Grabovski re-signs

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I think at $5.5, though, he sort of did give a bit of a discount.  I don't think there's much argument that he would have likely received more on the open market this summer.

I thought considering Grabovski a $5M player was a bit of a stretch.  If he hit the open market and were to receive upwards of $6M, I would have thought it was pure lunacy.

The Ville Leino sweepstakes want a word with you.

Lunacy comes as standard when any player of value is a UFA.

This is a good deal, Busta, Potvin and Erndog have all hit the nail on the head.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

That being said, a new CBA with a lower ceiling will likely include a buy-out period similar to the introduction period of the previous CBA, so, when it's all said and done, the issue could really be moot.

I hope some form of buyout happens like the last time but I'm not nearly as confident it will because I'm sure Bettman warned GMs before and they knew, like the rest of us, that a drop in the cap was likely. So GMs can't cry the blues nearly as much as they did in '05. As well, the drop in the cap will be a few % points - nothing like the drop in payroll the big market teams experienced in '05 when making the transition from the old CBA. This CBA is more like an adjustment rather than anything nearly as dramatic as '05 when that buyout had to be implemented to allow teams to conform to the bigger adjustment.

Dude I pretty much worship your mad posting skills, but if you think they are reducing the cap, even within a new CBA paradigm, without a contract rollback and that big market teams will allow it, then you're a little crazy.

They will probably get a rollback and a one contract dump type of deal if the cap comes down.

 

[cw]

Can we cut his winger's salary by 30% then?

Lance Hornby ‏ @sunhornby
The Leafs might have over-paid with Grabo, but they'll make it up with Gary Greenstin's other client, the slumping RFA Nikolai Kulemin.

Grabbo's $2.6 mil/yr pay raise is greater than RFA Kulemin's $2.35/yr expiring contract. There are significant limits to how much they can make up. If they drop him 10%, they're still looking at a $2.1 mil/yr deal. We can whine about this season but the guy did score 30 goals last year.

 

[Corn Flake]

That being said, a new CBA with a lower ceiling will likely include a buy-out period similar to the introduction period of the previous CBA, so, when it's all said and done, the issue could really be moot.

I hope some form of buyout happens like the last time but I'm not nearly as confident it will because I'm sure Bettman warned GMs before and they knew, like the rest of us, that a drop in the cap was likely. So GMs can't cry the blues nearly as much as they did in '05. As well, the drop in the cap will be a few % points - nothing like the drop in payroll the big market teams experienced in '05 when making the transition from the old CBA. This CBA is more like an adjustment rather than anything nearly as dramatic as '05 when that buyout had to be implemented to allow teams to conform to the bigger adjustment.

What do you think of the concept of reducing the overall % of revenue to players (a la NBA) but instead of dropping the cap ceiling, they drop the cap floor to make the adjustment?  IMO its where I think they will/should go.  I think some of the have-not teams have been quiet about the cap floor being waaay too high for them to sustain.  It has almost doubled since the CBA was signed and there's no way teams like Phx and Fla can continue with a $50 mil payroll.

Yes it might create more separation between the big spenders and everyone else, but it might increase the number of healthy teams. 

 

[Deebo]

Well this is why I'm asking about a rollback too, should player share drop.

The point for Toronto would be that they have flexibility to add contracts, if there's a buyout period ( which seems likely to me now, I wasn't sure about it before ) then that would be the time to bite the bullet and flip over the talent.

My guess is a rollback and a buyout period is unlikely - it will be one or the other, and, my guess is teams will push for the buyout instead.

The PA will probably push for the roll back, since one will occur naturally through the players percentage of revenue dropping.

 

[Tigger]

Well this is why I'm asking about a rollback too, should player share drop.

The point for Toronto would be that they have flexibility to add contracts, if there's a buyout period ( which seems likely to me now, I wasn't sure about it before ) then that would be the time to bite the bullet and flip over the talent.

My guess is a rollback and a buyout period is unlikely - it will be one or the other, and, my guess is teams will push for the buyout instead.

You could be right, though even with a buyout period if I'm Burke I'd try to push the envelope and take my lumps at the end if needs be to get some more talent on the roster, even if it was just to, say, try landing Suter and maybe a goalie.

I know the last CBA negotiation result isn't something that's likely to repeat, still, they did get both a rollback and a buyout at the time.

 

[Zee]

Can we cut his winger's salary by 30% then?

Lance Hornby ‏ @sunhornby
The Leafs might have over-paid with Grabo, but they'll make it up with Gary Greenstin's other client, the slumping RFA Nikolai Kulemin.

Grabbo's $2.6 mil/yr pay raise is greater than RFA Kulemin's $2.35/yr expiring contract. There are significant limits to how much they can make up. If they drop him 10%, they're still looking at a $2.1 mil/yr deal. We can whine about this season but the guy did score 30 goals last year.

Yeah Grabbo got a 90% raise, I guess we were saving on him this past season, but now we're paying top dollar.  Hopefully he can move beyond 60 points and get closer to the 70 point range in the coming seasons.  If he becomes more consistent then the deal is great.  Guess it will depend on a number of factors including how high the cap is, and how the Leafs deal with some terrible contracts they currently have and should get rid of in some way.

 

[cw]

That being said, a new CBA with a lower ceiling will likely include a buy-out period similar to the introduction period of the previous CBA, so, when it's all said and done, the issue could really be moot.

I hope some form of buyout happens like the last time but I'm not nearly as confident it will because I'm sure Bettman warned GMs before and they knew, like the rest of us, that a drop in the cap was likely. So GMs can't cry the blues nearly as much as they did in '05. As well, the drop in the cap will be a few % points - nothing like the drop in payroll the big market teams experienced in '05 when making the transition from the old CBA. This CBA is more like an adjustment rather than anything nearly as dramatic as '05 when that buyout had to be implemented to allow teams to conform to the bigger adjustment.

Dude I pretty much worship your mad posting skills, but if you think they are reducing the cap, even within a new CBA paradigm, without a contract rollback and that big market teams will allow it, then you're a little crazy.

They will probably get a rollback and a one contract dump type of deal if the cap comes down.

I hope you're right.

I do wonder how many teams will be howling for it because few teams are in as tough a cap situation as the Leafs are for next year (based upon available cap space per player needing to be signed). The small market teams will be howling just as loudly, if not louder, against it.

 

[Tigger]

I don't know how often rfa players take paycuts, I can see Kulemin getting 2.5 next year, fwiw.

 

[Tigger]

The small market teams will be howling just as loudly, if not louder, against it.

Maybe not if it goes to the cap floor like CF mentioned?

 

[cw]

Well this is why I'm asking about a rollback too, should player share drop.

The point for Toronto would be that they have flexibility to add contracts, if there's a buyout period ( which seems likely to me now, I wasn't sure about it before ) then that would be the time to bite the bullet and flip over the talent.

My guess is a rollback and a buyout period is unlikely - it will be one or the other, and, my guess is teams will push for the buyout instead.

A rollback is likely being done to help the teams bottom line since the players are receiving the highest proportion of league revenues of all the major pro sports leagues.

A cap exempt buyout period for transition increases the hit on the owners bottom line.

In other words, they work against each other in terms of the bottom line.

Therefore, I'm unclear why there would be a choice for one or the other. I think both could take place though as I've said, because the owner intent for this CBA is to lower salaries, I have my doubts about a grace period for buyouts to make a transition - because it goes against what they're trying to do overall and the dollars being adjusted are not nearly as great as they were in '05.

 

[Zee]

I don't know how often rfa players take paycuts, I can see Kulemin getting 2.5 next year, fwiw.

By what basis can he ask for a raise?  His point totals are nearly half of last season.

 

[Screwball]

I don't know how often rfa players take paycuts, I can see Kulemin getting 2.5 next year, fwiw.

For what it's worth, I believe Hornby was insinuating that the Leafs would save money on Kulemin over what his camp would have been asking for originally.  With his play, he will leave some money on the table over what he would have received if he had a stronger year.

Personally, I agree with you that Kulemin will come in around 2.5 - 3 million based on his potential and strong two-way play.  The interesting aspect will be the term.  If I was Burke, and you believe this year was an anomaly you want to lock up Kulemin for as long as you can at a discount.

 

[The Red Polar Bear]

Some perspective:

The difference between "great deal" (4.9M) and "too expensive" (5.5M) in terms of overall cap hit is not having Rosehill as a healthy scratch all year.

 

[WalterSobchak]

Does anyone feel that this contract makes Grabovski a challenge to move?  I'm not suggesting I would want him to be traded - but would this hurt his value in a trade for a 1st line centre down the road?

I never understand this way of thinking Screw. I remember people saying here when the Hawks signed Brian Campbell, he would never get moved...same went for Jason Blake. Guess what,there will always be someone desperate enough to take on these salaries. $5.5 million is actually a bargain for arguably the Leafs best all around player this season.

 

[Tigger]

I don't know how often rfa players take paycuts, I can see Kulemin getting 2.5 next year, fwiw.

By what basis can he ask for a raise?  His point totals are nearly half of last season.

Well he's in the second year of a two year contract, right? He got this contract based on his play in 9/10 and did put up a 30 goal year after...

 

[cw]

That being said, a new CBA with a lower ceiling will likely include a buy-out period similar to the introduction period of the previous CBA, so, when it's all said and done, the issue could really be moot.

I hope some form of buyout happens like the last time but I'm not nearly as confident it will because I'm sure Bettman warned GMs before and they knew, like the rest of us, that a drop in the cap was likely. So GMs can't cry the blues nearly as much as they did in '05. As well, the drop in the cap will be a few % points - nothing like the drop in payroll the big market teams experienced in '05 when making the transition from the old CBA. This CBA is more like an adjustment rather than anything nearly as dramatic as '05 when that buyout had to be implemented to allow teams to conform to the bigger adjustment.

What do you think of the concept of reducing the overall % of revenue to players (a la NBA) but instead of dropping the cap ceiling, they drop the cap floor to make the adjustment?  IMO its where I think they will/should go.  I think some of the have-not teams have been quiet about the cap floor being waaay too high for them to sustain.  It has almost doubled since the CBA was signed and there's no way teams like Phx and Fla can continue with a $50 mil payroll.

Yes it might create more separation between the big spenders and everyone else, but it might increase the number of healthy teams.

It wouldn't surprise me if some argued for that successfully to a limited degree. But the original idea for the small market teams was to keep the floor and ceiling fairly tight so they could achieve parity and allow the small market teams some playoff dough. That worked. I can't see them throwing that away in a big way.

Where I think the small market teams will go harder is for more revenue sharing - maybe an exponential curve for revenue sharing to get more dough out of the Leafs rather than the straight line relationship they have now. A divide and conquer because few beyond the Leafs and giant market teams will complain about that - they'll be heavily outnumbered. And let's face it, that's where the big excess money is.

 

[bustaheims]

What do you think of the concept of reducing the overall % of revenue to players (a la NBA) but instead of dropping the cap ceiling, they drop the cap floor to make the adjustment?  IMO its where I think they will/should go.  I think some of the have-not teams have been quiet about the cap floor being waaay too high for them to sustain.  It has almost doubled since the CBA was signed and there's no way teams like Phx and Fla can continue with a $50 mil payroll.

Yes it might create more separation between the big spenders and everyone else, but it might increase the number of healthy teams.

I was thinking something along the same lines. I imagine the way the floor is calculated will be changed - maybe it becomes a percentage of the ceiling, maybe the gap between the floor and the ceiling gets increased from $16M to $20M or whatever, etc - and that will definitely lessen the drop in the cap ceiling. Teams are going to over-react to the potential drop over the summer, but, odds are, the actual impact won't be as significant as some fear.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

The small market teams will be howling just as loudly, if not louder, against it.

Maybe not if it goes to the cap floor like CF mentioned?

Yup, any small market concerns at rollbacks would be addressed by salary floor movement I believe, as well as a larger percentage of revenue.

 

[Screwball]

I never understand this way of thinking Screw. I remember people saying here when the Hawks signed Brian Campbell, he would never get moved...same went for Jason Blake. Guess what,there will always be someone desperate enough to take on these salaries. $5.5 million is actually a bargain for arguably the Leafs best all around player this season.

I agree with you Brendan.  I was merely gauging reaction on the deal to see if anyone considered the cap hit and term to be a long term albatross.