Steve Stamkos?

[Tigger]

The cap space ear marked for a Stamkos contract, before it's applied to whatever big ticket FA down the road, could also be spent on acquiring more bullets for Hunters gun, taking short term bad contracts for picks and prospects. Just the flexibility alone is worth a ton.

With or without Stamkos, I think the Leafs would end up drafting in the top 10 next year.

That's what I am thinking as well.  5-6th without or 9-10th with.  I would argue that the Sabres have a better D corp and goaltending duo as well as some top prospects starting with Eichel and they finished only 2 spots higher then the Leafs in the Eastern Conference last season.  That was a virtually insurmountable 12 points.

5-6 suits me, I don't think they'll improve a whole lot personally but even if it's not a guaranteed top 4, it's better than 9-10.

 

[TBLeafer]

Anyone else here see the difference between acquiring Kessel by trading what became Seguin and Hamilton (and Knight), than acquiring Kessel while drafting Seguin and Hamilton (and whoever)?

its pretty clear to me.

 

[rdowdall]

Anyone else here see the difference between acquiring Kessel by trading what became Seguin and Hamilton (and Knight), than acquiring Kessel while drafting Seguin and Hamilton (and whoever)?

its pretty clear to me.

There's a difference but the end result is the same.

 

[Deebo]

5-6 suits me, I don't think they'll improve a whole lot personally but even if it's not a guaranteed top 4, it's better than 9-10.

I'd rather have Stamkos and 9-10 than no Stamkos and 5-6.

 

[Kin]

I'd rather have Stamkos and 9-10 than no Stamkos and 5-6.

I doubt this would change your opinion of the matter but a 26th place finish means a 26% chance of a top 3 draft choice, a 21st place finish means a 90% chance you'll be drafting 10th-12th.

 

[Tigger]

5-6 suits me, I don't think they'll improve a whole lot personally but even if it's not a guaranteed top 4, it's better than 9-10.

I'd rather have Stamkos and 9-10 than no Stamkos and 5-6.

Sure, I'd rather have 10 mil cap space and 5-6 or better.

 

[mr grieves]

there's an undeniable appeal in letting Nylander and Matthews and Marner and Rielly and whoever else play together and see a leader emerge from that group.

I prefer this.

Sure worked for Hall, Nugent-Hopkins, Yakupov, Eberle...

If Stamkos were signed, the longest he'd be with the team would be for 7 years, over which time one of Nylander, Matthews, Marner, Rielly would emerge as the leaderiest.

 

[mr grieves]

Anyone else here see the difference between acquiring Kessel by trading what became Seguin and Hamilton (and Knight), than acquiring Kessel while drafting Seguin and Hamilton (and whoever)?

its pretty clear to me.

There's a difference but the end result is the same.

In your alternate universe? It's yours, so why not?

 

[Kin]

Sure worked for Hall, Nugent-Hopkins, Yakupov, Eberle...

You mean the team where they didn't leave the captaincy open? Where they gave it to an established vet in the hopes he'd be the leader they need?

 

[mr grieves]

5-6 suits me, I don't think they'll improve a whole lot personally but even if it's not a guaranteed top 4, it's better than 9-10.

I'd rather have Stamkos and 9-10 than no Stamkos and 5-6.

Sure, I'd rather have 10 mil cap space and 5-6 or better.

We could sign three Casey Cizikases.

 

[Tigger]

5-6 suits me, I don't think they'll improve a whole lot personally but even if it's not a guaranteed top 4, it's better than 9-10.

I'd rather have Stamkos and 9-10 than no Stamkos and 5-6.

Sure, I'd rather have 10 mil cap space and 5-6 or better.

We could sign three Casey Cizikases.

:

 

[rdowdall]

Anyone else here see the difference between acquiring Kessel by trading what became Seguin and Hamilton (and Knight), than acquiring Kessel while drafting Seguin and Hamilton (and whoever)?

its pretty clear to me.

There's a difference but the end result is the same.

In your alternate universe? It's yours, so why not?

Really, so you believe that a team that has a core of Seguin, Kessel and Hamilton would have made the Leafs one of the strongest teams in the league and would have challenged for the cup year in and year out? 

 

[sneakyray]

I am very curious to see how the roster turns out because it seems as though toronto has a ton of nhl ready or very close prospects.

nylander, hyman, soshnikov, brown, kapenan, c carrick, valiev, leipsic, lindberg.

plus marner and matthews.

add to that all the nhl players jvr, kadri, bozak, komarov, greening, laich, michalek, reilly, hunwick, I'm sure I missed a bunch but what I am saying is that even if they sign stamkos and keep half or more of those kids down for some of the mediocre nhlers that are going to be shipped out this year than they are probably still going to be bad enough to get a top 5 pick.

personally I am happy if they sign stamkos or not but I am looking at the possibility of all the prospects and can't figure out an nhl roster for next year. which means that some guys who are quite good will be loft off for the start of the season and maybe brought in after the deadline (much like this past season). so they'll still be pretty bad if that happens.

 

[skrackle]

Wow, you guys have gone deep into this. I admire you all.

I've learned things reading this thread. I now realize that I have no idea what NHLe is. To me, it's one of those Rumsfeld unknowns. I'll look it up. It's on my to-do list.

I'm still on the no Stamkos side, with the caveat that if the Leafs manage to sign him at a very team-friendly cap hit, then ok. That's probably not going to happen.

Another unknown is what the Leafs actually have in their system, in terms of NHL talent. You can project (I suspect that's what NHLe is about, but I'll get to it...). Until prospects start producing in the NHL for the Leafs, it's just guesswork. There's no point in rushing things. The bad management of the Leafs going back from Nonis, through Burke to JFJ has exhausted the patience of many Leaf fans, but that doesn't matter anymore.

One thing I do know is that the Leafs, as of the last completed NHL season, were the worst team in the league. The worst. Think about that for a minute. They are not going to be competing for the Stanley Cup anytime soon. The only saving grace in this, is that they seem to not be trying to fast-track their way out of ineptitude in the same old stupid way that they've tried and failed at for decades.

What's that old term? An embarassment of riches. That's what I want the Leafs to accumulate in this period of their history. They have a start on it, but that's all. It's the wrong time for a savior, be it Stamkos or anyone else.

 

[Bill_Berg]

I can't help but like the allure of Stamkos, but I agree the timing is bad. If we were loaded on D and in the net, then I may think signing Stamkos now is a good move, but the team is forward heavy. Stamkos, or someone like him, would be a better fit to put the team over the top, like Pittsburgh seems to be doing with Kessel.

The only good argument towards signing Stamkos to me is that this may be a rare opportunity, to sign a young guy like him through free agency, although that opportunity hasn't technically even happened yet. But if we miss that opportunity, it's not the end of the world, they're still on a great track without Stamkos.

If someone offered me a Corvette worth 80k for 25k would I be stupid to turn it down if I have 3 kids and really what I need is a minivan? I might buy and resell that Corvette, not an option with Stamkos.

 

[Highlander]

If we trade Bozak and Lupul (or put Lupul on LTIR) doesnt that free up something like 8 million of the 10 we can pay Stamkos.

 

[herman]

If someone offered me a Corvette worth 80k for 25k would I be stupid to turn it down if I have 3 kids and really what I need is a minivan? I might buy and resell that Corvette, not an option with Stamkos.

*chuckles in agreement

If we trade Bozak and Lupul (or put Lupul on LTIR) doesnt that free up something like 8 million of the 10 we can pay Stamkos.

A) good luck trading them without taking on bad money contracts in return
B) we need defense and goaltending depth more

 

[TBLeafer]

You know what kind of problem not being able to keep all your good players is under cap, because you have too many good players is?

It's a good one and it likely means that you have a perennial contender.

 

[herman]

You know what kind of problem not being able to keep all your good players is under cap, because you have too many good players is?

It's a good one and it likely means that you have a perennial contender.

It's even better when you can keep all your good players because you managed the cap well instead of splurging it on superfluous purchases.

 

[TBLeafer]

If someone offered me a Corvette worth 80k for 25k would I be stupid to turn it down if I have 3 kids and really what I need is a minivan? I might buy and resell that Corvette, not an option with Stamkos.

*chuckles in agreement

If we trade Bozak and Lupul (or put Lupul on LTIR) doesnt that free up something like 8 million of the 10 we can pay Stamkos.

A) good luck trading them without taking on bad money contracts in return
B) we need defense and goaltending depth more

There's no way you need to take on anything for Bozak who still produces well and is signed to a good contract.

A team like Nashville that needs scoring depth could easily take him on for a pick/prospect.