Steve Stamkos?

[bustaheims]

Stamkos is almost certainly going to have one of the top 5 cap hits in the league.

If he actually hits the open market, I'd wager he'll end up with the highest cap hit in the league.

 

[herman]

UFA market are players that come available naturally and if you believe you can improve you team with one, regardless of who that player is, well that's just good ol' natural team building as long as it doesn't cripple you from continuing to build the internally built portion of your team going forward.

This is true to a point. The UFA market is great for plugging holes in the line up, but it is also a great time for GMs to do stupid things. UFA contracts are generally either really smart short-term low-risk (WINNIK), or bafflingly expensive (per the open market pressures) and entirely cost-inefficient (Clarkson? Gomez? So many...).

For a rebuilding team looking for sustained success, you want to stock your team with players outperforming their salaries, don't you? Best place to find that is internally. When you have a firm, established foundation of prime players, then the UFA/trade market would be a good place for a shrewd add that pushes players down the lineup where their talent will outshine their roles.

Yes, that most certainly is the goal as well as your seasoned vets at least performing AT their contract level.  Do you find Hossa overpaid?  If Stamkos for at least 5 of his 7 years brings 40-50 goals in a season, he'll be worth his contract.

When I look at team building and UFA's, I ask myself a few key questions to find out if I'm fast tracking or not.

1. Do I have to buy out any existing team members in order to fit under cap?

2. Do I have to let any of my existing UFA's that were integral to my team's success last season walk? 

3. Does it prevent me from signing my own key core players I will want to keep in the near future?

If I answer no to these 3 things, than fast tracking the team build is NOT going on.

It is merely making the team better while I can continue to go about my business of internally drafting and developing.  I just makes a prospect beating out a seasoned vet for a roster spot 1 player harder.

To me that's an acceptable problem to have.

I think all of those things are good questions to answer when signing a complementary player to augment your team from playoff contender to championship contender (a la Hossa).

Stamkos is a different situation, and more akin to Burke trading for Kessel (see Nik's post), than what you've been suggesting. SI's post highlights the downside of 'improving' your team too quickly without being able to follow through with some critical steps that we don't currently have.

We have not been bad enough yet to accumulate enough high end options. Even if all of Nylander, Marner, Rielly, Matthews, etc. pan out to their highest potentials, we're still looking for key pieces.

 

[bustaheims]

We have not been bad enough yet to accumulate enough high end options. Even if all of Nylander, Marner, Rielly, Matthews, etc. pan out to their highest potentials, we're still looking for key pieces.

And, if they do pan out, adding Stamkos would amount to adding to the team's strength without addressing their weaknesses (and limiting their ability to do so).

 

[TBLeafer]

We've seen enough of bad thanks AND we have our ace in the hole to show for it.

Might as well go for the longest drive too, while we're on a roll.

Right there. That's the problem. The Leafs' haven't seen enough bad. They won't have seen enough bad until they're capable of being good without having to bring in significant pieces from outside the organization.

No its not 'the problem'.

Staying bad now and continuing to go about a tank mentality now that we have 3 top 5 picks and one top 10 pick in 4 of the last five years is 'the problem'.

Wanting to STAY bad now is a greedy, fear based mentality that is safe.

Just 1 more chance at the lottery... Just 1 more chance at the lottery... just 1 more chance at the lottery...

We aren't ready yet, we aren't ready yet, we aren't ready yet.

Nope.  Not for me.  Time to cheer for this young mostly internally drafted and developed team to win again.

Cheer for Kadri.  Cheer for Rielly.  Cheer for Nylander.  Cheer for Marner.  Cheer for Matthews.  Cheer for Brown.

Cheer for JVR.  Cheer for Zaitsev.  Cheer for Gardiner.  Cheer for Bernier.  And if he comes, cheer for Stamkos, too.

See what I did there?

 

[Kin]

Staying bad now and continuing to go about a tank mentality now that we have 3 top 5 picks and one top 10 pick in 4 of the last five years is 'the problem'.

There's a world of difference between wanting a team to tank and wanting an assembled collection of young talent to develop and grow together organically.

Really only this year and last year(which, not coincidentally, will result in the two highest picks the Leafs have had in the last 26 years) were results of any sort of actual effort towards the bottom and last year's was only after an aborted attempt to compete. The Leafs have not engaged in perpetual intentional bottom finishes and one of the results of that is that the Leafs haven't had much in the way of early round picks over that time. If the Leafs draft in the first, second and third rounds of this year's draft, it will only be the second time since 2009 that they've done so(and they only did it last year because they traded down into the 2nd).

 

[rdowdall]

I disagree that signing available UFA's is fast tracking. Fast tracking is trading future to 'win now'.

UFA market are players that come available naturally and if you believe you can improve you team with one, regardless of who that player is, well that's just good ol' natural team building as long as it doesn't cripple you from continuing to build the internally built portion of your team going forward.

That's where I have an issue with it.  In order for the Leafs to continue to build internally they have to be bad.  Stamkos makes them good before they are actually good.  The Leafs were the worst team in the League last year.  Stamkos isn't going to turn them in to a cup contender.  But he is going to bring them up from worst to about 9th, 10th, 11th.  You are trading your future because of the way the system works in the NHL.

The system that the NHL works with is that bad teams get rewarded with high picks.  I don't agree with this system, but that is what the system is.  Stamkos makes the Leafs better today than a lot of teams.  That means that they won't finish near the bottom, which means their chances of getting an elite player or lower.  In order to maximize their chances at getting that elite d-man or goalie near the top of the draft, they need to be a bad team.  Unfortunately there isn't a way around it.

I understand the thinking.  Add Stamkos now and as he is an elite player,  then the Leafs have one.  It's the next step that's the problem.  How do they get that elite d-man?  How do they get that elite goalie?  Does one become available in through free agency?  Do you trade for one?  You are hedging your bets that one is going to become available.  You are building your team through a possibility that you are going to be able to make a move to get on of those pieces. 

How often did we hear that the Leafs were going to trade for a #1 center through the Kessel years?  How often did they trade for a #1 center through the Kessel years?  How many #1 centers were drafted near the top of the draft through the Kessel years? 

If you are really bad for 5 or 6 years, then you will get those pieces.  You will get a Stamkos and a Hedman.  You will get a Kane and Toews.  You will get a Crosby and Malkin.  The Leafs have only be really bad (and been able to reap the benefits of it) for about 3 years now .  Another couple of years and then you will have a foundation to build on top of.  Next year there is a pretty good d-man at #2 that would probably pan out as an elite defender.  They will have a better idea of where their secondary prospects (The Neilsens, the Dermott's, the Timashov's) are in terms of development.  They will have seen Nylander and the 1st from this year, and most likely Marner at the NHL level for a year.  They will have an idea of if they can handle the NHL.

In another year, the Leafs will have a clearer picture of where they are at in terms of their foundation.  Adding Stamkos now would be a gamble because all the information isn't there yet.  It's a decision based on projection.

We've seen enough of bad thanks AND we have our ace in the hole to show for it.

Might as well go for the longest drive too, while we're on a roll.

I agree that we have seen enough of the bad decisions which has led to a lot of the bad on the ice.  We have only seen 2 years of good decisions, that have led to bad on the ice.  One #1 overall pick is not an ace in the hole.  Wendel Clark would like you to count his cup rings for him.

 

[bustaheims]

Staying bad now and continuing to go about a tank mentality now that we have 3 top 5 picks and one top 10 pick in 4 of the last five years is 'the problem'.

Wanting to STAY bad now is a greedy, fear based mentality that is safe.

It's not about greed or safety. It's about doign things organically, addressing the team's actual issues/needs, and having the patience to build a sustainable contender. Signing Stamkos doesn't do any of those things.

The only fear being displayed here is the same one that has led to decades of impatience and poor decisions - the fear of waiting.

 

[nutman]

So my thoughts are ... we have a young core( counting Mathews of course),and to add Stamkos at this point would be the right move. My reasons are that they will need the leadership on the ice, as well as the heat will be on him and our two to three year guys like Jvr ect.

signing him would put Marnier , Mathews on secondary scoring lines, so not as much time vs other teams top defenders, giving them some growth time. we have the coach to point them, so now we need someone to lead them.

As for we have 3-5 yrs to wait before we compete at a high level, ya right!!!. more like two at most. we have the start of a very good defence, and we will find the missing pieces sooner then later. As for the goalies, I believe that problem will work out soon enough. Bernier will have one more crack at it to prove he can be a solid #1, and he may just be that.

So I think Stamkos signing would be a very good move. we are at the point where we dont need to finish in the basement for another two years.

 

[rdowdall]

We've seen enough of bad thanks AND we have our ace in the hole to show for it.

Might as well go for the longest drive too, while we're on a roll.

Right there. That's the problem. The Leafs' haven't seen enough bad. They won't have seen enough bad until they're capable of being good without having to bring in significant pieces from outside the organization.

No its not 'the problem'.

Staying bad now and continuing to go about a tank mentality now that we have 3 top 5 picks and one top 10 pick in 4 of the last five years is 'the problem'.

Wanting to STAY bad now is a greedy, fear based mentality that is safe.

Just 1 more chance at the lottery... Just 1 more chance at the lottery... just 1 more chance at the lottery...

We aren't ready yet, we aren't ready yet, we aren't ready yet.

Nope.  Not for me.  Time to cheer for this young mostly internally drafted and developed team to win again.

Cheer for Kadri.  Cheer for Rielly.  Cheer for Nylander.  Cheer for Marner.  Cheer for Matthews.  Cheer for Brown.

Cheer for JVR.  Cheer for Zaitsev.  Cheer for Gardiner.  Cheer for Bernier.  And if he comes, cheer for Stamkos, too.

See what I did there?

You realize that you are asking me to cheer for three players that haven't even set a foot on NHL ice yet, one of which hasn't even been drafted by the Leafs, and one of which hasn't even been signed by the Leafs? 

I like the players that you have listed above.  Do I think that's a core that competes with the two teams that are in the Stanley Cup final, no, not at all.  That's a team that fails in the first or second round at best.

 

[TBLeafer]

I disagree that signing available UFA's is fast tracking. Fast tracking is trading future to 'win now'.

UFA market are players that come available naturally and if you believe you can improve you team with one, regardless of who that player is, well that's just good ol' natural team building as long as it doesn't cripple you from continuing to build the internally built portion of your team going forward.

That's where I have an issue with it.  In order for the Leafs to continue to build internally they have to be bad.  Stamkos makes them good before they are actually good.  The Leafs were the worst team in the League last year.  Stamkos isn't going to turn them in to a cup contender.  But he is going to bring them up from worst to about 9th, 10th, 11th.  You are trading your future because of the way the system works in the NHL.

The system that the NHL works with is that bad teams get rewarded with high picks.  I don't agree with this system, but that is what the system is.  Stamkos makes the Leafs better today than a lot of teams.  That means that they won't finish near the bottom, which means their chances of getting an elite player or lower.  In order to maximize their chances at getting that elite d-man or goalie near the top of the draft, they need to be a bad team.  Unfortunately there isn't a way around it.

I understand the thinking.  Add Stamkos now and as he is an elite player,  then the Leafs have one.  It's the next step that's the problem.  How do they get that elite d-man?  How do they get that elite goalie?  Does one become available in through free agency?  Do you trade for one?  You are hedging your bets that one is going to become available.  You are building your team through a possibility that you are going to be able to make a move to get on of those pieces. 

How often did we hear that the Leafs were going to trade for a #1 center through the Kessel years?  How often did they trade for a #1 center through the Kessel years?  How many #1 centers were drafted near the top of the draft through the Kessel years? 

If you are really bad for 5 or 6 years, then you will get those pieces.  You will get a Stamkos and a Hedman.  You will get a Kane and Toews.  You will get a Crosby and Malkin.  The Leafs have only be really bad (and been able to reap the benefits of it) for about 3 years now .  Another couple of years and then you will have a foundation to build on top of.  Next year there is a pretty good d-man at #2 that would probably pan out as an elite defender.  They will have a better idea of where their secondary prospects (The Neilsens, the Dermott's, the Timashov's) are in terms of development.  They will have seen Nylander and the 1st from this year, and most likely Marner at the NHL level for a year.  They will have an idea of if they can handle the NHL.

In another year, the Leafs will have a clearer picture of where they are at in terms of their foundation.  Adding Stamkos now would be a gamble because all the information isn't there yet.  It's a decision based on projection.

We've seen enough of bad thanks AND we have our ace in the hole to show for it.

Might as well go for the longest drive too, while we're on a roll.

I agree that we have seen enough of the bad decisions which has led to a lot of the bad on the ice.  We have only seen 2 years of good decisions, that have led to bad on the ice.  One #1 overall pick is not an ace in the hole.  Wendel Clark would like you to count his cup rings for him.

So does Ovechkin.

Stamkos is a center. Matthews is a center. 

Clark is not.
Ovechkin is not.
Kessel is not.

Gilmour would like to show you his scar from Gretzky's stick.

 

[herman]

It's not about greed or safety. It's about doign things organically, addressing the team's actual issues/needs, and having the patience to build a sustainable contender. Signing Stamkos doesn't do any of those things.

The only fear being displayed here is the same one that has led to decades of impatience and poor decisions - the fear of waiting.

It's been rumoured (and probably confirmed somewhere) that JFJ originally wanted to teardown and rebuild the team coming out of the lockout in 04; ownership at the time had already budgeted with three playoff games' worth of revenue expected and kiboshed whatever plan he had, forcing him to try to field a contending team ill-equipped to deal with the new rules.

Shanahan did it a bit smarter. He made ownership and management feel the pain first by largely keeping all the people they had originally put in charge (Nonis, Carlyle) and let them play out the inevitable catastrophe before offering ownership the lifeline of a truly proper rebuild (and exorcism).

 

[TBLeafer]

We've seen enough of bad thanks AND we have our ace in the hole to show for it.

Might as well go for the longest drive too, while we're on a roll.

Right there. That's the problem. The Leafs' haven't seen enough bad. They won't have seen enough bad until they're capable of being good without having to bring in significant pieces from outside the organization.

No its not 'the problem'.

Staying bad now and continuing to go about a tank mentality now that we have 3 top 5 picks and one top 10 pick in 4 of the last five years is 'the problem'.

Wanting to STAY bad now is a greedy, fear based mentality that is safe.

Just 1 more chance at the lottery... Just 1 more chance at the lottery... just 1 more chance at the lottery...

We aren't ready yet, we aren't ready yet, we aren't ready yet.

Nope.  Not for me.  Time to cheer for this young mostly internally drafted and developed team to win again.

Cheer for Kadri.  Cheer for Rielly.  Cheer for Nylander.  Cheer for Marner.  Cheer for Matthews.  Cheer for Brown.

Cheer for JVR.  Cheer for Zaitsev.  Cheer for Gardiner.  Cheer for Bernier.  And if he comes, cheer for Stamkos, too.

See what I did there?

You realize that you are asking me to cheer for three players that haven't even set a foot on NHL ice yet, one of which hasn't even been drafted by the Leafs, and one of which hasn't even been signed by the Leafs? 

I like the players that you have listed above.  Do I think that's a core that competes with the two teams that are in the Stanley Cup final, no, not at all.  That's a team that fails in the first or second round at best.

Good, that would amount to a year over year satisfactory improvement would it not?

Do you expect to go from dead last to cup contender in just 1 year?

I may be an optimist, but I do like to keep my expectations reasonable.      ;D

 

[bustaheims]

Good, that would amount to a year over year satisfactory improvement would it not?

Do you expect to go from dead last to cup contender in just 1 year?

I may be an optimist, but I do like to keep my expectations reasonable.      ;D

He's not talking next year. He's talking long-term. And, he's right. That's a team that will be stuck in the cycle of perpetual mediocrity.

 

[herman]

I like the players that you have listed above.  Do I think that's a core that competes with the two teams that are in the Stanley Cup final, no, not at all.  That's a team that fails in the first or second round at best.

Good, that would amount to a year over year satisfactory improvement would it not?

Do you expect to go from dead last to cup contender in just 1 year?

I may be an optimist, but I do like to keep my expectations reasonable.      ;D

YoY improvement is not the goal. Sustained Championship runs is the goal.

If you want to jump over a large hole, you're better off taking several steps back to give yourself a running start, rather than taking incremental steps forward to try to span the hole.

 

[Kin]

So does Ovechkin.

Stamkos is a center. Matthews is a center. 

Clark is not.
Ovechkin is not.
Kessel is not.

Sundin was, Lindros was, Hawerchuk was. There are lots of great C's drafted high who aren't capable of lugging a team to the promised land by themselves without sufficient depth.

 

[Kin]

And we really need to redefine our concept of optimism if it translates as someone who thinks that only negative types buy insurance.

 

[TBLeafer]

Good, that would amount to a year over year satisfactory improvement would it not?

Do you expect to go from dead last to cup contender in just 1 year?

I may be an optimist, but I do like to keep my expectations reasonable.      ;D

He's not talking next year. He's talking long-term. And, he's right. That's a team that will be stuck in the cycle of perpetual mediocrity.

No that's just a year over year start with this year's new acquisitions and promoted prospects in place.  It is not the be all and end all to the rebuild.  It is the START of one around those existing pieces.  Stamkos helps that if he signs.

Who was the best available UFA under 30 in 2007 not locked up by his team?

 

[rdowdall]

Good, that would amount to a year over year satisfactory improvement would it not?

Do you expect to go from dead last to cup contender in just 1 year?

I may be an optimist, but I do like to keep my expectations reasonable.      ;D

He's not talking next year. He's talking long-term. And, he's right. That's a team that will be stuck in the cycle of perpetual mediocrity.

No that's just a year over year start with this year's new acquisitions and promoted prospects in place.  It is not the be all and end all to the rebuild.  It is the START of one around those existing pieces.  Stamkos helps that if he signs.

Who was the best available UFA under 30 in 2007 not locked up by his team?

Where do they get the pieces that they don't have after the first year?  After the second year?  After the third year?  Are you going to tell me that they are going to sign or trade for those pieces?  Because you can't guarantee me that those pieces are going to be available through a trade or through UFA.

I can guarantee you though that the best new players coming in to the league will be available at the top of the draft year in and year out.

 

[princedpw]

Somebody posted this link earlier in the thread (thanks to whoever posted it):

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/05/10/steven-stamkos-toronto-maple-leafs-salary-cap/

I think it is the most useful article on a potential Stamkos signing I have seen.  People will *definitely* quibble with the specific numbers, but that isn't where the value lies.  Unlike other articles I've seen, it lays out the Leafs potential salary structure 7 years in the future in a concrete way (and compares with the Blackhawks).  The charts on "Projected TML Salary Cap" closer to the bottom are the ones I thought were useful.  In particular, what other articles fail to do is to explain in detail what might happen in the critical 19-20 season.  In that season, Marner and (let's assume) Matthews will be in their first RFA year and the cap squeeze will hit. 

I don't actually know that I agree with the author's conclusion, but the salary framework is useful.  For instance, the author hopes that Stamkos might be signed for 10 million, and if so, that leaves 30% of the cap for the bottom half of the roster in the 19-20 season, which is similar to what the Blackhawks have now.  If you don't believe signing him for 10 million is plausible, you can see what happens if it is 11 million, for instance.  If you want to include JVR, decrease the estimate further.  If you don't think the estimates for Marner, Nylander, Matthews future salaries are accurate, you can easily up them and see how much cap space is left.  The roster given there doesn't leave room for adding another high-salary defenseman.  Anyway, you can play around a bunch to see what happens if you make different assumptions, which is why I think the chart is useful.

Overall, in my opinion, the chart, and the length of the discussion on this board, reinforces what is probably blazingly obvious to most others:  signing Stamkos leaves one on the knife's edge (and I think the assumption that Stamkos signs for 10 million is optimistic --- as a rule of thumb, free agents sign for substantially more than what is "reasonable").  It's a risk.  If a Stamkos-level defenseman was available, I'd take the risk.  If it were easier to make trades these days in the NHL, I'd also take the risk and I'd simply look for ways to trade one of our high-end forwards for the equivalent defenseman.  Too bad Stamkos isnt a defenseman and trades ARE hard to make and the chances someone wants to trade their #1 defenseman to the Leafs are miniscule and the chances that a #1 defenceman becomes a UFA AND decides to sign with the Leafs are probably small and at any rate difficult to quantify. 

I think I'm mostly going to sit back and trust our management team.  If they sign him for 13 million/year, I'm going to be worried.  If they sign him for 8 million/year, I'll be happy.  (Look at me going out on a limb!)  Neither will happen so I guess I'll probably take it in stride.

 

[Kin]

No that's just a year over year start with this year's new acquisitions and promoted prospects in place.  It is not the be all and end all to the rebuild. 

But there's really no getting around that it creates a problem with the next step. Provided we're more interested in fact than "optimism" when it comes to our players we're still left with unavoidable dilemmas. Who are our elite wingers going to be? Will the team have a #1 defenseman to rival Doughty or Keith or Chara? That seems pretty important to a contender. How about goaltending?

Since the real answers to all of those questions are that we don't know we have to then ask what the best way to find those players will be. We know the answer to that. It's at the top of the draft. Otherwise you're banking on the team drafting franchise talent in the middle of the first round or lower because trading for Stamkos effectively handicaps the ability to do so via UFA or trades. Banking on finding franchise talent outside of the top 5 as being integral to a successful rebuild is not what I think most of us mean by sustainable.