Steve Stamkos?

[bustaheims]

So I guess you're including Bozak, Lupul, and JVR?

At this point, they're still on the team, so, yes. You have to include them until that changes.

 

[Frank E]

So I guess you're including Bozak, Lupul, and JVR?

At this point, they're still on the team, so, yes. You have to include them until that changes.

Sure, but I don't think anyone expects all 3 of them to be on the team come fall. 

 

[Kin]

Yeah, that's what I found so sketchy about the cap projection article Potvin posted it was basically that the Leafs have room to sign Stamkos if:

1. Every prospect on the team works out, but signs very reasonable contracts
2. Stamkos takes 9.5-10.5
3. The cap grows at a certain rate
4. The goaltending gets solved somehow that doesn't involve paying more than 6 million on a goalie

 

[Kin]

Sure, but I don't think anyone expects all 3 of them to be on the team come fall.

I think Bozak and Lupul will be and I'm 50/50 on JVR.

 

[bustaheims]

Sure, but I don't think anyone expects all 3 of them to be on the team come fall.

Maybe, but, we also have no idea how deals that see them moving will be structured. I don't think there's much chance Lupul moves - and, if he does, it's definitely not without the Leafs either retaining salary or some coming back. Bozak and JvR are more likely to move - though, probably only one of the two, and their individual contracts would really only open up enough space for roughly what we can reasonably expect Stamkos to sign for and, maybe, some injury wiggle room, still leaving the team pressed right up near the cap ceiling before performance bonuses come into play.

 

[Redleaf]

And the value of this is what, trying to prove that I'm lying about hockey people saying 'the Leafs are putting the cart before the horse hiring Babcock'!

I legitimately can't put it any simpler than I did when you asked me that before.

Simply unnecessary you mean.

 

[Frank E]

Sure, but I don't think anyone expects all 3 of them to be on the team come fall.

Maybe, but, we also have no idea how deals that see them moving will be structured. I don't think there's much chance Lupul moves - and, if he does, it's definitely not without the Leafs either retaining salary or some coming back. Bozak and JvR are more likely to move - though, probably only one of the two, and their individual contracts would really only open up enough space for roughly what we can reasonably expect Stamkos to sign for and, maybe, some injury wiggle room, still leaving the team pressed right up near the cap ceiling before performance bonuses come into play.

This year though, because you've got Michalek, Greening, and Laich coming off for 2017-2018.

 

[bustaheims]

This year though, because you've got Michalek, Greening, and Laich coming off for 2017-2018.

Yeah, but that's already factored into the numbers I posted for next year. It still has strong potential to make things pretty tight/significantly limit the team's ability to bring in talent from outside the organization.

 

[TBLeafer]

https://www.thestar.com/sports/breakaway_blog/2015/09/what-will-be-the-effect-of-the-babcock-effect-.html

Everyone keeps talking about the "Babcock effect," as if new Maple Leafs coach Mike Babcock is going to somehow turn the lemons he inherited from last year's team and turn them into playoff-bound lemonade.

That was back in September.

That's an article responding to the idea that the "Babcock Effect" could take the team into the playoffs, not whether or not Babcock is so good the team can't possibly be bad enough for a top draft pick.

Regardless, it's still not someone actually advocating the idea.

No its an article that directly addressed your specific question with a specific answer and you're too focused on trying to discredit things to realize that that you just got bitch slapped. 

 

[Frank E]

This year though, because you've got Michalek, Greening, and Laich coming off for 2017-2018.

Yeah, but that's already factored into the numbers I posted for next year. It still has strong potential to make things pretty tight/significantly limit the team's ability to bring in talent from outside the organization.

No sir, I disagree that it should be characterized as "pretty tight." 

I thought this was a decent write up about the cap situation moving forward -
https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/05/10/steven-stamkos-toronto-maple-leafs-salary-cap/

 

[Kin]

No its an article that directly addressed your specific question with a specific answer and you're too focused on trying to discredit things to realize that that you just got witch slapped. 

So the specific answer of who it was who was saying it was a bad idea to hire Babcock because he'd put a low finish in jeopardy is....?

I'll take a name.

 

[TBLeafer]

No its an article that directly addressed your specific question with a specific answer and you're too focused on trying to discredit things to realize that that you just got witch slapped. 

So the specific answer of who it was who was saying it was a bad idea to hire Babcock because he'd put a low finish in jeopardy is....?

I'll take a name.

Ken Hitchcock actually said it as RL pointed out, but that went right over your head too.

Mirtle made some musings to the effect as well, as did the Leafs own performance once they put Babcock's system together from November until JVR got injured.

 

[Kin]

Ken Hitchcock actually said it as RL pointed out, but that went right over your head too.

Hitchcock did not say that. He said nothing of the sort. He said he thought Babcock would do well here and sooner than people thought. He did not say that would hurt the building efforts. He said exactly the opposite.

Mirtle made some musings to the effect as well, as did the Leafs own performance once they put Babcock's system together from November until JVR got injured.

You are confusing the issue. It's not about whether or not the Leafs would do better than expected, it's about anyone who said that meant hiring Babcock was bad for the team long-term.

Nothing posted here has said anything remotely like that and, no, "the team's performance" can't give that opinion.

 

[bustaheims]

No sir, I disagree that it should be characterized as "pretty tight." 

Without Stamkos, and with JvR, Lupul, and Bozak, the Leafs have about $27M to retain Zaitsev and Hyman, add 4 more defencemen, 4 more forwards and 2 goalies - so, 10 players. With Stamkos on the type of contract he's likely to get, and one of JvR or Bozak gone, that number becomes closer to $20M before the team sniffs at addressing the goaltending situation, or re-signing any of their pending RFAs that summer (Zaitsev, Hyman, Carrick, Marincin, Corrado, Brown, and some others). In my world, that's tight, we're likely talking half of that just for the starting goalie, Zaitsev, and Hyman. It basically leaves no room for improvements elsewhere.

I thought this was a decent write up about the cap situation moving forward -
https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/05/10/steven-stamkos-toronto-maple-leafs-salary-cap/

THe problem is that article doesn't take into account the LTIR/performance bonus issues, probably underestimates Stamkos' salary by $1M-$2M, and quite possibly overestimates the growth in the cap (not significantly in the first few season, but possibly beyond). I think it's overly optimistic, and ignoring a very important issue.

 

[TBLeafer]

Ken Hitchcock actually said it as RL pointed out, but that went right over your head too.

Hitchcock did not say that. He said nothing of the sort. He said he thought Babcock would do well here and sooner than people thought. He did not say that would hurt the building efforts. He said exactly the opposite.

Mirtle made some musings to the effect as well, as did the Leafs own performance once they put Babcock's system together from November until JVR got injured.

You are confusing the issue. It's not about whether or not the Leafs would do better than expected, it's about anyone who said that meant hiring Babcock was bad for the team long-term.

Nothing posted here has said anything remotely like that and, no, "the team's performance" can't give that opinion.

I'm sorry I thought that your whole position on this being a successful rebuild was continuing to tank to get high picks at the draft.

Now all of a sudden doing better than expected and not having access to those high picks isn't hurting the rebuild.

Okay there.  :

 

[Kin]

I'm sorry I thought that your whole position on this being a successful rebuild was continuing to tank to get high picks at the draft.

Now all of a sudden doing better than expected and not having access to those high picks isn't hurting the rebuild.

The Leafs finished in 30th place. Did you expect them to finish in 35th? Not having access to high picks? Were you expecting them to pick 0th overall?                     

Leaving aside that I don't think anyone seriously made the argument that hiring Babcock meant the team would finish too highly and as such was a mistake, even if they did this season emphatically proved them wrong.

 

[herman]

 

[TBLeafer]

I'm sorry I thought that your whole position on this being a successful rebuild was continuing to tank to get high picks at the draft.

Now all of a sudden doing better than expected and not having access to those high picks isn't hurting the rebuild.

The Leafs finished in 30th place. Did you expect them to finish in 35th? Not having access to high picks? Were you expecting them to pick 0th overall?                     

Leaving aside that I don't think anyone seriously made the argument that hiring Babcock meant the team would finish too highly and as such was a mistake, even if they did this season emphatically proved them wrong.

And you can thank Phaneuf and his uncalculated, inaccurate, teammate bone breaking slapshot for that.

 

[Kin]

And you can thank Phaneuf and his uncalculated, inaccurate, teammate bone breaking slapshot for that.

When JVR got hurt they had the 4th worst record in the league.

 

[TBLeafer]

And you can thank Phaneuf and his uncalculated, inaccurate, teammate bone breaking slapshot for that.

When JVR got hurt they had the 4th worst record in the league.

Thanks to October, not November and December when they put Babcock's system together with a healthy roster.

If you remove October, (which I obviously know you can't do) they were one of the hottest teams in the league until JVR got injured and definitely weren't trending down.