Decisions, decisions

[Kin]

My concern with the excitement of the prospects that some might expect the Leafs have a Doughty, Quick, Kopitar or a Toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook, Crawford in the Leafs lineup already and that the Leafs are finished the 'pain'.  I see the Leafs with some solid pieces but not that level yet to compete for the Cup. 

This draft should help and if the Leafs get a top 10 pick next year combined with the other 7 picks currently owned PLUS any picks received for Michalek, Laich, Greening, Hunwick...
...and maybe Bickell if the Leafs move Cowen for him.  That means the Leafs could add 5 or more picks for the 2017 draft to the 8 already owned.

I think that none of Grabner, Boyes or PAP were dealt at this year's trade deadline showed us evidence of a couple possibilities:

1) Teams are valuing their picks more than they used to, especially when it comes to adding depth

2) The Leafs feel there's diminishing returns with just stockpiling lower round draft picks

3) A combination of the two.

Personally I think #2 probably is the strongest thing to consider. I have to believe that if the Leafs really wanted a 5th or 6th round pick for some of their pending UFAs that didn't move they could have gotten it, there's just not much point to it. Does a team want 4 5th round picks? There are only so many minor league roster spots and it's not like they're overly valuable in a package.

It's pretty doubtful that any of the guys you mention as deadline bait will fetch a pick in the top 100 picks of the draft so I don't think the motivation to see that through is going to be a major factor in how the team approaches next year.

There's no way Nylander is a Marlie next year. It's a waste of his time. Same with Marner and the OHL. They've more than proven themselves at those levels. There's very little developmental upside to stagnation.

Next year is going to be about folding young players into the mix. There will be more bright spots than this year but also growing pains. They'll probably end up with another high draft pick but the trade deadline returns of the guys you mention are inconsequential. Thye're certainly not going to be a reason to keep good young players out the lineup.

 

[ZBBM]

Zaitsev & Vesey -- Radulov!!

If we hit the rumor jackpot on all 3 of those AND get Matthews, the forward lineup would make my head spin.

Radulov????

Are you smoking something illegal? Then again the professionalism he has displayed his whole career would fit in nicely.

Uh, what?

 

[slapshot]

Thanks for the feedback on the post folks. I think it going to take a while to sort all this out because of all the competition in the system now, and all the new picks that will be added this draft, and potentially next.
It's going take a while to see who develops into what at the pro level, and what pieces still need to be added.
It's great that the Marlies system is closely aligned with the Leafs. I think that's why the young guys were able to step in with a lot of confidence this year because they were already schooled in the system.
I think the biggest question mark is clearly goaltending. Will the Leafs make a move for someone the way Lou acquired Cory Snyder with the Devils, or will they give Bernier another chance? I think the Leafs should snag another top-rated goalie in the draft. Seems to make sense with all those picks...

 

[Zee]

Thanks for the feedback on the post folks. I think it going to take a while to sort all this out because of all the competition in the system now, and all the new picks that will be added this draft, and potentially next.
It's going take a while to see who develops into what at the pro level, and what pieces still need to be added.
It's great that the Marlies system is closely aligned with the Leafs. I think that's why the young guys were able to step in with a lot of confidence this year because they were already schooled in the system.
I think the biggest question mark is clearly goaltending. Will the Leafs make a move for someone the way Lou acquired Cory Snyder with the Devils, or will they give Bernier another chance? I think the Leafs should snag another top-rated goalie in the draft. Seems to make sense with all those picks...

It's going to be a very important summer (don't we say that every summer  ).  The goalie issue is big of course, we've seen mediocre teams get carried by a stud goalie in the past (look no further than the Habs with Price, or the Habs with Halak)  Would be nice if the Leafs could steal a goalie from a team similar to how Bishop was landed in Tampa.  Target a team that has a proven #1 and a good goalie prospect and see if you can get their other goalie for a relatively low price.  (sort of like how the Leafs got Bernier lol).  Of course they'll probably draft another goalie this summer, but he'd be years away from being ready.  If they want immediate help the trade route seems the most logical.

 

[Jolly good show chaps]

Thanks for the feedback on the post folks. I think it going to take a while to sort all this out because of all the competition in the system now, and all the new picks that will be added this draft, and potentially next.
It's going take a while to see who develops into what at the pro level, and what pieces still need to be added.
It's great that the Marlies system is closely aligned with the Leafs. I think that's why the young guys were able to step in with a lot of confidence this year because they were already schooled in the system.
I think the biggest question mark is clearly goaltending. Will the Leafs make a move for someone the way Lou acquired Cory Snyder with the Devils, or will they give Bernier another chance? I think the Leafs should snag another top-rated goalie in the draft. Seems to make sense with all those picks...

It's going to be a very important summer (don't we say that every summer  ).  The goalie issue is big of course, we've seen mediocre teams get carried by a stud goalie in the past (look no further than the Habs with Price, or the Habs with Halak)  Would be nice if the Leafs could steal a goalie from a team similar to how Bishop was landed in Tampa.  Target a team that has a proven #1 and a good goalie prospect and see if you can get their other goalie for a relatively low price.  (sort of like how the Leafs got Bernier lol).  Of course they'll probably draft another goalie this summer, but he'd be years away from being ready.  If they want immediate help the trade route seems the most logical.

Anaheim might be a good partner, although the price surely comes down a little if teams can only protect one goalie next season if there is an expansion draft.

Also aren't there some rule changes regarding goalie equipment coming up in the not too distant future?  Seem to recall consensus was that it's better to see who plays well under the new rules before making a trade.

 

[caver]

Thanks for the feedback on the post folks. I think it going to take a while to sort all this out because of all the competition in the system now, and all the new picks that will be added this draft, and potentially next.
It's going take a while to see who develops into what at the pro level, and what pieces still need to be added.
It's great that the Marlies system is closely aligned with the Leafs. I think that's why the young guys were able to step in with a lot of confidence this year because they were already schooled in the system.
I think the biggest question mark is clearly goaltending. Will the Leafs make a move for someone the way Lou acquired Cory Snyder with the Devils, or will they give Bernier another chance? I think the Leafs should snag another top-rated goalie in the draft. Seems to make sense with all those picks...

It's going to be a very important summer (don't we say that every summer  ).  The goalie issue is big of course, we've seen mediocre teams get carried by a stud goalie in the past (look no further than the Habs with Price, or the Habs with Halak)  Would be nice if the Leafs could steal a goalie from a team similar to how Bishop was landed in Tampa.  Target a team that has a proven #1 and a good goalie prospect and see if you can get their other goalie for a relatively low price.  (sort of like how the Leafs got Bernier lol).  Of course they'll probably draft another goalie this summer, but he'd be years away from being ready.  If they want immediate help the trade route seems the most logical.

St Louis has a couple of strong goalies....

 

[Al14]

Thanks for the feedback on the post folks. I think it going to take a while to sort all this out because of all the competition in the system now, and all the new picks that will be added this draft, and potentially next.
It's going take a while to see who develops into what at the pro level, and what pieces still need to be added.
It's great that the Marlies system is closely aligned with the Leafs. I think that's why the young guys were able to step in with a lot of confidence this year because they were already schooled in the system.
I think the biggest question mark is clearly goaltending. Will the Leafs make a move for someone the way Lou acquired Cory Snyder with the Devils, or will they give Bernier another chance? I think the Leafs should snag another top-rated goalie in the draft. Seems to make sense with all those picks...

It's going to be a very important summer (don't we say that every summer  ).  The goalie issue is big of course, we've seen mediocre teams get carried by a stud goalie in the past (look no further than the Habs with Price, or the Habs with Halak)  Would be nice if the Leafs could steal a goalie from a team similar to how Bishop was landed in Tampa.  Target a team that has a proven #1 and a good goalie prospect and see if you can get their other goalie for a relatively low price.  (sort of like how the Leafs got Bernier lol).  Of course they'll probably draft another goalie this summer, but he'd be years away from being ready.  If they want immediate help the trade route seems the most logical.

St Louis has a couple of strong goalies....

How much weight can they bench press?  8)

 

[herman]

Let's add this info to the decision pile:
http://www.shanaplandebate.com/2016/04/18/in-depth-analysis-toronto-maple-leafs-cap-situation/

This can be slightly confusing with both Nathan Horton and Stephane Robidas being victimized by Pridham?s loopholes. Both players did not play a single game in the 2015-2016 season and as will likely be the case again, will find themselves on Season Opening Injured Reserve (SOIR) next year as well.

SOIR is similar to Long Term Injured Reserve (LTIR) but with a few additional rules: The first rule being that players who failed to play a single NHL game in the year previous, are eligible to have their entire cap hit relieved from the team they are signed to. Meaning, this effectively wipes the entirety of both Robidas? and Horton?s combined $8.3M salaries from Toronto?s cap hit for next season.

[much gnashing of teeth later...]

So as you may have read (and hopefully learned), the cap space may be a lot less than originally expected. And it also looks like placing Lupul on LTIR is tougher than it looks. For the leafs to do so, they need to spend up to the $71.4M cap limit, and even if we are to assume that the entirety of that $19,534,408.90 is applied to the already established figure of $49,733,333.00, then the Leafs will only receive an overage relief of $3,117741.90.

And even then, that number may grow or shrink depending on what the actual salary cap is or how many of the RFA?s are/aren?t signed and to the type of contracts they are signed to (one-way vs. two-way).

Just for fun, if we use the $74.5M figure at the beginning of the season, then we have an off season spending allowance of around $22M and we could end up with more than $3.4M in cap relief from Lupul being placed on LTIR.

Because Horton and Robidas are taking up the bulk of the offseason spending allowance, the only method available to completely clear Lupul?s contract would be to place him on LTIR during training camp (only AFTER the spending is over the salary cap).

This method would then allow the Leafs to receive cap relief by subtracting total team spending from the final salary cap. This method may still be available to Leafs, however it is a matter of whether or not the Leafs can place Lupul on LTIR before placing Robidas and Horton on SOIR to make use of this. Thus far I have found no evidence stating there is a preferred order.

Still, with at least 8 roster players required, one of which has to be a goaltender, the approximate $19 million in cap space will be plenty of room to put to good use on improving the 2016-17 roster.

Add in the fact that the Leafs need to spend as close to the offseason allowance as they can (to reap the benefits from the Lupul contract), I can almost assure readers that something special is on its way.

 

[Frank E]

Let's add this info to the decision pile:
http://www.shanaplandebate.com/2016/04/18/in-depth-analysis-toronto-maple-leafs-cap-situation/

This can be slightly confusing with both Nathan Horton and Stephane Robidas being victimized by Pridham?s loopholes. Both players did not play a single game in the 2015-2016 season and as will likely be the case again, will find themselves on Season Opening Injured Reserve (SOIR) next year as well.

SOIR is similar to Long Term Injured Reserve (LTIR) but with a few additional rules: The first rule being that players who failed to play a single NHL game in the year previous, are eligible to have their entire cap hit relieved from the team they are signed to. Meaning, this effectively wipes the entirety of both Robidas? and Horton?s combined $8.3M salaries from Toronto?s cap hit for next season.

[much gnashing of teeth later...]

So as you may have read (and hopefully learned), the cap space may be a lot less than originally expected. And it also looks like placing Lupul on LTIR is tougher than it looks. For the leafs to do so, they need to spend up to the $71.4M cap limit, and even if we are to assume that the entirety of that $19,534,408.90 is applied to the already established figure of $49,733,333.00, then the Leafs will only receive an overage relief of $3,117741.90.

And even then, that number may grow or shrink depending on what the actual salary cap is or how many of the RFA?s are/aren?t signed and to the type of contracts they are signed to (one-way vs. two-way).

Just for fun, if we use the $74.5M figure at the beginning of the season, then we have an off season spending allowance of around $22M and we could end up with more than $3.4M in cap relief from Lupul being placed on LTIR.

Because Horton and Robidas are taking up the bulk of the offseason spending allowance, the only method available to completely clear Lupul?s contract would be to place him on LTIR during training camp (only AFTER the spending is over the salary cap).

This method would then allow the Leafs to receive cap relief by subtracting total team spending from the final salary cap. This method may still be available to Leafs, however it is a matter of whether or not the Leafs can place Lupul on LTIR before placing Robidas and Horton on SOIR to make use of this. Thus far I have found no evidence stating there is a preferred order.

Still, with at least 8 roster players required, one of which has to be a goaltender, the approximate $19 million in cap space will be plenty of room to put to good use on improving the 2016-17 roster.

Add in the fact that the Leafs need to spend as close to the offseason allowance as they can (to reap the benefits from the Lupul contract), I can almost assure readers that something special is on its way.

OK, I'll bite...

All 3 of them are charged to the cap over the summer, just like last year, right?

 

[sickbeast]

Two things are going to have a huge factor in terms of what the Leafs are going to do now.  First of all, if they win the draft lottery that is going to really accelerate the rebuild, and if they can sign Stamkos then they should be right back into the playoff mix next season provided they can fill out the rest of the roster quickly and deal with the goaltending situation.

I have to say I'm quite excited about the team for the first time in a long time.  They are going to have an excellent young team next season aside from the goaltending.

If they lose the draft lottery and if they can't sign Stamkos then I expect them to tank for one more year and then maybe try for Tavares next year.

 

[Deebo]

Two things are going to have a huge factor in terms of what the Leafs are going to do now.  First of all, if they win the draft lottery that is going to really accelerate the rebuild, and if they can sign Stamkos then they should be right back into the playoff mix next season provided they can fill out the rest of the roster quickly and deal with the goaltending situation.

I have to say I'm quite excited about the team for the first time in a long time.  They are going to have an excellent young team next season aside from the goaltending.

If they lose the draft lottery and if they can't sign Stamkos then I expect them to tank for one more year and then maybe try for Tavares next year.

Tavares has 2 years left on his contract.

 

[mr grieves]

Interesting (and overly long) PPP post covering all the Stamkos angles.

http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2016/4/17/11444736/the-case-for-signing-steven-stamkos

The point I find most interesting is #8.

The argument is that the young talent -- Nylander, Marner, Pulwjjja/Laine/Matthews -- will be hitting their scoring peaks in 3-4 years, while still on controlled deals. The idea, when building a contender, is to have your core talent under those controlled deals and win as many Cups as you can before the Cap makes you sell parts off... but the other part is that this structure is so valuable because you can use the savings to spend on pieces that'll put you over the top. And what are the chances that there'll be something better to buy than Stamkos...? Given how hard it was for the author to find comparables, the answer is "exceedingly slight."

In 2019-20, top-nine pairs of
L1) x - '90 Stamkos - '97 Marner
L2) y - '96 Nylander - '98 Laine
L3) z - '90 Kadri - Brown/Kapanen/Timashov/???/whichever-one-hits
ought to be pretty good.

and a D of...
D1) '94 Reilly - um... this might be a problem
D2) '90 Gardiner - something suitable can surely be found.
well... ought to be serviceable (?)


Leaving aside the general principle of 'if a player of Stamkos's calibre hits UFA, you go for it,' some questions I have about accelerating the process:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Is there a danger in waiting around too long for can't-miss core pieces to be found in the draft and for latter round picks to pan out (i.e. depreciating the value you're getting out of Nylander et al's cheap years)?
[*]Does that danger make it worth gambling that Marner, Nylander, Matthews-to-Chychrun, and Rielly will, in fact, turn out as we need them to?
[*]If they miss by a bit, does adding Stamkos to the mix compensate for that at all?
[/list]

 

[Kin]

Interesting (and overly long) PPP post covering all the Stamkos angles.

http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2016/4/17/11444736/the-case-for-signing-steven-stamkos

The point I find most interesting is #8.

The argument is that the young talent -- Nylander, Marner, Pulwjjja/Laine/Matthews -- will be hitting their scoring peaks in 3-4 years, while still on controlled deals. The idea, when building a contender, is to have your core talent under those controlled deals and win as many Cups as you can before the Cap makes you sell parts off... but the other part is that this structure is so valuable because you can use the savings to spend on pieces that'll put you over the top. And what are the chances that there'll be something better to buy than Stamkos...? Given how hard it was for the author to find comparables, the answer is "exceedingly slight."

In 2019-20, top-nine pairs of
L1) x - '90 Stamkos - '97 Marner
L2) y - '96 Nylander - '98 Laine
L3) z - '90 Kadri - Brown/Kapanen/Timashov/???/whichever-one-hits
ought to be pretty good.

and a D of...
D1) '94 Reilly - um... this might be a problem
D2) '90 Gardiner - something suitable can surely be found.
well... ought to be serviceable (?)


Leaving aside the general principle of 'if a player of Stamkos's calibre hits UFA, you go for it,' some questions I have about accelerating the process:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Is there a danger in waiting around too long for can't-miss core pieces to be found in the draft and for latter round picks to pan out (i.e. depreciating the value you're getting out of Nylander et al's cheap years)?
[*]Does that danger make it worth gambling that Marner, Nylander, Matthews-to-Chychrun, and Rielly will, in fact, turn out as we need them to?
[*]If they miss by a bit, does adding Stamkos to the mix compensate for that at all?
[/list]

I think there's a fundamental problem with the argument though. You and I have probably discussed some permutation of it before but I still think it's central to the question.

Namely, using the Blackhawks/Kings as models for team building is both useful, as they're clearly the gold standard for NHL teams these days, but also perhaps a little backwards looking. The Kings/Blackhawks were both built under a different CBA and different market conditions. 

If we look at the Kings/Blackhawks and their big quartet of Kane/Toews/Doughty/Kopitar you're right that we see a pattern of high achievement in the first 7 years of their careers at very reasonable cap hits. First with the ELC's, then with their affordable second contracts. This allowed the team to supplement that core with older players or young-ish players with big contracts and still be cap-happy.

What I worry about though is this assumption that even if Marner, Nylander and Matthews-to-Chychrun are what we want them to be, that in their first few years they're as relatively successful as the above mentioned quartet was in theirs, that we'll see a second contract that's as team-friendly as Chicago and LA did.

I don't know, looking around the league, that we have evidence for that. That isn't to say there's evidence against it either, just that in the new no-backdiving, just high as possible AAV CBA we haven't really yet seen any players roughly comparable to those four negotiate second contracts that look as friendly. This is in large part to the fact that the draft classes of 2011, 2012 and 2013 were so light on top of the league type players . What will Aaron Ekblad's next cap hit be? What will Connor McDavid or Jack Eichel's be?

If we're planning on our young guys being as good as quick as the Blackhawks/Kings core guys were, reasonably or not, we really can't just assume they'll be as reasonably priced. That's what makes me wonder about a Stamkos contract. He very well might be the best Hossa/Carter sort of addition to make but until you have a clearer picture of what sort of money you have and what sorts of roles your homegrown stars aren't filling that you want to supplement via UFA I don't know if you want to make that sort of investment your first real concrete step.

Which I guess is how I'd answer the questions you pose. Yes, there's a risk in the team being cautious about making sure that the players they add via the draft are good enough to be the focal points of a cup contending team. But it is/was more central to the Blackhawks success that they got the right Kane/Toews than that they got the right Hossa. 

 

[CarltonTheBear]

As sort of an aside, the bright side for the Leafs (and all other teams in the league) is that it's probably going to be a little easier to win a Cup in the next 6 years than it was in the past 6 years. The Chicago Blackhawks now aren't the same team that they were before, and I don't really see another team being able to replicate what they did. That's not to say that teams shouldn't be trying to build the next Blackhawks, but there were a countless number of things that had to go right for that team that went past just having a good management/coaching staff. Including of course being able to exploit a CBA loophole that is no longer open.

We're going to start to see teams like the Stars or Capitals or Sharks or Blues start winning some Cups in the future, and while those teams still set a very high standard for the rest of the league, they don't have four first-ballot HHOFers performing at a high level as part of their core.

 

[Kin]

As sort of an aside, the bright side for the Leafs (and all other teams in the league) is that it's probably going to be a little easier to win a Cup in the next 6 years than it was in the past 6 years. The Chicago Blackhawks now aren't the same team that they were before, and I don't really see another team being able to replicate what they did. That's not to say that teams shouldn't be trying to build the next Blackhawks, but there were a countless number of things that had to go right for that team that went past just having a good management/coaching staff. Including of course being able to exploit a CBA loophole that is no longer open.

We're going to start to see teams like the Stars or Capitals or Sharks or Blues start winning some Cups in the future, and while those teams still set a very high standard for the rest of the league, they don't have four first-ballot HHOFers performing at a high level as part of their core.

That's almost certainly true but I don't know if that will necessarily make things easier on any one team and especially not on the Leafs. Outside of stubbornness or incompetence on the part of various managements over the years the Leafs have never genuinely faced any obstacles in being a team that accumulates a big time collection of talent.

Heightened parity, everyone scrambling for the minor advantages they can seize...these do make building a team like the Blackhawks less possible and therefore less daunting a challenge but "Get pretty good and cross your fingers" seems less easy because it's less certain.

 

[ZBBM]

To me, there are so many imponderables (e.g., nobody knows how good Nylander, Marner etc. will turn out to be) that I think if you are presented with the chance to get a top player for nothing but money in return, you take it.

Except.

Stamkos has now suffered two pretty serious injuries.  How much have they added to his odometer?  I guess that's an imponderable too, but nonetheless I ponder.

 

[Highlander]

He recovered from his broken tibia and resumed great play. According to what I have read the clot is common to athletes when a bone repeatly rubs against the artery/vein. His surgery was to remove the part of the rib that was rubbing his artery/vein so he should be Ok on that front.

 

[mr grieves]

If we're planning on our young guys being as good as quick as the Blackhawks/Kings core guys were, reasonably or not, we really can't just assume they'll be as reasonably priced. That's what makes me wonder about a Stamkos contract. He very well might be the best Hossa/Carter sort of addition to make but until you have a clearer picture of what sort of money you have and what sorts of roles your homegrown stars aren't filling that you want to supplement via UFA I don't know if you want to make that sort of investment your first real concrete step.

Which I guess is how I'd answer the questions you pose. Yes, there's a risk in the team being cautious about making sure that the players they add via the draft are good enough to be the focal points of a cup contending team. But it is/was more central to the Blackhawks success that they got the right Kane/Toews than that they got the right Hossa.

My hesitation is in making a UFA purchase the first concrete real step toward contention. There's no specific reason that I'm wary of it. The cap-world has told us this isn't just good practice -- so I've been cool to the idea. But, as I look at Marner's and Nylander's early returns, the author's proposal becomes a bit more attractive.

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.

 

[Al14]

He recovered from his broken tibia and resumed great play. According to what I have read the clot is common to athletes when a bone repeatly rubs against the artery/vein. His surgery was to remove the part of the rib that was rubbing his artery/vein so he should be Ok on that front.

Broken bones can sometimes cause problems for high performance athletes down the road.  So, don't rule that out as a non-factor.   

Should be ok is what scares me, however, if any team can afford to pay $10M to a player sitting on LTIR it's our Leafs.  :-\

 

[Kin]

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.