Steve Stamkos?

[Frank E]

Hey guys, whatcha talkin' 'bout here?  Can I join in?

The Lecavalier buyout...great idea or good idea?

 

[LuncheonMeat]

I wonder if there's a cautionary tale to be told about over-valuing prospects before they've played an NHL game. Like when Ottawa drafted a 6' 5", 240# defenceman at #7 overall.

 

[Misty]

And we would have just 3 sunk costs long term when our top prospect young trio enter their rookie season.  Problem?

Having fewer sunk costs would be more flexible in a time when flexibility is at a premium (stagnant cap). You believe Stamkos' contract will still leave us flexible enough, which is your right. I believe there are options available later better suited to our needs and I'd like the team to be positioned to take advantage of those opportunities should they come up and when we know what we need more of.

Stamkos is currently not a sunk cost, and I don't think we need his contributions to get to where we need to go. Sure, they would help initially, but then our hands would be tied if one of our superstar-potential prospects ends up a middling player.

You claim it would be easy to move on from Stamkos' contract when that time comes. Why is that? Do you see the Leafs moving a 10.5+M player with a modified NTC (at the least) in his early 30s without eating a portion of that salary?

Doesn't having Stamkos in the fold sort of provide insurance for such an event?

Is that where we need insurance coverage? Judging by the plethora of forwards we have: 2016-1st, Nylander, Marner, Kadri, JvR, Bracco, Brown, backed up by Hyman, Soshnikov, Timashov, Johnson... Is there not some natural insulation there?

Where we really need some help is probably the back end: Rielly, Gardiner, Carrick, Zaitsev (should be at least a 5-6), Marincin, and then what? Loov, Valiev, Harrington, Corrado are all 5-6 at most. Dermott has promise, but D-men take longer to develop.

Can Stamkos help our defense?

Part of my premise to bring him in was to free up another forward or two to help faciliate a trade for a D-man.

EDIT: You upgrade at both positions that way.

While I like the premise, the kind of money and term Stamkos is going to command makes it very hard for me to view him as "insurance." That would be more in the realms of buying a house on the Bridal Path in case the bungalow you're building in Markham doesn't end up being quite what you want. I'd want my insurance to be a lot cheaper.

I also doubt that anyone would take any of the Leafs' current forward prospects if they had any sense they were giving away a prospect with any reasonable potential to become Drew Doughty or Carey Price level players in return, and those are the two positions that currently look like they most need to be addressed. At very least, it would cost you Matthews, and I don't see a lot of value in that proposition unless the team was already on the cusp of being competitive. That's the kind of deal you make 3-4 years from now.

It would also work wonderfully if he'd agree to some silly, low value, but I can't imagine Stamkos agreeing to any less than 7 years and something with an 8-digit cap hit. I'm sure all the objections would evaporate at league minimum, and probably even in the range of Rielly's $6 million $5 million cap hit. It's investing north of $10m in a position that we hope Matthews will be able to fill that makes it tough to contemplate.

Just as a purely hypothetical exercise, if we were talking about Doughty instead of Stamkos would there be similar objections? They're close to the same age and would command about the same as UFAs.


EDIT: fixed Rielly's cap value

 

[TBLeafer]

And we would have just 3 sunk costs long term when our top prospect young trio enter their rookie season.  Problem?

Having fewer sunk costs would be more flexible in a time when flexibility is at a premium (stagnant cap). You believe Stamkos' contract will still leave us flexible enough, which is your right. I believe there are options available later better suited to our needs and I'd like the team to be positioned to take advantage of those opportunities should they come up and when we know what we need more of.

Stamkos is currently not a sunk cost, and I don't think we need his contributions to get to where we need to go. Sure, they would help initially, but then our hands would be tied if one of our superstar-potential prospects ends up a middling player.

You claim it would be easy to move on from Stamkos' contract when that time comes. Why is that? Do you see the Leafs moving a 10.5+M player with a modified NTC (at the least) in his early 30s without eating a portion of that salary?

Doesn't having Stamkos in the fold sort of provide insurance for such an event?

Is that where we need insurance coverage? Judging by the plethora of forwards we have: 2016-1st, Nylander, Marner, Kadri, JvR, Bracco, Brown, backed up by Hyman, Soshnikov, Timashov, Johnson... Is there not some natural insulation there?

Where we really need some help is probably the back end: Rielly, Gardiner, Carrick, Zaitsev (should be at least a 5-6), Marincin, and then what? Loov, Valiev, Harrington, Corrado are all 5-6 at most. Dermott has promise, but D-men take longer to develop.

Can Stamkos help our defense?

Part of my premise to bring him in was to free up another forward or two to help faciliate a trade for a D-man.

EDIT: You upgrade at both positions that way.

While I like the premise, the kind of money and term Stamkos is going to command makes it very hard for me to view him as "insurance." That would be more in the realms of buying a house on the Bridal Path in case the bungalow you're building in Markham doesn't end up being quite what you want. I'd want my insurance to be a lot cheaper.

I also doubt that anyone would take any of the Leafs' current forward prospects if they had any sense they were giving away a prospect with any reasonable potential to become Drew Doughty or Carey Price level players in return, and those are the two positions that currently look like they most need to be addressed. At very least, it would cost you Matthews, and I don't see a lot of value in that proposition unless the team was already on the cusp of being competitive. That's the kind of deal you make 3-4 years from now.

It would also work wonderfully if he'd agree to some silly, low value, but I can't imagine Stamkos agreeing to any less than 7 years and something with an 8-digit cap hit. I'm sure all the objections would evaporate at league minimum, and probably even in the range of Rielly's $6 million cap hit. It's investing north of $10m in a position that we hope Matthews will be able to fill that makes it tough to contemplate.

Just as a purely hypothetical exercise, if we were talking about Doughty instead of Stamkos would there be similar objections? They're close to the same age and would command about the same as UFAs.

Rielly's contract only carries a 5 mil cap. Beauty of a contract and so is Kadri's.

 

[McGarnagle]

Rielly's contract only carries a 5 mil cap. Beauty of a contract and so is Kadri's.

Now this, we can agree on. 

 

[herman]

While I like the premise, the kind of money and term Stamkos is going to command makes it very hard for me to view him as "insurance." That would be more in the realms of buying a house on the Bridal Path in case the bungalow you're building in Markham doesn't end up being quite what you want. I'd want my insurance to be a lot cheaper.

I also doubt that anyone would take any of the Leafs' current forward prospects if they had any sense they were giving away a prospect with any reasonable potential to become Drew Doughty or Carey Price level players in return, and those are the two positions that currently look like they most need to be addressed. At very least, it would cost you Matthews, and I don't see a lot of value in that proposition unless the team was already on the cusp of being competitive. That's the kind of deal you make 3-4 years from now.

It would also work wonderfully if he'd agree to some silly, low value, but I can't imagine Stamkos agreeing to any less than 7 years and something with an 8-digit cap hit. I'm sure all the objections would evaporate at league minimum, and probably even in the range of Rielly's $6 million $5 million cap hit. It's investing north of $10m in a position that we hope Matthews will be able to fill that makes it tough to contemplate.

Just as a purely hypothetical exercise, if we were talking about Doughty instead of Stamkos would there be similar objections? They're close to the same age and would command about the same as UFAs.


EDIT: fixed Rielly's cap value

Have you seen Markham home prices lately? but I think your point definitely stands. It's not the right time to make this type of move.

If it was Doughty though... I'd think pretty hard about it. Is Doughty getting 10.5M? I don't think defensemen get paid as much, and they have later development curves and longevity to the type of production you want from them. There are a lot of pluses for swinging for Doughty.

 

[Kin]

If it was Doughty though... I'd think pretty hard about it. Is Doughty getting 10.5M? I don't think defensemen get paid as much, and they have later development curves and longevity to the type of production you want from them. There are a lot of pluses for swinging for Doughty.

We haven't really seen an elite defenseman negotiate a UFA contract in the current CBA. The closest we've really come to that is Subban and he got enough that you'd have to think a UFA would match the forwards.

The last instance we have of something like that is probably Suter and he got just as much as Parise so...

 

[herman]

If it was Doughty though... I'd think pretty hard about it. Is Doughty getting 10.5M? I don't think defensemen get paid as much, and they have later development curves and longevity to the type of production you want from them. There are a lot of pluses for swinging for Doughty.

We haven't really seen an elite defenseman negotiate a UFA contract in the current CBA. The closest we've really come to that is Subban and he got enough that you'd have to think a UFA would match the forwards.

The last instance we have of something like that is probably Suter and he got just as much as Parise so...

I stand corrected! I keep forgetting Suter exists.
Doughty currently makes nearly current-Stamkos money too.

Looks like we can expect to pay $7.5-9M for an established #1D then?

Edit: And established premiere goalies look to be around the $6-7M mark.

 

[Kin]

Looks like we can expect to pay $7.5-9M for an established #1D then?

As a free agent? I'd expect higher. Again, Subban got 9 as a RFA.

 

[herman]

Looks like we can expect to pay $7.5-9M for an established #1D then?

As a free agent? I'd expect higher. Again, Subban got 9 as a RFA.

Jeez. UFA contracts add up stupid quick. I hope we can draft some potential #1 Ds, because we can safely expect Nylander, Marner, and Matthews to get at least tier 2 forward money.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

For some reason I didn't realize that Hedman was a UFA in 2017, I thought he'd still qualify as a RFA. That'll be an interesting contract. He arguably deserves more than Stamkos.

 

[herman]

For some reason I didn't realize that Hedman was a UFA in 2017, I thought he'd still qualify as a RFA. That'll be an interesting contract. He arguably deserves more than Stamkos.

His contract will likely establish a high water mark for Gardiner's following contract, as he is on a similar contract path but a half step down in earnings (and performance).

 

[Redleaf]

Please take this with a grain of salt, I heard this from my father...

He was saying that the Leafs may be about to sign Steve Stamkos.

I assume he heard this somewhere in the media.

Anyhow I just thought I would throw that one out there.  Enjoy.

OK sickbeast. NOW tell us what you heard from your father?  ;D

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

For some reason I didn't realize that Hedman was a UFA in 2017, I thought he'd still qualify as a RFA. That'll be an interesting contract. He arguably deserves more than Stamkos.

While I suspect Hedman would resign with Tampa, I otherwise think "Stamkos vs. Hedman" would prove a lot more interesting than "Matthews vs. Laine".  I'd be on Team Hedman.

 

[Redleaf]

As much as I'd love for Stamkos to be a Leaf, I know it's not going to happen. I really hope he signs an extension with the Bolts this summer so we don't have to deal with a year full of absurd rumours and speculation about how he's sure to sign with the Leafs, only to see him re-sign with Tampa.

Looks like you've had a change of heart over the past year as well. What a thread

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Please take this with a grain of salt, I heard this from my father...

He was saying that the Leafs may be about to sign Steve Stamkos.

I assume he heard this somewhere in the media.

Anyhow I just thought I would throw that one out there.  Enjoy.

OK sickbeast. NOW tell us what you heard from your father?  ;D

Leafs are about to sign Hedman!

 

[CarltonTheBear]

While I suspect Hedman would resign with Tampa, I otherwise think "Stamkos vs. Hedman" would prove a lot more interesting than "Matthews vs. Laine".  I'd be on Team Hedman.

Agreed.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Looks like you've had a change of heart over the past year as well. What a thread

Not to speak for busta, but a year is a pretty long time. I mean, I was a lot more on board with Stamkos just a month and a half ago pre-draft lottery than I am today.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Looks like you've had a change of heart over the past year as well. What a thread

Not to speak for busta, but a year is a pretty long time. I mean, I was a lot more on board with Stamkos just a month and a half ago pre-draft lottery than I am today.

Hell, even Marner wasn't a Leaf on June 3, 2015, let alone this year's 1st overall.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Hell, even Marner wasn't a Leaf on June 3, 2015, let alone this year's 1st overall.

Right. If we drafted Hanifin and Laine/Puljujarvi/Tkachuk/Juolevi I bet we'd be having a different conversation right now.