buck vs Top Eastern Div challengers analysis.

Best guesstimate Matthews (~$11 mil) + Marner (~$8 mil) + Nylander (~7 mil) = approx $26 mil combined for the 3 amigos.

Compared to East Contenders top 3 top players cap hit

TB top 3 (Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman = @$25.8 mil
Boston top 3 (Marchand, Pastrnak & Bergeron)= @ $19.7 mil
Washington (OV, Kuznetzov, Backstrom = $24 mil
Pittsburgh Sid + Geno + Letang = $25.5 mil

in 2019-20 the Leafs will likely be paying the 3 Amigos >/= to the other top Eastern Cup contending teams.

Will Leafs kids produce statistically at the same level as the proven stars of the beasts of the east as cap hit wise it will be similar cap $ invested in them?

Note: This doesn't even include Tavares in this analysis as the 2nd highest cap hit in the NHL at $11 mil.

 

[4thline]

"analysis"

 

[wc17]

Bang for you Cap Buck vs Top Eastern Div challengers analysis.

Best guesstimate Matthews (~$11 mil) + Marner (~$8 mil) + Nylander (~7 mil) = approx $26 mil combined for the 3 amigos.

Compared to East Contenders top 3 top players cap hit

TB top 3 (Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman = @$25.8 mil
Boston top 3 (Marchand, Pastrnak & Bergeron)= @ $19.7 mil
Washington (OV, Kuznetzov, Backstrom = $24 mil
Pittsburgh Sid + Geno + Letang = $25.5 mil

in 2019-20 the Leafs will likely be paying the 3 Amigos >/= to the other top Eastern Cup contending teams.

Will Leafs kids produce statistically at the same level as the proven stars of the beasts of the east as cap hit wise it will be similar cap $ invested in them?

Note: This doesn't even include Tavares in this analysis as the 2nd highest cap hit in the NHL at $11 mil.

Should we include the tax savings Tampa has and say the 25.8 is more like 30 mil in Toronto? Or that Pitt signed their contracts years ago and Sid is on a cheater deal? How about that Washington has Backstroms deal coming up in 2 years, and another cheater deal in Ovi.

I'd say the Leafs are in a pretty damn good spot in 2 or 3 years based on cap % and production and compared to other teams that are in, or will be in a similar situation.

 

[diceman934]

At this point I'm not sure if you're daft or just trolling...

No one's confused about why the contract is front-loaded - Everyone knows that the dollar amounts decrease in each year of the contract, culminating in one minor payment remaining following his July 1, 2019 signing bonus.

None of that is in question.

What I am asking is why the first two years have such heavy signing bonuses, with such minor salaries, when (assuming you're correct, and the only reason he's making such a minuscule salary in his final year is that he doesn't intend to play it) there is absolutely no reason for them to be structured that way.

Again, to clarify - I am NOT asking about the front-loading of the contract. No one is confused about the fact that the contract is front-loaded in order to make the final salary as small as possible. What I AM asking, is why the first two years of the deal feature heavy signing bonuses like the last year does, if they do not need to. In 2017/18, there could've been 0$ signing bonus and $8.5M in salary; In 2018/19 it could've been 0$ signing bonus. But they didn't do that - They structured the first 2 years of the contract exactly the same way as the 3rd year, with a heavy signing bonus and minuscule salary.

If the only reason for the final year being so small is that he could retire/leave early, then why do the first 2 years contain similar (yet, in this case, meaningless) signing bonuses?

Me daft...now that is funny!

If you can not grasp the simply concept that all but 1.25m of a 18.75m contract is paid out in the first 2 years of a 3 year deal so as to make it easy for a player to walk away then I do not know what to tell you.

 

[ACC1224]

Me daft...now that is funny!

If you can not grasp the simply concept that all but 1.25m of a 18.75m contract is paid out in the first 2 years of a 3 year deal so as to make it easy for a player to walk away then I do not know what to tell you.

What will be the theory when Marleau suits up for the 3rd year?

 

[diceman934]

What will be the theory when Marleau suits up for the 3rd year?

If he suits up I would be very surprise and wrong. Which unlike some on here I would admit it. I am just going by his contract as it sure appears that the intent is for him not to play.

 

[ACC1224]

If he suits up I would be very surprise and wrong. Which unlike some on here I would admit it. I am just going by his contract as it sure appears that the intent is for him not to play.

I fully expect him to play, we'll see.