Steve Stamkos?

[bustaheims]

I don't disagree with the general point you're making but I don't know if I buy the rationale. Joe Colborne was a legit NHL talent(admittedly not one to write home about) regardless of whether or not the Leafs planned to demote him.

For what it's worth, since the trade, Olesz has played in all of 16 NHL games - so, there's evidence that GMs around the league no longer considered him a legit NHL talent at the time of the trade. I don't think Florida management considered moving him to be a talent cost.

 

[Kin]

The real question isn't even if the Leafs should sign Stamkos but rather, will the young prospects who will most certainly be with the big club come next season, be able to handle the 'pressure' of the big leagues. 

No, no. This is the thread where the question is about Stamkos. It's right in the title.

 

[Kin]

For what it's worth, since the trade, Olesz has played in all of 16 NHL games - so, there's evidence that GMs around the league no longer considered him a legit NHL talent at the time of the trade. I don't think Florida management considered moving him to be a talent cost.

Again, I agree with the general point. Just not on the basis of what Florida thought.

 

[groundskeeper willie]

As far as the team being too good with Stamkos even Pittsburgh finished last the season after adding Crosby and his 100+ point season.

But look at the roster of that 05-06 Pittsburgh team. Crosby is literally the only good young player on the roster. There's a 25 year old Ryan Malone, a 22 year old Colby Armstrong and Ryan Whitney and Brooks Orpik. That's it.

Next year's Leaf team is almost certainly going to have Rielly, Marner and Nylander. Maybe Kapanen. Maybe one of Laine, Matthews or Puljujarvi. Even before you get to maybe still having JVR or Kadri and Gardiner there's going to be a lot of young talent on the roster.

What about the other example? What is the difference between adding Stamkos and McDavid right now? Both potentially have the same impact on the Leafs draft position moving forward, and by the time the team is ready to compete both likely have similar cap hits, so if you think it's too early to add a player like Stamkos to the team why is McDavid different?

 

[Kin]

What about the other example? What is the difference between adding Stamkos and McDavid right now? Both potentially have the same impact on the Leafs draft position moving forward, and by the time the team is ready to compete both likely have similar cap hits, so if you think it's too early to add a player like Stamkos to the team why is McDavid different?

Well, for one, I would say that I'm roughly 95-99% certain that, barring injury, Connor McDavid is going to be elite, cup contender worthy #1 center five years from now. I don't know what percentage I'd put that with in Stamkos' case but I'd say it's roughly half that.

Two, I think McDavid is going to be better than Stamkos when the team is eventually competitive.

Three, I disagree with the notion that their cap hits will be similar when the Leafs are competitive. I'd guess McDavid's will be anywhere from 20-40% lower.

Fourth, if we assume that both guys will be legit #1 centers(and the Leafs can keep them) until they're 35, that would represent the team getting 9 such years from Stamkos, 17 from McDavid.

Fifth, I'm more confident in an 18 year old under team control's willingness to be patient with the process than I am a veteran whose salary could be a real problem if ends up unhappy.

So while I agree there's risk to both, I think the reward with McDavid is much, much higher.

 

[bustaheims]

Also, adding McDavid/Matthews is clearly sticking to the plan - it's a natural part of being a team that finishes at the bottom of the standings. Adding Stamkos would be a deviation, in that it's adding an established talent to the team, which is more akin to a team in the building process than one still trying to create their foundation. It also impacts expectations from management more than adding an 18 year old top prospect.

 

[groundskeeper willie]

What about the other example? What is the difference between adding Stamkos and McDavid right now? Both potentially have the same impact on the Leafs draft position moving forward, and by the time the team is ready to compete both likely have similar cap hits, so if you think it's too early to add a player like Stamkos to the team why is McDavid different?

Well, for one, I would say that I'm roughly 95-99% certain that, barring injury, Connor McDavid is going to be elite, cup contender worthy #1 center five years from now. I don't know what percentage I'd put that with in Stamkos' case but I'd say it's roughly half that.

Two, I think McDavid is going to be better than Stamkos when the team is eventually competitive.

Three, I disagree with the notion that their cap hits will be similar when the Leafs are competitive. I'd guess McDavid's will be anywhere from 20-40% lower.

Fourth, if we assume that both guys will be legit #1 centers(and the Leafs can keep them) until they're 35, that would represent the team getting 9 such years from Stamkos, 17 from McDavid.

Fifth, I'm more confident in an 18 year old under team control's willingness to be patient with the process than I am a veteran whose salary could be a real problem if ends up unhappy.

So while I agree there's risk to both, I think the reward with McDavid is much, much higher.

You really think McDavid is coming in with a 20-40% lower cap hit after his entry deal is up? If he's as good as you expect him to be (which is the general consensus) then he's hitting ten mil for sure. Tarasenko signed for 8 million on his second contract.

And again, I'm not advocating for signing Stamkos, I just want to understand your thought process. Your argument for McDavid vs Stamkos is essentially age related as I suspected, so what is the cut off point? Again, if Stamkos were 24 would that be acceptable in your eyes?

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

To maybe guess at what someone like McDavid should be looking at for his next contract, Crosby's first contract after his ELC signed for the 2008-09 season was a 5-year deal that came with a cap hit of $8.7 million (with a $56.7 million salary cap).  That was after putting up 294 points in his first 213 games (1.38 PPG).

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

To maybe guess at what someone like McDavid should be looking at for his next contract, Crosby's first contract after his ELC signed for the 2008-09 season was a 5-year deal that came with a cap hit of $8.7 million (with a $56.7 million salary cap).  That was after putting up 294 points in his first 213 games (1.38 PPG).

Crosby's deal also represented 15.3% of the salary cap when it was signed too.

If you work with a 75 million cap, that would give McDavid approx $11.5 million a season.

 

[Kin]

You really think McDavid is coming in with a 20-40% lower cap hit after his entry deal is up? If he's as good as you expect him to be (which is the general consensus) then he's hitting ten mil for sure. Tarasenko signed for 8 million on his second contract.

Tarasenko was also 23 when he signed his contract so an eight year deal is buying five free agent years. McDavid's second contract will be when he's 21, so an 8 year deal would only be buying three. Tarasenko represents a high end, sure, but the more discounted RFA deals signed by players like Tavares, Seguin and Doughty present another consideration.

So I think a fair range for McDavid's second contract is 8-10 million. I think the range for Stamkos' is probably 10.5-12.5. So, yeah, 20-40% strikes me as about right.

And again, I'm not advocating for signing Stamkos, I just want to understand your thought process. Your argument for McDavid vs Stamkos is essentially age related as I suspected, so what is the cut off point? Again, if Stamkos were 24 would that be acceptable in your eyes?

I'd say the argument is actually primarily talent related.

But I guess I'd say my cut off point is the age at which players are allowed to be unrestricted free agents?

 

[Kin]

Crosby's deal also represented 15.3% of the salary cap when it was signed too.

Crosby also won a Hart trophy before he signed that deal. I wouldn't rule that out for McDavid but I don't think it should be assumed.

 

[groundskeeper willie]

You really think McDavid is coming in with a 20-40% lower cap hit after his entry deal is up? If he's as good as you expect him to be (which is the general consensus) then he's hitting ten mil for sure. Tarasenko signed for 8 million on his second contract.

Tarasenko was also 23 when he signed his contract so an eight year deal is buying five free agent years. McDavid's second contract will be when he's 21, so an 8 year deal would only be buying three. Tarasenko represents a high end, sure, but the more discounted RFA deals signed by players like Tavares, Seguin and Doughty present another consideration.

So I think a fair range for McDavid's second contract is 8-10 million. I think the range for Stamkos' is probably 10.5-12.5. So, yeah, 20-40% strikes me as about right.

And again, I'm not advocating for signing Stamkos, I just want to understand your thought process. Your argument for McDavid vs Stamkos is essentially age related as I suspected, so what is the cut off point? Again, if Stamkos were 24 would that be acceptable in your eyes?

I'd say the argument is actually primarily talent related.

But I guess I'd say my cut off point is the age at which players are allowed to be unrestricted free agents?

Personally I think the numbers are much more likely 10-11 for Stamkos and 10-12 for McDavid, but there's no point arguing over opinions. If Stamkos gets 12 or more I hope it's not the Leafs doing it.

And based on your age range then, you'd turn down a 26 year old Crosby or Ovechkin as a UFA too?

 

[Kin]

And based on your age range then, you'd turn down a 26 year old Crosby or Ovechkin as a UFA too?

Like I said, my reasoning is as much talent based as anything. A 26 year old Crosby was a multiple Hart Trophy winning Stanley Cup champion who'd just won the Art Ross by 17 points. Ovechkin was likewise a multiple Hart winner. I don't know what I'd say about those two but it'd be a harder call I think.

And like I've said, I'm not 100% no on Stamkos, just that I think that we all have points where we'd pass(for you it's if he wants 12 million apparently) and mine are just different.

 

[groundskeeper willie]

... like I've said, I'm not 100% no on Stamkos, just that I think that we all have points where we'd pass(for you it's if he wants 12 million apparently) and mine are just different.

You really haven't come across as being OK with a Stamkos signing under any reasonable circumstances from what I've read, but if that's your stance I'll take your word on it.

 

[Kin]

You really haven't come across as being OK with a Stamkos signing under any reasonable circumstances from what I've read, but if that's your stance I'll take your word on it.

Like I said I just think we differ on what constitutes a reasonable circumstance. If Stamkos walks into the ACC and tells Shanahan he's willing to take a deep discount to be here, that he's so crazy about being a Leaf that he doesn't care at all about how long the rebuild might take and that his disagreements with Cooper are just personality based and that he would have no problem playing the wing if that's what the team wanted...again, to me that would mitigate a lot of the risk. 

 

[Frank E]

You really haven't come across as being OK with a Stamkos signing under any reasonable circumstances from what I've read, but if that's your stance I'll take your word on it.

Like I said I just think we differ on what constitutes a reasonable circumstance. If Stamkos walks into the ACC and tells Shanahan he's willing to take a deep discount to be here, that he's so crazy about being a Leaf that he doesn't care at all about how long the rebuild might take and that his disagreements with Cooper are just personality based and that he would have no problem playing the wing if that's what the team wanted...again, to me that would mitigate a lot of the risk.

My theory is that they're playing him on the wing because they're developing the centres because they knew he was leaving a long time ago.  Stamkos doesn't like that, but he's leaving anyways so he's dealing with it...but he gets a little pissy about it sometimes. 

Honestly, if the Lightning didn't want to sign Stamkos, would they be handling this any differently?

EDIT:  By the way, as far as the discount question, my number is max $10m AAV.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

An inherently flawed theoretical question, but nonetheless:  Pretend Stamkos had played his career up to this point with the Leafs.  There's no baggage or ill will between him and the coach/management.  Pretend there's no option to trade him leading into free agency.  He's coming up for UFA as he is in July.  In that circumstance, for anybody who opposes the signing of Stamkos as it stands right now, would you also still take the position that the team should let him walk if he were a Leaf right now?

So in this situation the Maple Leafs have had a top flight, elite #1 center the last 7 years but that hasn't changed the situation they're in at all?

Exactly, like when Joe Sak.... uuuhhhh, you know what, uh, nevermind...

 

[dappleganger]

If the Leafs were to sign Stamkos, I think this would be a very plausible lineup for next season:



FORWARDS

JVR - STAMKOS - NYLANDER

MARNER - KADRI - KOMAROV

LEIVO - BOZAK - LUPUL

LEIPSIC - FROESE - WINNIK


DEFENSE

HUNWICK - RIELLY 

GARDINER - MARINCIN

ZAITSEV - CORRADO


GOALIES

REIMER

STALOCK



What does everyone think of that?

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

If the Leafs were to sign Stamkos, I think this would be a very plausible lineup for next season:



FORWARDS

JVR - STAMKOS - NYLANDER

MARNER - KADRI - KOMAROV

LEIVO - BOZAK - LUPUL

LEIPSIC - FROESE - WINNIK


DEFENSE

HUNWICK - RIELLY 

GARDINER - MARINCIN

ZAITSEV - CORRADO


GOALIES

REIMER

STALOCK



What does everyone think of that?

Needs some Matthews.

 

[ZBBM]

If the Leafs were to sign Stamkos, I think this would be a very plausible lineup for next season:



FORWARDS

JVR - STAMKOS - NYLANDER

MARNER - KADRI - KOMAROV

LEIVO - BOZAK - LUPUL

LEIPSIC - FROESE - WINNIK


DEFENSE

HUNWICK - RIELLY 

GARDINER - MARINCIN

ZAITSEV - CORRADO


GOALIES

REIMER

STALOCK



What does everyone think of that?

The defense is a problem.  The goaltending is a problem.