If we've learned anything from signing Kovalchuk, watching the Rangers pre and immediately post 05 lockout, watching the Wild fail after the great Parise-Suter homecoming, etc., it's that signing guys to massive contracts rarely ends up being a good move. Who in recent memory has looked back on handing out these deals a couple years later and been happy they did it? Washington with Ovechkin? The Penguins with Crosby and Malkin? Chicago with Kane and Toews?
But look at how the Pens have struggled to ice a competitive bottom six for years. Look at how Chicago once again has to sell off good players because they're paying 21 million to two players.
Even in 2012, when we had 3 of probably the top 20 forwards in the league, the team didn't really take off until the bottom six was solidified with the additions of Ponikarovsky and Bernier and the return of Zajac.
Having a solid lineup from top to bottom is so important to competing, and giving $10 million to one player just makes it so much harder to do that.
We could sign Stamkos for $10 million, and I'd probably be excited about it. Stamkos and by some miracle a healthy Cammalleri would almost certainly make us a playoff team, especially if Henrique and Palmieri could repeat their seasons. But I can't help but feel like at some point we would regret that contract.
I get this argument, I truly do, but it is a bit flawed.
The reason it took the Penguins so long to start competing again is because they decimated their prospect pool. You can commit top money to star players, but you better make damn sure you have kids coming through that can fill out your roster. Shero didn't and added to the problem by trading away picks/prospects for veterans at the deadline. It's a lot easily to fill spots in when you have guys like Crosby/Malkin anchoring your forward group and Letang on the back end. They FINALLY got their influx of youth -- Rust, Sheary, Maatta, Dumoulin, Kuhnackl -- along with some timely additions. Same goes for Washington developing talent around Ovechkin and filling in the gaps they needed with guys like Orpik, Niksnanen, Williams, and Oshie.
I'm ok with signing Stamkos. I'm ok with committing around 10 million to him. However, that is only because the way this team is structured now and in the long term, it make sense. If Stamkos was pass-first more than shoot-first, I would be all over him. This team can afford to take on Stamkos long-term and with a high salary and build around it. The one thing we are missing in the prospect pool and at the NHL level is top-end talent. I think we're going to have enough Henrique's and quality middle-six guys sprinkled throughout our line-up with the prospects we have. If done right, I also think they could supplement Stamkos the same way the Pittsburgh young guys like Sheary, Rust, Kuhnackl are filling the holes in the Penguins line-up.
It's likely a moot discussion considering the chances of him coming here. But the way the Devils are right now, they have the ability to take on a high contract to add a star player and not have it hurt them. This is not nearly the same as adding Kovalchuk to an owner with tons of debt, still having to sign Zajac/Parise long term, and having little future in our prospect pool. The future looks pretty bright and the money/cap flexibility is as good as it can get in the cap era.
