Marner signs 6 year, $10.893mil AAV contract

[mr grieves]

Personally, I don't really think this team was done in by a cap crunch at the top. I think the bigger failure was that because they invested so much in getting the team to where they are via shortcut rather than team building(and the subsequent losses of draft picks) they had to round out the team hoping to get good performances out of fringe players and guys who were past their primes instead of having a bunch of young guys on cheap rookie deals who could add the sort of depth they need.

Fair enough, though it's easier to "recoup" those draft picks via free agency and trade when you've got more than the value of 3 average Canadian homes to spend rounding out the roster. This top-heavy construction takes that option away. Of course, those players do tend to be overpayments and underwhelming, and the really good teams have that constant in-flux of young depth out-performing their ELCs, so, yeah, I'd prefer it if the Leafs hadn't accelerated the rebuild after getting Matthews. There's your original sin. I still think that others followed.

 

[Kin]

Of course, those players do tend to be overpayments and underwhelming, and the really good teams have that constant in-flux of young depth out-performing their ELCs, so, yeah, I'd prefer it if the Leafs hadn't accelerated the rebuild after getting Matthews. There's your original sin. I still think that others followed.

Sure. This team hasn't been perfect in its construction in any regards. But I think the extent to which the Leafs are top heavy is a little exaggerated. I don't think this is a team that really suffered from a lack of depth. I think it was a pretty good defense. I think they had good players in supporting roles. They just don't have exciting young talent to supplement it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again but, like, even if you gave the Leafs another 7 million in cap space and you did it by signing the top 4 guys to deals nobody could possibly have had issue with(Matthews at 10.5, Nylander at 6, Marner at 8, Tavares at 9) I don't think that's the difference between the Leafs and Tampa. It helps, sure, but you need those guys you want to pay internally first.

 

[rdowdall]

Hallinder, Anderson, Robertson, Amirov will hopefully play on this team bringing some skill and some bite.

 

[Guilt Trip]

Hallinder, Anderson, Robertson, Amirov will hopefully play on this team bringing some skill and some bite.

Leafs have some good prospects that should bolster the roster soon. Sandin is a def for next season. Robertson and Liljegren are possibilities too.

 

[mr grieves]

I've said it before and I'll say it again but, like, even if you gave the Leafs another 7 million in cap space and you did it by signing the top 4 guys to deals nobody could possibly have had issue with(Matthews at 10.5, Nylander at 6, Marner at 8, Tavares at 9) I don't think that's the difference between the Leafs and Tampa. It helps, sure, but you need those guys you want to pay internally first.

I think we've already seen the team trade out some homegrown talent to accommodate the big stars. I'm not even saying they'd be better off with Johnsson, Kapanen, and Kadri, but they need more players than can score. By and large, I think Dubas did his job in replacing them: Simmonds and Thorton didn't really work out, but Spezza did and finding Galchenyuk after Vesey flopped was a really good move. He massively upgraded the defense. Found a great, cheap goalie. I think the supporting cast, on balance, exceeded expectations. But those were necessarily modest expectations because the team was trying to fill out a roster with bargain bin finds.

On the recent Leafs Report, Mirtle (I think) observed that there are a lot of forwards beyond the top four that just don't have any finish, especially when you compare the Leafs to the teams that are still playing. And I think that's pretty hard to argue with. The Leafs had 2 forwards with more than one post-season goal. Had Matthews and Marner been on their games, they would've had 4. Colorado and Vegas have 5, Carolina and Boston 6, NYI 7, and Tampa Bay 8.

One way to get secondary scoring is the way Tampa did, another is the way the rest of those teams did: a mix of trades and FA signings. By trading away all those picks, the Leafs passed on the Tampa model (we'll see how the next crop turns out, of course). And by allocating their cap space as they did, they made it pretty well impossible to build like those other teams too. At least until the cap rises.

 

[herman]

I guess this goes here
https://twitter.com/HardevLad/status/1399767659173093380

 

[Chris]

I've said it before and I'll say it again but, like, even if you gave the Leafs another 7 million in cap space and you did it by signing the top 4 guys to deals nobody could possibly have had issue with(Matthews at 10.5, Nylander at 6, Marner at 8, Tavares at 9) I don't think that's the difference between the Leafs and Tampa. It helps, sure, but you need those guys you want to pay internally first.

I think we've already seen the team trade out some homegrown talent to accommodate the big stars. I'm not even saying they'd be better off with Johnsson, Kapanen, and Kadri, but they need more players than can score.

I think they win this series going away if they have say Kapanen and Brown still on the team. Johnsson I was never sold on, Kadri would be great if he played smart enough to stay off the suspended list. Anyway, those are guys (Kapanen/Brown) who are hard workers, go into the corners, will push back and even fight if needed. Kapanen is like a much better version of Mikheyev who can actually score (especially on the breakaway and PK). IMO we've never had a suitable replacement for Brown. Both also provide speed (especially Kapanen) which has been sacrificed on this team and it shows.

This is what had to be sacrificed to maintain that top heavy core and improve the defense. You replace guys like that with a soon-to-be-retired Thornton, a fumbling Simmonds, an injured Foligno and what do you expect to happen. Throw in an injury to one of those top 4 and shut down Matthews and this is what we get.

I don't know if a major change is needed (yet) or possible but will be interested to see how this offseason goes. Maybe you just tell these guys to grow a pair and hope that this particularly embarrassing loss finally flips the switch. Maybe someone makes an offer that can't be refused.

 

[Kin]

I think we've already seen the team trade out some homegrown talent to accommodate the big stars. I'm not even saying they'd be better off with Johnsson, Kapanen, and Kadri, but they need more players than can score. .

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

 

[bustaheims]

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

Agreed. Can't go blowing your cap on complimentary pieces, regardless of where they're developed. You need to judicious in your use of cap space, which means limited dives into the UFA market. Free agency really should only be used for really big swings, (like Tavares) where you can usually still get value for performance, even if it's an overpayment, or cheap low-risk/reasonable reward depth pieces like Spezza has been. Occasionally, you might find a guy like Brodie who fits a need and comes at a reasonable rate for what they bring, but they're the exception rather than the norm. The flat cap has forced teams to recognize that to some degree - which is why a guy like Hoffman was on the market for so long and only got a 1 year deal.

Gotta keep the big money for guys that really move the needle, and find guys some guys who overperform their contracts to fill out the lineup. The Leafs had a mixed bag with those guys this year, but, in general, they have a poor track record there.

 

[Guilt Trip]

I think we've already seen the team trade out some homegrown talent to accommodate the big stars. I'm not even saying they'd be better off with Johnsson, Kapanen, and Kadri, but they need more players than can score. .

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

Agreed. We're going to see how well Dubas drafted coming up soon. We def know that the Hunter drafts haven't done well. Leafs have invested a lot in development so hopefully the payoff is coming soon. I do expect at least 3 young guys next season. Sandin should be a regular, maybe Liljegren and Robertson too.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Marner's now the first player to go if this forward heavy plan doesn't work out in the next few years.

Just realized that this was my first comment in this thread once Marner's contract was announced.

 

[ZBBM]

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

Agreed. Can't go blowing your cap on complimentary pieces, regardless of where they're developed. You need to judicious in your use of cap space, which means limited dives into the UFA market. Free agency really should only be used for really big swings, (like Tavares) where you can usually still get value for performance, even if it's an overpayment, or cheap low-risk/reasonable reward depth pieces like Spezza has been. Occasionally, you might find a guy like Brodie who fits a need and comes at a reasonable rate for what they bring, but they're the exception rather than the norm. The flat cap has forced teams to recognize that to some degree - which is why a guy like Hoffman was on the market for so long and only got a 1 year deal.

Gotta keep the big money for guys that really move the needle, and find guys some guys who overperform their contracts to fill out the lineup. The Leafs had a mixed bag with those guys this year, but, in general, they have a poor track record there.

Maybe, but you can't just keep giving away those pieces for nothing (Johnsson) or for a poor return (Kadri).

 

[Guilt Trip]

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

Agreed. Can't go blowing your cap on complimentary pieces, regardless of where they're developed. You need to judicious in your use of cap space, which means limited dives into the UFA market. Free agency really should only be used for really big swings, (like Tavares) where you can usually still get value for performance, even if it's an overpayment, or cheap low-risk/reasonable reward depth pieces like Spezza has been. Occasionally, you might find a guy like Brodie who fits a need and comes at a reasonable rate for what they bring, but they're the exception rather than the norm. The flat cap has forced teams to recognize that to some degree - which is why a guy like Hoffman was on the market for so long and only got a 1 year deal.

Gotta keep the big money for guys that really move the needle, and find guys some guys who overperform their contracts to fill out the lineup. The Leafs had a mixed bag with those guys this year, but, in general, they have a poor track record there.

Maybe, but you can't just keep giving away those pieces for nothing (Johnsson) or for a poor return (Kadri).

I actually don't think the return for Kadri was bad. Kerfoot had a pretty good year this season. As for Johnsson. We'll see how Anderson works out but Johnny had a whopping 11 points at 3.4 million.

 

[Kin]

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

Agreed. Can't go blowing your cap on complimentary pieces, regardless of where they're developed. You need to judicious in your use of cap space, which means limited dives into the UFA market. Free agency really should only be used for really big swings, (like Tavares) where you can usually still get value for performance, even if it's an overpayment, or cheap low-risk/reasonable reward depth pieces like Spezza has been. Occasionally, you might find a guy like Brodie who fits a need and comes at a reasonable rate for what they bring, but they're the exception rather than the norm. The flat cap has forced teams to recognize that to some degree - which is why a guy like Hoffman was on the market for so long and only got a 1 year deal.

Gotta keep the big money for guys that really move the needle, and find guys some guys who overperform their contracts to fill out the lineup. The Leafs had a mixed bag with those guys this year, but, in general, they have a poor track record there.

Maybe, but you can't just keep giving away those pieces for nothing (Johnsson) or for a poor return (Kadri).

I dont so much agree on the Kadri thing but on Johnsson if there weren't takers for him that's not really on the Leafs. You can say teams lowballed Dubas on him because of the Leafs cap situation but if he was really seen as providing good value for the money teams would have bid up.

 

[bustaheims]

Maybe, but you can't just keep giving away those pieces for nothing (Johnsson) or for a poor return (Kadri).

I don't think Johnsson had a ton of value, quite frankly, as he was coming back from a major injury and a disappointing year. Also, it's too early to write Anderson off as nothing - he's a "might be something useful in a year or two."

As for the Kadri deal, it's unfortunate how that turned out, but if Barrie was a good fit for the Leafs, we'd see that deal in a very different light. In hindsight, it doesn't look great, but in terms of value at the time, it was a pretty decent return for a guy the entire league knew the Leafs were looking to move.

 

[Chris]

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

Agreed. Can't go blowing your cap on complimentary pieces, regardless of where they're developed.

What about Tampa? If you take their 4 highest cap hits you get about $5 mill less than the Leafs top 4. Tampa has a whole bunch of supporting cast forwards in the $4-$6 mill range. They seem to be a pretty good team. That's what the Leafs could have been. Now they have to hope several of the young players hit early, or that they find cheap gems in the free agent pool. Nick Robertson does not look ready to me and is frequently injured. Rodion Amirov have never played over here. Pavel Gogolev? 20 years old, looked promising in AHL but...it's a lot to hope for. Maybe Anderson makes the jump and we get improvements from Brooks, Engvall, Mikheyev (if they're all even in the organization next year). Maybe.

 

[mr grieves]

I'm not sure you can file all of those guys under that heading but in all of those cases, with the possible exception of Kadri, they're really not guys who it should be that hard to replace internally.

Because, honestly, guys making a lot of money at the top or not I don't think having a bunch of 3-4 million dollar guys on your 3rd lines and lower is a particularly good use of cap space regardless. I'm not prepared to just throw my hands up and say that because the Leafs haven't drafted and developed well enough yet that we should start spending money in bad ways to compensate. Like I said, there aren't short cuts. Either you do things right or you're always going to be fighting uphill. You need to develop young talent to bolster the existing roster and when you get it right and get good guys on rookie deals, you have a window.

Agreed. Can't go blowing your cap on complimentary pieces, regardless of where they're developed. You need to judicious in your use of cap space, which means limited dives into the UFA market.

This became a conventional wisdom around here and for good reason (Davey Clarkson!), but it's possible to go too far in the other direction, no?

If you're so penny wise in the middle of your roster that you can't afford guys who can score a goal here or there, you risk looking pound foolish when only 1 of your 4 stars is going and the likes of Engvall, Mikheyev, Simmonds are bumbling attempts that somewhat higher paid guys are converting in other series.

I am all for committing to your superstars, but it looks like Dubas might've created the US's GINI coefficient on his roster and... I dunno -- it starts to occur to me that maybe sports teams are slightly more like national economies than I'd thought...

 

[mr grieves]

What about Tampa? If you take their 4 highest cap hits you get about $5 mill less than the Leafs top 4. Tampa has a whole bunch of supporting cast forwards in the $4-$6 mill range. They seem to be a pretty good team. That's what the Leafs could have been.

And what's the idea here? What did the management team think was going to happen if they met Tampa Bay in the playoffs? That the Leafs $33M core 3 forwards would not only outplay Tampa's $25M ones but also outplay them by so much that the advantage Tampa has farther down its line-up would be negated? You have to be supremely confident in Matthews, Tavares, and Marner to make that bet, and, even then, it's a weird way to build a team.

 

[Kin]

This became a conventional wisdom around here and for good reason (Davey Clarkson!), but it's possible to go too far in the other direction, no?

If you're so penny wise in the middle of your roster that you can't afford guys who can score a goal here or there, you risk looking pound foolish when only 1 of your 4 stars is going and the likes of Engvall, Mikheyev, Simmonds are bumbling attempts that somewhat higher paid guys are converting in other series.

No, you're making an excellent point. Your position of "The Leafs paying their superstars as much as they did has hurt their ability to add depth via free agency" is a much better position than the "Actually it's really good and smart to have no scoring depth" one that we are.

 

[bustaheims]

What about Tampa? If you take their 4 highest cap hits you get about $5 mill less than the Leafs top 4. Tampa has a whole bunch of supporting cast forwards in the $4-$6 mill range. They seem to be a pretty good team. That's what the Leafs could have been. Now they have to hope several of the young players hit early, or that they find cheap gems in the free agent pool. Nick Robertson does not look ready to me and is frequently injured. Rodion Amirov have never played over here. Pavel Gogolev? 20 years old, looked promising in AHL but...it's a lot to hope for. Maybe Anderson makes the jump and we get improvements from Brooks, Engvall, Mikheyev (if they're all even in the organization next year). Maybe.

Tampa has done a much better job of A) spreading that money across forwards and D, B) signed players for below market value because of their tax situations, and C) $5M in cap space is a lot more than it initially seems like. They were also desperate for a team to take Tyler Johnson off their hands this season, and had Kucherov on LTIR all season, which allowed them a lot more flexibility. The Kucherov thing makes them a very poor direct comparison - their playoff roster would be well over the cap. Between the expansion draft and cap issues, their depth is also going to take a big hit this offseason.

They were already basically begging teams to take Tyler Johnson off their hands this offseason. I imagine they'll be regretting a few of those other mid-level deals in the next few seasons.