Confirmed Signing with Link: [TOR] D Jake McCabe signs extension with the Maple Leafs (5 years, $4.51M AAV; deferred salary between year 2 and 3)

[KrisLetAngry]

Now that the Leafs are doing it, salary deferment will be against the rules

I think the next CBA will remove this.

My understanding is Gary Bettman really dislikes this happening.

 

[Strangle]

Horrible signing by a team that will win nothing. Also run it back!!

It didn’t take longer than post #3 lmao

 

[WiHockeyGuy]

Good for Jake. Also it just seems right for there to be a McCabe on defense for the Leafs.

 

[Roo]

This is a solid deal in isolation...

But slightly problematic in the grand scheme of things. He's getting a $2.51m raise (from our perspective), as he turns 32.

The next year the Leafs have 4 defencemen signed for a total of $19m, the youngest of which is Morgan Rielly at 31, who will have been a 12-year vet at this point.

He is not getting a $2.51m raise. He is currently at $4m aav with the Blackhawks retaining half from their 2023 trade.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Nobody would have given McCabe five years and $5.5 million. Thats insanity.

evolving-hockey's contract projection had him at 5 x 5.6

 

[seanlinden]

He is not getting a $2.51m raise. He is currently at $4m aav with the Blackhawks retaining half from their 2023 trade.

$2.51m raise FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE

The current cap hit (after retention) is irrelevant to the extension. You're not going to find a defenseman in free agency who can play on your 2nd pair for $2M.

Correct... I guess the question is -- are we "happy" with him as our 2nd pair defenceman for the next couple of years.

You look at all 3 deals -- Tanev, OEL, McCabe, there's nothing wrong with any of them individually.

The challenge is add Rielly into that mix as your #1-- is this the trio you want as your 2-3-4? Even if you assume that you can go out and get a better #1 or #2 to bump the trio down, it's a very old group.

 

[cc]

At his age, I don't like the term.

 

[FerrisRox]

evolving-hockey's contract projection had him at 5 x 5.6

Okay ... what do you want me to do with that?

If you think there are teams that want to pay Jake McCabe $5.5 million until he's 37, I'm gonna go ahead and disagree.

McCabe is a solid mid-pairing guy and he's played quite well for the Maple Leafs since he was acquired. He will turn 32 about a week into his new contract. I think he could have got $5.5 on a two year deal, and maybe on a three, but a five year deal? Extremely unlikely.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Okay ... what do you want me to do with that?

If you think there are teams that want to pay Jake McCabe $5.5 million until he's 37, I'm gonna go ahead and disagree.

McCabe is a solid mid-pairing guy and he's played quite well for the Maple Leafs since he was acquired. He will turn 32 about a week into his new contract. I think he could have got $5.5 on a two year deal, and maybe on a three, but a five year deal? Extremely unlikely.

2nd pair defenders don't sign two year deals in UFA, there's too much interest in them.

Your position is that it's insanity. A group that models contract projections based on historical data disagrees.

 

[Hobnobs]

To be honest, the Leafs will not be competitive in 5 years I don't think so who cares. It's all about the next few years

So when is it expected for the Leafs to be competitive?

 

[Golden_Jet]

3-4 year would of been better, cap hit is fine.

 

[Chainshot]

Good for him. Still remember him saying "I'm just a guy" in an interview years ago. Well, you are a pretty good defenseman as well, Jake.

 

[mouser]

Would have much preferred four years on this deal instead of five.

 

[Puckstuff]

McCabe, OEL and Tanev all under 4.51 is insane value for the next 2-3 years. Sure we are paying the price via term so the back end might get ugly but this is the price to pay to get these low cap hits. Great work by Treliving.

 

[Go Wings]

Solid signing

 

[wired14]

I see people complaining that it should have been 1 year less or a little less money, but honestly he is one of the Leafs most consistent defencemen. He hits, he blocks shots, he can kill penalties, and he makes a good first pass. I am fine with this deal. He might be the best all-around defenceman on the team.

 

[JediOrderPizza]

Hmm last couple years might not be great, but doubt they care.

 

[REALTALK81]

Solid deal considering he can play L or R side, block shots and play physical.

 

[Peasy]

Ye deferred salaries are gunna get axed ASAP

 

[Koivu11]

Ye deferred salaries are gunna get axed ASAP

Not even sure how it doesn’t count as part of the AAV calculations with it being between year 2 and 3. Like how is it not treated like a SB or part of the yearly salary. I can understand it when it’s paid out at the end of the contract but not in the middle like this one. Can someone explain?

 

[FerrisRox]

I was expecting him to get the zadorov deal. Solid deal.

Why would you think Jake McCabe would have garnered the kind of contract that Zadorov got?

 

[WhatTheDuck]

That doesn't seem too bad, 20+ min per night Dmen with any standout qualities, are always going to get paid well as UFA's. I don't doubt he may have done even better on an open market, but obviously likes where he's at. It's low end top 4 money for a solid second pairing guy, seems fine to me, just the term that's a maybe a tad worrisome.

 

[All Mod Cons]

Best contract in the Atlantic division

Why?

 

[mouser]

Not even sure how it doesn’t count as part of the AAV calculations with it being between year 2 and 3. Like how is it not treated like a SB or part of the yearly salary. I can understand it when it’s paid out at the end of the contract but not in the middle like this one. Can someone explain?

Deferred money is counted in the AAV at a discount rate based presumably on SOFR.

McCabe is deferring $5.5m to year 6, the NPV (net present value) of that deferral is included in the AAV at 4.55m. That’s a reduction of $199k/year on the AAV.

 

[Koivu11]

Deferred money is counted in the AAV at a discount rate based presumably on SOFR.

McCabe is deferring $5.5m to year 6, the NPV (net present value) of that deferral is included in the AAV at 4.55m. That’s a reduction of $199k/year on the AAV.

Thanks for clarifying.