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

[The Winter Soldier]

So we should only re-sign our players after we win a cup? That might make it hard to field a team. Plus individual and team success is two different things. You can be a great player on a bad team, or a bad player on a good team.

I am sure Shanny can recognize a Toews or Doughty from the mediocrities we have signed.

Lombardi and Bowman did not re-sign Versteeg, Byfuglin, B Schenn, Penner to long term contracts did they?

Do you understand this major difference in player evaluation?

 

[King85Kong]

I am sure Shanny can recognize a Toews or Doughty from the mediocrities we have signed.

Lombardi and Bowman did not re-sign Versteeg, Byfuglin, B Schenn, Penner to long term contracts did they?

Do you understand this major difference in player evaluation?

Why are you avoiding the questions.
If your against long term contracts, then why did you support the Clarkson deal (5or7 years)?
You said our core sucks, are you in favour of moving the center who has lead the worse defensive line in the league, and replace him with someone else?

And as soon as a Toews or Doughty become available I'll be right there hoping we sign them.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Why are you avoiding the questions.
If your against long term contracts, then why did you support the Clarkson deal (5or7 years)?
You said our core sucks, are you in favour of moving the center who has lead the worse defensive line in the league, and replace him with someone else?

And as soon as a Toews or Doughty become available I'll be right there hoping we sign them.

You know my position already since you obviously follow each post I make here.

I have been critical of Nonis in his handing out of long term contracts for mediocrities for some time now, I know you know this, because all your posts are all geared to replying to my positions. I have been Nonis' biggest critic here this summer. And it all stems from trading picks, bad asset management.Ie. Gunnar, taking back salary, and picks squandered for a lesser player.

The only good signing Nonis has made is Bozak for 4.2, you know this too because I replied to you but it was ignored. Ie Weiss same summer 4.9 as the most accurate comp able. Who would you rather have going fwd. When Leafs get a #1C this deal will beeves more a steal as a cap friendly number. So I have been on record as saying Nonis has made only one cap friendly value signing.

Now that I have answered your questions again.

Do you understand the difference in long term contracts LA and CHI have committed to, and the Leafs committing to?

Again do you recognize The Hawks let Versteeg, Byfuglin, Ladd, B Schenn, Clifford, Penner go because they were deemed disposable. Do you get this pertinent point when I brought up Leafs may have 12 players locked up next summer and Kings and Hawks cup winners only 7.

Do you get this fundamental difference? This has only been repeated here by me about 7 times.

 

[King85Kong]

You know my position already since you obviously follow each post I make here.

I have been critical of Nonis in his handing out of long term contracts for mediocrities for some time now, I know you know this, because all your posts are all geared to replying to my positions. I have been Nonis' biggest critic here this summer. And it all stems from trading picks, bad asset management.Ie. Gunnar, taking back salary, and picks squandered for a lesser player.

The only good signing Nonis has made is Bozak for 4.2, you know this too because I replied to you but it was ignored. Ie Weiss same summer 4.9 as the most accurate comp able. Who would you rather have going fwd. When Leafs get a #1C this deal will beeves more a steal as a cap friendly number. So I have been on record as saying Nonis has made only one cap friendly value signing.

Now that I have answered your questions again.

Do you understand the difference in long term contracts LA and CHI have committed to, and the Leafs committing to?

Again do you recognize The Hawks let Versteeg, Byfuglin, Ladd, B Schenn, Clifford, Penner go because they were deemed disposable. Do you get this pertinent point when I brought up Leafs may have 12 players locked up next summer and Kings and Hawks cup winners only 7.

Do you get this fundamental difference? This has only been repeated here by me about 7 times.

Finally you admit to being wrong on Clarkson. Wow that took awhile.

I'm ok with trading depth players. I want to hold on to our skilled young players like Gardiner, Kadri, Reilly, Nylander, JVR and the likes (of course unless we get over payment). Makes sense, how most teams do it.
And I like that Bozak contract now he had a good year points wise. Makes him a great trade candidate in that we can get a good return on a 28 year old. Buy low sell high.
You kind of dodged my second question, but you answered one of them so we will take it slowly.
I'm proud of you for admitting to a mistake (Clarkson). This is a big step for you.

And we have let players go to. None of those players you mentioned were core players, big difference. Some of them got pushed out by young skill players like Toews and Doughty.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Finally you admit to being wrong on Clarkson. Wow that took awhile.

I'm ok with trading depth players. I want to hold on to our skilled young players like Gardiner, Kadri, Reilly, Nylander, JVR and the likes (of course unless we get over payment). Makes sense, how most teams do it.
And I like that Bozak contract now he had a good year points wise. Makes him a great trade candidate in that we can get a good return on a 28 year old. Buy low sell high.
You kind of dodged my second question, but you answered one of them so we will take it slowly.
I'm proud of you for admitting to a mistake (Clarkson). This is a big step for you.

And we have let players go to. None of those players you mentioned were core players, big difference. Some of them got pushed out by young skill players like Toews and Doughty.

Just want to be clear so you don't ask me to clarify my position again.

Again do you recognize The Hawks let Versteeg, Byfuglin, Ladd, B Schenn, Clifford, Penner go because they were deemed disposable. Do you get this pertinent point when I brought up Leafs may have 12 players locked up next summer and Kings and Hawks cup winners only 7.

Do you get this fundamental difference? This has only been repeated here by me about 7 times.

 

[King85Kong]

Just want to be clear so you don't ask me to clarify my position again.

Again do you recognize The Hawks let Versteeg, Byfuglin, Ladd, B Schenn, Clifford, Penner go because they were deemed disposable. Do you get this pertinent point when I brought up Leafs may have 12 players locked up next summer and Kings and Hawks cup winners only 7.

Do you get this fundamental difference? This has only been repeated here by me about 7 times.

And the Leafs let go Kulemin, Bolland, Grabo, MacCarthur, Gleason, kaberle, L. Schenn, Gunner, among others. All teams do this. And Leafs might lose some of those long term deals through trades. Who knows, all a guessing game at this point. If Bernier and Kadri do well this year, they well get theirs, and others will probably be moved.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

And the Leafs let go Kulemin, Bolland, Grabo, MacCarthur, Gleason, kaberle, L. Schenn, Gunner, among others. All teams do this. And Leafs might lose some of those long term deals through trades. Who knows, all a guessing game at this point. If Bernier and Kadri do well this year, they well get theirs, and others will probably be moved.

Hawks let Byfuglin, Versteeg, Ladd, Campbell, Niemi, Brouwer, and now Bolland go. One would argue these players are better than some of the players we signed long term with us. They resisted signing non core players to limiting contracts for the betterment for cap flexibility.

Do you see the fundamental difference with a winning team and the Leafs a losing team?

 

[King85Kong]

Hawks let Byfuglin, Versteeg, Ladd, Campbell, Niemi, Brouwer, and now Bolland go. One would argue these players are better than some of the players we signed long term with us. They resisted signing non core players to limiting contracts for the betterment for cap flexibility.

Do you see the fundamental difference with a winning team and the Leafs a losing team?

We let many good players walk to, or does it only count when the Hawks do it? How do you continue to say the last part when you applauded the signing of Clarkson. Again I'm for signing young skilled core players like Kadri, Gardiner, Bernier. We let some good players walk for nothing when we could of traded them. Past management has made many mistakes.

 

[Menzinger]

Having nearly 10 million invested in Bozak/Clarkson long term is disastrous. Fortunately Bozak at least should be tradeable in a season or two.

Leafs do have options to shed salary. Lupul, even Phaneuf is moveable: and most of our signings this off season were short term. Not to mention, most indications seem to suggest the cap will increase.

Getting Kadri inked for something similar to JVR's contract should be a priority: I've got a feeling a bridge contract will burn us eventually.

 

[Zonk]

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.

Maximum bonuses for Rielly are $850,000. Chicken Little says "hi".

 

[Gallagbi]

So we should only re-sign our players after we win a cup? That might make it hard to field a team. Plus individual and team success is two different things. You can be a great player on a bad team, or a bad player on a good team.

It's worth pointing out Hossa, Kane, Toews and Keith all signed their long-term (5 or more year) deals before the Hawks won their cup.

LA also acquired Richard and Carter's long-term deals before their cup win and locked up Kopitar for 7+ years when they were a non-playoff team.

So it is not accurate to say they won a cup, then locked up their core.

 

[King85Kong]

It's worth pointing out Hossa, Kane, Toews and Keith all signed their long-term (5 or more year) deals before the Hawks won their cup.

LA also acquired Richard and Carter's long-term deals before their cup win and locked up Kopitar for 7+ years when they were a non-playoff team.

So it is not accurate to say they won a cup, then locked up their core.

Good point that I missed. Guess LA and the Hawks did it wrong

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Maximum bonuses for Rielly are $850,000. Chicken Little says "hi".

It may very well happen, Rielly is our most talented player without question. And when I say talent I don't mean the flash people associate it with this term. He is the whole package.

He hits his bonuses and Bernier plays to his first 45 games last year. It will be lights out for Kadri and Franson, barring a trade we will have to take back more salary than Gunnarson this summer.

Nonis didn't pay attention to successful teams like LA and Chicago. Bad cap management.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

do you do any research or do you just spew out words?

1990/91 season
chi 106 points #1
LA 102 points #3
91/92
8th chi
10th la
92/93
chi 106 points 3rd
la 11th
93/94 chi
13th
94
chi 8th
95
chi 6th
umm what troubles?

Nice cherry picking. Wasn't aware there were only 5 years in the 90s.

I also wasn't aware that LA stopped having a team in 1993.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

2002/03 to 2008/09 that's only 6 seasons played that had 1 17th place finish in there and 3 bottom 10. Still don't see the 9+ years.

LA 2002/03 to 2009/20, 7 seasons played only 3 bottom 10 finishes, still struggling to find this 9+ years or even longer.

Where did I say 9+ years of straight bottom-10 finishes? The Leafs haven't had 9 straight years of bottom-10 finishes either. I don't think anybody has.

They weren't any kind of sustained threat from the mid-90s to 2009, with multiple horrible years in there. And until they actually won something, everybody made fun of them and their players and laughed at their long streak of mediocrity, and said they could never win with those players, etc.

People on this site are horrible at predictions. They live in the immediate past and don't even analyze that right, or draw the proper conclusions.

Not sure what you're trying to prove here in the first place.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Where did I say 9+ years of straight bottom-10 finishes? The Leafs haven't had 9 straight years of bottom-10 finishes either. I don't think anybody has.

They weren't any kind of sustained threat from the mid-90s to 2009, with multiple horrible years in there. And until they actually won something, everybody made fun of them and their players and laughed at their long streak of mediocrity, and said they could never win with those players, etc.

People on this site are horrible at predictions. They live in the immediate past and don't even analyze that right, or draw the proper conclusions.

Not sure what you're trying to prove here in the first place.

Just before the collapse you said (among other things) that:

- LA was no better than Toronto
- LA's chances of winning the cup were the same Toronto's

This was partly based on LA's "immediate past" where they had a bad stretch of 6 games.

Out of all the horrible predictions I have seen on this site, yours was the worst by a good margin.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Actually the number is 9 and could be 12 players that were given over 3 to 8 year contracts by this Management group.

LA has to sign Kopitar in 2 years, yet they only have 7 players locked up to 3 or more years long term contracts that can be termed as core players. One can say they have been a very successful franchise correct?

Surely you are not comparing Quick, Doughty, Brown, Voynov, Gaborik, Richards, Williams to our core players of 12 if we sign Kadri, Bernier, and Franson next year…

Again, another that missed the point. The best teams do not lock up mediocre players, Leafs do. Said this about 5 times in this thread. It's a very easy point to grasp.

Once again, you are wrong. Show your players if you are going to make wild claims.

First off, 3 years is NOT long term. That is the length of an ELC, so unless you are counting rookie contracts as "long term", then that is an unacceptable time-frame for other contracts to be considered "long term".

Kessel, lupul, Clarkson, JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Phaneuf and Gardiner are the ONLY players on the Leafs with 4 or more years on their contract. That is 8 players.

And once again, you are wrong about LA. They have Brown, Richards, Carter, Gaborik, Doughty, Voynov, Greene and Quick on contracts with 4 or more years. That is 8 players.

So yes, LA has been a successful franchise and you just showed that we operate in a similar way. Congratulations.

You can't just pick and choose which players on other teams count as "core" in your mind, and then just count all players signed to an arbitrary contract length that doesn't even stay consistent, as core on our team, ALSO counting 3 players on expiring contracts as "core" because in your magical fairy world, they are all signed and all signed to long term deals.

So if we sign Kadri, Bernier, and Franson to long-term deals automatically, that means that LA signs all their RFAs (and at least 1 UFA) to long term deals as well right?

Which would mean, as of next year, the total number of players with 4 or more years left on their contract for each team would be:

Toronto - 7
LA - 14

Taking away your ridiculous method of projecting long-term contracts on RFAs and UFAs, we still have a total count of:

Toronto - 4
LA - 7

Based on your solitary measure of what makes a team good (arbitrary counts of long-term contracts with none of the context), Toronto will be better than LA next year, right?

Actually, to make this whole thing laughable, I was looking through other good teams, and LA and Chicago have more long-term deals than most others. And they have won 4 of the last 5 cups. Maybe long-term deals CAN be beneficial, and it has nothing to do with an absolute number. What a concept.

As for quality of locked up players, that's a matter of opinion, and frankly, like every other claim you made in that post, it's just flat-out wrong.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Losing fan support? In Toronto? If that was even possible it would have happened by now don't you think?

It's very possible, and no, it doesn't happen all at once. But there is a very big difference in losing, and visibly trying to lose, and that difference can easily be fan support.

The overall point is that it is stupid to sell off your team when you are in a playoff position and had done so well the previous year.

I agree playoff experience is valuable but calling it priceless is overstating it. I certainly didn't see the experience gained against Boston carry over to this year in any meaningful way. Perhaps it would have been better if we missed the playoffs considering where we are now.

Looking at only the following season and only at end results is short-sighted. Playoff experience is very valuable.

Calling us one of the better teams that year is another huge overstatement. 2 points ahead of the 8th place team in a historically weak Eastern conference is hardly brag-worthy.

9th in points, 4th best team in the east, 4th best team for ROW.

I realize that since we haven't won a playoff series in what seems like forever, people have a desire to romanticize our series loss against Boston as some kind of noteworthy achievement. In the end though, we lost and still haven't won anything in what seems like forever. The fact that the team we lost to went on to win some more might make you feel better but it really isn't anything that we can to our list of accomplishments.

It's merely another point to add context. Surely you wouldn't want to take away from context, because the only people who try to do that are trying to hide something or twist something.

Good to have you back posting though. I remember before you disappeared you were arguing vehemently that we had as good a chance of winning the cup as LA. I thought you'd left us for good after that fiasco.

An oversimplified version of what I said, but yes, at that point in time, we did have about an equal chance, which was very very slim. Variables changed.

In actuality, the fact that LA did go on and win the cup only makes it more clear that anybody can win the cup if you make the playoffs, regardless of where you stand at an arbitrary point in the season.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

If Kadri doesn't improve this season, he won't be #3C with us, never mind a #2C. His contract is up and I would wager the Leafs will re-sign Bernier over Kadri if Bernier can repeat his first 45 games last year.

Odd. In one post you are arguing to the death that not only will Kadri, Bernier, and the 1-year contract wonder Franson sign long-term deals, it is such a guarantee that it has essentially already happened and it's already something you can complain about.

Yet in the next post you are saying Kadri sucks, is a 3C and you would be surprised if he was signed at all.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

[*]How difficult would it be to sweet-talk Clarkson into waiving his NMC, and accepting a stint with the Marlies? He doesn't have to worry about anybody snapping him up on the waiver wire.
[/LIST]

As absurd as that scenario is, I'm still not entirely convinced that a team like Edmonton wouldn't grab him. I don't think Nonis wants rid of him yet.

A lot depends on this coming year for him.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Leafs Cap Situation Gary. This situation might rear it's head this summer. Going to be interesting seeing who the Leafs lock up and who they don't.

If Bernier proves he is a #1G worthy of winning a couple of playoff rounds, then Nonis should lock him up which would basically give us no more room to sign anyone else as it stands. Bernier at 5M or 5.5M x 5 would put us at 59M for the 15 players signed through 15-16.

You don't have to be a mathematician to know this would give us just 10M at the present cap to sign the remaining 8 players. Franson and Kadri are the 2 big names that may be out in the cold.

And people claim we are not in a cap crunch?

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

We aren't, because aside from trades and such which always change things and nobody ever accounts for, those remaining players are primarily lower-end players for the bottom-6 and bottom pairing roles, which come significantly cheaper. You are also not counting the likely significant rise in the cap.

Basically what needs to be signed for the year after next includes a 4th line, a #6D to replace Franson if he leaves, and then our RFA Kadri and Bernier (which you already included in the amount).

The fact that you think Kadri would be left out in the cold is hilarious (and contradictory based on your previous statements). Franson probably won't be signed regardless of cap, because unless he turns things around big-time this year, he flat-out sucks.

Next off-season probably also marks the start of some of our more promising prospects becoming ready. Cheap, cheap contracts. If not, we have seen this off-season how cheap bottom-6 players can be.

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Do you disagree with how Cup winners Chicago and LA operate?

What have the Leafs won with these core players to warrant this core being together for 3 to 8 years?

Do you seriously think LA and Chicago signed no players to long term deals before they won the cup? If so, you are sadly, sadly mistaken and need to recheck your history.

In fact, it is much smarter to lock up your core BEFORE you win a cup, because after, it costs a significant amount more (Toews, Kane, etc.) and you don't get to keep that core together.

 

[Gary Nylund]

It's very possible, and no, it doesn't happen all at once. But there is a very big difference in losing, and visibly trying to lose, and that difference can easily be fan support.

The overall point is that it is stupid to sell off your team when you are in a playoff position and had done so well the previous year.

As long as they're the only team in Toronto, the Leafs will never lose fan support. If 40+ years of failure won't do it, you really think trading away an expiring contract for a pick/prospect will?

Trading a player for a pick/prospect doesn't equate to trying to lose. In fact good teams often do this and some good teams did it last spring.

.
Looking at only the following season and only at end results is short-sighted. Playoff experience is very valuable.

Yet you dismissed LA's playoff experience when I cited it as one reason LA had a much better chance at winning the cup than the Leafs.

9th in points, 4th best team in the east, 4th best team for ROW.

It's merely another point to add context. Surely you wouldn't want to take away from context, because the only people who try to do that are trying to hide something or twist something.

Yes you were chirping how we were the 4th best team in the East last spring, how did that turn out?

Saying something irrelevant, and then claiming it was meant to add context doesn't make it any less irrelevant.

An oversimplified version of what I said, but yes, at that point in time, we did have about an equal chance, which was very very slim. Variables changed.

In actuality, the fact that LA did go on and win the cup only makes it more clear that anybody can win the cup if you make the playoffs, regardless of where you stand at an arbitrary point in the season.

The Leafs weren't even in the playoffs at the time, a point that seems to have escaped you then and now.

If the Leafs went on to win the cup, now that would have been argument in favor of the anybody can win argument. The fact that LA did win and the Leafs went off a cliff is a strong argument showing that you were wrong thinking they had equal chances.

At no point in time were their chances equal. At the time of the discussion the odds-makers said LA's chances were much better as did I and everybody else that I remember expressing their opinion. The only person who thought their chances were equal was you. There was nothing to oversimplify. I made my case and quoted odds-makers who had LA way ahead of Toronto. You said that those odds-makers numbers are meaningless and when I asked you what you thought were fair numbers, your response was that LA and Toronto had about the same (slim) chance of winning the cup.

That's all there was to it. Why don't you just admit that you grossly misread the situation at the time and stop saying arrogant things like people in this forum are "horrible" at making predictions as if you're somehow smarter and in a position to judge? Everybody errs from time to time. Be a man and admit it.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

If Bernier gets a #1G comparable contract. That will leave us with 10M to sign 8 players to our 23 man roster.
Leafs are locked in with a lot of immovable contracts and the best ones JVR and Bozak only save 8.45M for 2 spots in the top 6.

Surely we are not moving our best cap hits.

10M to sign 8 players, I am not sure how one can make the claim we are in good shape.

Here's the kicker, if Leafs move Lupul, Clarkson, or Dion. Nonis will take back salary and this would be counterproductive. Which is almost assured as in the Gunnarson deal.

This Management group has been abysmal with their cap management. Tying up mediocre assets.

It's all here on cap geek:

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

The cap will be rising again largely due to the new Rogers deal so it will be more then 10 million available.

The only bad contract we have is the Clarkson contract but we have lots of good guys locked in at great rates (or at least fair rates).

For a long time the Leafs have been a bad team and the only way to attract players was to give them playing minutes they wouldn't get elsewhere + potentially also overterm and overpay otherwise why would they ever sign with us? That's what happened with guys like Connolly and Komisarek. Nobody was taking a discount to play for us.

Now we're finally starting to get our young building blocks (or have acquired them at a young age by giving up other keys assets like picks, highly regarded youngsters. Witness: Kessel + JVR deals).

Consider the last 3 major signing:

1. Gardiner has the potential to be a steal of a contract.

2. Kessel is making less then his comparables like Perry (8.625) or Kane (next year wil be 10.5)

3. Phaneuf locked at 7 will start to look good. Consider that injury prone Letang who can't play a lick of Defence is getting comparable dollars well inferior Dmen in Niskanen + Orpik + Girardi + Markov all got at least 5.5 this season well a superior Dman in Subban got 9 but 2 million is a big difference). Once people see the coin guys like Green, Staal get on their new deals peoples perspective will start to change on the Phaneuf deal. The guy is a # 1 Dman on a terrible team where he's expected to do everything with a weak supporting cast (like Franson on the 2nd pair).

We might not have a lot of extra wiggle next free agency but we also will have most of our key roster pieces filled after signing Kadri + Bernier.

Filling out the roster with cheap youngsters who make less then a million and/or guys who make a little over a million shouldn't be hard to do.

5 of our top 6 spots will be already filled by Phaneuf-Gardiner-Rielly-Robidas-Polak. 4 of those 5 are either in their primes or haven't hit them. Granberg + Percy are very good candidates to fill one if not both of the remaining spots at a cheap rate.

Majority of our top 9 spots will be filled between Kessel-Bozak-JVR-Lupul-Kadri-Clarkson-Holland-Frattin-Komarov. Youngsters like Leivo, Gautheir, Nylander, Carrick, Broll are candidates who will be 1 year older and on cheap deals. Next year cheap depth canidates will be available to fill remainng spots more Santorelli, CMac, Raymond, Booth type guys to sign as players for cheap depth as their is every year.

# 1 goalie would be Bernier. Competent backups are easy to find and we probably won't want to pay Reimer 2.3 million.

The fate of this organization becoming a contender in the next few years depends on our homegrown talent becoming key cogs like Gardiner, Kadri, Rielly, Nylander, Holland to support our already keys guys like JVR + Kessel + Phaneuf + Bozak + Lupul + Clarkson (he'll need to get back to being at least a decent 3rd liner).

 

[Delicious Dangles*]

Again do you recognize The Hawks let Versteeg, Byfuglin, Ladd, B Schenn, Clifford, Penner go because they were deemed disposable.

Try because they won the cup the year that a lot of their contracts came up and couldn't keep together their whole core, in addition to the horrible management mistake of not qualifying their RFAs, resulting in having to give them bigger contracts that wouldn't fit.

As for Brayden Schenn, he was traded for Richards, so he was far from "disposable".

Penner and Clifford were dime-a-dozen players and of no real importance.

None of these players have any correlation to the Leaf players, nor does the situation of, as you say "disposing of them". Some were forced due to cap and mismanagement, some were traded for a better player, and some were disposable because they sucked and there were players ready to replace them.

Leafs do the same thing these teams do, and every team does.

Do you get this pertinent point when I brought up Leafs may have 12 players locked up next summer and Kings and Hawks cup winners only 7.

Once again, wrong. This has been repeatedly disproven, aside from the fact that you are adding next year's contracts for the Leafs and not for LA/Chicago. Get your facts straight.