HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Notices

My Leafs- Post CBA

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-19-2005, 01:20 PM
  #126
jamiebez
Registered User
 
jamiebez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55
So who will be targetted?

Whatever, there will be ways around it. Leafs are going to have some willing partners in the group of successful franchises out there.

Other dance partners, Canucks Jovo ... Leafs McCabe. Jagr and ...

If you found equal contracts, you could trade first, then buy-out, and then re-sign you old player.


Restructuring deals is likely to be seen as well. Heck, that even happened in the old NHL, as we recall hearing about the Sens getting relief from players so they could trade for and get players under their restrictive situation there.
There are already rules to close such loopholes with the waiver draft - it's unoffically known as the "Pete Peeters" rule.

In the late 80s, the Flyers had 3 veteran goalies who they wanted to protect in the waiver draft (can't recall who) - however, you can only protect 2. They exposed Peeters anyway, and the Jets selected him. The Flyers then traded a late-round draft pick to the Jets for Peeters immediately after the waiver draft. The Jets get a low pick in exchange for doing the Flyers a favor. The NHL instituted a rule the next season that prohibited teams from re-acquiring a player they gave up in the waiver draft for one year. I'm sure we'll see something similar with buyouts, probably for a year as well.

As far as restructuring deals go, that is possible (I believe the Leafs did it to get Gilmour 2 years ago, too) but I have a hard time believing you'll find a lot of players willing to give up money they've already been guaranteed - especially when they just lost one year's salary and 24% going forward.

jamiebez is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 03:05 PM
  #127
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PepNCheese
Nolan might perform well, but it's not worth the risk.

4.94 million of cap room is put to better use elsewhere with all the players available.

I would rather spend that money on just about any other of the elite free agent forwards, wouldn't you?
Not me.

mooseOAK* is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 04:27 PM
  #128
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiebez
There are already rules to close such loopholes with the waiver draft - it's unoffically known as the "Pete Peeters" rule.

As far as restructuring deals go, that is possible (I believe the Leafs did it to get Gilmour 2 years ago, too) but I have a hard time believing you'll find a lot of players willing to give up money they've already been guaranteed - especially when they just lost one year's salary and 24% going forward.
I realize they have that situation covered, but that hardly matters, this is a new CBA, new rules, and they wouldn't do it via waivers.

I could see players restructuring, if it extended their career, even if it meant a buy-out in 3 years, rather than retiring in 2.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 08:08 PM
  #129
sittler rules!!!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 27
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by think/blue
I think thats one incentive to bring back (at reduced cost if they accept it) both of those guys, particularly Nieuwendyk. He was important for Stajan's development (they roomed together) and he could do the same for guys like Steen.

Who knows, maybe Niewendyk would be easier/cheaper to sign than a guy like Allison, who would get quite a bit of interest league wide Im sure.

Anyways, looks like we'll see how creative JFJ can get this summer.
Nieuwendyk and Roberts should be resigned. Even if for just one more year. Joe has had a year to rest his wonky back and Roberts is always in tremendous shape. You can get these two back at a bargain price, sign Lindros cheap, Spend a little on Glen Murray, Adam Foote and Sergi Gonchar. Let Domi and Mogilny walk.

sittler rules!!! is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 09:17 PM
  #130
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,071
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
The Leafs will lose their spending advantage. Oh my whatever will we do?

I've already pointed this out once in this thread, but I guess it needs to be done again.

As recently as the 2000-2001 season, the Leafs didn't have much of a spending advantage. Their total salary was about $40 million. Not much more than the proposed cap.

Washington and San Jose both had higher payrolls than us. Plus Buffalo, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Carolina and Florida all had payrolls withing $10 million of ours.
The Leafs had the fifth highest payroll in the entire league that season. Only Dallas, Colorado, New York and Detroit spent more then Toronto.

So to sit here and pretend they didn't have a spending advantage when they had the fifth highest payroll in the league is beyond stupid.

I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but the Caps payroll for the 2000-01 season was $34.5 million. That's well below the Leafs $42.4 million. San Jose was at $35 million.

FerrisRox is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 09:26 PM
  #131
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,071
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiebez
There are already rules to close such loopholes with the waiver draft - it's unoffically known as the "Pete Peeters" rule.

In the late 80s, the Flyers had 3 veteran goalies who they wanted to protect in the waiver draft (can't recall who) - however, you can only protect 2. They exposed Peeters anyway, and the Jets selected him. The Flyers then traded a late-round draft pick to the Jets for Peeters immediately after the waiver draft. The Jets get a low pick in exchange for doing the Flyers a favor. The NHL instituted a rule the next season that prohibited teams from re-acquiring a player they gave up in the waiver draft for one year. I'm sure we'll see something similar with buyouts, probably for a year as well.
This is close, but incorrect.

First of all, the Flyers had two veterans they wanted to retain but didn't have room to cover in the waiver draft.

One was Pete Peeters, the other was Leaf coach Keith Acton. Right before the waiver draft both players were shipped to the Winnipeg Jets for future considerations. The Jets then covered both players in the waiver draft so they couldn't be claimed.

Five days later - after the draft - both Acton and Peeters were traded back to Philadlephia for a 5th round draft pick (who became Juha Ylonen.)

The NHL then instituted a rule that stated you cannot be traded BACK to a team that has traded you (key being traded, not waived or released) unless 12 months have passed from the time of the original transaction.

This rule was brought in to stop people from circumventing the waiver draft, but it's only been used in practice for another reason. Two years back when the Calgary Flames made the big Derek Morris/Chris Drury trade with Colorado, they also shipped speedy winger Dean McAmmond to the Avs. That same season, at the deadline, the Avalanche traded McAmmond back to Calgary.

Amazingly, nobody in the league office remembered the "Pete Peeters" rule and the trade was processed and allowed. The Flames, were mildly threatening to sneak into the playoffs and the Oilers contacted the league office and protested the trade. As a result, McAmmond was not allowed to suit up with Flames until the following year, when the 12 months from his intitial trade had passed.

FerrisRox is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 09:44 PM
  #132
think-blue-
Registered User
 
think-blue-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,159
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to think-blue-
Quote:
Originally Posted by sittler rules!!!
, Spend a little on Glen Murray, Adam Foote and Sergi Gonchar. Let Domi and Mogilny walk.
Thats simply not happening.

think-blue- is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 10:43 PM
  #133
Leaf Lander
Registered User
 
Leaf Lander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: BWO Headquarters
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,691
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Leaf Lander Send a message via MSN to Leaf Lander
leafs had 5th highest payroll because they can afford it

where as montreal being one of the weaker teams because they have less capital smaller because of a smaller hockey market place

Leaf Lander is online now  
Old
06-19-2005, 11:11 PM
  #134
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox
The Leafs had the fifth highest payroll in the entire league that season. Only Dallas, Colorado, New York and Detroit spent more then Toronto.

So to sit here and pretend they didn't have a spending advantage when they had the fifth highest payroll in the league is beyond stupid.

I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but the Caps payroll for the 2000-01 season was $34.5 million. That's well below the Leafs $42.4 million. San Jose was at $35 million.
Not according to this. Don't know how you're so far off on the Caps and San Jose's payroll.

Link

I said they didn't have much of a spending advantage because even the 17th overall total salary in the league (Boston) was still within $10 million of theirs.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-19-2005, 11:24 PM
  #135
not quite yoda
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Qatar
Posts: 3,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55

Goal: 5 million

Belfour 4.5
Tellqvist .5


Defense: 12 million

Pronger 1.0 - Kaberle 2.2
McCabe 3.5 - Leetch 2.4
Ken Klee 1.9 - Berg .5
Pilar .5


Forward: 19.3

Nolan 4.5 - Sundin 6.0 - Palffy 1.0
Antropov .8 - Niewy 1.5 - Poni .5
Stajan .5 - Tucker 1.5 - Lindros 1.5Kukemberg .5 - Welly .5 - Steen .5



Of course Palffy and Pronger's deals are back-end loaded, but Nolan and McCabe/Belfour won't be around in 2006-2007 season.
Yes. Whoever believes that a guy like Palffy is dying to play for the Leafs... especialy to the point of playing for a 1 million$ salary... is beyond crazy. And if your rational is that he will make more in the following years of his deal... well guess what? The Leafs are not going to be the only team trying to be competitive.

I am glad that Wings fans are sain enough to accept the reality that they won't be able to stack their team like in pre-appocalyptic times. Only Leaf fans believe that loading on FAs sill still be possible under such a modest cap while having already commited heavy sums (Sundin, Nolan). All other fans realize that the "old" Leafs can not keep up old habits. You will soon learn that the players too understand that the Leafs can not be a team of today.

Thinking that the whole team would take a 50% pay cut (after having lost an ENTIRE YEAR of salary) is further proof of raving lunacy. "So that they have one last shot at the cup"... with a team that has never made it to the finals since... I don't even remember.
No. Seriously: this thread is just sad.

not quite yoda is offline  
Old
06-20-2005, 12:16 AM
  #136
bert
Registered User
 
bert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55
In the NNHL skill will be paramount.

The new Kings: Sullivan, Comrie, St. Louis, Welly, ...

Going to war just to skate down the ice will be a thing of the past, and the Belaks, Cross', and Chara's are going to have to use more than just size to play the game.
You put Chara in the same sentence as Belak and Cross. Do you realise this?

The leafs will be fine, they have an x factor most teams dont players want to play for the Leafs they will take less money to go to Toronto. Plus Torontos recent good drafting will come in handy as the players are matureing. With core players like Sundin, McCabe, Kaberle, and Belfour the leafs will always be competitive.

bert is offline  
Old
06-20-2005, 12:24 AM
  #137
not quite yoda
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Qatar
Posts: 3,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bert
You put Chara in the same sentence as Belak and Cross. Do you realise this?

The leafs will be fine, they have an x factor most teams dont players want to play for the Leafs they will take less money to go to Toronto. Plus Torontos recent good drafting will come in handy as the players are matureing. With core players like Sundin, McCabe, Kaberle, and Belfour the leafs will always be competitive.
you do realize that you put the words "belfour" and "always in the same sentence right? he is old and has a bad back. his career will not last "always" or forever.

not quite yoda is offline  
Old
06-20-2005, 01:48 AM
  #138
Mat
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Magnetomountaineer
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 2,054
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Mat Send a message via MSN to Mat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Reasons why the Leafs will suck, by year:

1998-1999- They're not going anywhere with three rookies on defence. Thomas is washed up and Berezin and Modin are not good enough to be top 6 players.

Result- 97 points

1999-2000- Last year was a fluke. Thomas can't repeat his season and the young players will fall back down to Earth.

Result- 100 points

2000-2001- The Devils dominated the playoff series last year. The other teams have figured out how to play them and the Leafs don't have the ability to compete with the trap.

Result- 90 points

2001-2002- The NHL is cracking down on obstruction. The Leafs rely too heavily on obstruction don't have the speed to compete in the new NHL.

Result- 100 points

2002-2003- The Leafs relied too heavily on Cujo all these years. His loss will finally be their demise. Belfour is washed up and is too old to carry the team like Cujo did.

Result- 98 points

2003-2004- Now they really are too old. They won't be able to handle the long season and they could be out of contention by spring. Don't be surprised to see them selling off assets at the trade deadline.

Result- 103 points

2005-2006- They've lost their "spending advantage" and they're going to have to rely on too many young players. This year really will be their demise (grins and rubs hands together).

Result- ???
its true. we hear this crap every year and still keep winning to the dismay of the leaf-haters

Mat is offline  
Old
06-20-2005, 06:41 AM
  #139
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat
its true. we hear this crap every year and still keep winning to the dismay of the leaf-haters
Winning what?

Fozz is offline  
Old
06-20-2005, 07:29 AM
  #140
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bert
You put Chara in the same sentence as Belak and Cross. Do you realise this?
Did I?

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
06-20-2005, 07:30 AM
  #141
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fozz
Winning what?
Same thing about 14 other teams do.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
06-20-2005, 11:30 PM
  #142
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,071
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Army
Not according to this. Don't know how you're so far off on the Caps and San Jose's payroll.

Link

I said they didn't have much of a spending advantage because even the 17th overall total salary in the league (Boston) was still within $10 million of theirs.
http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/$maseq_e.htm

I'll take the Hockey News as a source over USA Today any day of the week.

And $10 million is a huge difference when you're talking about 40 million payrolls. That's a full quarter of their payroll! Several teams have salaries in the $30 million range, that's a third. It's a big difference and an advantage they (rightfully) used.

FerrisRox is offline  
Old
06-21-2005, 12:22 AM
  #143
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox
http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/$maseq_e.htm

I'll take the Hockey News as a source over USA Today any day of the week.
Please.... The USA today site is by far the best source for salary totals for all four major sports.

Your source is not The Hockey News. Your source is a chintz operation of a website who claims to use The Hockey News as a source. In fact they've put those salary numbers together by pieceing together information from no fewer than four separate sources. Not really the most reliable method.

I have no reason to believe the information I provided was inaccurate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox
And $10 million is a huge difference when you're talking about 40 million payrolls. That's a full quarter of their payroll! Several teams have salaries in the $30 million range, that's a third. It's a big difference and an advantage they (rightfully) used.
Do you think the Leafs won't still have a $5-$10 million difference over many teams in the league? Of course they will.

So like I said, they managed to compete fine in those years. No reason why they can't going forward.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-21-2005, 01:32 AM
  #144
Ronald Pagan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat
its true. we hear this crap every year and still keep winning to the dismay of the leaf-haters
Winning what exactly? Regular season games and a playoff round or two?

Ronald Pagan is offline  
Old
06-21-2005, 09:18 AM
  #145
Leaf Army
Registered User
 
Leaf Army's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 8,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan
Winning what exactly? Regular season games and a playoff round or two?
Yes.

Typical response from a Leaf hater. Before the season it's, "You guys probably won't make the playoffs."

Then after the season it's,"Big deal, you had a good regular season and a couple playoff series. You still haven't won the Cup."

But thanks anyway for indirectly pointing out that the Leafs haven't won the Cup. Guess what? We know that. Only one team gets those bragging rights after the season's over. But if you've been following the thread, a few people have been suggesting that the Leafs won't be able to compete next year (as they tend to suggest every other year as well). So if they did win a couple playoff series, that should probably be considered a fairly successful season.

Leaf Army is offline  
Old
06-21-2005, 09:31 AM
  #146
Volcanologist
Habitual User
 
Volcanologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kessel Apocalypse
Country: Germany
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Don't feed the trolls, guys.

Volcanologist is online now  
Old
06-21-2005, 08:20 PM
  #147
Trevor_deen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 120
vCash: 500
David Ling?

Why not sign David Ling? The guy was great for the Baby Buds and developed some chemistry with Welly. Put him out there with Welly and he'll drop 'em if anyone takes a run at the kid.

Trevor_deen is offline  
Old
06-21-2005, 08:24 PM
  #148
Blue_and_White
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor_deen
Why not sign David Ling? The guy was great for the Baby Buds and developed some chemistry with Welly. Put him out there with Welly and he'll drop 'em if anyone takes a run at the kid.
I didn't see him play at all, but his stats from last season are impressive. That doesn't mean he can play in the pros though.

Blue_and_White is offline  
Old
06-21-2005, 09:17 PM
  #149
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 59,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PepNCheese
Don't feed the trolls, guys.
Now I know what they mean when they say .. Please don't feed the Bears ..

What is with all the these Habs and Sens fans that feel motivated to come over to the Leafs board and give us their opinion on the Leafs and preach all the Doom and Gloom. ??

Our threads are full on them ..

Mess is offline  
Old
06-21-2005, 10:23 PM
  #150
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Messenger
What is with all the these Habs and Sens fans that feel motivated to come over to the Leafs board and give us their opinion on the Leafs and preach all the Doom and Gloom. ??
If you were a Hab or Sens fan would you stay at home?

ULF_55 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.