Unofficial 2013-2014 Armchair GM Thread

[Kin]

The Leafs are also in somewhat of a cap jam, so whatever value you get for him now is probably lower than it would be otherwise.

That only works if the teams looking to trade for Franson don't really want him or if the Leafs are limited to trading Franson as a means of getting under the cap. If I'm a GM of a team who really wants Franson I'm not playing hardball with the Leafs because of their cap situation if someone else can come along and beat my offer.

 

[Kin]

Here's my latest attempt at squeezing under the cap.  It involves a prayer that some team will take Liles if we retain 33% of his salary.  Liles at 2.6 million for another team doesn't seem atrocious to me.  I'm not expecting to get any assets back.  It is pure salary dump.  You could probably afford to pay the combo of Liles + Kadri $500K more if you had to.  Given Kadri has only been in the NHL for 1/2 a season really and Subban got 2.4, $3 million each doesn't sound impossible.

CAPGEEK.COM USER GENERATED ROSTER
My Custom Lineup
FORWARDS
James Van Riemsdyk ($4.250m) / Tyler Bozak ($4.200m) / Phil Kessel ($5.400m)
Joffrey Lupul ($5.250m) / Nazem Kadri ($3.000m) / David Clarkson ($5.250m)
Joe Colborne ($0.600m) / Dave Bolland ($3.375m) / Nikolai Kulemin ($2.800m)
Frazer McLaren ($0.700m) / Jay McClement ($1.500m) / Colton Orr ($0.925m)
Trevor Smith ($0.550m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Dion Phaneuf ($6.500m) / Carl Gunnarsson ($3.150m)
Jake Gardiner ($1.117m) / Cody Franson ($3.000m)
Paul Ranger ($1.000m) / Mark Fraser ($1.000m)
Korbinian Holzer ($0.788m) /
GOALTENDERS
Jonathan Bernier ($2.900m)
James Reimer ($1.800m)
OTHER
Buyout: Darcy Tucker ($1.000m)
Buyout: Colby Armstrong ($1.000m)
RETAINED SALARY TRANSACTIONS (2.766% of upper limit)
Matt Frattin ($0.437m?0.5%) Ben Scrivens ($0.062m?0.1%) John-Michael Liles ($1.279m?33.0%)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $62,832,917; BONUSES: $300,000
CAP SPACE (21-man roster): $1,767,083

You know, lost in all of the talk about the cap and the various signings is....I really like that team. Yeah, I'm not wild about Bozak as the #1 guy but if Kadri steps up that might be the #1 line going forward. I really like that 3rd line too. That's ok depth at that position and yeah, the defense isn't great but ideally Rielly is in that mix at some point sooner rather than later and the goaltending looks pretty good.

I think that's a good team. Not world beaters but three legit lines, pretty good top 4....could be a lot worse.

 

[mr grieves]

You know, lost in all of the talk about the cap and the various signings is....I really like that team. Yeah, I'm not wild about Bozak as the #1 guy but if Kadri steps up that might be the #1 line going forward. I really like that 3rd line too. That's ok depth at that position and yeah, the defense isn't great but ideally Rielly is in that mix at some point sooner rather than later and the goaltending looks pretty good.

I think that's a good team. Not world beaters but three legit lines, pretty good top 4....could be a lot worse.

If that's roughly the opening day roster, I'd think that's a pretty good, competitive team.
But I don't like the overall depth very much. What do you think if, say, Lupul goes down for any length of time? Frattin and MacArthur were replaceable parts, but they haven't been replaced. I don't see many options on the bottom six that can move up and provide much in the way of offense, and I don't know who's useful along those lines on the Marlies. 

 

[Kin]

If that's roughly the opening day roster, I'd think that's a pretty good, competitive team.
But I don't like the overall depth very much. What do you think if, say, Lupul goes down for any length of time? Frattin and MacArthur were replaceable parts, but they haven't been replaced. I don't see many options on the bottom six that can move up and provide much in the way of offense, and I don't know who's useful along those lines on the Marlies.

Well, Mac's replacement is Clarkson and Frattin's is Colborne. I wrote a post on the main board about forward depth in the organization recently but to sum it up the Leafs have, like, 5 or 6 forwards who'll be on the Marlies who were picked in the top 3 rounds(Ashton, Biggs, Leivo, Ryan, Ross and....I'm blanking on someone) as well as guys like D'Amigo so there are players who might very well warrant a look in that event.

edit: The guys I forgot were McKegg and Devane.

 

[mr grieves]

If that's roughly the opening day roster, I'd think that's a pretty good, competitive team.
But I don't like the overall depth very much. What do you think if, say, Lupul goes down for any length of time? Frattin and MacArthur were replaceable parts, but they haven't been replaced. I don't see many options on the bottom six that can move up and provide much in the way of offense, and I don't know who's useful along those lines on the Marlies.

Well, Mac's replacement is Clarkson and Frattin's is Colborne. I wrote a post on the main board about forward depth in the organization recently but to sum it up the Leafs have, like, 5 or 6 forwards who'll be on the Marlies who were picked in the top 3 rounds(Ashton, Biggs, Leivo, Ryan, Ross and....I'm blanking on someone) as well as guys like D'Amigo so there are players who might very well warrant a look in that event.

edit: The guys I forgot were McKegg and Devane.

I don't know whether any of those Marlies have the potential offensive upside that Frattin did -- thought you'd said they were all likely solid depth forwards.

Anyhow, just seemed there were a few more options for putting guys into the injured's spots with MacArthur, Frattin, Colborne, and assorted Marlies than with Clarkson, Colborne, and assorted Marlies. The former seems a bit deeper on the wingers (if that's how you play Colborne) than the latter.

The premium paid on Clarkson (or any top six winger that might've been signed for ~$5m) is one place where the talk about the cap and various signings does affect how confident one might be about the team itself. That move seemed to be trading depth/quantity for quality, which will of course give you an opening day line-up that looks better. 

 

[Kin]

I don't know whether any of those Marlies have the potential offensive upside that Frattin did -- thought you'd said they were all likely solid depth forwards.

Although that's what I think Frattin is too. I'm not overly concerned about whether or not any of those guys can be as good as Matt Frattin in five years.

Anyhow, just seemed there were a few more options for putting guys into the injured's spots with MacArthur, Frattin, Colborne, and assorted Marlies than with Clarkson, Colborne, and assorted Marlies. The former seems a bit deeper on the wingers (if that's how you play Colborne) than the latter.

Well, not to get overly math heavy here but that strikes me as having one more option, Frattin, who I think is fairly easily replaced from the Marlies.

The premium paid on Clarkson (or any top six winger that might've been signed for ~$5m) is one place where the talk about the cap and various signings does affect how confident one might be about the team itself. That move seemed to be trading depth/quantity for quality, which will of course give you an opening day line-up that looks better.

I think the kind of depth you're talking about is largely unrealistic for any team to really have. Between Lupul, JVR, Kulemin, Kessel and Clarkson you're basically eating up all of the top 9 winger minutes and PP minutes. There's one other spot there. If you have Frattin in it the goaltending's worse but you might be more confident with Frattin than Colborne.

Beyond that teams aren't going to stockpile legitimate NHL wingers just in case. Replacements have to come from within. The scenario you're talking about is having 6 guys plus Colborne(albeit a weaker six guys), this is having 5 plus Colborne. That's not a big difference in depth.

 

[caver]

it looks like the opportunity is there for Colborne this season (with the current roster). i hope he is up for it.

 

[Redleaf]

For those really high on Franson and think either he is worth big money ($3+ mil) and or could play a top unit role, what exactly do you think his value is on the trade market?  If he's as good as some think he is, he must be worth a ton on the market, no?

For those thinking his value is high and it is a good time to trade him, I would disagree. I think his value to the Leafs is greater than his value on the open market at present. I believe his value will increase in the coming years, so to trade him now wouldn't be selling high IMO.

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

So, if a bidding war between Buffalo, Calgary, and Carolina doesn't yield what you think a very good RFA PMD with size entering his prime should, that doesn't really prove that that's not what he is -- no more than a half dozen teams falling over themselves to sign some UFA on July 1st proves that guy is a top-pairing defenseman or elite top-six forward (hello, David Clarkson).

Most of what we learn from signings and trades, IMO, has to do with the market -- not the talent of players and of what use they'll be on the ice. For that, there are measures that are more useful than salary, trade return, number of teams submitting offers, etc.

That's just another reason they need to hold on to him. You're right. The market isn't as robust for players this off season with the cap going down. I could be wrong, but I don't think they would really get back good value in a trade right now. A one year contract might be a viable stop gap solution. Nonis could then have another full season of grading Franson, then either sign him to a long term contract or trade him for a better return if/when the cap goes back up.

 

[Kin]

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

It's also worth mentioning that the above is only true if you make some pretty big assumptions about the internal caps of other teams.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Found this amusing from twitter.

Basically, the Leafs left personnel decisions to the guy who said "I have a theory about concussions..."

The quote referenced above from Dr Randy Carlyle M.D.

"I have a theory on concussions," he said. "I think the reason there?s so much more of them ? obviously the impact and the size of the equipment and the size of the player ? but there?s another factor: everyone wears helmets, and under your skull when you have a helmet on, there?s a heat issue. Everyone sweats a lot more, the brain swells. The brain is closer to the skull. Think about it. Does it make sense? Common sense?" said Carlyle, who said he?d never talked to a doctor about his premise, which he was introduced to by Jim Pappin, the former Leaf who also played his career helmet free.

Oh Randy...

 

[Jalili]

The Leafs are also in somewhat of a cap jam, so whatever value you get for him now is probably lower than it would be otherwise.

That only works if the teams looking to trade for Franson don't really want him or if the Leafs are limited to trading Franson as a means of getting under the cap. If I'm a GM of a team who really wants Franson I'm not playing hardball with the Leafs because of their cap situation if someone else can come along and beat my offer.

GM's take full of advantage of the leverage (or lack thereof) that a team has, but I agree, in a vacuum that alone shouldn't deter a GM from making a competitive offer.

But one also has to consider that it's late July, the FA spending spree already passed and a lot of GM's spent the cap space and/or filled the role they might have had for Franson (compared to if we were offering him at say, last year's trade deadline).

 

[mr grieves]

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

It's also worth mentioning that the above is only true if you make some pretty big assumptions about the internal caps of other teams.

Wouldn't that only eliminate possible suitors?

Or are you referring to the LeafsNation article specifically and saying the author threw out teams he shouldn't've?

 

[Corn Flake]

For those really high on Franson and think either he is worth big money ($3+ mil) and or could play a top unit role, what exactly do you think his value is on the trade market?  If he's as good as some think he is, he must be worth a ton on the market, no?

For those thinking his value is high and it is a good time to trade him, I would disagree. I think his value to the Leafs is greater than his value on the open market at present. I believe his value will increase in the coming years, so to trade him now wouldn't be selling high IMO.

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

So, if a bidding war between Buffalo, Calgary, and Carolina doesn't yield what you think a very good RFA PMD with size entering his prime should, that doesn't really prove that that's not what he is -- no more than a half dozen teams falling over themselves to sign some UFA on July 1st proves that guy is a top-pairing defenseman or elite top-six forward (hello, David Clarkson).

Most of what we learn from signings and trades, IMO, has to do with the market -- not the talent of players and of what use they'll be on the ice. For that, there are measures that are more useful than salary, trade return, number of teams submitting offers, etc.

That's just another reason they need to hold on to him. You're right. The market isn't as robust for players this off season with the cap going down. I could be wrong, but I don't think they would really get back good value in a trade right now. A one year contract might be a viable stop gap solution. Nonis could then have another full season of grading Franson, then either sign him to a long term contract or trade him for a better return if/when the cap goes back up.

This is where struggle here... if he's so good and worth all this money, why would he have reduced value on the trade market?  Are we overpaying him on faith he will have a season like the 48 game one but produce it over 82? Seems risky and unnecessary, IMO. 

To me if he is worth what he's asking there should be a healthy trade market for him. If there isn't, that should tell us something about how good he really is in the eyes of the league.

Just like Grabovski, who by the way is still not signed. 

 

[Kin]

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

It's also worth mentioning that the above is only true if you make some pretty big assumptions about the internal caps of other teams.

Wouldn't that only eliminate possible suitors?

Or are you referring to the LeafsNation article specifically and saying the author threw out teams he shouldn't've?

I'm referring to the idea that only 6 or so teams could reasonably add Franson's reported salary. 14 of the 29 Non-Leaf teams in the NHL could fit him under their cap even if absolutely no salary is sent the Leafs way(and it's important to keep in mind that in order to make things work the Leafs could take on players making 1 million or less, stash them, and create more room that way) and just about every team has 20+ players signed. To pare that down to 6 you really have to just arbitrarily decide what a bunch of teams have as their internal cap.

 

[Redleaf]

For those really high on Franson and think either he is worth big money ($3+ mil) and or could play a top unit role, what exactly do you think his value is on the trade market?  If he's as good as some think he is, he must be worth a ton on the market, no?

For those thinking his value is high and it is a good time to trade him, I would disagree. I think his value to the Leafs is greater than his value on the open market at present. I believe his value will increase in the coming years, so to trade him now wouldn't be selling high IMO.

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

So, if a bidding war between Buffalo, Calgary, and Carolina doesn't yield what you think a very good RFA PMD with size entering his prime should, that doesn't really prove that that's not what he is -- no more than a half dozen teams falling over themselves to sign some UFA on July 1st proves that guy is a top-pairing defenseman or elite top-six forward (hello, David Clarkson).

Most of what we learn from signings and trades, IMO, has to do with the market -- not the talent of players and of what use they'll be on the ice. For that, there are measures that are more useful than salary, trade return, number of teams submitting offers, etc.

That's just another reason they need to hold on to him. You're right. The market isn't as robust for players this off season with the cap going down. I could be wrong, but I don't think they would really get back good value in a trade right now. A one year contract might be a viable stop gap solution. Nonis could then have another full season of grading Franson, then either sign him to a long term contract or trade him for a better return if/when the cap goes back up.

This is where struggle here... if he's so good and worth all this money, why would he have reduced value on the trade market?  Are we overpaying him on faith he will have a season like the 48 game one but produce it over 82? Seems risky and unnecessary, IMO. 

To me if he is worth what he's asking there should be a healthy trade market for him. If there isn't, that should tell us something about how good he really is in the eyes of the league.

Just like Grabovski, who by the way is still not signed.

I'm actually trying to separate the money from the talent to make my point. If we look at the straight value of his play and not his worth on the market, at the very least he deserves further evaluation as a Leaf. The only reason the market was brought up was because it is an unusual off season as we are seeing the cap go down, and like you mentioned, talented guys like Grabovski are still not signed this far into free agency. Is that because Grabbo is unworthy of healthy contract, or is it because the cap is effecting the GMs decision making more than usual this off season? Either way, I'd keep Franson if at all possible, and forget about the offers unless they blew me away.

 

[mr grieves]

For those really high on Franson and think either he is worth big money ($3+ mil) and or could play a top unit role, what exactly do you think his value is on the trade market?  If he's as good as some think he is, he must be worth a ton on the market, no?

For those thinking his value is high and it is a good time to trade him, I would disagree. I think his value to the Leafs is greater than his value on the open market at present. I believe his value will increase in the coming years, so to trade him now wouldn't be selling high IMO.

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

So, if a bidding war between Buffalo, Calgary, and Carolina doesn't yield what you think a very good RFA PMD with size entering his prime should, that doesn't really prove that that's not what he is -- no more than a half dozen teams falling over themselves to sign some UFA on July 1st proves that guy is a top-pairing defenseman or elite top-six forward (hello, David Clarkson).

Most of what we learn from signings and trades, IMO, has to do with the market -- not the talent of players and of what use they'll be on the ice. For that, there are measures that are more useful than salary, trade return, number of teams submitting offers, etc.

That's just another reason they need to hold on to him. You're right. The market isn't as robust for players this off season with the cap going down. I could be wrong, but I don't think they would really get back good value in a trade right now. A one year contract might be a viable stop gap solution. Nonis could then have another full season of grading Franson, then either sign him to a long term contract or trade him for a better return if/when the cap goes back up.

This is where struggle here... if he's so good and worth all this money, why would he have reduced value on the trade market?  Are we overpaying him on faith he will have a season like the 48 game one but produce it over 82? Seems risky and unnecessary, IMO. 

To me if he is worth what he's asking there should be a healthy trade market for him. If there isn't, that should tell us something about how good he really is in the eyes of the league.

Just like Grabovski, who by the way is still not signed.

I'm actually trying to separate the money from the talent to make my point. If we look at the straight value of his play and not his worth on the market, at the very least he deserves further evaluation as a Leaf. The only reason the market was brought up was because it is an unusual off season as we are seeing the cap go down, and like you mentioned, talented guys like Grabovski are still not signed this far into free agency. Is that because Grabbo is unworthy of healthy contract, or is it because the cap is effecting the GMs decision making more than usual this off season? Either way, I'd keep Franson if at all possible, and forget about the offers unless they blew me away.

Ideally, Nonis is comfortable waiting Franson out, lets Rielly have his 8 games, signs a nervous Franson to whatever cap space is left after Kadri and Fraser are signed, and flips JML for whatever and goes into the next off season -- where it's likely more than the increase in the cap and the expiring buyouts/ retained salary will be needed to re-sign the UFAs and RFAs -- with an extra ~$4m.

 

[A finnish leaf fan]

For those really high on Franson and think either he is worth big money ($3+ mil) and or could play a top unit role, what exactly do you think his value is on the trade market?  If he's as good as some think he is, he must be worth a ton on the market, no?

For those thinking his value is high and it is a good time to trade him, I would disagree. I think his value to the Leafs is greater than his value on the open market at present. I believe his value will increase in the coming years, so to trade him now wouldn't be selling high IMO.

It's worth considering that the market this season is a depressed one: there are only about 6 teams that could reasonably take on Franson's likely $3-4m contract without Leafing themselves. Otherwise, cap's gone down, dollars have been committed, and lots of teams are already pretty close to it.

So, if a bidding war between Buffalo, Calgary, and Carolina doesn't yield what you think a very good RFA PMD with size entering his prime should, that doesn't really prove that that's not what he is -- no more than a half dozen teams falling over themselves to sign some UFA on July 1st proves that guy is a top-pairing defenseman or elite top-six forward (hello, David Clarkson).

Most of what we learn from signings and trades, IMO, has to do with the market -- not the talent of players and of what use they'll be on the ice. For that, there are measures that are more useful than salary, trade return, number of teams submitting offers, etc.

That's just another reason they need to hold on to him. You're right. The market isn't as robust for players this off season with the cap going down. I could be wrong, but I don't think they would really get back good value in a trade right now. A one year contract might be a viable stop gap solution. Nonis could then have another full season of grading Franson, then either sign him to a long term contract or trade him for a better return if/when the cap goes back up.

This is where struggle here... if he's so good and worth all this money, why would he have reduced value on the trade market?  Are we overpaying him on faith he will have a season like the 48 game one but produce it over 82? Seems risky and unnecessary, IMO. 

To me if he is worth what he's asking there should be a healthy trade market for him. If there isn't, that should tell us something about how good he really is in the eyes of the league.

Just like Grabovski, who by the way is still not signed.

I'm actually trying to separate the money from the talent to make my point. If we look at the straight value of his play and not his worth on the market, at the very least he deserves further evaluation as a Leaf. The only reason the market was brought up was because it is an unusual off season as we are seeing the cap go down, and like you mentioned, talented guys like Grabovski are still not signed this far into free agency. Is that because Grabbo is unworthy of healthy contract, or is it because the cap is effecting the GMs decision making more than usual this off season? Either way, I'd keep Franson if at all possible, and forget about the offers unless they blew me away.

Ideally, Nonis is comfortable waiting Franson out, lets Rielly have his 8 games, signs a nervous Franson to whatever cap space is left after Kadri and Fraser are signed, and flips JML for whatever and goes into the next off season -- where it's likely more than the increase in the cap and the expiring buyouts/ retained salary will be needed to re-sign the UFAs and RFAs -- with an extra ~$4m.

This. While Franson is a good player, the Leafs are not desperate in getting him signed. In these kinds of situations the player/agent trying to play hardball with the team usually ends up with the short stick (see Subban for example, who was reported to be looking for Doughty-like money and ended up signing for less than half of that, albeit at a shorter term). Kadri should and will be Nonis's priority after Fraser's arbitration case is settled. If some team gives Franson an offer sheet, I'm sure the Leafs will happily let him go as the compensation will most likely be 1st+. Since Franson decided not to go for arbitration, Nonis has all the cards firmly in his hand here.

 

[Hampreacher]

I think we need to keep Franson. Surely players can see that patience in this year will give team more cap room for future contracts. I do not think Fraser gets that. Trade Liles and Fraser if need to or bury them in minors. Leafs can exceed cap by 10% until Season starts.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I think we need to keep Franson. Surely players can see that patience in this year will give team more cap room for future contracts. I do not think Fraser gets that. Trade Liles and Fraser if need to or bury them in minors. Leafs can exceed cap by 10% until Season starts.

I'm not worried about getting Franson signed, however I think I'll be disappointed in a one year deal for him. I'd rather gain a few UFA years with him and get him signed at a reasonable rate long term. I'm confident that Franson is going to continue to improve and that he'll end up in the 5+ million range sooner than later. So, do we gamble on a 1 year deal to save the cap now, or do we get him signed for a long term deal, that eats a few years off the UFA age? This route hinges on a trade, but so be it, there is only so many spots anyway. Getting him at a reduced rate long term helps with trade value also IMO, if the need to trade him arises due of other talent we have in the system coming into their own.

I know a lot of people see him as an average defender and I'll admit he has to tighten up his defensive game a bit more, but from where I'm watching, he'll be a very good defenseman for a long time. I don't think he's as replaceable as others think he is, but that's just my personal opinion.

 

[Champ Kind]

Just like Grabovski, who by the way is still not signed.

Although, to be fair, he didn't do himself any favours when he bashed Carlyle and "let the expletives fly" on his way out the door.