Steve Stamkos?

[Peter D.]

that's some Oilers logic right there...

I kid I kid... but still, no one knows this for sure.. I mean Yanic Perreault tore it up in every level below the NHL, so did Kadri... and I'm sure there are countless  others... We know they'll be good, but we don't know if they'll be elite.

And don't get me wrong, I'm really, really, really hoping they are.

Actually, I don't think there is anything to kid about here.  That's a legitimate point.  Worry about that when the time comes.  It's ridiculous to pass over top talent, at the cost of no assets, on the basis you think two draft picks and one current player turn out to be a mirror image of the Blackhawks core.

 

[Tigger]

Cap space is a significant asset cost, no? Particularly one close to if not max, for max term?

Wouldn't it be better to have the ability to sign $12M worth of help once we can see what the team is lacking upon maturity of our prospects?

I dont know if it would be better, but you could hope to add some quality players via free agency in 2 or 3 years, but it's doubtful you'd find anything elite like Stamkos.

The main reason teams are building through the draft now is because  players like Steve Stamkos never make it to free agency. 

Timing isn't perfect, as has been mentioned, but you're crazy to pass on a 25 year old elite player if he only costs you money.

I don't think the cap space is best looked at as potential for free agents down the road, more that the Leafs could do an awful lot with that space, taking bad salaries, acquiring picks and prospects, rolling the roster hard and sifting the gems that fall to the bottom. I'm torn because the thought of getting Stamkos is really appealing, but I have to go with my brain on this one, the Leafs aren't a Stamkos away from anything, by the time they are I think he's on his way to being a player past his prime on a big contract. ( Nazem and JVR aren't 10 million dollar players and may legitimately not figure into the Leafs long term plans ).

Sure, the Leafs can afford him, in fact with Horton on the books they can still wheel and deal some, but this isn't anything like Chicago's situation, the Leafs haven't paid the price at the bottom they need to in the way the Hawks did. In fact, the Leafs are even more hamstrung because they can't circumvent the cap like they did.

 

[Frank E]

Cap space is a significant asset cost, no? Particularly one close to if not max, for max term?

Wouldn't it be better to have the ability to sign $12M worth of help once we can see what the team is lacking upon maturity of our prospects?

I dont know if it would be better, but you could hope to add some quality players via free agency in 2 or 3 years, but it's doubtful you'd find anything elite like Stamkos.

The main reason teams are building through the draft now is because  players like Steve Stamkos never make it to free agency. 

Timing isn't perfect, as has been mentioned, but you're crazy to pass on a 25 year old elite player if he only costs you money.

I don't think the cap space is best looked at as potential for free agents down the road, more that the Leafs could do an awful lot with that space, taking bad salaries, acquiring picks and prospects, rolling the roster hard and sifting the gems that fall to the bottom. I'm torn because the thought of getting Stamkos is really appealing, but I have to go with my brain on this one, the Leafs aren't a Stamkos away from anything, by the time they are I think he's on his way to being a player past his prime on a big contract. ( Nazem and JVR aren't 10 million dollar players and may legitimately not figure into the Leafs long term plans ).

Sure, the Leafs can afford him, in fact with Horton on the books they can still wheel and deal some, but this isn't anything like Chicago's situation, the Leafs haven't paid the price at the bottom they need to in the way the Hawks did. In fact, the Leafs are even more hamstrung because they can't circumvent the cap like they did.

Barkov is turning 21 years old and just signed an extension at $5.9 mil X 6 years...and some think Florida got a deal at that figure. He scored 35 points last year, his second in the league, and is pacing close to a point per game this season.  Those bridge contracts seem to be disappearing for elite talent guys. 

Even if the Leafs drafted Matthews this summer, if he knocked it out of the park Barkov style, he'd be $6 mil too in a few years. 

My point is that elite talent is going to get paid, and the Leafs need a bunch of elite talents to win Stanley Cups.  Signing a UFA Stamkos could provide some of that quota for 6 or 7 years, and just like drafting, it doesn't come at any asset cost other than the cap space to pay him.  Having said that, I do think that his contract AAV should be a discussion.

I think the conversation should be about whether or not you can see past the $8.5m that Tampa offered to something around $10m.  I'm not as keen on the signing if it's in the double digits.

 

[Tigger]

Cap space is a significant asset cost, no? Particularly one close to if not max, for max term?

Wouldn't it be better to have the ability to sign $12M worth of help once we can see what the team is lacking upon maturity of our prospects?

I dont know if it would be better, but you could hope to add some quality players via free agency in 2 or 3 years, but it's doubtful you'd find anything elite like Stamkos.

The main reason teams are building through the draft now is because  players like Steve Stamkos never make it to free agency. 

Timing isn't perfect, as has been mentioned, but you're crazy to pass on a 25 year old elite player if he only costs you money.

I don't think the cap space is best looked at as potential for free agents down the road, more that the Leafs could do an awful lot with that space, taking bad salaries, acquiring picks and prospects, rolling the roster hard and sifting the gems that fall to the bottom. I'm torn because the thought of getting Stamkos is really appealing, but I have to go with my brain on this one, the Leafs aren't a Stamkos away from anything, by the time they are I think he's on his way to being a player past his prime on a big contract. ( Nazem and JVR aren't 10 million dollar players and may legitimately not figure into the Leafs long term plans ).

Sure, the Leafs can afford him, in fact with Horton on the books they can still wheel and deal some, but this isn't anything like Chicago's situation, the Leafs haven't paid the price at the bottom they need to in the way the Hawks did. In fact, the Leafs are even more hamstrung because they can't circumvent the cap like they did.

Barkov is turning 21 years old and just signed an extension at $5.9 mil X 6 years...and some think Florida got a deal at that figure. He scored 35 points last year, his second in the league, and is pacing close to a point per game this season.  Those bridge contracts seem to be disappearing for elite talent guys. 

Even if the Leafs drafted Matthews this summer, if he knocked it out of the park Barkov style, he'd be $6 mil too in a few years. 

My point is that elite talent is going to get paid, and the Leafs need a bunch of elite talents to win Stanley Cups.  Signing a UFA Stamkos could provide some of that quota for 6 or 7 years, and just like drafting, it doesn't come at any asset cost other than the cap space to pay him.  Having said that, I do think that his contract AAV should be a discussion.

I think the conversation should be about whether or not you can see past the $8.5m that Tampa offered to something around $10m.  I'm not as keen on the signing if it's in the double digits.

I get the appeal for no asset cost, believe me, it's what keeps pulling me back. Barkov being 5 years younger is a bit of deal too though, no? That fits, to me, with the reality that is the Leafs. They probably aren't going to be legitimate contenders before Stamkos is 31, maybe 32, even if they get Matthews, they don't have the framework to get there sooner, currently.

If the conversation is about getting Stamkos closer to 8.5, yeah that's more interesting for sure, I don't think it's in line with what he'll likely get though.

 

[rdowdall]

If age is the issue, then as long as those who point to that admit JvR (older than Stamkos) and Kadri (same birth year and 6 months younger than Stamkos) have absolutely no place in the long-term plans of the team, I'll buy it.  Otherwise, I think it's a silly point of contention.

I think the problem is looking at this from a "Is Stamkos going to be worth his contract" perspective.  That's not the issue.  It's that if you sign Stamkos, you are again trying to fast track the rebuild.  That doesn't work.  You need to make the correct decision based on the current phase that the team is in.  The team is currently in the "burn it to the ground phase".  You don't add older accomplished assets at that time.  You add picks and prospects and let them grow through the system together and you hopefully build a complete team that can compete for the cup.

It's funny, but for all this talk that you can't let Stamkos go because when will another player like him become available, there is this article on TSN:

http://www.tsn.ca/trade-talk-leafs-could-target-tavares-down-the-line-1.437971

And yes that article is wishful thinking because you don't know what is going to happen with Tavares in 2018.  Still signing Stamkos because "players like him are never available" seems like a hollow argument as well, because there is a possibility where one could be in the near future.  Making a decision that could quite possibly derail the rebuild because you don't know what will be available in 2018 seems short sighted.  I think you build your team with your high draft picks and then survey the landscape in 2018 and figure out what you need in order to continue progressing towards the ultimate goal of winning the cup.

 

[TML fan]

Just ask yourself if you'd rather be sitting on here 3-5 years from now wishing the Leafs had Stamkos, or lamenting the fact they signed him? Decide which one is worse, and you'll know what you want the Leafs to do.

Personally, I'd rather complain about him being here than wishing we had someone ripping clappers bar down from the top of the circle all day.

I don't think he would derail the rebuild. As someone said, we aren't a Stamkos away from anything. As long as they stick to the plan, adding a good established player at this point won't do much to change the team's fortunes....but it might down the road. I'd rather take that gamble.

 

[skrackle]

If age is the issue, then as long as those who point to that admit JvR (older than Stamkos) and Kadri (same birth year and 6 months younger than Stamkos) have absolutely no place in the long-term plans of the team, I'll buy it.  Otherwise, I think it's a silly point of contention.

I think the problem is looking at this from a "Is Stamkos going to be worth his contract" perspective.  That's not the issue.  It's that if you sign Stamkos, you are again trying to fast track the rebuild.  That doesn't work.  You need to make the correct decision based on the current phase that the team is in.  The team is currently in the "burn it to the ground phase".  You don't add older accomplished assets at that time.  You add picks and prospects and let them grow through the system together and you hopefully build a complete team that can compete for the cup.

It's funny, but for all this talk that you can't let Stamkos go because when will another player like him become available, there is this article on TSN:

http://www.tsn.ca/trade-talk-leafs-could-target-tavares-down-the-line-1.437971

And yes that article is wishful thinking because you don't know what is going to happen with Tavares in 2018.  Still signing Stamkos because "players like him are never available" seems like a hollow argument as well, because there is a possibility where one could be in the near future.  Making a decision that could quite possibly derail the rebuild because you don't know what will be available in 2018 seems short sighted.  I think you build your team with your high draft picks and then survey the landscape in 2018 and figure out what you need in order to continue progressing towards the ultimate goal of winning the cup.

I've wavered on the Stamkos thing, but at this point, I agree with you. The timing is just wrong on acquiring an expensive UFA like Stamkos. And it's where the patience for a proper rebuild gets tested.

The Leafs are really bad, as in worst team in the league on any given night. They won't be a contender until, I'm going to guess, 5 years from now.

Stamkos is not currently a top 10 NHL scorer. His numbers seem to be declining at age 26. Is this really the guy that's going to be leading the Leafs as one of the top paid players in the league into his '30's?

If he's willing to sign an under-market contract for the sake of bringing the Leafs back to greatness, then sure. But, how likely is that?

 

[Kin]

Well, the interesting thing I think is that a lot of people have sort of dismissed the possibility that Stamkos would come to Toronto on the basis of the Leafs still being in the rebuild but when they talk about alternate choices like Detroit or NYR I think they don't ask the obvious question which is not why would Stamkos choose Detroit/NYR/Montreal over Toronto but why would he choose them over Tampa. If winning is the thing that's going to be first and foremost on his mind...Tampa probably has a better long term chance than any of them.

It does kind of remind me of the Babcock situation where we heard so much about how he'd never choose Toronto over Detroit because Detroit was familiar or never choose Toronto over Buffalo because Buffalo was further along in their rebuild...but in the end a lot of it just came down to money and term. I think the people thinking Stamkos will come at a team-friendly cap hit are kidding themselves a little bit but if the Leafs or whoever come in with the heaviest offer? I wouldn't rule anyone out.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Stamkos is not currently a top 10 NHL scorer. His numbers seem to be declining at age 26. Is this really the guy that's going to be leading the Leafs as one of the top paid players in the league into his '30's?

He had the 2nd most goals in the league last season and was on the best goals per game pace the season before until his leg injury.

If that's what he's declining from, sign me up.

 

[Joe S.]

Still signing Stamkos because "players like him are never available" seems like a hollow argument as well, because there is a possibility where one could be in the near future.  Making a decision that could quite possibly derail the rebuild because you don't know what will be available in 2018 seems short sighted.  I think you build your team with your high draft picks and then survey the landscape in 2018 and figure out what you need in order to continue progressing towards the ultimate goal of winning the cup.

Name me any player,  in the cap era,  of Stamkos' age and talent that has been a ufa.

 

[AvroArrow]

Name me any player,  in the cap era,  of Stamkos' age and talent that has been a ufa.

Just because he is available is not a reason to sign him.  There have been countless UFAs signed by the Leafs that have been absolute disasters, both in their play and in their contracts and it's pretty much a guarantee that Stamkos is getting a monster contract.

Again, I think the team needs to decide where they expect to be in the near future.  If they expect to be in the basement for another 3 years, then I think you don't sign him.  On the other hand, if they think they'll start an upswing as early as next year, then you do it.

 

[Kin]

Kovalchuk is probably the closest comparison.

 

[Joe S.]

Kovalchuk is probably the closest comparison.

And ended up staying with the devils with the most awesome contract of all time.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I'm in the if a 25/6-year-old elite player becomes UFA you have to sign him camp.

I'd definitely not trade for him unless it's a nominal fee for his right prior to July 1st.

I think you give him the same type of pitch you gave Babcock, this team probably has another year or two of pain in them before they turn a corner in a fairly significant way.

I think if you're worried about his signing hurting your draft pick you can turn around and trade some guys like Kadri/JVR etc and that takes care of any concerns you have there and you also have whatever 1st's those guys net you that can compliment Stamkos even before he turns 30.

I think they're probably close to where the Lightning were a few years ago before they got the huge injection of talent from Syracuse and I'm comfortable building around Stamkos as one of the core pieces. They'll still have a lot of talent on entry level deals over the next three years.

 

[Kin]

Kovalchuk is probably the closest comparison.

And ended up staying with the devils with the most awesome contract of all time.

Hey man, a 27 year old that good available as a UFA? You don't ask questions.

 

[Joe S.]

Kovalchuk is probably the closest comparison.

And ended up staying with the devils with the most awesome contract of all time.

Hey man, a 27 year old that good available as a UFA? You don't ask questions.

I was just making fun of the Lou Lamoriello shenanigans 

 

[Redleaf]

Just ask yourself if you'd rather be sitting on here 3-5 years from now wishing the Leafs had Stamkos, or lamenting the fact they signed him? Decide which one is worse, and you'll know what you want the Leafs to do.

Personally, I'd rather complain about him being here than wishing we had someone ripping clappers bar down from the top of the circle all day.

I don't think he would derail the rebuild. As someone said, we aren't a Stamkos away from anything. As long as they stick to the plan, adding a good established player at this point won't do much to change the team's fortunes....but it might down the road. I'd rather take that gamble.

Sort of the mindset management used when they brought in Babcock, isn't it?

 

[Kin]

I was just making fun of the Lou Lamoriello shenanigans

So was I.

 

[rdowdall]

Still signing Stamkos because "players like him are never available" seems like a hollow argument as well, because there is a possibility where one could be in the near future.  Making a decision that could quite possibly derail the rebuild because you don't know what will be available in 2018 seems short sighted.  I think you build your team with your high draft picks and then survey the landscape in 2018 and figure out what you need in order to continue progressing towards the ultimate goal of winning the cup.

Name me any player,  in the cap era,  of Stamkos' age and talent that has been a ufa.

How many have been drafted in the cap era?

Lets say the Leafs get the first overall pick, they trade out the likes of Bozak, Lupul and their forward lineup looks something like this:

JVR - Stamkos - Marner
Nylander - Matthews - Kapanen
Leipsic - Kadri - Brown
Winnick - Gauthier - Clune

Again, purely speculative, but that looks really awesome.  I won't deny that.  However, now lets look at the defence

Reilly - Gardiner
Marincin - Corrado
?? - Harrington

Not as good as the forward lines.  Quite a bit of a drop off there.

Now lets look at the goalies

Bernier/Reimer/Bibeau/Sparks/Some UFA

Again, nothing spectacular.  You've essentially created an Oilers situation where you have a top heavy team with little to no defence.  You don't have the d-man that can control the game such as a Keith or a Doughty.  It's worse than the Oilers situation though because I think that forward lineup is good enough to get you in the 12 to 14 range so you don't have the chance to draft that potential Ekblad or Hedman type of defenceman near the top of the draft.  I realize that Keith was a second round selection, but hoping that you strike it rich in the second round of the draft doesn't seem like the best possible course of action for building a cup contender.  This is why I would prefer the Leafs stay the course and build through the draft rather than signing Stamkos.

 

[Frank E]

Name me any player,  in the cap era,  of Stamkos' age and talent that has been a ufa.

Just because he is available is not a reason to sign him.  There have been countless UFAs signed by the Leafs that have been absolute disasters, both in their play and in their contracts and it's pretty much a guarantee that Stamkos is getting a monster contract.

Again, I think the team needs to decide where they expect to be in the near future.  If they expect to be in the basement for another 3 years, then I think you don't sign him.  On the other hand, if they think they'll start an upswing as early as next year, then you do it.

If this team wants to compete for a Stanley Cup, then they're going to have to take some risks.

They'll be in the playoff mix in a couple of seasons, and they've already been ranked 4th and 6th in terms of nhl prospects quality rankings by HF and The Hockey Writers.  I think we're further into this rebuild than people think, but they won't be convinced until they've got that #1 centre.  Stamkos gives you that, and you trade away Kadri, Bozak, and JVR this summer for some high-end futures.  The Leafs trade Reimer, Parenteau, Matthias, Boyes, Polak, Spaling, and Grabner at the deadline.

Here's your post-trade-deadline roster:

JVR         Kadri Komarov
Lupul         Bozak Leivo
Winnik Holland Greening
Clune Arcobello Leipsic
Michalek Morin

Gardiner Hunwick
Rielly         Cowan
Corrado Marincin
callup

Belfour/Bibeau

I could see them taking back some heavy overpriced expiring contracts as part of some deadline stuff, just to send Leipsic and Leivo back for a nice little playoff run with the Marlies...but whatever, they'll still have enough bodies to get them through the rest of the tank 2016 post-deadline season.

Then:

Lupul   5.25 Stamkos 10 Komarov 2.95
Michalek 4 Holland 2 Marner 2.5
Leivo     0.895 Nylander 2.5 Brown 2.5
Leipsic 0.65 Winnik 2.25 Greening 2.65
Lindberg 0.7 Clune 0.6

Gardiner 4.05 Hunwick 1.2
Rielly 5.25         Harrington 1.25
Corrado 1 Marincin 1
Loov 0.7

Bernier 4.15
Bibeau 0.65

That's a 60ish million dollar cap if you include Kessel and Gleason (!).  They've got some flipable assets there for the deadline, and a ton of cap space.

This is obviously just for discussion, but with the proposed addition of Stamkos, and the deletion of Phaneuf and Reimer, the holes would really seem to be bigger on defense and goaltending.  I would think that that would be the focus of the return on the JVR, Kadri, Bozak, Reimer deals.