Stamkos: Yea or Nay?
- Thread starter Warden of the North
- Start date
- Status
New User Name
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2008
- 12,916
- 1,773
100% yes!
Guess I should qualify this. Only if he signs for 9 million or less. Maximum years though which is 7.
Guess I should qualify this. Only if he signs for 9 million or less. Maximum years though which is 7.
Kurisu
mad scientist
WilliamNylander
Papi's home
- Jul 26, 2012
- 12,896
- 2,608
Daisy Jane
everything is gonna be okay!
- Jul 2, 2009
- 70,240
- 9,248
Here are the reasons why people are saying no:
1: the cap hit - it eats up too much
2: position: well if Cooper sees him as a winger, and now everyone sees this as a winger, he's obvs a winger. and we have Matthews/Nylander
3: defensive - he is not
4: blood clots and broken legs oh my.
reasons why people feel he should.
1: he is still elite (or elite-ish) - with a small hiccup the last few years. [somewhat similar to ovy, which does concide with St Louis leaving + his broken leg
2: it will cost just the cap hit and we will be saving money on the crap contracts
3: will shield Matthews, Nylander, and Marner (and Rielly) in a myraid of ways
4: his age fits the "core" in the "older " sense (only 26-27).
5: can handle the Toronto pressure brilliantly.
6: named to team canada right off the bat [I know if I don't mention this, Fav will so mentioning!]
I figure. the sticky point for most is 9.5-10.5 as people feel 9 to 9.5 is okay.
so really. then. 10 should be fine. because you save the million (to mllion and a half) from a mercenary draft pick player anyway.
1: the cap hit - it eats up too much
2: position: well if Cooper sees him as a winger, and now everyone sees this as a winger, he's obvs a winger. and we have Matthews/Nylander
3: defensive - he is not
4: blood clots and broken legs oh my.
reasons why people feel he should.
1: he is still elite (or elite-ish) - with a small hiccup the last few years. [somewhat similar to ovy, which does concide with St Louis leaving + his broken leg
2: it will cost just the cap hit and we will be saving money on the crap contracts
3: will shield Matthews, Nylander, and Marner (and Rielly) in a myraid of ways
4: his age fits the "core" in the "older " sense (only 26-27).
5: can handle the Toronto pressure brilliantly.
6: named to team canada right off the bat [I know if I don't mention this, Fav will so mentioning!]
I figure. the sticky point for most is 9.5-10.5 as people feel 9 to 9.5 is okay.
so really. then. 10 should be fine. because you save the million (to mllion and a half) from a mercenary draft pick player anyway.
TMLife*
Auston Matthews
kk87
Registered User
I'm pretty convinced Stammer wants to come to Toronto. I'm just not sure how much money he's willing to leave on the table. I am firmly in the sign Stamkos camp, but we can't handcuff ourselves by drastically overpaying him. I easily take him at a reasonable price.
mr grieves
Registered User
- May 21, 2011
- 521
- 39
Was posting this to Sustainable Future, but that thread was moved to another STamkos thread, which has been closed...
Why I think Stamkos could create cap havoc, and why I doubt that he'll actually end up creating an impossible situation, will help the team contend:
If those guys pan out that way, it sure would be!
I looked up each of those players, plus Kane & Toews, too see what their RFA contracts were as a % of the cap. Giroux took a bridge deal, which kept his first RFA contract at about 6% of the cap (3.75m), so I dropped that one. I'm pretending the cap is at 78m in 2 years, 80m in 3, because it's easier...
In 2 years, Nylander looks for a Backstrom like contract --> $6.7m under $59.4m cap = $8.6m of 78m = 11.3% of cap
In 3 years, Marner is Kane-like --> $6.3m under $59.4 cap = $8.5m of $80m cap = 10.6%
In 3 years, Matthews is Kopitar-ish --> $6.8m under $56.8m cap = $9.6m under $80m cap = 12%
So, that's 34% to 3 young stars. Stamkos at $9.5m would be 12%, Rielly 6.25%, Kadri 5.6%, Gardiner 5%. So, 60%+ of the cap on a core than doesn't have a true 2D or goalie... Not good.
And yet...
I don't think this is a real problem. I think the core is Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Kadri, Rielly, Gardiner... and Stamkos. You're adding pieces at prices that'd make them "core," but I don't think the Leafs will do this.
I think the Leafs have enough lottery tickets that one of the prospects will be serviceable alongside Rielly. It won't be a great defense with stars throughout, but look at the forwards... The defense will be decent, cost-controlled (cheaper RFA), well-coached.
The Leafs also won't be paying $3-4m for top-6 wingers, since the whole point of filling up the prospect pool is to have good complimentary players who are cheap. When Brown, Hyman, or Soshnikov want raises, we ship them out for picks/prospects and bring in next batch of ELC Browns, Hymans, Soshnikovs.
And I don't think the Leafs will pay for a #1G. The teams that have on goalies who are worth it -- Rangers, Habs, Preds -- haven't won any Cups. The teams who have paid their 1G after winning Cups -- Kings, Pens, Hawks, Hurricanes -- erred in overpaying goaltending they could've got more cheaply, as evidenced by their Cups. There needs to be a lot more expansion before it makes sense to pay a lot for a good starter.
So, I don't think it'd be impossible. There's little room for error though. And that's IF the three high picks pan out as you're saying they will.
Why I'm not worried about a Stamkos contract:
It's also a big question mark that the Leafs have the 2020 versions of Kopitar, Kane, and Backstrom. While I'm sure each of Matthews, Marner, Nylander will be very good, I doubt each will hit his loftiest projection and thus his highest possible cap hit. In addition, there are hometown discounts, building a winning thing, 2 young stars needing a contract in the same year (so maybe Toews/Kane style matching contracts), etc., that'll likely keep things a bit below those projections.
There might even be a Captain Stamkos making $9.5m on a UFA contract, precedent that skill capitains be the highest paid player, that there's a guy with four 40+ goal seasons making $9.5m on a UFA contract... that's to say, maybe he helps keep star salaries in line.
It's entirely reasonable to think that even with Stamkos at $9m+, the core can be taking up only about ~50% cap in the contending years. That's about in line with perennial contenders built around elite talent.
So, my bottom line is... One of Nylander/Marner/Matthews probably won't turn out to be quite as amazing as we'd all hoped. Given that, adding Stamkos would likely make the Leafs a stronger contender in 3 years. And I want the Leafs to have the best chance possible of winning as many cups possible over the next 7-9 year window. So I'd add him at ~$9.5m.
Why I think Stamkos could create cap havoc, and why I doubt that he'll actually end up creating an impossible situation, will help the team contend:
If those guys pan out that way, it sure would be!
I looked up each of those players, plus Kane & Toews, too see what their RFA contracts were as a % of the cap. Giroux took a bridge deal, which kept his first RFA contract at about 6% of the cap (3.75m), so I dropped that one. I'm pretending the cap is at 78m in 2 years, 80m in 3, because it's easier...
In 2 years, Nylander looks for a Backstrom like contract --> $6.7m under $59.4m cap = $8.6m of 78m = 11.3% of cap
In 3 years, Marner is Kane-like --> $6.3m under $59.4 cap = $8.5m of $80m cap = 10.6%
In 3 years, Matthews is Kopitar-ish --> $6.8m under $56.8m cap = $9.6m under $80m cap = 12%
So, that's 34% to 3 young stars. Stamkos at $9.5m would be 12%, Rielly 6.25%, Kadri 5.6%, Gardiner 5%. So, 60%+ of the cap on a core than doesn't have a true 2D or goalie... Not good.
And yet...
I don't think this is a real problem. I think the core is Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Kadri, Rielly, Gardiner... and Stamkos. You're adding pieces at prices that'd make them "core," but I don't think the Leafs will do this.
I think the Leafs have enough lottery tickets that one of the prospects will be serviceable alongside Rielly. It won't be a great defense with stars throughout, but look at the forwards... The defense will be decent, cost-controlled (cheaper RFA), well-coached.
The Leafs also won't be paying $3-4m for top-6 wingers, since the whole point of filling up the prospect pool is to have good complimentary players who are cheap. When Brown, Hyman, or Soshnikov want raises, we ship them out for picks/prospects and bring in next batch of ELC Browns, Hymans, Soshnikovs.
And I don't think the Leafs will pay for a #1G. The teams that have on goalies who are worth it -- Rangers, Habs, Preds -- haven't won any Cups. The teams who have paid their 1G after winning Cups -- Kings, Pens, Hawks, Hurricanes -- erred in overpaying goaltending they could've got more cheaply, as evidenced by their Cups. There needs to be a lot more expansion before it makes sense to pay a lot for a good starter.
So, I don't think it'd be impossible. There's little room for error though. And that's IF the three high picks pan out as you're saying they will.
Why I'm not worried about a Stamkos contract:
It's also a big question mark that the Leafs have the 2020 versions of Kopitar, Kane, and Backstrom. While I'm sure each of Matthews, Marner, Nylander will be very good, I doubt each will hit his loftiest projection and thus his highest possible cap hit. In addition, there are hometown discounts, building a winning thing, 2 young stars needing a contract in the same year (so maybe Toews/Kane style matching contracts), etc., that'll likely keep things a bit below those projections.
There might even be a Captain Stamkos making $9.5m on a UFA contract, precedent that skill capitains be the highest paid player, that there's a guy with four 40+ goal seasons making $9.5m on a UFA contract... that's to say, maybe he helps keep star salaries in line.
It's entirely reasonable to think that even with Stamkos at $9m+, the core can be taking up only about ~50% cap in the contending years. That's about in line with perennial contenders built around elite talent.
So, my bottom line is... One of Nylander/Marner/Matthews probably won't turn out to be quite as amazing as we'd all hoped. Given that, adding Stamkos would likely make the Leafs a stronger contender in 3 years. And I want the Leafs to have the best chance possible of winning as many cups possible over the next 7-9 year window. So I'd add him at ~$9.5m.
Last edited:
HellasLEAF
'93 to Infinity
- Sep 14, 2006
- 15,342
- 1,798
I'm only a yes if the cap hit and term are within reason.
Despite what they say, landing the top pick and drafting a franchise C like Mathews should absolutely alter what they do with free agency now.
Despite what they say, landing the top pick and drafting a franchise C like Mathews should absolutely alter what they do with free agency now.
Murphy Blue
Live blue
I can't believe there are actually people in the no-Stamkos camp. Do you guys realize that we're talking about signing Stamkos in free agency? Come on ppl. (anything over 10m is too much)
Kurisu
mad scientist
to the poster who posted above me (mr grieves), I agree. I like all 3 of Matthews, Nylander and Marner but being realistic, 1 of them most likely won't hit the expectations we have for them. They might be very good but not elite. That's why I've been advocating to sign Stamkos as well as he would shelter them as well. Goal scoring is a premium in the league, you can never have too much scoring.
TheLeastOfTheBunch
Franchise Centre
Babcocks Marner
It's a magical time
And this is why some are in the no-Stamkos camp. Many feel he will be asking for 10+.
I guess it all comes down to terms if we get him. It's hard to say Yes, or No.... for the right price, of course. So for now, I restrain on the vote. Support Lou and Co. 100%.
KIWILEAFFAN
Registered User
I will just trust the management group to make the right call if the opportunity exists.
Doesn't really matter what I think, it will not effect the outcome.
It would be good for the team to get him.
If he really wants to be part of what's coming, he would want to do whatever is required financially and positionally in my opinion.
I see this team doing well with or without him over the next few seasons.
Doesn't really matter what I think, it will not effect the outcome.
It would be good for the team to get him.
If he really wants to be part of what's coming, he would want to do whatever is required financially and positionally in my opinion.
I see this team doing well with or without him over the next few seasons.
HEAVY DUTY
Thanks to denial, I’m immortal.
i think signing stamkos for 9.5M-10M per is fair. considering toews and kane make 10.5M each, 9.5M-10M is fair for stamkos. if he wants 11M+, then lou can tell him to take a hike.
Murphy Blue
Live blue
You know I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up coming in around 8.5M, I think that's equally likely as 10.5+
Eternal Leaf
Registered User
I think anything over $10M is too much.
I doubt he'll take anything less than $9.5M, so somewhere in that range should be the goal.
Of course, if he starts asking for ridiculous numbers, you don't sign him.
I doubt he'll take anything less than $9.5M, so somewhere in that range should be the goal.
Of course, if he starts asking for ridiculous numbers, you don't sign him.
Willie Oree
Registered User
I want to look at this objectively and i need both the naysayer and yaysayers to ring in on this. Many are saying Stamkos has fallen off since injury, and that he's no longer a potential 50-60 goal scorer. I'd like to look at his most successful seasons and try to discern what the common thread is vs the season(s) where he hasn't been at his best
2011 - 2012
60G 303 SOG 19.8 SH% 3.69 Shots/Game 0.73 goals/game
2009 - 2010
51G 297 SOG 17.2 SH% 3.62 Shots/Game 0.61 goals/game
2010 - 2011
45G 272 SOG 16.5 SH% 3.13 Shots/Game 0.54 goals/game
2014 - 2015
43G 268 SOG 16 SH% 3.26 Shots/Game 0.52 goals/game
2015 - 2016
36G 216 SOG 16.7 SH% 2.80 Shots/Game 0.46 goals/game
2012 - 2013
25G 124 SOG 20.2 SH% 3.35 Shots/Game 0.67 goals/game *injury season*
Now if you look at these stats, and I know it is simplifying quite a bit, what you see is firstly Stamkos is an efficient goalscorer. (More efficient than even Brett Hull!) The next thing I notice is when Stamkos shoots the puck more he scores a lot, his efficiency is actually higher when he shoots more. The stats also don't change whether he is with Martin St. Louis or not because the year after St. Louis left 2013-14, Stamkos was on pace for his second highest goal tally of his career at 55g.
He had his lowest shots per game average since his rookie year at 2.80 and that while playing the wing for the majority of the season (Killorn and Callahan his linemates...) and first time since his rookie season he finished outside of the top 3 in goals per game(6th).
What can this be attributed to? Has Stammer just forgotten how to score? Clearly not since his shooting % is still otherworldly even during his slow seasons. So is he just not seeing the puck enough? His linemates are Callahan and Killorn who had point totals of 29 and 40 respectively not exactly offensive dynamos! One could argue that this line has absolutely no chemistry whatsoever. And through it all Steven scores 36...
What argument can we make to suggest he's past it?
2011 - 2012
60G 303 SOG 19.8 SH% 3.69 Shots/Game 0.73 goals/game
2009 - 2010
51G 297 SOG 17.2 SH% 3.62 Shots/Game 0.61 goals/game
2010 - 2011
45G 272 SOG 16.5 SH% 3.13 Shots/Game 0.54 goals/game
2014 - 2015
43G 268 SOG 16 SH% 3.26 Shots/Game 0.52 goals/game
2015 - 2016
36G 216 SOG 16.7 SH% 2.80 Shots/Game 0.46 goals/game
2012 - 2013
25G 124 SOG 20.2 SH% 3.35 Shots/Game 0.67 goals/game *injury season*
Now if you look at these stats, and I know it is simplifying quite a bit, what you see is firstly Stamkos is an efficient goalscorer. (More efficient than even Brett Hull!) The next thing I notice is when Stamkos shoots the puck more he scores a lot, his efficiency is actually higher when he shoots more. The stats also don't change whether he is with Martin St. Louis or not because the year after St. Louis left 2013-14, Stamkos was on pace for his second highest goal tally of his career at 55g.
He had his lowest shots per game average since his rookie year at 2.80 and that while playing the wing for the majority of the season (Killorn and Callahan his linemates...) and first time since his rookie season he finished outside of the top 3 in goals per game(6th).
What can this be attributed to? Has Stammer just forgotten how to score? Clearly not since his shooting % is still otherworldly even during his slow seasons. So is he just not seeing the puck enough? His linemates are Callahan and Killorn who had point totals of 29 and 40 respectively not exactly offensive dynamos! One could argue that this line has absolutely no chemistry whatsoever. And through it all Steven scores 36...
What argument can we make to suggest he's past it?
Riellyfan04
Registered User
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
Around the League | We’re off to the (not you, Toronto) 2nd Round!- Latest: SeawaterOnIce
-
-
Upcoming events
-
-
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 9Staked: $11,200.00Event closes- Updated: