Decisions, decisions

[Al14]

I'd not considered the uncertainty around what those second contracts will be and just put em down for "cheaper than they'll be later when the team wants its Hossa/Richards." Seems sound, in that those contracts could be $7-8m (inflation adjusted Edmonton contracts?), three of which could certainly make Stamkos's $10m a problem. I wonder the extent to which Pridham is looking down the line.

I guess that's sort of my point though. That is a fair number if you're looking at a progression of those Oilers guys and their contracts but there's a pretty big difference between those guys and the guys we're talking about. Doughty finished 2nd in Norris voting in his second year. Kopitar scored 77 points as a second year player. Toews, in his third year, was almost a point per game player and finished 4th in the Selke race, Kane scored 88 points.

Maybe it's fair to say that Eberle, Hall or RNH would have looked better in different surroundings and that they can't entirely be judged on the stink the Edmonton situation has left on them but I think there's a gap between "this young player we have is pretty good" which would determine the Edmonton deals and "this young player we have is already making a case for being among the best in the league" which would be in play if our young guys look more like the Hawks/Kings guys.

I just don't know how that plays out. Like I said, it's going to be really interesting to see what Ekblad/McDavid/Eichel do on their second deals.

McDavid's second contract is likely going to catapult him to the highest salary in the NHL. That's the only way I see Edmonton being able to lock him up long term.  We'll see. 

 

[Highlander]

Oil prices better come back up!! 8)

 

[Al14]

Oil prices better come back up!! 8)

:sarcasm on:  Can't wait for that to happen!!!  :sarcasm off:    :-*

 

[mr grieves]

I'd not considered the uncertainty around what those second contracts will be and just put em down for "cheaper than they'll be later when the team wants its Hossa/Richards." Seems sound, in that those contracts could be $7-8m (inflation adjusted Edmonton contracts?), three of which could certainly make Stamkos's $10m a problem. I wonder the extent to which Pridham is looking down the line.

I guess that's sort of my point though. That is a fair number if you're looking at a progression of those Oilers guys and their contracts but there's a pretty big difference between those guys and the guys we're talking about. Doughty finished 2nd in Norris voting in his second year. Kopitar scored 77 points as a second year player. Toews, in his third year, was almost a point per game player and finished 4th in the Selke race, Kane scored 88 points.

Maybe it's fair to say that Eberle, Hall or RNH would have looked better in different surroundings and that they can't entirely be judged on the stink the Edmonton situation has left on them but I think there's a gap between "this young player we have is pretty good" which would determine the Edmonton deals and "this young player we have is already making a case for being among the best in the league" which would be in play if our young guys look more like the Hawks/Kings guys.

I just don't know how that plays out. Like I said, it's going to be really interesting to see what Ekblad/McDavid/Eichel do on their second deals.

I wonder: would percent of the cap hit be a useful way of thinking of this?

Whatever the dollar-amount cap hit is, no good team is likely going (or, in our case, ought to) to depart widely from what those model franchises have done when signing the next generation of elite talent.

Didn't look at everyone from the last wave, but Kane & Toews each signed for $6.3m for their 21yo seasons, when the cap was about $60m. So, a bit over 10%... Doughty for a bit less.

So, the Leafs already have their best Dman locked up at less (7%), but they likely have an extra elite guy coming into the system in this year's pick... Gardiner and Kadri are making about what your 6th & 7th highest guys should be paid.

So... signing Stamkos seems feasible, but the UFA money means he'd likely be at 12% or so of the cap (more than Getzlaf and Perry now), so it'd mean definitely no other UFAs that aren't off the scrap heap. And, with respect to the overall salary structure, it'd mean you're shifting money (farther) away from defense and going cheap in goal. I think there's good reason to look at Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh and think their greatest salary inefficiencies are in net, so I'm all for not committing serious cap space to a goalie.

But cheap of defense is dicier. Isn't Anaheim doing okay with that for for now..?

Also, things being that tight supposes: Nylander, Marner, and 2016's 1st pick all develop into those top of the league players, there's enough ice-time for that 3 young forwards to score enough to demand Toews/Kane/Kopitar like money, the cap does go up beyond 80m, Pridham isn't a cap wizard...

 

[Kin]

I wonder: would percent of the cap hit be a useful way of thinking of this?

Maybe, but only if you take into account the way that players at the top of the salary scale have also shifted the % of what they're taking. Again, it seems like a pretty simple question. Do you think guys like McDavid, Eichel and Ekblad are going to sign long-term second contracts at 7 million or so?

Whatever the dollar-amount cap hit is, no good team is likely going (or, in our case, ought to) to depart widely from what those model franchises have done when signing the next generation of elite talent.

Sadly, teams don't get to unilaterally set a salary structure.

So... signing Stamkos seems feasible, but the UFA money means he'd likely be at 12% or so of the cap (more than Getzlaf and Perry now), so it'd mean definitely no other UFAs that aren't off the scrap heap. And, with respect to the overall salary structure, it'd mean you're shifting money (farther) away from defense and going cheap in goal. I think there's good reason to look at Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh and think their greatest salary inefficiencies are in net, so I'm all for not committing serious cap space to a goalie.

I think 12% of the cap is a pretty conservative guess at what Stamkos might come in at. That's 8.6 or 8.7 million a year, right? Why are we assuming that Stamkos, on the UFA market, is going to be coming in at a significant price cut from guys like Kane, Toews or Kopitar?

But cheap of defense is dicier. Isn't Anaheim doing okay with that for for now..?

Let's see what Anaheim looks like next year after re-signing Lindholm/Vatanen. 

 

[mr grieves]

I wonder: would percent of the cap hit be a useful way of thinking of this?

Maybe, but only if you take into account the way that players at the top of the salary scale have also shifted the % of what they're taking. Again, it seems like a pretty simple question. Do you think guys like McDavid, Eichel and Ekblad are going to sign long-term second contracts at 7 million or so?

Whatever the dollar-amount cap hit is, no good team is likely going (or, in our case, ought to) to depart widely from what those model franchises have done when signing the next generation of elite talent.

Sadly, teams don't get to unilaterally set a salary structure.

How many RFAs recently have not reported when offered as many years they want and the difference is ~$2m?

So... signing Stamkos seems feasible, but the UFA money means he'd likely be at 12% or so of the cap (more than Getzlaf and Perry now), so it'd mean definitely no other UFAs that aren't off the scrap heap. And, with respect to the overall salary structure, it'd mean you're shifting money (farther) away from defense and going cheap in goal. I think there's good reason to look at Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh and think their greatest salary inefficiencies are in net, so I'm all for not committing serious cap space to a goalie.

I think 12% of the cap is a pretty conservative guess at what Stamkos might come in at. That's 8.6 or 8.7 million a year, right? Why are we assuming that Stamkos, on the UFA market, is going to be coming in at a significant price cut from guys like Kane, Toews or Kopitar?

$10.5 under an $80m cap is 12%. It's a maybe reasonable guess at where it'll be in 4 years when this actually matters.

But cheap of defense is dicier. Isn't Anaheim doing okay with that for for now..?

Let's see what Anaheim looks like next year after re-signing Lindholm/Vatanen.

Yeah, I'm curious. I'm guessing no good, sustainable team with 5 forwards and 2 defensemen eating 60% of the cap.

 

[Kin]

How many RFAs recently have not reported when offered as many years they want and the difference is ~$2m?

Roughly the same number as the number of teams who have gone into negotiations with their top flight young building blocks looking to antagonize them or drive them towards shorter deals/early free agency. When you're dealing with players of the calibre we're talking about offer sheets are a real threat. There is no combination of salary/RFA compensation that would scare me off the Leafs offering McDavid a deal as a RFA and it's a no lose situation. Either you make Edmonton pay him what he wants or you get a 21 year old franchise player at a reasonable price.

We saw what happened in Montreal with Subban. Teams don't really have a ton of leverage in these situations. The number of years a player wants isn't really much of a prize if it's at a lower salary than they want. 

 
$10.5 under an $80m cap is 12%. It's a maybe reasonable guess at where it'll be in 4 years when this actually matters.

Which, at the very least, should be another warning sign on this sort of impatience. Unless you're desperate for Stamkos, why play that sort of chicken with the cap? Actually knowing what cap dollars you have to spend once your young core is locked up seems like a positive, no?
   

 

[slapshot]

Gotta love draft lottery outcome, now it will be interesting to see where we go from here? What I see it, here are the next three biggest decision, not particularly in order.

1. Stamkos or no Stamkos? I think it might come down to money. If Stamkos is willing to take something that Kessel type money instead of Kane type money because he wants to play at home and sees where the Leafs are heading with Babcock, Lou, and Shanny leading the way, there could be a good fit. He'd certainly be a quality veteran presence to lead the way. But if he's going for the biggest bucks, I think Shannie and co. will hold the course. If Stamkos comes on board, it likely free up a quality piece up front to be used to upgrade on D or in the net.

2. Upgrading the D. As well and Hunwick and Marincin (in latter half of year) played, it would be great to find a top pairing defenceman to play along side Rielly. Ideally, the Leafs would try to move up in the draft  to land one of the three or four top d-men available this year. Their lower 1st, a second and a prospect might get the job done. It appears the Leafs are targeting Nikita Zaitsev to play alongside Gardiner. I've been really impressed with Connor Carrick both in his Leafs debut and with the Marlies. I could easily see him surplanting Corrado as the third right d-man. That would leave either Marincin or Hunwick as the third pairing left d-man. That is assuming the Leafs could move up in the draft. I would also think, they'd have to see if a rookie d-man could handle top-pairing minutes (probably not right away), so Hunwick or Marincin would likely play with Rieilly for a while, until a young prospect could move up to take that spot alongside Rielly. I don't see anything via free agency to acquire a top d-man. Trade is a possibly but I think moving up in the draft to get one, given the assets the Leafs currently have makes the most sense.

3. Upgrading in the nets. In a perfect world, Bernier would get his act together and become the number 1 goalie we all originally hoped he would be after be after his first year here. However, that's far from sure, so no doubt the Leafs are going to hedge their bet in net. Frederic Anderson seems perhaps the likely target, though I wouldn't be surprised if Marc Andre Fleury also becomes available, and would he make sense? Certainly a veteran presence who's won a cup, and may still have some good years left in him. I don't think the Leafs could pry Matt Murray away from the Pens. There are a few other goalie options around but I also like to see the Leafs grab a top ranked goalie with one of their picks. I don't think Sparks or Bibeau will be ready for anything more than a back-up role, and that's a maybe. Goaltending seems to be the hardest area to predict.

 

[sneakyray]

I wonder also if the leafs will still be in on vesey.

 

[Redleaf]

I wonder also if the leafs will still be in on vesey.

Exciting times for sure. Why wouldn't they still try to sign Vesey? I mean nothing is required to try to sign him? It could also free up some assets in order to help strenthen their defense. Signing Stamkos could essentially facilitate the same sort of trade. Perhaps Marner or Kadri gets shopped and the Leafs land a true #1 defenseman.

 

[lamajama]

Please don't mention Marner in this context again.

That would be too Leaf-ian to trade away probably the best prospect currently in their system.

 

[dappleganger]

Please don't mention Marner in this context again.

That would be too Leaf-ian to trade away probably the best prospect currently in their system.

Personally I think Marner is more untouchable than anyone on the Leafs including the 1st pick. He's Hunter's guy.

 

[herman]

Please don't mention Marner in this context again.

That would be too Leaf-ian to trade away probably the best prospect currently in their system.

Personally I think Marner is more untouchable than anyone on the Leafs including the 1st pick. He's Hunter's guy.

Personally, I don't think anyone should be untouchable on a rebuilding team -- merely extremely difficult to touch and at great cost to the toucher.

I would imagine the Leafs have a price in mind for Marner, Nylander, the 2016 1st overall pick. They just happen to be prices no one would pay. For example, I would trade any of them for McDavid, straight up.

 

[jonlleafs]

Please don't mention Marner in this context again.

That would be too Leaf-ian to trade away probably the best prospect currently in their system.

Agreed.  Let's never mention his name and the word trade again. 

 

[slapshot]

I wonder also if the leafs will still be in on vesey.

Exciting times for sure. Why wouldn't they still try to sign Vesey? I mean nothing is required to try to sign him? It could also free up some assets in order to help strenthen their defense. Signing Stamkos could essentially facilitate the same sort of trade. Perhaps Marner or Kadri gets shopped and the Leafs land a true #1 defenseman.

I was thinking more like the Leafs pick from Pittsburgh, a second rounder and a prospect like Kapanen or Lindberg for a crack at one of the top 3 d-men this year, Chychrun,  Juolevi or Sergachyov. I would try to try to retain the high end talent and go for quality for quantity deal, if someone would bite. I don't know if that would get it done? Anyone have a preference among those 3 d-men?

 

[lamajama]

The apparent plethora of top quality prospects for the Leafs (probably never seen before) means
we will have to be moving quite a few out as another 10-12 are being drafted in the next 2 years
and the Leafs have the 50 max contracts. I know most of the new drafts do not have to be signed
so that won't impact the 50 but for sure we'll see a lot of the old prospects playing for the Marlies
having to be moved.

It's a great situation to be in in terms of packaging prospects for a better player/prospect.

It's also high risk (see Pogge and Rask as an example) but I for one feel so much more confident
with Hunter's crew making these decisions - and yes I do know mistakes will be made,

But not on the JFJ level that's for sure. Thank goodness.

 

[Al14]

The apparent plethora of top quality prospects for the Leafs (probably never seen before) means
we will have to be moving quite a few out as another 10-12 are being drafted in the next 2 years
and the Leafs have the 50 max contracts. I know most of the new drafts do not have to be signed
so that won't impact the 50 but for sure we'll see a lot of the old prospects playing for the Marlies
having to be moved.

It's a great situation to be in in terms of packaging prospects for a better player/prospect.

It's also high risk (see Pogge and Rask as an example) but I for one feel so much more confident
with Hunter's crew making these decisions - and yes I do know mistakes will be made,

But not on the JFJ level that's for sure. Thank goodness.

With Boston on the verge of needing a rebuild, we might just get to see Rask in a Leafs jersey very soon! 

Just spit balling on that one!  ???

 

[Omallley]

The apparent plethora of top quality prospects for the Leafs (probably never seen before) means
we will have to be moving quite a few out as another 10-12 are being drafted in the next 2 years
and the Leafs have the 50 max contracts. I know most of the new drafts do not have to be signed
so that won't impact the 50 but for sure we'll see a lot of the old prospects playing for the Marlies
having to be moved.

It's a great situation to be in in terms of packaging prospects for a better player/prospect.

It's also high risk (see Pogge and Rask as an example) but I for one feel so much more confident
with Hunter's crew making these decisions - and yes I do know mistakes will be made,

But not on the JFJ level that's for sure. Thank goodness.

This was something that I was thinking about lately - the combination of 50 max contracts, young players without waiver exemption status, and the larger holes on the team (defense, goal) will dictate a lot of the moves that are made at the draft, or leading up to the 2016-17 season. Assuming that Jared Cowen is being bought out, the Leafs have 34 players under contract for next season. Let's call that 35 with the safe assumption that their first overall pick is signed/with the club in 16-17.

There are 10 remaining RFAs to sign (Harrington, C. Carrick, Percy, Corrado, Marincin, Sparks, S. Carrick, C. Smith, Leivo and Holland).

Trying to visualize the roster as a list of folks who are on NHL contracts, who are likely to make the team, and who's likely on LTIR hasn't been easy to put together, but I'll try - this is not meant to be anything other than a descending list of salary commitments to highlight some of the contracts that are likely to get moved out:

Likely LTIR:
Horton (5.3)
Lupul (5.25)
Robidas (3)

Under NHL contract next year:
JvR (4.2) - Kadri (4.5) - Michalek (4)
Komarov (3) - Laich (4.5) - [empty]
Greening (2.65) - Bozak (4.2) - [empty]
[empty] - [empty] - [empty]

Rielly (5) - Gardiner (4.05)
Hunwick (1.2) - Zaitsev (.925)
[empty] - [empty]

Bernier (4.15)
[empty]

If you layer in the RFAs:
JvR (4.2) - Kadri (4.5) - Michalek (4)
Komarov (3) - Laich (4.5) -  [empty]
Greening (2.65) - Bozak (4.2) -  [empty]
[empty]  - Holland (RFA)  - [empty]

Rielly (5) - Gardiner (4.05)
Hunwick (1.2) - Zaitsev (.925)
Marincin (RFA) - Carrado (RFA)

Bernier (4.15)
Sparks (RFA)

If we start to look at the guys in the AHL/presumed top pick, there are additional guys to layer in:

Making the team:
Nylander (C/RW) .925
Matthews (C/W?) .925

Likely making the team:
Soshnikov (LW) .737
Marner (RW) .925

May or may not be good enough for NHL/players with waiver implications (I'm likely missing a few waiver guys here, but off the top of my head):
Brown
Hyman
Leivo (RFA)
Harrington (RFA)
Carrick (RFA)


Layering in the young players:
JvR (4.2) - Kadri (4.5) - Michalek (4)
Komarov (3) - Laich (4.5) -  Nylander (.925)
Greening (2.65) - Bozak (4.2) -  Marner (.925)
Sohsnikov (.737) - Matthews (.925) - Hyman (.900)
Leivo (RFA) - Holland (RFA) - Brown (.687)

Rielly (5) - Gardiner (4.05)
Hunwick (1.2) - Zaitsev (.925)
Marincin (RFA) - Corrado (RFA)
Harrington (RFA) - Carrick (RFA)

Bernier (4.15)
Sparks (RFA)

That's a bit of a mess. A good kind of mess to have (in that there are likely too many guys who *could* make the jump to the NHL than there is room fo), but there are definitely some players that will need to be moved out. So who goes? The obvious ones for me are Bozak, Holland and some defense - likely Hunwick and Harrington? This ignores what, if anything, could be had in return, but I just don't see those guys fitting.

Where do you guys want the roster to end up? What could you see the final roster looking like?

 

[Kin]

That's a bit of a mess. A good kind of mess to have (in that there are likely too many guys who *could* make the jump to the NHL than there is room fo), but there are definitely some players that will need to be moved out. So who goes? The obvious ones for me are Bozak, Holland and some defense - likely Hunwick and Harrington? This ignores what, if anything, could be had in return, but I just don't see those guys fitting. 

Bozak is an interesting case. I keep going back and forth on him. Earlier I made the case that his season had moved his contract from one of those anchors you'd move in a second if you could to maybe actually being a pretty good value. He's produced at roughly a 50 pts/82 pace for five straight years now and this year proved that wasn't just a function of being joined at the hip. A 50 point center who's not awful defensively and can win face-offs shouldn't just be a salary dump, right? He should have some real value. Not 1st round pick value but 2nd at least.

But the more and more I think about it the harder time I have seeing him move. Bozak's production can't be entirely linked to Kessel any more but it probably can be linked to getting a ton of PP time. He's also got a bit of an injury history at this point. Is there a team out there who's really going to look at Bozak as a desirable option as a top 2 C? Is there a team who won't think they have better ways of spending 4.2 million?

I don't know, I think that's going to be a tough sell without taking back some bad money. 

 

[Omallley]

Bozak is an interesting case. I keep going back and forth on him. Earlier I made the case that his season had moved his contract from one of those anchors you'd move in a second if you could to maybe actually being a pretty good value. He's produced at roughly a 50 pts/82 pace for five straight years now and this year proved that wasn't just a function of being joined at the hip. A 50 point center who's not awful defensively and can win face-offs shouldn't just be a salary dump, right? He should have some real value. Not 1st round pick value but 2nd at least.

But the more and more I think about it the harder time I have seeing him move. Bozak's production can't be entirely linked to Kessel any more but it probably can be linked to getting a ton of PP time. He's also got a bit of an injury history at this point. Is there a team out there who's really going to look at Bozak as a desirable option as a top 2 C? Is there a team who won't think they have better ways of spending 4.2 million?

I don't know, I think that's going to be a tough sell without taking back some bad money.

I see there being more of an opportunity cost with Bozak in the lineup in that he takes a role that would otherwise (presumably at least) be up for grabs by one of the current-Marlies. Maybe that just means that Nylander gets time on the wing instead of at centre (and perhaps Babcock is happier with that prospect), but he does feel like the guy that the Leafs could get something back for, but it is a fair point that perhaps there's a bad contract coming back with him.

If not Bozak, what do you do? Buyout Laich? Ship Greening off for a song (if that's even possible)? Keep some guys on the Marlies or have Marner stay in junior for another year? Or maybe I am not looking at this right, and perhaps the solution is moving a guy like JvR for a serious return.