Steve Stamkos?

[herman]

Thats sort of the X factor in my mind. How much authority does Shanny really have here? We don't know that. We can't say the board has given him carte blanche and that time isn't really an issue moving forward. For all we know he's being told to go out and get Stamkos no matter what and be done with this rebuild already.

It was made pretty clear when he was brought in that ownership was taking a major step back and letting hockey people take charge of the hockey decisions - and with Lieweke being replaced, I think there's even less influence from ownership and such than before. The impression I got was that the Leafs are essentially a separate entity.

It's part of the beauty of what Shanahan has started here.

He came in, respecting ownership's original plan (which they knew needed help), and basically let it run its natural course (keeping Nonis and Carlyle and pretty much all the players that they said would be playoff contenders and the scouting staff). Once ownership saw the true picture of the team, Shanahan came in with a detailed plan (with Dubas' explaining powers) that outlined why the old plan failed and what steps needed to be taken next. There were probably some cost projections for how much a perennial deep playoff contender makes vs. a once-in-awhile like the Leafs had been.

Dubas talked to the Board about the effect of PDO and the swings in results that luck can cause in this game. The Board now refers to PDO as percentage-driven outcome, and they've come to understand that the process is more telling than the results in this game for long term success. The analytics department that they approved the building of demonstrated Carlyle and the personnel's disconnect and shortcomings, without necessarily blaming ownerships' previous (erroneous) mandates.

Our former mediocrity and quick-patch fix was the comfort of Egypt. Now we are roaming the wilderness, letting the old generation move on, developing our youth, and setting our eyes towards the Promised Land. It will not be easy, and it will not be all that quick, but it will be worth the wait.

 

[Redleaf]

It doesn't really matter what they value. They can tell Shanahan to offer Stamkos the max for 7 years and Stamkos can still say no if he wants to sign with a team that he thinks is closer to contending.

And Rogers/Bell are both well run enough businesses that someone will know that the best thing for ratings is a team that's good in the long-term. Especially when, like we talked about when we were talking about endorsements, Stamkos isn't really a "star" in any sort of way that resonates with casual fans or the semi-interested.

Common sense doesn't always prevail in a board room meeting.
Edit: I'm just saying I want to hear more about the plan before I'm absolutely convinced the goal is long term or short term, or somewhere in the middle. By July 1st I may have the answer I'm looking for, but today I'm not entirely convinced.

 

[Kin]

It's not so much a matter of common sense. It's smart strategy. I'm pretty confident in both Rogers' and Bell's know-how when it comes to making money and the track record of moves Shanahan's already made to tear the team down as signs that they're on board with a long-term rebuild.

 

[bustaheims]

Common sense doesn't always prevail in a board room meeting.

No, but dollars and cents do, and the reality is that there's a very real chance that the expense of Stamkos' contract will outweigh the increase in income.

 

[TBLeafer]

In fact, if you think about it, Tampa is really a perfect example of advocating for building the team the way busta, Herman and I are advocating. They were essentially stalled as a lousy team with "established stars" but, once they got rid of St. Louis and Lecavalier's cap hits they were able to take that money and use it on more affordable free agents who were targeted more for their specific needs like Filppula, Boyle and Stralman. It's only after their cap space was re-allocated from established stars to those guys that they became a contender.

Goaltending matters.  They made a good run just three years into Stamkos' career.

 

[Kin]

Goaltending matters. They made a good run just three years into Stamkos' career.

That doesn't address anything I said. They weren't able to build a consistent playoff team for 4 full seasons after they drafted Hedman and after they'd got rid of Lecavalier/St. Louis.

We don't want a team that can go on one good run and we don't have anything resembling solid goaltending in place.

 

[jdh1]

It's not so much a matter of common sense. It's smart strategy. I'm pretty confident in both Rogers' and Bell's know-how when it comes to making money and the track record of moves Shanahan's already made to tear the team down as signs that they're on board with a long-term rebuild.

I'm surprised that your not worn out yet ,trying to explain the obvious.

 

[herman]

It's not so much a matter of common sense. It's smart strategy. I'm pretty confident in both Rogers' and Bell's know-how when it comes to making money and the track record of moves Shanahan's already made to tear the team down as signs that they're on board with a long-term rebuild.

I'm surprised that your not worn out yet ,trying to explain the obvious.

We're taking turns to keep each other fresh.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Once this is resolved one way or the other, can we have some kind of forum meetup where we have a ritual burning of a printout of this thread while a mod simultaneously deletes it?

 

[TBLeafer]

Goaltending matters. They made a good run just three years into Stamkos' career.

That doesn't address anything I said. They weren't able to build a consistent playoff team for 4 full seasons after they drafted Hedman and after they'd got rid of Lecavalier/St. Louis.

We don't want a team that can go on one good run and we don't have anything resembling solid goaltending in place.

No two rebuilds are alike.  Filling Bozak's roster spot with Stamkos who is four years younger and getting the best possible pick for Bozak just makes too much sense, without disrupting the rebuild otherwise.

Having Shanny's FIRST new core three of Kadri, Rielly and Stamkos is a solid first core three while the rest of the team gets evaluated and develops to try and earn their place long term too.

As of now, there will be no additional long term contracts needed through the the first two years of Stamkos' contract except Bernier if he proves himself or another goalie is determined to be a better option.

I see NO problem with being a good now team, while the future gets built around the high picks we already have in place.

We don't need any more no matter how badly you might want them.

 

[Kin]

Re-stating a premise isn't an argument.

 

[herman]

Once this is resolved one way or the other, can we have some kind of forum meetup where we have a ritual burning of a printout of this thread while a mod simultaneously deletes it?

There were some great discussions here, and more than one bon mot. I know I've learned and grown in my view of the game and the team because of this thread.

This will be one to tell the kids about.

 

[bustaheims]

We don't need any more no matter how badly you might want them.

Well, that's just flat out wrong. In order to improve or maintain a level of competitiveness in a cap world, there isn't a team in the league that doesn't need more of the cost controlled high-end young talent found at the top of the draft.

 

[TBLeafer]

We don't need any more no matter how badly you might want them.

Well, that's just flat out wrong. In order to improve or maintain a level of competitiveness in a cap world, there isn't a team in the league that doesn't need more of the cost controlled high-end young talent found at the top of the draft.

No its not flat out wrong.  It's just flat out wrong in your ideal scenario.

Perennial playoff teams seem to manage just fine without them, after they sucked for a few years first and added a few.

Leafs have sucked for a decade.  Enough is enough.

 

[TBLeafer]

Once this is resolved one way or the other, can we have some kind of forum meetup where we have a ritual burning of a printout of this thread while a mod simultaneously deletes it?

There were some great discussions here, and more than one bon mot. I know I've learned and grown in my view of the game and the team because of this thread.

This will be one to tell the kids about.

How witty. 

 

[Kin]

Seriously, in like two hours it went from "Having Lecavalier and St. Louis didn't hurt Tampa at all" to "So what if it hurt them? No two rebuilds are alike".

The cognitive dissonance here is just staggering.

 

[TBLeafer]

Seriously, in like two hours it went from "Having Lecavalier and St. Louis didn't hurt Tampa at all" to "So what if it hurt them? No two rebuilds are alike".

The cognitive dissonance here is just staggering.

It didn't hurt them.  They weren't anchors and the team kept progressing, with and without them and it didn't take too long to become a perennial playoff team and contender after Stamkos and Hedman were added.  Definitely not 7 years or the full duration of what Stamkos' contract on the Leafs would be.

Consistent Goaltending was the main issue there, not Vinny and Marty with Stammer and Hedman.

 

[leafsjunkie]

Group A: Our Position is right!
Group B: Actually, your position is wrong.
Group A: What? How dare you say our position is wrong, you idiot! We're right we're right we're right! It doesn't matter what you say, we're right!
Group B: Actually, if you look at the facts of the matter you're wrong.
Group A: *looks* Who cares about being right anyway! It's not about being right! It's just about opinions! Why do you have to be so mean?

Wash, rinse, repeat.

I've read this entire, painful thread.

The above is accurate.

This thread is like watching Richard Dawkins debate with a religious person. It doesn't matter how many facts are brought up by Dawkins. The religious people have 'faith' on their side....

I'd rather the Leafs continue with the plan and not sign Stamkos right now, as Herman, Nik and a few others have outlined why (way too many times), nicely.

 

[TBLeafer]

Group A: Our Position is right!
Group B: Actually, your position is wrong.
Group A: What? How dare you say our position is wrong, you idiot! We're right we're right we're right! It doesn't matter what you say, we're right!
Group B: Actually, if you look at the facts of the matter you're wrong.
Group A: *looks* Who cares about being right anyway! It's not about being right! It's just about opinions! Why do you have to be so mean?

Wash, rinse, repeat.

I've read this entire, painful thread.

The above is accurate.

This thread is like watching Richard Dawkins debate with a religious person. It doesn't matter how many facts are brought up by Dawkins. The religious people have 'faith' on their side....

I'd rather the Leafs continue with the plan and not sign Stamkos right now, as Herman, Nik and a few others have outlined why (way too many times), nicely.

Except if Stamkos does sign here he was obviously part of the plan and making sure they had room to sign him if he comes available (which they now comfortably do), was part of the plan.

 

[Kin]

 
It didn't hurt them.  They weren't anchors and the team kept progressing, with and without them and it didn't take too long to become a perennial playoff team and contender after Stamkos and Hedman were added.

They thought so much of Lecavalier they bought out the last 7 years of his 85 million dollar contract. They didn't "keep progressing". The Leafs are almost certain to struggle with consistent goaltending.

Facts.