yes.

but why can't they do what they did with simmmonds and keep waiving him so the leafs can keep him with the team and put him on and off the roster as they please?
- Santo_44

This is the way.

Yeah they did that with Spezza.
Waive me ok but if a team claim's me, I'll retire
- dmnted

And if he retires, no cap penalty, since both years of his contract are the exact same $$$.

I’d rather give a young guy 82 games of third pairing duty than a 40 year old 50 games of third pairing duty.

Can’t Reaves do “wily vet in the dressing room” duty by himself?
- Atomic Wedgie

If theres a young guy who’s better, go for it.

And if he retires, no cap penalty, since both years of his contract are the exact same $$$.
- Atomic Wedgie

Does said team still have to pay it though?

I have only seen one game with minten in it

Has he been good?

I am confused about what they are doing and not doing right now.

Of the waiver ineligible players on their roster, excluding Martin Jones (who I am loathe to say has played well enough in preseason to deserve a spot over Woll, but realistically has not played well enough since 2017 to deserve that exception) and Knies who should make the roster, we have:

Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Bertuzzi, Domi, Kampf, Jarnkrok, Reaves, Lafferty, Knies and Robertson (12 forwards)

and

Rielly, Brodie, McCabe, Klingberg, Liljegren, Giordano and Timmins (7 defense)

to go with Samsonov and Woll.

With LTIR considerations, that still puts us at least $493,950 over the cap.

If they waive Timmins, they'll regret it - he's likely better than Giordano (at this stage), Klingberg or McCabe. But now they're talking about how Minten has a chance of making the roster. Over Robertson? Over who? Minten still makes $845k which is more than Robertson but less than everyone else.

Is the plan to waive Timmins, keep Minten? Waive Robertson and also Timmins and keep Minten?

I don't see the easy solution for this roster outside of trying to move Jarnkrok. And this entire conversation ignores that Noah Gregor has definitely impressed at camp while being lined up with guys who haven't really done much to help elevate his camp (Kampf, Reaves and Holmberg).

Is there a camp injury I'm unaware of? Klingberg is expected to be back before LTIR would be applicable, so that's not going to forestall any decisions . . .
- Monkeypunk

Unless I misread I think the math is off. They can do 12F, 6D plus Timmins on LTIR. They'd have to waive Benoit and they'd have to drop all the young waiver eligible guys. If they want to protect Benoit and carry 7D plus Timmins on LTIR they'd have to either go with 11F or move/drop Lafferty.

If they want to carry two extras plus have Timmins on LTIR then they've got to find a new home for Jarnkrok.

Or, if Klingberg is headed to LTIR (no news of that) then they'd have all sorts of room.

We shall see in a few days.

Nothing to see here.

Go Leafs Go

Leafs would have to pay the actual money, but it wouldn't appear on our cap hit.

Edit: now I'm wondering if I have that correct. Stay tuned.
- Atomic Wedgie

Well he could threaten a team that picks him up that it will be a 800K waiver charity to the league because im retiring.

Well he could threaten a team that picks him up that it will be a 800K waiver charity to the league because im retiring.
- Santo_44

Sorry, didn't fully read your original question:

- If he retires, the team doesn't have to pay him.

- if he goes to the AHL, he gets his full salary.

And if he retires, no cap penalty, since both years of his contract are the exact same $$$.
- Atomic Wedgie

Doesn't the contract count against the cap no matter what for 35+ players?

I'm tired and sick today so my brain might also function at 50%.

Sorry, didn't fully read your original question:

- If he retires, the team doesn't have to pay him.

- if he goes to the AHL, he gets his full salary.
- Atomic Wedgie

I think there is enough respect for the 40 year old that no one would end his career.

Some GMs would be mad the Leafs were doing this though.

I'm not seriously suggesting this, but looking at CapFriendly, we need to shed $3M in salary.

The easiest thing to do would be to trade Samsonov.

We still have two goalies, and could carry 13 forwards and 7 D.

Doesn't the contract count against the cap no matter what for 35+ players?

I'm tired and sick today so my brain might also function at 50%.
- Scabeh

If I'm reading it correctly, they amended the 35+ rule in the most recent CBA.

Since his salary is consistent across the entire contract, it in effect does not function like a 35+ contract.

At least that's what I think.

Maybe.

Unless I misread I think the math is off. They can do 12F, 6D plus Timmins on LTIR. They'd have to waive Benoit and they'd have to drop all the young waiver eligible guys. If they want to protect Benoit and carry 7D plus Timmins on LTIR they'd have to either go with 11F or move/drop Lafferty.

If they want to carry two extras plus have Timmins on LTIR then they've got to find a new home for Jarnkrok.

Or, if Klingberg is headed to LTIR (no news of that) then they'd have all sorts of room.

We shall see in a few days.
- The Law

The missing piece for me - thanks to you and Santo - was that I didn't actually realize the severity of Timmins' injury. I didn't know he was LTIR-bound.

So with 12F/6D/2G, they are $606,500 to the good - which is just not good enough when you need some degree of roster flexibility in case of minor injury, suspension or personal considerations. At some point they'd have to waive someone to create flexibility.

I believe I read that Klingberg was back skating and was expected back soon, for what it's worth. In terms of the cap room needed, Lafferty's $1.1m isn't really replaced by $800k and bringing that much more as an example. Jarnkrok is a better player than most of the other guys competing for a roster spot, but that $1.3m extra he makes lets you have 2 players up instead of 1.

There are still some tough decisions to be made.

has tonight line up been posted yet?

I'm not seriously suggesting this, but looking at CapFriendly, we need to shed $3M in salary.

The easiest thing to do would be to trade Samsonov.

We still have two goalies, and could carry 13 forwards and 7 D.
- Atomic Wedgie

With the fact its likely there will always be a guy injured there probably won't be many issues.

They may have to trade Lafferty though.

If they want to bring in Gregor.

If I'm reading it correctly, they amended the 35+ rule in the most recent CBA.

Since his salary is consistent across the entire contract, it in effect does not function like a 35+ contract.

At least that's what I think.

Maybe.
- Atomic Wedgie

You're right. I had thought what Scabs was saying was correct - but it has since changed to (as per Cap Friendly, verbatim):

A contract is designated a 35+ contract if the players age on the first year of the contract is 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the year of the effective contract).

35+ contracts that are two years in length or longer and:
1. Have a signing bonus in the 2nd or later year, OR
2. Are front-loaded

Shi Davidi
@ShiDavidi
·
57m
Luis Rivera is retiring so the Blue Jays need a new third-base coach for the first time in 11 years

______________________________

Smart man. Saved himself from getting fired.

But that's one down on the guys that need to be gone.

With the fact its likely there will always be a guy injured there probably won't be many issues.

They may have to trade Lafferty though.

If they want to bring in Gregor.
- Santo_44

Once I remember who Lafferty is, I'll tell you if I think this is a good idea or not.

You're right. I had thought what Scabs was saying was correct - but it has since changed to (as per Cap Friendly, verbatim):

A contract is designated a 35+ contract if the players age on the first year of the contract is 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the year of the effective contract).

35+ contracts that are two years in length or longer and:
1. Have a signing bonus in the 2nd or later year, OR
2. Are front-loaded
- Monkeypunk

But then if you look at the Leafs' actual chart on CapFriendly, they list him as a 35+ contract.

But I'm pretty almost sure kinda maybe positive I'm correct on this one.

Good call with Minton @ 13
- .HOHO.

The entire list is laughable.

Blue Jays couldn't score any runs. Shocker. In other news, Netflix added a bunch of cheesy horror movies for October. 1999/2000 Jennifer Love Hewitt makes anything watchable
- PlatosRepucklic

You're right. I had thought what Scabs was saying was correct - but it has since changed to (as per Cap Friendly, verbatim):

A contract is designated a 35+ contract if the players age on the first year of the contract is 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the year of the effective contract).

35+ contracts that are two years in length or longer and:
1. Have a signing bonus in the 2nd or later year, OR
2. Are front-loaded
- Monkeypunk

Well there you go.

Giordano is risk free!

Well, at least we can all stop pretending that we give a poop about baseball.

Am I the only one who solely watches hockey and no other sports? Just curious.
- GalacticStone

I got 3 main sports I watch. Hockey (Leafs), Lacrosse (Rock), and Baseball (Jays).

I also watch the Argo's, too. But I don't go out of my way for it. If I miss it, I can live with it.

The entire list is laughable.
- GreatGigInTheSky

Well when the Leafs are putting millions into a scouting department I'd hope they can do better than beat writers and a handful of semi respected writer/amateur scouts who watch video and compile prospect lists every season.