Toronto Maple Leafs

[Axeman33]

Murray was healthy by the end of the 1st round.
Wasn't he the back up to Woll vs. Fla?

Thats what I thought too. Thats why I am trying to figure out why guys like Frank Seravelli are talking about him going on LTIR to free up cap space.

[lucafen4]

Thats what I thought too. Thats why I am trying to figure out why guys like Frank Seravelli are talking about him going on LTIR to free up cap space.

I guess there's also a difference in fit to play and healthy/fully recovered.
A significant difference for some players.

I doubt when Murray was cleared to play he was even 80%.
Forced into a back-up role when Samsonov went down.
It was Murray or Kallgren.
I'll take Murray at 80%

I think this is why Robidas Island exists in the first place. Robidas & Lupul should have a room all ready for him if he's not traded or bought out

[Daydream Nation]

Thats what I thought too. Thats why I am trying to figure out why guys like Frank Seravelli are talking about him going on LTIR to free up cap space.

This was the same guy that talked about buying out Brodie which made absolutely no sense.

[2014olympicgold]

Buying out Brodie was only mentioned because his buyout would be $0 cap penalty this yr, and $2.5m next yr. There's no other reason to bring him up as a buyout candidate besides that. Talent and Team need had 0 influence on that lol.

[lucafen4]

I'm just waiting for a Cgy-Tor trade.
Treleving was in Cgy too long not to bring in someone

[havanablast21]

Thats what I thought too. Thats why I am trying to figure out why guys like Frank Seravelli are talking about him going on LTIR to free up cap space.

Robidas island. Ever hear of it!? Or the Lupol loophole?

Doesn’t matter how “healthy” he may seem to be… apparently.

They’ll do what they need to do including Hiring Tonya Harding for a specific task.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm just waiting for a Cgy-Tor trade.
Treleving was in Cgy too long not to bring in someone

Think Willy has Calgary on his no trade list?

[2014olympicgold]

Robidas island. Ever hear of it!? Or the Lupol loophole?

Doesn’t matter how “healthy” he may seem to be… apparently.

They’ll do what they need to do including Hiring Tonya Harding for a specific task.

- - - Updated - - -



Think Willy has Calgary on his no trade list?

It depends on how Nylander wants to approach the situation, he could have submitted a list of teams that Toronto would trade him to so it blocks routes out. Or he could have submitted a 10 team list that has the most cap. Or he could have been serious and submitted a real 10 team NTC.

10 team NTC would likely be CBJ, Arizona, Winnipeg. I'd guess the other Canadian teams minus Calgary (Vancouver, Edmonton, MTL, Ottawa). So that's 7 teams right there. Maybe add Chicago, NJD (arena area and high taxes), and Philly. There's a strong 10 team list.

Nylander isn't the only trade chip also.

Robertson, Liljegren, Hirvonen, Minten, Abruzzese, Voit, Niemela

[Axeman33]

That's quite a gap.

https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/stat...57763900817408

Arbitration filings in for Ilya Samsonov (TOR). Team: $2.4M; player $4.9M.

[Feenom]

I'm just waiting for a Cgy-Tor trade.
Treleving was in Cgy too long not to bring in someone

He loves him some Hanifin.

[Daydream Nation]

That's quite a gap.

https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/stat...57763900817408

Does the arbitrator have to pick one side or can he pick somewhere in the middle?

[Axeman33]

Does the arbitrator have to pick one side or can he pick somewhere in the middle?

I'll copy a good description of the process as laid out by the Hurricanes Asst GM Eric Tulsky. This is from an article in the Athletic.

By definition, assistant general manager of the Hurricanes Eric Tulsky explained, “salary arbitration is a process for having a neutral third party determine a fair salary for a player.”

This is a process designated for restricted free agents, only — specifically, those that meet a criteria based on their years of professional experienced.

• Players who sign an entry-level contract between the ages of 18 and 20 years old require four years of professional experience.
• 21-year-olds must have three years of professional experience.
• Those who sign an ELC at 22 or 23 years old need two years.
• And anyone who signs at 24 or older needs one year before becoming eligible.

There’s a deadline each year for players to file, and typically quite a few do — this year, 24 skaters filed.

“Most NHL regulars who are eligible for arbitration elect for arbitration because it is a way to ensure that they get a reasonable salary in a timely fashion,” Tulsky said, noting that from his perspective, it’s a normal part of the process for RFAs who are eligible.

Following the deadline for players, teams get a chance to file for the process with players who didn’t opt for it already. These are less common instances, seeing as so many skaters do it ahead of time. While players can file for arbitration anytime they’re eligible, a team can only elect for this process once against the same player. And teams are limited to electing for arbitration with two players per offseason.

Few players actually reach their scheduled hearings. Players and teams can negotiate along the way up until the hearing starts, which is why there are often settlements beforehand. That allows both parties to be in control of the final outcome, versus the arbitrator deciding the salary. How that process goes depends on a few factors, like why arbitration was filed in the first place — was it a player with few rights as a restricted free agent trying to find some leverage, or simply part of the process to ensure there’s an end-date to these negotiations? If player and management aren’t far apart in the first place, despite that filing, then it may be a smoother process to find that middle-ground. When sides are far apart, especially when one party wants to avoid reaching the hearing, then there can be a bit more pressure in the situation which may stretch the process closer to the scheduled date.

“Most cases do settle,” Tulsky said. “There is often common ground and room for a deal that both sides are happy with; arbitration creates a deadline for reaching that deal and motivates both sides to find that common ground. But obviously sometimes the two sides just disagree; arbitration provides the fallback plan for getting a contract done and looking ahead to the upcoming season.”

What happens when teams actually need that fallback plan? What’s actually involved in the arbitration process?

“The team gives him a qualifying offer before his contract expires, he elects for arbitration, and they are unable to negotiate a contract. The two sides exchange briefs two days before the hearing, laying out their arguments and their requested salary,” Tulsky said. “Then, at the hearing, each side presents their case and their rebuttal, and the arbitrator issues a ruling.” Players and teams can come to an agreement after the briefs are exchanged, but not once the hearing actually starts.

The briefs include the value the party is asking the arbitrator to award, along with an argument that supports it. “[Players and teams] arrive at that figure by selecting statistical criteria for identifying comparable contracts and making an argument for where the player falls relative to those contracts,” Tulsky said, adding that this is not a negotiation tactic, but a figure that each side prepares to defend in front of an arbitrator.

“Preparing a compelling argument for arbitration happens independently from negotiations – you work to negotiate a deal that both sides like, and in parallel you work to develop a compelling argument for arbitration in case you don’t reach a settlement,” Tulsky said.

“Offers made during negotiations cannot be discussed in arbitration, so the negotiation process and the process of building an arbitration case are almost completely separate. The only connection between them is that your estimate of where arbitration would end up might affect what offers you were willing to accept in negotiation, but the numbers presented when briefs are exchanged do not necessarily give any real indication of what either side is asking for in negotiations or how close they are to reaching an agreement.”

Only certain evidence is allowed to be used in those arguments, including games played (or time missed due to injuries), tenure with a team or in the league, statistics to define performance, leadership qualities, and comparable player compensation (only from other restricted free agents).

Most cases end up relying heavily on a statistical comparison to other players, Tulsky noted, adding that the parties give reasoning on why that player is a fair comparable.

“Each side will lay out a set of criteria for identifying players to compare to; they specify what they think are the key statistical measures for describing that player and what range of values they would consider similar. Then they will list the players who signed a contract when their statistics at that time looked like the current statistics of the player in question, and will discuss how the player’s salary should be situated in light of those contracts.”

The salary cap situation of the team, however, cannot be used as evidence, neither can the players’ share of hockey related revenue.

Once the hearing concludes, the ruling is issued 48 hours later via email. The value that’s decided on must be at least 85 percent of the previous year’s salary in the instance of a team elects for arbitration instead of making a qualifying offer. Whoever does not elect for this process gets to decide on term (between a one or two year deal).

In team-elected arbitration, the ruling is binding. In player-elected cases, managers do have a few options — including whether to walk away from the deal entirely and send the player to unrestricted free agency.



Via CapFriendly

The decision on term varies per situation, based on their salary cap outlook, the player’s trajectory, or the next contract situation. A two-year deal in some instances, depending on player’s age and experience, can take a skater to unrestricted free agency while a one year deal allows them to retain control for another season.

Take Tyler Bertuzzi’s case back in 2020; the player was awarded $3.5 million and the Red Wings opted for a one year deal. That allowed Detroit to maintain control at its expiration, while a two year deal would have taken him to unrestricted free agency, giving the team less time (and leverage) when planning the future with the forward.

In the rare instances that players and teams do reach their scheduled hearings, it can have a ripple effect on relations afterward.

As The Athletic’s Craig Custance analyzed a few years ago, players who actually require arbitration generally don’t stick around with that team. In some situations, relations can sour during the process when management gets particularly harsh on a player to diminish their value. But other times, it’s less about a damaged relationship and more about the fact that a player and team got to this point in the first place. That alone can represent a difference in opinion on a player’s value or role, which can lead to an eventual split.

Electing for arbitration initially isn’t a red flag, it’s just a step in the process that most expect. Ideally, a middle-ground can be found before the situation is handed off to the arbitrator. If not, it’s a fallback that provides a conclusive end to a contract negotiation. Whether that resolution makes waves depends on the situation, and the temperature of those negotiations along the way.

[2014olympicgold]

There's some stat out there like 75% of players who end up going to arbitration aren't on the team in 2yrs. Since 2017, 10 of 13 players who had their contract settle via arbitration weren't on the team 2yrs later (bolded are the moved players)

2022: Yakov Trenin (NSH)
2021: No one
2020: Bertuzzi (DET)
2019: Andrew Copp (WPG), Christian Djoos (WSH), Joel Edmundson (STL), Anton Forsberg (CAR), Rocco Grimaldi (NSH), Evan Rodrigues (BUF)
2018: Cody Ceci (OTT), Brett Kulak (CGY), Gemel Smith (DAL), Jacob Trouba (WPG)
2017: Nate Schmidt (VGK)

[tweetdrivr]

Because the team is seen by the player as acting like an a-hole and tearing them down. It makes perfect sense that this process ruins the relationship.

[Pengwin7]

How long has the NHL had the "buyout window" in place following arbitration cases?
I feel like this is a new(er) thing and that teams actually WANT to open that 2nd buyout window by having at least one arbitration case farther into summer.

PHI used this with Noah Cates to get to a buyout on TonyD.

So... as for Samsonov - maybe (for all we know) TOR wanted a player towards arbitration.
1. Take early July to see who you are putting on roster.
2. Build to some point of a "complete" roster to know your cap hit.
3. Go to arbitration or negotiation with your "final" player.
4. Then buyout players - as needed - knowing your final piece (Samsonov).


Leafs, seem to me, to be 100% lock to buyout Murray after the Samsonov arb.
They'll have to move one other piece though - right?

Could they possibly buy-out Brodie as well... that would get them there/close.
And they still want to get the 21-23 healthy players close to $83.5m so that Muzzin's LTIR activates as big a space as possible.


But... point being... the Samsonov arbitration bought them time/room into later July to figure out their cap situ.
Seems like a completely smart planning by TOR/Management/Planning/TeamSamsonov.

[2014olympicgold]

I wondered about this Murray/Samsonov 2nd buyout window from the beginning. The only thing that can cause a hiccup in the buyout is Murray's true health. You can't buyout someone who's hurt, and there's rumblings he's not healthy enough to play for a season and could fail a physical.

But ya, I think the Leafs knew the 2nd buyout window was there, and there was no reason to rush a Samsonov deal. Treliving has used this twice in the past (Brouwer in 2018, and M.Stone in 2019)

@P7, in terms of how long that window is open for....

Clubs can execute a buyout later in the summer during a 48-hour period beginning on the third day after the final of a settlement of the team's final arbitration case or the team's last arbitration award

So Friday is the arbitration day, the 3rd party has 48hrs to make his decision (Sunday July 23), then the buyout window would be July 26-28th.