Steve Stamkos?

[Peter D.]

If the debate is about Stamkos now vs. Tavares in two years, unless you see the latter as being far superior than the former (I don't), I really don't see the point in passing on a 26-year old Stamkos today for a 28-year old Tavares tomorrow. 

Similar age, similar talents, both with a major injury on their resume, both proven as #1 centres, both will command similar cap hits (Tavares possibly more based on how the cap trajects over the next two seasons).  One is mere days after from hitting free agency.  The other is no guarantee to hit the market in two years time. 

Both would be at the same stage in terms of the team's overall picture in two years time.  I'd grab the sure thing this summer if available.

 

[Kin]

If the debate is about Stamkos now vs. Tavares in two years, unless you see the latter as being far superior than the former (I don't), I really don't see the point in passing on a 26-year old Stamkos today for a 28-year old Tavares tomorrow. 

It's not really. The debate is about Stamkos vs. saving the money for someone else in the future, Tavares just being a possibility. The point of holding off being that in a couple years time the Leafs will be in a better position to decide if where they want to invest that money is at center or at another position, as well as having that player signed for 7 years starting when they should be closer to contention as opposed to burning 2-4 years of the deal as they develop the internal talent that's almost certainly going to be more crucial to any cup runs they go on in the future.

 

[bustaheims]

If the debate is about Stamkos now vs. Tavares in two years, unless you see the latter as being far superior than the former (I don't), I really don't see the point in passing on a 26-year old Stamkos today for a 28-year old Tavares tomorrow. 

Similar age, similar talents, both with a major injury on their resume, both proven as #1 centres, both will command similar cap hits (Tavares possibly more based on how the cap trajects over the next two seasons).  One is mere days after from hitting free agency.  The other is no guarantee to hit the market in two years time. 

Both would be at the same stage in terms of the team's overall picture in two years time.  I'd grab the sure thing this summer if available.

That's not really the debate, though. Tavares is just being used as example of a premiere UFA who could be available when the Leafs are closer to being/are contenders rather than a specific target. The debate is whether it's in the team's best interests to commit to Stamkos now, or to wait until they have a better idea of how the prospects are going to pan out and what holes they'll need to fill to take the next step in their growth as a team.

There's also the question as to whether it could be in the Leafs' interest to split the cap hit for two or three pieces, rather than committing all to Stamkos. For example, could, say, a $6M defenceman and a $4.5M forward provide better value to the team than Stamkos at $10M and another player at the league minimum?

 

[jonlleafs]

If the debate is about Stamkos now vs. Tavares in two years, unless you see the latter as being far superior than the former (I don't), I really don't see the point in passing on a 26-year old Stamkos today for a 28-year old Tavares tomorrow. 

It's not really. The debate is about Stamkos vs. saving the money for someone else in the future, Tavares just being a possibility. The point of holding off being that in a couple years time the Leafs will be in a better position to decide if where they want to invest that money is at center or at another position, as well as having that player signed for 7 years starting when they should be closer to contention as opposed to burning 2-4 years of the deal as they develop the internal talent that's almost certainly going to be more crucial to any cup runs they go on in the future.

I'm sorry but just like how a generational player like McDavid comes every decade or so, same goes with elite talents hitting the open market while they are still well before their prime (assuming prime is around 28-30) PLUS someone who wants to play for his childhood team the Leafs.  That just doesn't happen often.  Stamkos is closer to a "sure thing" of wanting to sign with the Leafs now versus a complete unknown in Tavares in 2yrs.  I take Stamkos any day of the week and would be content that we get even 1 Stanley Cup contending team in the 7yrs he is here.  Beggars cannot be choosers and as we stand now we would all be ecstatic if we just reach the final for 1 of the 7 years because Stamkos helped.

 

[bustaheims]

I'm sorry but just like how a generational player like McDavid comes every decade or so, same goes with elite talents hitting the open market while they are still well before their prime (assuming prime is around 28-30) PLUS someone who wants to play for his childhood team the Leafs.  That just doesn't happen often.  Stamkos is closer to a "sure thing" of wanting to sign with the Leafs now versus a complete unknown in Tavares in 2yrs.  I take Stamkos any day of the week and would be content that we get even 1 Stanley Cup contending team in the 7yrs he is here.  Beggars cannot be choosers and as we stand now we would all be ecstatic if we just reach the final for 1 of the 7 years because Stamkos helped.

As Nik point out earlier in the thread, on average, elite talents hit the open market every other summer, and, with the current free agency rules, they'll be getting there in their mid-20s at a similar rate (and, for the record, prime production seasons for forwards tend to be in their early 20s). On top of that, as has been pointed out a number of times, no one who is suggesting that the Leafs don't aggressive pursue Stamkos is suggesting they wait specifically for Tavares. The question is about waiting until the Leafs are actually in a position to take full advantage of adding a high-end free agent - which is very much not this summer.

Also, the Leafs aren't beggars in this situation. They're not in a situation where their choice is Stamkos or Stamkos. They're not desperate to add a #1C this summer - and, even if they were, they're in a prime position to draft one. This management team has been preaching patience since they started the team down this path. The idea that they have to sign Stamkos or that waiting to add big pieces until they're in a position where adding big pieces makes sense just flies in the face of that. They're 100% in a position where they can wait. They can absolutely afford to be choosers. In fact, they basically have to be. They can't hamstring themselves because of today's opportunity.

 

[mr grieves]

I think Stamkos would be a great signing, the main reason being that we need a capt. He would also be a very good mentor for all the stars we have coming up. His scoring punch will be very welcomed on a team that will be better then most would like to admit. If our goaltending issue is fixed, and the players buy into the coach I think we would take our first steps this up coming season. I am of the belief that in two seasons the way things are going, and if we sign Stamkos and our goalie thing is fixed we will be a good young playoff team. So if we sign Stamkos for seven yrs, then how is it wasting his contract. this means two seasons for while we are growing and five while we are a playoff team. So in my opinion I say the Leafs should be all over signing him.

I agree with a lot of the benefits you've listed. I'd like to add a couple of questions in addition that we should ask even if Stamkos pans out exactly as expected (Art Ross, etc.).

Are these things enough to push the Leafs in their current (albeit fluid) state into contending for the conference finals on a regular basis (i.e. 5-6 years)?

Or will Stamkos' projected scoring only push the Leafs up 5-6 spots in the standings? From a bottom 3 finish up to a bottom-9?

Are we content to draft 7-12 (or even lower) for the next two growth years? Or would it be better to have a good shot at the top-5 again for at least one more year?

I think the Leafs have already done about as well in terms of drafting as TBL, NYI, FLA did before they started moving out of the basement. I'm not sure whether those teams stopped bottoming out because external pressures forced their managements to begin building to compete or if the talent drafted proved good enough that the team was no longer in a position to draft really high.

But I'd consider the possibility that bottom 3 finishes aren't happening with or without Stamkos.

 

[Kin]

 
I'm sorry but just like how a generational player like McDavid comes every decade or so, same goes with elite talents hitting the open market while they are still well before their prime (assuming prime is around 28-30) PLUS someone who wants to play for his childhood team the Leafs.  That just doesn't happen often.  Stamkos is closer to a "sure thing" of wanting to sign with the Leafs now versus a complete unknown in Tavares in 2yrs.  I take Stamkos any day of the week and would be content that we get even 1 Stanley Cup contending team in the 7yrs he is here.  Beggars cannot be choosers and as we stand now we would all be ecstatic if we just reach the final for 1 of the 7 years because Stamkos helped.

I really don't get why people don't see a fundamental contradiction here. Either my list of elite talents available as UFAs is right, and elite talents are available every other year or so, or I'm wrong and Stamkos is virtually the only elite talent ever available on the UFA market in which case every single Cup winner has been put together without signing an elite UFA.

The Leafs aren't beggars. They're not desperate. For the first time in a long time they're not desperate to make the playoffs as quickly as possible just to appease an impatient ownership group or impatient fans. They can slow build it. They can try and do what Chicago/LA did. The difference between signing a 26 year old free agent and a 28-29 year old one as many cup winners have done in the past is not that big a deal. The idea that elite talents routinely hit the age of 33 and then fall off a cliff has absolutely no basis in fact.

 

[Kin]

As Nik point out earlier in the thread, on average, elite talents hit the open market every other summer, and, with the current free agency rules, they'll be getting there in their mid-20s at a similar rate (and, for the record, prime production seasons for forwards tend to be in their early 20s).

Also, just to expand on this when I said that elite free agents hit the free agent market every other year it's important to keep in mind I'm not just talking about someone like Stamkos who might go on to produce at an elite rate. I'm strictly talking about the Free Agents who were terrific additions to their team. Who played up to their contracts. I mentioned not counting Brad Richards or Zach Parise(whose drop-off can't just be attributed to age). It also doesn't include someone like Brian Campbell, who hit UFA after a year where he was a second team all-star and finished 5th in Norris voting(his second consecutive top 10 finish) or Marian Gaborik who was a 40 goal scorer(and then hit 40 twice more with his new team).

Every other year is just how often teams were able to radically change the course of their franchises via free agency. If the question is just how often teams have a chance to add an elite free agent, the answer is probably closer to there being one a year on average.

 

[Highlander]

Don't we have to factor in burying Lupul on the LTIR and trading Bozak, that opens ups a lot of caps space for SS without hampering the team to much cap wise.  A lot of bold moves have been made in the past 2 years and I don't think it is time to get shy now. Lets do what needs to be done and secure one of the premier centres in the league, who wants to come home, cause that is what Babs promised. And he is C material the moment he signs his contract:  Stamkos, Matthews and Kadri down the middle sounds damn good to me or Stamkos and Laine on the same line sounds almost as good.

 

[Kin]

Lets do what needs to be done and secure one of the premier centres in the league, who wants to come home, cause that is what Babs promised.

Actually, what Babcock said was that the way to bring Ontario-born players in was to win first, then bring them in. Or, essentially, the opposite of what you're suggesting.

 

[Highlander]

He said he would make it safe for the players and then they would come home. I think he has done that

 

[Kin]

He said he would make it safe for the players and then they would come home. I think he has done that

?We need to create a safe environment for the players ? right now, it?s a hard place,? he explained. ?Winning creates a safe place for players.?

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2015/05/21/babcock-predicts-pain-for-leafs-who-are-a-massive-massive-challenge/

 

[sneakyray]

http://www.tsn.ca/babcock-creating-safe-environment-for-players-1.439669

tsn article from feb 18, 2016

But with sick bay overflowing and the trade deadline now days away, will the task of keeping the Leafs players ?safe? become harder?
"No, no, I don't think so," Babcock said shaking his head. "I think we've looked after them real good. We talked about that today. If you play real hard and you get prepared and stay determined and you play with structure and play real hard you can walk around town, go for breakfast, life's good, people like you, it's no problem. If you don't get prepared and you don't play with determination and you don't play with structure it's not as much fun being around town."

 

[princedpw]

Can someone point me to the list of free agents comparable to Stamkos that Nik posted earlier?  Thanks!

 

[Kin]

Can someone point me to the list of free agents comparable to Stamkos that Nik posted earlier?  Thanks!

It's probably a mistake to categorize them as "comparable" to Stamkos as they are all very different players at varying stages of their careers but the 6 UFAs I described as elite were Niedermayer, Chara, Hossa, Kovalchuk, Suter and Stamkos.

 

[princedpw]

Can someone point me to the list of free agents comparable to Stamkos that Nik posted earlier?  Thanks!

It's probably a mistake to categorize them as "comparable" to Stamkos as they are all very different players at varying stages of their careers but the 6 UFAs I described as elite were Niedermayer, Chara, Hossa, Kovalchuk, Suter and Stamkos.

Id say those guys are of comparable quality.-- Suter, Hossa maybe a little lesser, Chara, Niedermayer even better perhaps, but same ballpark. 

Niedermayer was 2005 -- 11 years. Let's call it 12 so that would be 1 every 2 years.  There are 30 teams in the league.  You only need 1 place to be more desirable for the FA.  If they let decide not to go for the guy this year, they maybe have 2 more shots at that level guy over the next 2-5 years.  Nobody can calculate the probabilities on these things, but if those are the level of guy you want, it doesn't seem the chances are all that high. They arent zero either. It is a risk no matter what you do.

What I'd like to see are cap estimates for the 2020 season and a plan for getting a 1A defenseman.  On the latter, if buying Stamkos allows us  to trade a top prospect or young guy like a marner, nylander or kadri for a similar age and talent defenseman, Id consider it after mapping out the cap implications.

 

[ZBBM]

I think I come down where prince is. All this discussion about where the team might be in x years is hypothetical. This July they may well be confronted with an actual opportunity to add a player who would undoubtedly make the team much better. You have to make decision about him at that time. I don't think you make it based primarily on largely imponderable future possible UFA choices.

To me the biggest question re Stamkos is whether you think he has peaked or not, which is certainly a possibility, and perhaps too his injury history.

 

[mr grieves]

Can someone point me to the list of free agents comparable to Stamkos that Nik posted earlier?  Thanks!

It's probably a mistake to categorize them as "comparable" to Stamkos as they are all very different players at varying stages of their careers but the 6 UFAs I described as elite were Niedermayer, Chara, Hossa, Kovalchuk, Suter and Stamkos.

Id say those guys are of comparable quality.-- Suter, Hossa maybe a little lesser, Chara, Niedermayer even better perhaps, but same ballpark. 

Niedermayer was 2005 -- 11 years. Let's call it 12 so that would be 1 every 2 years.  There are 30 teams in the league.  You only need 1 place to be more desirable for the FA.  If they let decide not to go for the guy this year, they maybe have 2 more shots at that level guy over the next 2-5 years.  Nobody can calculate the probabilities on these things, but if those are the level of guy you want, it doesn't seem the chances are all that high. They arent zero either. It is a risk no matter what you do.

What I'd like to see are cap estimates for the 2020 season and a plan for getting a 1A defenseman.  On the latter, if buying Stamkos allows us  to trade a top prospect or young guy like a marner, nylander or kadri for a similar age and talent defenseman, Id consider it after mapping out the cap implications.

MLHS tried to do just that.

link: https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/05/10/steven-stamkos-toronto-maple-leafs-salary-cap/

I think the author is maybe too conservative in estimating the cap hits of Nylander, Marner, and Matthews, but also a bit too conservative in projecting cap growth, too generous in budgeting a core...

As for getting a 1A defenseman, I think the Leafs best chance of having one that's developed in order to work with the primes of the aforementioned prospects is to have Stamkos, which would free them to package one of Marner, Nylander, or Matthews.

 

[Redleaf]

While getting Matthews is going to be huge for the franchise, I don't buy that we don't need him now that we have Matthews.  The cap hit is gonna suck, but when can you get a guy like Stamkos at 26yrs of age at his prime?  Not often at all nowadays.  There are a few positives in adding him to the teams that I can't overlook:

1.  A superstar Canadian-boy who loves the Leafs and wants to play for the Leafs.
2.  A player who steps in as the leader (and/or Captain) of the biggest hockey franchise in the world.  A guy the whole Leafs nation can get behind (i.e. Gilmour)
3.  Matthews is not going to be a #1 center his rookie season.  If he is thrust into that role, it may do more harm than good.  Having him start on the 3rd line is probably best where he'll be shielded from other #1 centers.  So having Stamkos then Kadri /Nylander above him in the depth chart for next season is probably the best way to go. 
4.  Again, Matthews will be shield from the constant scrutiny of this city and the media.  Stamkos is older and can handle most of the focus of the media on him. 
5.  We immediately become closer to becoming a playoff team and contender.  We could be knocking on the playoff door if we have him on the team next season not that we are expecting it of course.  They could surprise us next season.  Nylander was on a tear for a while there along with Soshnikov. 
6.  We would have some serious offensive threats on 3 lines versus 2.

The only thing will be salary that is a negative that I can see signing Stamkos, which everyone's already delved into.  If we can figure that out with him, then I don't see why we don't sign Stamkos.

Let me add another, and perhaps biggest potential positive.

* it allows the Leafs to trade one of their other talented forwards for a much needed #1 or #2 defenseman

Where was everyone's support on this idea 2 wks ago when I was suggesting the exact same thing in a few different threads? Lol ;D
Seriously though, trading one of the young forwards could certainly get you a good d-man. But the idea is rife with bad outcomes. The trust factor has to be huge for management to trade away one of Marner or Nylander for a defenseman. I wonder if anyone has an example of that sort of trade happening elsewhere, with such young players involved?

 

[rdowdall]

While getting Matthews is going to be huge for the franchise, I don't buy that we don't need him now that we have Matthews.  The cap hit is gonna suck, but when can you get a guy like Stamkos at 26yrs of age at his prime?  Not often at all nowadays.  There are a few positives in adding him to the teams that I can't overlook:

1.  A superstar Canadian-boy who loves the Leafs and wants to play for the Leafs.
2.  A player who steps in as the leader (and/or Captain) of the biggest hockey franchise in the world.  A guy the whole Leafs nation can get behind (i.e. Gilmour)
3.  Matthews is not going to be a #1 center his rookie season.  If he is thrust into that role, it may do more harm than good.  Having him start on the 3rd line is probably best where he'll be shielded from other #1 centers.  So having Stamkos then Kadri /Nylander above him in the depth chart for next season is probably the best way to go. 
4.  Again, Matthews will be shield from the constant scrutiny of this city and the media.  Stamkos is older and can handle most of the focus of the media on him. 
5.  We immediately become closer to becoming a playoff team and contender.  We could be knocking on the playoff door if we have him on the team next season not that we are expecting it of course.  They could surprise us next season.  Nylander was on a tear for a while there along with Soshnikov. 
6.  We would have some serious offensive threats on 3 lines versus 2.

The only thing will be salary that is a negative that I can see signing Stamkos, which everyone's already delved into.  If we can figure that out with him, then I don't see why we don't sign Stamkos.

Let me add another, and perhaps biggest potential positive.

* it allows the Leafs to trade one of their other talented forwards for a much needed #1 or #2 defenseman

Where was everyone's support on this idea 2 wks ago when I was suggesting the exact same thing in a few different threads? Lol ;D
Seriously though, trading one of the young forwards could certainly get you a good d-man. But the idea is rife with bad outcomes. The trust factor has to be huge for management to trade away one of Marner or Nylander for a defenseman. I wonder if anyone has an example of that sort of trade happening elsewhere, with such young players involved?

Ryan Johansen for Seth Jones