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

[Skolman]

Solid singing. I was expecting 5-5.5 if he leveraged potential free agency.

He will basically be 32 when that deal kicks in, I doubt teams would be lining up to give him 5-5.5 mil at that term.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Hate the deferred money. Get it out of the playbook in the next CBA.

 

[CraigBillington]

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.

What i don't get is the between years 2 and 3 part

 

[dj Mahoney]

Seems fair

 

[AcerComputer]

Cap hit is full market rate but fair, but the term is going to get real ugly at 5 years when the guy is already 31 yrs old.

I mean we handed Tanev 6 years at 34 years old

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

A win for the division.

 

[AcerComputer]

McCabe looks like a poor mans Duncan Keith out there, so it's a good deal

 

[WarriorofTime]

Trevling making the best out of that situation imo. Most gloomy thing from a leaf perspective is that their defense for the foreseeable future will not be as good as each prior year with all the term handed out to older guys.

 

[HockeyVirus]

I am convinced McCabe is a litmus test for hockey evaluation. Anyone who thinks this is a bad deal probably doesn't watch him and is just talking smack (fair enough).

If anyone watched him with regularity, how consistent he is for the Leafs and how physical he defends, in the role he has played for us and thinks he is a bad player not worth 4M a year you can basically throw that in the trash.

He's not some stud #1 Dman but as far as 2nd pairing guys go, he's really good.

 

[The Management]

Term is a tad too long, but the AAV is about right, and we might have needed to pony up extra term to keep it at that level.

You won't find many Maple Leafs fans who do not like Jake McCabe. He's been a solid soldier on that middle pairing.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Trevling making the best out of that situation imo. Most gloomy thing from a leaf perspective is that their defense for the foreseeable future will not be as good as each prior year with all the term handed out to older guys.

I guess the good news is over time as the quality degrades from those 4 guys as they age and an upgrade is needed the cap has gone up substantially and they can afford to shift everyone's roles down a slot and bring in an age appropriate #1 assuming the money's not taken by other positions. This will be #4/#5 D money by the time the cap reaches 100 million.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I guess the good news is over time as the quality degrades from those 4 guys as they age and an upgrade is needed the cap has gone up substantially and they can afford to shift everyone's roles down a slot and bring in an age appropriate #1 assuming the money's not taken by other positions. This will be #4/#5 D money by the time the cap reaches 100 million.

True but that cap goes for everyone.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

I guess the good news is over time as the quality degrades from those 4 guys as they age and an upgrade is needed the cap has gone up substantially and they can afford to shift everyone's roles down a slot and bring in an age appropriate #1 assuming the money's not taken by other positions. This will be #4/#5 D money by the time the cap reaches 100 million.

Just a heads up. When people try to justify contracts based on the cap going up it’s a pretty big red flag. We saw the same thing in Vancouver during the Benning era.

 

[Paulinbc]

This seems… A little much.

 

[RomanianLeafs]

I would have loved 4 years but it's OK haters can say what they want Jake has been solid

 

[Canada4Gold]

True but that cap goes for everyone.

Yes but the 4 guys they have now are fixed costs. If one thinks they're good enough to be a teams 1 through 4 guys now and in 3 years each guy degrades 1 spot becoming a 2 through 5 they still cost the same and the extra 12 to 15 million each team has to spend the Leafs could use theirs on bringing in the #1 they need at that time. The cost of a #1 will have also gone up by then but 12 should still cover it. It's not entirely that simple with F and G roles to fill as well and the incremental increse than gets used as it gets added rather than 12 million all at once but as a rough plan.

4.5 million now is #3/#4 tweener money which McCabe roughly is. In 3 years it's probably #4/#5 tweener money, which McCabe will probably have degraded to. I'm concerned about the long term outlook of the Tanev deal. This one I'm happy with.

 

[TootooTrain]

Yes he'll be in his mid 30s but its a pretty good deal.

 

[Smif]

Trevling making the best out of that situation imo. Most gloomy thing from a leaf perspective is that their defense for the foreseeable future will not be as good as each prior year with all the term handed out to older guys.

My guess is the plan is to reallocate Tavares' salary to more defense which will hopefully get a boost next year.

 

[sxvnert]

Much better of his off side with OEL.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Yes but the 4 guys they have now are fixed costs. If one thinks they're good enough to be a teams 1 through 4 guys now and in 3 years each guy degrades 1 spot becoming a 2 through 5 they still cost the same and the extra 12 to 15 million each team has to spend the Leafs could use theirs on bringing in the #1 they need at that time. The cost of a #1 will have also gone up by then but 12 should still cover it. It's not entirely that simple with F and G roles to fill as well and the incremental increse than gets used as it gets added rather than 12 million all at once but as a rough plan.

4.5 million now is #3/#4 tweener money which McCabe roughly is. In 3 years it's probably #4/#5 tweener money, which McCabe will probably have degraded to. I'm concerned about the long term outlook of the Tanev deal. This one I'm happy with.

Yes, correct. It's basically a race between cap-flationary bringing down the total % of cap that is allocated against a potential player decline throughout the term of the contract. Also correct that a larger cap means larger amounts necessary to sign other pieces, whether it be other position groups or upgrades within the position group. I would reckon with all those factors, it will be hard to improve upon the position group with four players locked in during their 30s at what will still be a strong multiple above minimum [plug] amount.

 

[Jeune Poulet]

Lol

This is the Calgary Flames all over again.

In 2 or 3 years, when it's time to clean up this mess in Toronto, Treliving will be gone, laughing his ass off at his successor.

 

[Lunatik]

3 million seems high for bottom pair. Deharnais, Forbort, and Branstrom make two and under, while our 2nd pair is four and three.

I can't speak on Mcabe but Brad isnt known for signing great deals

the bolded isn't really true. he's not known for signing great FA deals, he's always done a good to very good job with re-signing players.

 

[mouser]

What i don't get is the between years 2 and 3 part

The contract defers $3m from year 2 and $2.5m from year 3.

That deferred $5.5m is paid in year 6.

 

[Spargon]

For better or worse the Leafs for the first time in ages has a solidified top 4 for at least the next 3 years after this. I am sure some of these will be bad deals by the last year or 2 but you are paying for a window to win now.

As a Leaf fan I am happier knowing we have
Rielly-Tanev
Mccabe-OEL

vs

Rielly-Random
Cluster-f***

 

[seanlinden]

Yes, correct. It's basically a race between cap-flationary bringing down the total % of cap that is allocated against a potential player decline throughout the term of the contract. Also correct that a larger cap means larger amounts necessary to sign other pieces, whether it be other position groups or upgrades within the position group. I would reckon with all those factors, it will be hard to improve upon the position group with four players locked in during their 30s at what will still be a strong multiple above minimum [plug] amount.

This.

You look at the Benoit deal, and objectively, it's a nice piece of business. $1.35m for a bottom pair everyday defenceman, that plays the way you want.

The challenge is -- how are the Leafs realistically going to improve on D? They're spending $23m on 7 defencemen right now (Rielly/Tanev/OEL/Liljegren/McCabe/Benoit/Timmins -- I'll exclude Myers), and next year have $24.36m locked up in 6 defencemen. Assume Liljegren gone and maybe an ELC in for $1m, and you're down to $22.36m committed for 6 guys.

To get the defenceman that's going to truly "elevate" this group, is probably going to cost you $7m.... putting your defensive commitment to roughly $29.36m... up $5m from this year.

Yes, the cap is projected to go up by that amount... but there are other issues in play:

1. Matthew Knies is in line for a big raise -- probably in the neighborhood of $5m more than he's paid today.

2. The goaltending tandem is getting a $3m raise.

3. Sure, John Tavares is coming off the books, but you're going to need a #2 centre to replace him. These days, that costs $8m.

4. Mitch Marner, probably in line for a raise.

A $5m cap bump, and $3m saved on Tavares, doesn't pay for $5m more to Knies, $5m more on blueline, and $3m more to the goaltending tandem... and that's before talking about Marner.