Stamkos Yay or Nay - Pro and Cons ??

[tmlfan98]

I just need to point out that with his playoff beard he looks like Rick from the walking dead

 

[dimi78]

I think you underestimate the psychological impact of having a star on your team. Do you not believe that the Bruins draw confidence from knowing Chara is your D? Kopitar? Toews and Kane?

Winning and good play is infectious. Good players score big goals and give a team swagger on the ice. It's just the way it is and always has been. To say otherwise is impossible to argue against unless you want to look silly.

Who said anything about going out on the town. This about rallying around an elite player and drawing from their swagger while learning how to be better and what makes a player better through exposure.

We can sit here and discount the credit guys like Datsyuk give to their talented mentors but what does that do?

Are you saying you're smarter than Datsyuk? There are many players who say the exact same things if you look, people don't pay homage for the sake of it.

Think about it.

Actually they do for the very same reason why politicians do. Star players don't equate into winning or even playing good team hockey. They're the entertainment value to the game that sells the game and frankly through the media have been glorified well above to what they actually mean to a teams on ice performance in winning or losing. They're just one piece to the puzzle that's it yet they get Placed on pedestals when there teams win and trashed on when there teams lose. It's not about star players never was and never will be about 1 player. Hockey is about the collective group where leadership stems from the guys not on the ice but in suits both behind the bench and upstairs.

There's only one position in hockey where one individual can transform the psychological impact of the team and that's the goaltender.

Have listen to Wendal Clark talk about the impact of a goaltender to a team in this video not to mention just how people overanalyze leadership and pressures etc. of young guys. From the 6 min. mark to 8 min.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFjxeaMh_q8

If you sign Stamkos it's for on ice performance to score goals for you at an elite rate and if he fits in with players your moving forward with nothing more nothing less. Signing him for leadership is a mistake just waiting to happen and signing him to play above youngsters rather than to play with them is detrimental towards player development.

For me playing him on Kadri's or Nylander's wing would be a good fit same with playin him center with Marner on his wing. Not for leadership but because playing with those guys would put him in a position to benefit the only thing Stamkos is elite at in scoring goals that will benefit all playing with him and vise versa.

 

[Tak7]

Why has no one pointed out that this could be nothing more than genius negotiation tactics from Stamkos' camp to try and get a bumper contract out of Yzerman, who up until now, might be very hesitant or stubborn about handing one out?

 

[Menzinger]

There are/were plenty of bottom feeders that had "stars" and didn't go anywhere.

Ie Kessel with the Leafs, OEL with Arizona, Nash with the Blue Jackets, Ect. Having a star player isn't a guarantee to turn around a franchise.

 

[Tak7]

There are/were plenty of bottom feeders that had "stars" and didn't go anywhere.

Ie Kessel with the Leafs, OEL with Arizona, Nash with the Blue Jackets, Ect. Having a star player isn't a guarantee to turn around a franchise.

Yep.

Kessel's consistent 30 goal seasons here didn't interrupt the Leafs from being a pretty terrible hockey team that ended up with some pretty high picks.

Stamkos wouldn't "derail the rebuild".

Plus, why do teams rebuild? So that they can acquire a Stamkos-like talent.

 

[Menzinger]

Yep.

Kessel's consistent 30 goal seasons here didn't interrupt the Leafs from being a pretty terrible hockey team that ended up with some pretty high picks.

Stamkos wouldn't "derail the rebuild".

Plus, why do teams rebuild? So that they can acquire a Stamkos-like talent.

Yep - though losing 10 million plus in cap space to a single player might complicate the rebuild.

 

[Tak7]

Yep - though losing 10 million plus in cap space to a single player might complicate the rebuild.

Not if you are managing your cap properly.

There's no way around paying your top players top money, so it only complicates the rebuild if you are foolish with your spending on the bottom chunk of your roster.

 

[Menzinger]

Not if you are managing your cap properly.

Perhaps. I'm not necessarily opposed to signing him, it will all come down to what his contract his like.

In my view though, a great player on a bad contract is overall a net negative for a team.

 

[Tak7]

Perhaps. I'm not necessarily opposed to signing him, it will all come down to what his contract his like.

In my view though, a great player on a bad contract is overall a net negative for a team.

What is a bad contract for a guy who scores at the rate he does, offers huge leadership qualities, and is the kind of player that could instantly attract others to come here?

There's a cautionary tale in Edmonton worth paying attention too - there's no point grabbing all these great young high potential talent, if you aren't able to insulate them with strong veteran talent that can eat some of those more crucial minutes

 

[Menzinger]

What is a bad contract for a guy who scores at the rate he does, offers huge leadership qualities, and is the kind of player that could instantly attract others to come here?

There's a cautionary tale in Edmonton worth paying attention too - there's no point grabbing all these great young high potential talent, if you aren't able to insulate them with strong veteran talent that can eat some of those more crucial minutes

Given his age, and the fact that he will likely decline over his contract as a player I'd prefer a deal in the 8-9ish million range. I'm not convinced that his "leadership" qualities are enough to pay a single player over 10 million a ear, particularly one whose on pace for under 60 points this year

I think Edmonton would have faced a lot less problems if they were able to draft a couple top 4 defenders.

 

[dimi78]

Perhaps. I'm not necessarily opposed to signing him, it will all come down to what his contract his like.

In my view though, a great player on a bad contract is overall a net negative for a team.

Not really if the great player is great than he's done his duties living up to his contract. It's up to management to assemble a team not the star player to magically make players better around him.

As a manager however what is your goal? It's to assemble a winning combination on the ice under a cap structure. It's really hard to assemble depth to have a championship caliber team if your star players have max contracts.

This Stamkos situations screams that Stamkos wants max $$$$ and Tampa wants him to sign at a term that would allow them to sign others and that's what the holding matters up. I'm not about to trash Stamkos for wanting the most he could get from his livelihood but if he does want to stay in Tampa max dollar contract wont be of help to keep depth good enough to contend.

Beautiful things this cap isn't it? Especially now with how they've put an end to these circumventing contracts.

 

[Menzinger]

Not really if the great player is great than he's done his duties living up to his contract. It's up to management to assemble a team not the star player to magically make players better around him.

As a manager however what is your goal? It's to assemble a winning combination on the ice under a cap structure. It's really hard to assemble depth to have a championship caliber team if your star players have max contracts.

This Stamkos situations screams that Stamkos wants max $$$$ and Tampa wants him to sign at a term that would allow them to sign others and that's what the holding matters up. I'm not about to trash Stamkos for wanting the most he could get from his livelihood but if he does want to stay in Tampa max dollar contract wont be of help to keep depth good enough to contend.

Beautiful things this cap isn't it? Especially now with how they've put an end to these circumventing contracts.

That's what I'm getting at - overpaying a good player can severely hinder management's ability to build a good team. If management gives 12 million to a player worth around 8, there goes 4ish million in cap space that could have been used elsewhere.

I really like Stamkos as a player, and he has every right to ask to be the highest paid NHLer, I just hope the Leafs aren t the team to give it to him.

If he wants to play for his home town than it needs to be a contract that works for both sides. I just feel his agent will be looking for as much cash as possible.

 

[MapleLeafs9]

I just need to point out that with his playoff beard he looks like Rick from the walking dead

LOL I actually noticed this, and I realized its because he doesn't let it grow fully by shaving the neck area like Andrew Lincoln does.

 

[dimi78]

That's what I'm getting at - overpaying a good player can severely hinder management's ability to build a good team. If management gives 12 million to a player worth around 8, there goes 4ish million in cap space that could have been used elsewhere.

I really like Stamkos as a player, and he has every right to ask to be the highest paid NHLer, I just hope the Leafs aren t the team to give it to him.

If he wants to play for his home town than it needs to be a contract that works for both sides. I just feel his agent will be looking for as much cash as possible.

For sure but not every teams cap structure is the same to paint signing Stamkos at a max $$$$ in one broad brush. Tampa is trying to allocate money around to established players. The Leafs however the majority of there good players are so far away from demanding max contracts it could fit in a Stamkos easily if management perceives he's a fit with the young core that is on it's way.

Not to say we don't know what the numbers are that makes sense for Tampa. It may be south of the 8-9 that you would sign him to. At the end of the day Stamkos is a bright young man I think he knows that the number that is fair is 8-9 range so if he's signed to that why not?

Nashiville isn't exactly regretting matching on the Shea Weber contract offersheet Philly threw at them are they? You make it work like Chicago has and forget about this silliness about keeping NHL ready youngsters in the AHL to overripen them.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Almost at 1,000 posts. Can the person who makes the next thread do a summary of the major points for both sides in post #1? I feel like a thread like this has a lot of repetition that people jist don't read (40 pages?!)

 

[studebaker17]

For sure but not every teams cap structure is the same to paint signing Stamkos at a max $$$$ in one broad brush. Tampa is trying to allocate money around to established players. The Leafs however the majority of there good players are so far away from demanding max contracts it could fit in a Stamkos easily if management perceives he's a fit with the young core that is on it's way.

Not to say we don't know what the numbers are that makes sense for Tampa. It may be south of the 8-9 that you would sign him to. At the end of the day Stamkos is a bright young man I think he knows that the number that is fair is 8-9 range so if he's signed to that why not?

Nashiville isn't exactly regretting matching on the Shea Weber contract offersheet Philly threw at them are they? You make it work like Chicago has and forget about this silliness about keeping NHL ready youngsters in the AHL to overripen them.

Tampa hasn't allocated a ton of money to anyone really . The RFA's like Hedman make some money and Callahan is probably overpaid a million or 2 but most of their players are fair salary. Then they still need to worry about Druin, Kutcherov and Johnson all getting RFA raises soon. It really doesn't take much to spend the cap if you have good players.

 

[tml19]

Made a new thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2000015