Steve Stamkos?

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

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.

At the same time, bottoming out is no longer as easy as it once was with the new lottery situation. Can you honestly imagine another two losing season after this one and the best the Leafs do is draft 4th overall?

I think they have faith in their scouting setup now, give Hunter picks and he'll get you NHL'ers, get him enough picks and he'll get you impact NHL'ers outside of the first two rounds.

I mean it's early yet, but I don't recall a group of drafted Leafs prospects that have as a whole had as excellent a post-draft year as the group Hunter selected have. I think the guy has an excellent eye

As long as they aren't trading away picks for veterans the way previous regimes have, I'm confident that Hunter will stock the cupboard quite nicely.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

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.

Your psychologist would like to have a word with you. 

I initially thought the Leafs would trade Kadri, but now I'm starting to wonder. I don't think Nylander starts at center, so Kadri might be valuable to keep around. I've hear that Babcock is not a fan of Holland at center, so I could see Greening going bye bye and being replaced by Holland on the wing. Then Kadri to center on the second line. Perhaps Nylander on the wing to start as well?

Of course Kadri eats up some of that cap space, so once Nylander is ready to play center (assuming Stamkos) you trade Kadri. I wonder if he wouldn't be worth more in a trade anyway if he has a reasonable contract.

 

[Frank E]

Your psychologist would like to have a word with you. 

I always screw up goalies for some reason.

 

[Redleaf]

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.

I don't think we'll ever have an 'Oilers situation' here. Just look at the game against them last week. The teams on the ice looked liked polar opposites. The Leafs had a structured team completely devoid of talent and the Oilers had a talented team devoid of any sort of structure. The Leafs held there own for most of that game. And the Oilers had Connor McDavid.

Looking at your defensive pairings, I'm pretty sure it would still include some veteran presence of some sort. I'm guessing Hunwick and Polak are around, and/or others are brought in to augment the 'D'.

Lets not forget, nobody ever said this 'rebuild' would be the scorched earth kind, without retaining or acquiring higher end veteran help if and when it becomes available. (Particularly if it comes at no cost but $) 

I think we have one of the smartest front offices in the league right now, and I'm stoked at the moves they've been able to pull off so far. I think its pretty safe to say, they are attempting something in Toronto a lot of people believed wouldn't fly or be green-lighted by ownership. So, if they don't completely bottom out enough for everyone's liking, I don't think its the end of the world.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Your psychologist would like to have a word with you. 

I always screw up goalies for some reason.

You shall hence forth be known as The Flyers.

 

[Kin]

I don't think we'll ever have an 'Oilers situation' here. Just look at the game against them last week. The teams on the ice looked liked polar opposites. The Leafs had a structured team completely devoid of talent and the Oilers had a talented team devoid of any sort of structure. The Leafs held there own for most of that game. And the Oilers had Connor McDavid.

And the Oilers won 5-2. Talent beats systems.

 

[bustaheims]

You shall hence forth be known as The Flyers.

Whoa. Whoa. He only screwed up a name. No need to insult the dude like that!

 

[Redleaf]

I don't think we'll ever have an 'Oilers situation' here. Just look at the game against them last week. The teams on the ice looked liked polar opposites. The Leafs had a structured team completely devoid of talent and the Oilers had a talented team devoid of any sort of structure. The Leafs held there own for most of that game. And the Oilers had Connor McDavid.

And the Oilers won 5-2. Talent beats systems.

Talented teams with structure often win Stanley cups.

 

[Kin]

Talented teams with structure often win Stanley cups.

And they find that talent at the top of the draft. The structure comes second. This "we don't need to bottom out" stuff is the exact same stuff we heard from Burke and it's the exact same stuff we heard from JFJ.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

And they find that talent at the top of the draft. The structure comes second. This "we don't need to bottom out" stuff is the exact same stuff we heard from Burke and it's the exact same stuff we heard from JFJ.

No ones saying that we don't need to bottom out, Burke/JFJ's philosophy was obviously terribly flawed. It's a minor point to you I suppose, but the question is "do we need to bottom-out anymore"?.

 

[Redleaf]

Talented teams with structure often win Stanley cups.

And they find that talent at the top of the draft. The structure comes second. This "we don't need to bottom out" stuff is the exact same stuff we heard from Burke and it's the exact same stuff we heard from JFJ.

My point wasn't that I agreed with that theory or not. It was that whatever way this goes, and with what I've seen so far, I'm going to trust this administration until there's a reason not to.

 

[Kin]

No ones saying that we don't need to bottom out, Burke/JFJ's philosophy was obviously terribly flawed. It's a minor point to you I suppose, but the question is "do we need to bottom-out anymore"?.

You know me and my love of semantics, if you can bottom out some more, you're not at the bottom.

 

[herman]

No ones saying that we don't need to bottom out, Burke/JFJ's philosophy was obviously terribly flawed. It's a minor point to you I suppose, but the question is "do we need to bottom-out anymore"?.

You know me and my love of semantics, if you can bottom out some more, you're not at the bottom.

LOL.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

You know me and my love of semantics, if you can bottom out some more, you're not at the bottom.

Alright, I see what you mean. It doesn't get talked about much but I do wonder how much the new lottery rules will effect teams plans going forward. You really can't count on getting the 1st or 2nd overall pick like you used to be able to. The Leafs could very well pour 2 seasons down the drain and not come out with the type of prospect that they thought they needed.

It's so Toronto that the league would institute these new rules right when the Leafs decided to try and take advantage of the system.

 

[Frank E]

You know me and my love of semantics, if you can bottom out some more, you're not at the bottom.

Alright, I see what you mean. It doesn't get talked about much but I do wonder how much the new lottery rules will effect teams plans going forward. You really can't count on getting the 1st or 2nd overall pick like you used to be able to. The Leafs could very well pour 2 seasons down the drain and not come out with the type of prospect that they thought they needed.

It's so Toronto that the league would institute these new rules right when the Leafs decided to try and take advantage of the system.

I think what Nik is suggesting is that they need to bottom out so low so as to have the opportunity to draft a Steven Stamkos.

 

[Bill_Berg]

You know me and my love of semantics, if you can bottom out some more, you're not at the bottom.

Alright, I see what you mean. It doesn't get talked about much but I do wonder how much the new lottery rules will effect teams plans going forward. You really can't count on getting the 1st or 2nd overall pick like you used to be able to. The Leafs could very well pour 2 seasons down the drain and not come out with the type of prospect that they thought they needed.

It's so Toronto that the league would institute these new rules right when the Leafs decided to try and take advantage of the system.

This is what I'm afraid of. There is no guarantee you'll get a top pick, I mean Matthews or McDavid level pick, no matter how many years you finish dead last. Worse case is you suck for 5 years and you get 5 4th overall picks, or worse. But I'm hoping that some of the highest end guys start becoming available as UFAs earlier in their careers, which the UFA rules do drive towards. Sure Stamkos, who isn't even one yet, may be the only one we've seen so far, but if in 7 years we've seen, Stamkos, Tavares, and McDavid all hit the UFA market, then 1st overalls are no longer as important in the equation.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

It should be noted too that the projected 1st overall pick in the 2017 draft, Nolan Patrick, isn't exactly being billed as an above-average 1st overall pick. And finishing last only gives you a 20% chance at him. If we were playing by the old rules, and/or there was an Eichel/Matthews type player in the draft, then I'd be much more inclined to try to bottom-out again.

 

[Kin]

Alright, I see what you mean. It doesn't get talked about much but I do wonder how much the new lottery rules will effect teams plans going forward. You really can't count on getting the 1st or 2nd overall pick like you used to be able to. The Leafs could very well pour 2 seasons down the drain and not come out with the type of prospect that they thought they needed.

Yup. That's why teams like Pittsburgh or Chicago had 4 or even 5 seasons at the bottom until they found their guys. Other teams are lucky and only had to be around the bottom for a year or two. I've got my fingers crossed for Auston Matthews like everyone else.

But man, we haven't even had one season with a bottom three finish and already people are saying it's too many. The whole point of patience is that it's less fun than getting what you want right away.

 

[Redleaf]

Alright, I see what you mean. It doesn't get talked about much but I do wonder how much the new lottery rules will effect teams plans going forward. You really can't count on getting the 1st or 2nd overall pick like you used to be able to. The Leafs could very well pour 2 seasons down the drain and not come out with the type of prospect that they thought they needed.

Yup. That's why teams like Pittsburgh or Chicago had 4 or even 5 seasons at the bottom until they found their guys. Other teams are lucky and only had to be around the bottom for a year or two. I've got my fingers crossed for Auston Matthews like everyone else.

But man, we haven't even had one season with a bottom three finish and already people are saying it's too many. The whole point of patience is that it's less fun than getting what you want right away.

I suppose were going to find out soon if this management team is preaching the same patience you speak of or not. I think there is going to be a lot of fans that unfairly grill this front office if Shanny & company's definition of a rebuild isn't exactly like the one they have in their minds.

 

[rdowdall]

You know me and my love of semantics, if you can bottom out some more, you're not at the bottom.

Alright, I see what you mean. It doesn't get talked about much but I do wonder how much the new lottery rules will effect teams plans going forward. You really can't count on getting the 1st or 2nd overall pick like you used to be able to. The Leafs could very well pour 2 seasons down the drain and not come out with the type of prospect that they thought they needed.

It's so Toronto that the league would institute these new rules right when the Leafs decided to try and take advantage of the system.

The odds are still in the favour of the teams that finish with poor records, so if your bad for long enough, then you should get that top pick at some point.  Again there are no guarantees, but you need if you go with a plan that has the highest chance of yielding the best results, then you should at some point yield the best results.