The NHL salary cap has been the talk of the town in recent months, and with speculation that the number could rise to over $100M, it's got teams and fans salivating at the possibility of having a ton of extra cap room to make those premium signings and trades.
But now it's become less speculation and according to Elliotte Friedman, it's basically set in stone for the cap to rise exponentially.
It seems that the days of having three or four premium players choking the cap room is going to be over in the near future. In three years teams will see an increase of $25.5M compared to 2024-25 which is only at $88M.
The Maple Leafs for instance have four players making over $10M, and it takes up nearly half of the team's forward budget and leaving the team to play with some less than desirable pieces at times.
So with an added few million as the seasons pass, it gives Toronto a massive advantage as one of the wealthiest and most profitable franchises in not only the NHL, but all of pro sports.
They can make a Connor McDavid pitch without worrying about destroying their cap, they can sign Mitch Marner and feel more comfortable about paying him what he deserves, and the team can now lock up Matthew Knies for the long-term.
NHL Insider Frank Seravalli also revealed the cap floor that teams will need to get to in order to be cap compliant, and in 2027-28; the floor is almost as much as the ceiling is now.
It's a massive advantage for Toronto because teams are also hesitant to spend so much money, given that there's so many outside factors that can make a contract bargain into a bust.
In a couple of years, the Maple Leafs are going to be in a prime position to not only add some big names down the line, but set themselves up for the future without truly breaking the bank.
The only question now is, how does Brad Treliving finish 2025?
With a bang or with a whimper?
POLL | ||
2 HOURS AGO | 40 ANSWERS Toronto Maple Leafs Set Up for Success Following Elliotte Friedman's Latest Report Do you think the NHL salary cap is going up too much, or not enough? | ||