Confirmed with Link: Leafs sign Jake McCabe to an extension (5 years - 4.51M AAV)

[Puckstuff]

4 D past their prime... I plan on being a Leafs fan for longer than 4 years, so it'd be nice to have a GM that thinks past the current year.

So keep them them for their prime and then LTIR them or trade them at 36?

D-men age a little better then forwards and can maintain form until 34-35 or beyond.

If things go well we're only looking at a year or so of declined play by the end of the deal, and they can be LTIR'd at that time anyways.

 

[ULF_55]

I feel that is a good contract.

As UFA, probably add $1mm.

 

[notbias]

So keep them them for their prime and then LTIR them or trade them at 36?

D-men age a little better then forwards and can maintain form until 34-35 or beyond.

If things go well we're only looking at a year or so have declined play, and they can be LTIR'd at that time anyways.

Your prime doesn't end at 36, pretty sure it is around 27.

No clue how these D will age, but they may start regressing at any moment.

It is a risk.

Also, no clue where people get the idea that you can just LTIR unwilling players.

 

[mapleleaf979]

4.5 is a good contract for the Leafs. McCabe was very good in the playoffs, willing to lay his body on the line. I would much rather have McCabe at 4.5 than Reilly at 7.5 million.

 

[LeafEgo]

Teams could in theory defer a portion of big ticket contract for super stars to future years... totally made up name lets say Match deMiner signs a $12.56 mil contract, could the team defer 25% of that to year 5 and reduce his salary down to $10 mil cap hit annually?

I haven't really looked into it but I think AAV savings are limited to the difference between present day and future day value of bonus deferral amounts, which have their own restrictions. Something like that.

Not sure if Jarvis for example maxed out what is possible, but his AAV was reduced by 6%.

 

[All Mod Cons]

So for all of the people who wish we don't ever have a player over the age of 30, can they suggest a way in which we can ice a team?

We can't draft worth shit, especially dmen, and everyone complains we overspend in FA. We also don't have any/many assets to trade away.

How do we ice a team of under 30s?

 

[Tie Domi Esquire]

Now that McCabe is signed, who's next?

16 and 91. Dynasty.

 

[mjd1001]

Well, he might be good now, however he might not live up to this new deal down the road in a couple of years.

I agree with that, but the team is better this year and next for this deal.

Once you get to 2026-27, this deal, along with Tanev, and OEL, and even possibly Nylander at 30/31 years of age, might not look AS good, but so much can change in 2-3 years. Its about this year and next for this team right now.

 

[Gabriel426]

4.51mil in 3-4 years might be the price of a No. 4-5 Dmen. I really don't think this is a bad deal.
Even TJ last year at 5mil. Yes, he was overpaid but only really by 1.5mil or so as he was still a okay for a No. 4-5 Dmen. Problem was that we didn't have 4-5 dmen better than TJ, lol.

 

[trellaine201]

Didn’t realize our D is getting a little old.

 

[IronHookem]

I feel like with all of these long-term signings that weve made as of late, that we essentially have 2 more years of contention before these contracts starts weighing us down seriously..

Dont get me wrong, I love McCabe, OEL & Tanev has also been great, but are they going to be great 3 years from now? Rielly has already started declining and he is also signed til 2030...

 

[Larcos_Unal]

Now that McCabe is signed, who's next?

The only guy left to sign is Knies...that's it, that's the one and only guy Treliving needs to even think about mid-season.

I feel like with all of these long-term signings that weve made as of late, that we essentially have 2 more years of contention before these contracts starts weighing us down seriously..

Dont get me wrong, I love McCabe, OEL & Tanev has also been great, but are they going to be great 3 years from now? Rielly has already started declining and he is also signed til 2030...

That'll be the next GM's problem

 

[arso40]

4.5 is a good contract for the Leafs. McCabe was very good in the playoffs, willing to lay his body on the line. I would much rather have McCabe at 4.5 than Reilly at 7.5 million.

Exactly what I’m saying

 

[Hellcat]

So don't hire GMs who you think will ruin the team for the next GM?

You hire who you think will win you a cup. Outside of Jim Nill and Ken Holland, are there that many long long term GM's (7 years +) in the last 25 years?

I remember when Babcock was brought in they talked about building a franchise from within that will have long term year over year staying power, building for today while building for tomorrow... fast forward 8 years later and I think we can say confidently, for the Leafs, that the draft schmaft philosophy won out over the building from with in staying power philosophy. Every GM will sacrifice 2 dollars tomorrow for 50 cents today. If a GM could trade his mothers house, without her knowledge, for a 1st line center, he would... I have yet to meet a successful executive that does not have a thick vein of selfishness and self preservation running through him/her... you can read them coming through the door, they will to a man (woman) put their self interests 1st.

 

[Leaf Rocket]

We got ourselves a Domi & McCabe. Next we need Sundin, Antropovsky, Kulemin and of course Kaberle

 

[sunstersun]

Barf deal.

 

[Leafsfan74]

So keep them them for their prime and then LTIR them or trade them at 36?

D-men age a little better then forwards and can maintain form until 34-35 or beyond.

If things go well we're only looking at a year or so of declined play by the end of the deal, and they can be LTIR'd at that time anyways.

Without question. Outside of a few exceptions, from a defensive standpoint, D Men don't even reach their prime until 28-32. It's a more difficult position to play than even being a goaltender as you have to understand so much more from the rules to the other teams formations etc.

 

[Canada4Gold]

This is a good deal. Thought he would get more. Sure we're lining up to have a bunch of older players on the back end in 3 years time but if by then our 1-4 Dmen have degraded to 2-5 Dmen the good news is we're paying them the same and the cap has probably gone up 15 million to easily be able to afford a 1D to fill that hole plus other stuff elsewhere. If they all turn into bottom pair guys then yes that's a real problem, but 3 of these guys will be getting #4D money by the end of their deals. If they're somewhere competent it won't be a huge problem.

 

[Dreakmur]

That's a good cap hit for McCabe.

 

[notbias]

This is a good deal. Thought he would get more. Sure we're lining up to have a bunch of older players on the back end in 3 years time but if by then our 1-4 Dmen have degraded to 2-5 Dmen the good news is we're paying them the same and the cap has probably gone up 15 million to easily be able to afford a 1D to fill that hole plus other stuff elsewhere. If they all turn into bottom pair guys then yes that's a real problem, but 3 of these guys will be getting #4D money by the end of their deals. If they're somewhere competent it won't be a huge problem.

In three years? We are already old on the backend.

Our entire top 4 is in the 75 oldest D in the NHL.

 

[Martin Skoula]

This is a good deal. Thought he would get more. Sure we're lining up to have a bunch of older players on the back end in 3 years time but if by then our 1-4 Dmen have degraded to 2-5 Dmen the good news is we're paying them the same and the cap has probably gone up 15 million to easily be able to afford a 1D to fill that hole plus other stuff elsewhere. If they all turn into bottom pair guys then yes that's a real problem, but 3 of these guys will be getting #4D money by the end of their deals. If they're somewhere competent it won't be a huge problem.

What about the scenario where they’re #4-5s that are constantly out week to week but never long enough for LTIR? Each costs picks to dump or needs to be bought out so you can spend assets to replace them with healthy prime aged replacements.

 

[Canada4Gold]

In three years? We are already old on the backend.

Our entire top 4 is in the 75 oldest D in the NHL.

So 6 D times 32 teams that's 75 of 192 or the 61st percentile? That's 11% from the exact middle. They're in the back half of their prime sure but D tend to reach their prime later. Tanev is the only one who's deal goes so long he's likely not going to be NHL quality at the end of it. Surely you don't think OEL's going to go from a good #4 to a #7 in 3 years. or Rielly from an ok #1 to a #3 in 3 years. Or McCabe being a #6 in 3 years. 4.5 million is going to be #4/5 D money in 3 years man.

What about the scenario where they’re #4-5s that are constantly out week to week but never long enough for LTIR? Each costs picks to dump or needs to be bought out so you can spend assets to replace them with healthy prime aged replacements.

Cool? I didn't bring up LTIR at any point. Hope they're good for the playoffs which is all that matters. Bad injury timing can happen to anyone. I'm not looking to salary dump my #4/5 defenceman making number 4/5 defenceman money in 3 years thanks.

 

[notbias]

So 6 D times 32 teams that's 75 of 192 or the 61st percentile? That's 11% from the exact middle. They're in the back half of their prime sure but D tend to reach their prime later. Tanev is the only one who's deal goes so long he's likely not going to be NHL quality at the end of it. Surely you don't think OEL's going to go from a good #4 to a #7 in 3 years. or Rielly from an ok #1 to a #3 in 3 years. Or McCabe being a #5 in 3 years. 4.5 million is going to be #4/5 D money in 3 years man.

There are currently 239 registered D this season, all of our top 4 is in the top 75 for age.

I'm not sure there is an older top 4 than ours.

The issue is not a single contract, it's that every D contract we have takes them to 36+... there are bound to be some bad years where they are playing well below their contracts.

OEL went from bad to good in one year, if he regressed I wouldn't be surprised.

All I am saying is these are risky contracts to carry all at once, it could end up really bad.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Value wise that's a pretty nice contract.

 

[Da Mash]

Teams could in theory defer a portion of big ticket contract for super stars to future years... totally made up name lets say Match deMiner signs a $12.56 mil contract, could the team defer 25% of that to year 5 and reduce his salary down to $10 mil cap hit annually?



This is some purple haze enlightenment

The great James Marshall Hendrix….man I regret not seeing him in concert. One of my all time favs. They don’t make music like they did in the late 60’s and 70’s