Steve Stamkos?

[LuncheonMeat]

I don't think we're ever going to agree on when this rebuild started so I think its time we agree to disagree and let it lie.

Also, signing a UFA long term to help your build doesn't have to the acquired as the final piece of your rebuild.  Period.

Thinking is is IMO is tunnel vision.

That UFA should still be one that addresses your team's needs, rather than simply the best available UFA within a certain time-span. They don't have the be the final piece - and no one is saying that they have to be - but UFAs that require significant commitment in cap and term should not be brought in until A) the prospects have developed past the point of simply being prospects, and B) the team's needs at that point have been identified.

Disagree when that UFA is a top player in the league, in their prime and can contribute nicely to that team going forward for the foreseeable future WHILE those prospects are developing naturally, without any need of rushing things.

That's what Stamkos can provide. As long as he signs on with the Shanaplan patient approach and they don't change any other aspect with how we're approaching this rebuild, we golden.  We're just rebuilding better.

You can call it accelerated if you'd like.  I will just call it better.

Except that signing him flies in the face of that approach. I agree with someone who said earlier in the thread, that signing Stamkos starts the clock ticking and creates an artificial timeline. Inevitably it will produce pressure to win in his prime years (now), and that means acquiring players to help win now. Those come at a cost, and that's usually assets/picks.

To date, Shanahan has been steadfast in his approach to build tear the team down and build through the draft. He has said recently that they won't waiver from that plan and, based on his actions so far, I believe him.

Stamkos would be like Phil Kessel in a way. A great hockey player, but at the wrong time. And that pains me, because I've been excited about the prospect of seeing him in a Leaf uniform. But the timing's not right.

 

[Kin]

Stamkos would be like Phil Kessel in a way.

Brace yourself. You're about to have a couple people tell you that Steven Stamkos is not exactly the same player as Phil Kessel and that, in fact, trades are different than UFA signings.

 

[Bill_Berg]

Stamkos would be like Phil Kessel in a way.

Brace yourself. You're about to have a couple people tell you that Steven Stamkos is not exactly the same player as Phil Kessel and that, in fact, trades are different than UFA signings.

Don't forget that Stamkos is a centre and Kessel a winger.

 

[herman]

Stamkos would be like Phil Kessel in a way.

Brace yourself. You're about to have a couple people tell you that Steven Stamkos is not exactly the same player as Phil Kessel and that, in fact, trades are different than UFA signings.

Can I get this in a Ned Stark meme?

 

[jdh1]

I,m glad you guys see this and very clear about it.I was adamant a few months ago that this was not the time for Stamkos this early in the rebuild.I,m with you on this stand by Shanahan not to rush the process.Lesser GM's would have fast tracked a partial rebuild only to fail in the first or second round of the playoffs at the peak.

We want the team to contend for a cup on a annual basis ,not only for a round or two.Just a little more patience is all we need and the management team will put it together.

 

[TBLeafer]

I don't think we're ever going to agree on when this rebuild started so I think its time we agree to disagree and let it lie.

Also, signing a UFA long term to help your build doesn't have to the acquired as the final piece of your rebuild.  Period.

Thinking is is IMO is tunnel vision.

That UFA should still be one that addresses your team's needs, rather than simply the best available UFA within a certain time-span. They don't have the be the final piece - and no one is saying that they have to be - but UFAs that require significant commitment in cap and term should not be brought in until A) the prospects have developed past the point of simply being prospects, and B) the team's needs at that point have been identified.

Disagree when that UFA is a top player in the league, in their prime and can contribute nicely to that team going forward for the foreseeable future WHILE those prospects are developing naturally, without any need of rushing things.

That's what Stamkos can provide. As long as he signs on with the Shanaplan patient approach and they don't change any other aspect with how we're approaching this rebuild, we golden.  We're just rebuilding better.

You can call it accelerated if you'd like.  I will just call it better.

Except that signing him flies in the face of that approach. I agree with someone who said earlier in the thread, that signing Stamkos starts the clock ticking and creates an artificial timeline. Inevitably it will produce pressure to win in his prime years (now), and that means acquiring players to help win now. Those come at a cost, and that's usually assets/picks.

To date, Shanahan has been steadfast in his approach to build tear the team down and build through the draft. He has said recently that they won't waiver from that plan and, based on his actions so far, I believe him.

Stamkos would be like Phil Kessel in a way. A great hockey player, but at the wrong time. And that pains me, because I've been excited about the prospect of seeing him in a Leaf uniform. But the timing's not right.

Disagree. Again.

You don't need to change anything else other than the addition of an exceptional player without it costing you valuable futures that instantly fits into the core you are developing.

How many NHL'ers have the privilege of hitting their UFA years at 25?

No. Stamkos has to agree to buy into the Shanaplan.

That doesn't all of a sudden turn into the Stammerplan just because he decided to pull the Centennial Leafs jersey over his head.

He becomes to Matthews what Vinny was to him. He also does so knowingly and let the chips fall where they may, as we continue to stay the course.

 

[Kin]

 
Can I get this in a Ned Stark meme?

 

[Redleaf]

I think UFA's can and probably should be treated like draft picks for the most part. You get the best player available providing he fits into your plans and cap moving forward.

That's how you end up like the Rangers of the late 90s/early 2000s - loaded with names, but thin on success. The UFA market is the least efficient tool in the team building toolkit. Using it the way you suggest ends up with a team full of bloated contracts, with little room to manouver.

I suppose that's true if thats all you end up doing is signing high priced UFA's. A smart management team can implement a few different strategies using all avenues available, like finding good trading partners to unload other pieces.

 

[herman]

 
Can I get this in a Ned Stark meme?

May the Old Gods look upon you with favour.

 

[bustaheims]

I suppose that's true if thats all you end up doing is signing high priced UFA's. A smart management team can implement a few different strategies using all avenues available, like finding good trading partners to unload other pieces.

Smart management doesn't treat UFAs like draft picks, putting them in the position where they have to unload pieces. Smart management avoids situations where they have to take pennies on the dollar in return for assets because they've made other bad investments.

Basically, smart management sees the UFA market for what it is - inefficient - and uses it to acquire secondary and depth pieces rather than core pieces at inflated prices (certain back-diving, cap circumventing contracts excluded, I suppose - but, being as they're no longer an option, that's a pretty moot point).

 

[TBLeafer]

I suppose that's true if thats all you end up doing is signing high priced UFA's. A smart management team can implement a few different strategies using all avenues available, like finding good trading partners to unload other pieces.

Smart management doesn't treat UFAs like draft picks, putting them in the position where they have to unload pieces. Smart management avoids situations where they have to take pennies on the dollar in return for assets because they've made other bad investments.

Basically, smart management sees the UFA market for what it is - inefficient - and uses it to acquire secondary and depth pieces rather than core pieces at inflated prices (certain back-diving, cap circumventing contracts excluded, I suppose - but, being as they're no longer an option, that's a pretty moot point).

Smart management in a rebuilding situation also makes sure there is also ample cap space available to play in one of the deepest potential UFA pools in years.

And doing so with one of the best future projected cap positions in the league, a plethora of draft picks over the next few years while also putting themselves in the best position possible to win the draft lottery.

Time to play.

 

[Britishbulldog]

I don't think we're ever going to agree on when this rebuild started so I think its time we agree to disagree and let it lie.

Also, signing a UFA long term to help your build doesn't have to the acquired as the final piece of your rebuild.  Period.

Thinking is is IMO is tunnel vision.

That UFA should still be one that addresses your team's needs, rather than simply the best available UFA within a certain time-span. They don't have the be the final piece - and no one is saying that they have to be - but UFAs that require significant commitment in cap and term should not be brought in until A) the prospects have developed past the point of simply being prospects, and B) the team's needs at that point have been identified.

I felt that way as well until 1998.  Felix Potvin was setting or tying various record for 5 years.  The Leafs then signed Cujo.  I was surprised.  But then they flipped Potvin for Berard and the Leafs were much better than before.  Since then I have been open to signing a top UFA, even if it doesn't directly address a weakness, since another team player can then be flipped to address the weakness.

 

[Kin]

I felt that way as well until 1998.  Felix Potvin was setting or tying various record for 5 years.  The Leafs then signed Cujo.  I was surprised.  But then they flipped Potvin for Berard and the Leafs were much better than before.  Since then I have been open to signing a top UFA, even if it doesn't directly address a weakness, since another team player can then be flipped to address the weakness.

Do you remember how the closest those Leafs teams came to a cup was getting beaten in a conference finals by a team that then got demolished in the finals?

 

[bustaheims]

I felt that way as well until 1998.  Felix Potvin was setting or tying various record for 5 years.  The Leafs then signed Cujo.  I was surprised.  But then they flipped Potvin for Berard and the Leafs were much better than before.  Since then I have been open to signing a top UFA, even if it doesn't directly address a weakness, since another team player can then be flipped to address the weakness.

I'd argue that goaltending was a strong need for that Leafs team, as they were among the worst teams in the league in terms of goals against for the previous two seasons. Potvin wasn't getting the job done anymore. He hadn't been the goalie that we like to remember him as.

And, now that we're in the cap era, it's not so easy to flip players to address weaknesses. Trades are much more complicated than they were when Milbury made a typically dumb move and let the Leafs have Berard.

 

[Redleaf]

I suppose that's true if thats all you end up doing is signing high priced UFA's. A smart management team can implement a few different strategies using all avenues available, like finding good trading partners to unload other pieces.

Smart management doesn't treat UFAs like draft picks, putting them in the position where they have to unload pieces. Smart management avoids situations where they have to take pennies on the dollar in return for assets because they've made other bad investments.

Basically, smart management sees the UFA market for what it is - inefficient - and uses it to acquire secondary and depth pieces rather than core pieces at inflated prices (certain back-diving, cap circumventing contracts excluded, I suppose - but, being as they're no longer an option, that's a pretty moot point).

I think you're referring to how the Rangers used the UFA market. In no way does that reflect on what or how the Leafs plan on using UFAs to their advantage. They have more options at their disposal than just UFAs. My point was if you decide to go that route as part of a larger plan, than it makes sense to use it for the very best players available. Using UFAs just to fill holes with lesser players just shows you didn't draft very well.

 

[Kin]

I'd argue that goaltending was a strong need for that Leafs team, as they were among the worst teams in the league in terms of goals against for the previous two seasons. Potvin wasn't getting the job done anymore. He hadn't been the goalie that we like to remember him as.

And, now that we're in the cap era, it's not so easy to flip players to address weaknesses. Trades are much more complicated than they were when Milbury made a typically dumb move and let the Leafs have Berard.

Yeah, the other thing to keep in mind about that trade is that it also sort of reveals the dicey nature of a team just being able to flip whoever they want for a weakness. The Leafs eventually were able to move Potvin for Berard  but despite Potvin being more or less available since Cujo signed the trade didn't take place until well into the season(and was hastily cobbled together Potvin-Renberg was rumoured for months but fell through).

That maybe speaks to busta's point about Potvin not being quite the hot commodity we thought he was but also shows that you're not necessarily dealing from a position of strength there if other teams know you have to make a trade.

 

[TBLeafer]

Ace in the hole time for the for Stamkos side. The argument not taken to my knowledge.

For those thinking Stammer will remain in decline...

How many would continue to bet on that considering goalie equipment is shrinking next next and Stammer is known for having one of the hardest, most accurate shots in the world?

 

[sneakyray]

I wonder if it were an elite dman available like suter a few years ago would there be so many people against but since stammer is a forward and it's a position of relative strength it's not a necessity.  I guess my question is if the leafs sign or trade for an upgrade on d wouldn't that also be accelerating the plan?

 

[TBLeafer]

I wonder if it were an elite dman available like suter a few years ago would there be so many people against but since stammer is a forward and it's a position of relative strength it's not a necessity.  I guess my question is if the leafs sign or trade for an upgrade on d wouldn't that also be accelerating the plan?

You're not allowed to make sense in this debate, so please stop now. 

 

[KadriFan]

I wonder if it were an elite dman available like suter a few years ago would there be so many people against but since stammer is a forward and it's a position of relative strength it's not a necessity.  I guess my question is if the leafs sign or trade for an upgrade on d wouldn't that also be accelerating the plan?

I think the leafs main focus should be on a dman to compliment Rielly.  Maybe Tyson Barrie??? As for Samkos I will be very happy with Matthews and Nylander as our top two.  Add Kadri in there and you're set