Confirmed with Link: The Stamkos Dream is Dead - He re-signs with Tampa Bay for 8 Years

[Daisy Jane]

I think upset is probably the wrong word. We have a lot to look forward to here in Toronto. But I'd say my perspective on Stamkos has soured somewhat because he didn't want to embrace the Leafs, and I'm not overly eager to discuss the possibility of Tavares, Seguin or anybody like that from a "hometown" angle. If we're addressing a positional need like a Subban, go and look into it, but I'm not that interested in the prodigal son storyline anymore.

right. like. the Stamkos thing was intriguing because of all the little bread crumbs. and there are some variables - ie: if he won the cup instead of Chicago, would he be more inclined to be "whatever, i've won, now i can help Toronto win." or if we weren't 30th - - say we were... 10th-14thish - do we look "close" to being playoff ready. and if the rumour was true (though it's a rumour in this city which means bumpkis now) - we offered Stamkos pretty much the same thing that Yzerman offered. 5 years 8.5 m. So with that - why not stay in Tampa for that (and he got the extra few years so good for him).

like Seguin's always said that Toronto wasn't for him , Tavares flat out said he wants to stay with the Islanders until his career is over. Subban laughed it off last summer... like. whatever. that storyline is dead. what it ALSO means is for me as a fan - don't come as you said, Ray Borque-ing it over here to try to win a cup if y'all don't come close. Or "Oh i want to fill my dream now that i'm all fulfilled in life." this isn't a Make a Wish set up over here. either you can contirbute when it matters and wear the jersey, or you can go to Sportscheck, and make due with the rest of us. no need for hand-me-downs anymore.

 

[Stephen]

right. like. the Stamkos thing was intriguing because of all the little bread crumbs. and there are some variables - ie: if he won the cup instead of Chicago, would he be more inclined to be "whatever, i've won, now i can help Toronto win." or if we weren't 30th - - say we were... 10th-14thish - do we look "close" to being playoff ready. and if the rumour was true (though it's a rumour in this city which means bumpkis now) - we offered Stamkos pretty much the same thing that Yzerman offered. 5 years 8.5 m. So with that - why not stay in Tampa for that (and he got the extra few years so good for him).

like Seguin's always said that Toronto wasn't for him , Tavares flat out said he wants to stay with the Islanders until his career is over. Subban laughed it off last summer... like. whatever. that storyline is dead. what it ALSO means is for me as a fan - don't come as you said, Ray Borque-ing it over here to try to win a cup if y'all don't come close. Or "Oh i want to fill my dream now that i'm all fulfilled in life." this isn't a Make a Wish set up over here. either you can contirbute when it matters and wear the jersey, or you can go to Sportscheck, and make due with the rest of us. no need for hand-me-downs anymore.

Yep, it's not fantasy camp and being a Leaf will one day be serious business. No room for making dreams come true for aged passengers!

 

[HoweHullOrr]

many people were interested in Stamkos - but a a lot of those people also flat out said that it was a YAY if we got him and a whatever if we didn't. so I am really not getting the back flips, and the hard turns. that a lot of people were seeing.

There was plenty of scorn and vitriol against people who even hinted that they didn't think it was a wise idea. Now its just "whatever", and/or no big deal from many of those same people.

I could dig up stuff and/or say more, but its too much work, and it will just earn the wrath of the mods - definitely not worth it.

Hence, its far better to say UFA players either don't even hit the market, or ultimately they stick with their team. You (not literally you, just figuratively) probably don't need thousands of posts and hundreds of pages when you've digested that fact.

 

[Mad Brills*]

Leafs were interested, lou admitted that today, and they reportedly offered 5 years due to health concerns.

Thems the breaks.

 

[Mess]

Leafs were interested, lou admitted that today, and they reportedly offered 5 years due to health concerns.

Thems the breaks.

Toronto offered him 5 years so 8 years was a no brainer to return to TB where he really wanted to be anyways.

Leafs helped him greatly in deciding what was best for him.

 

[Stephen]

There was plenty of scorn and vitriol against people who even hinted that they didn't think it was a wise idea. Now its just "whatever", and/or no big deal from many of those same people.

If Stamkos isn't going to come, you have to say "screw it". That doesn't mean trying to add him is a bad idea all of a sudden.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

If Stamkos isn't going to come, you have to say "screw it". That doesn't mean trying to add him is a bad idea all of a sudden.

Your offering your opinion that its "not a bad idea" which is OK. But, that's what it is, an "opinion". And, its not "all of a sudden", at least for some.

And for some, he was either highly unlikely to come here, or he wasn't come here at all ever.

You (not literally you, just figuratively) probably don't need thousands of posts and hundreds of pages when you've digested that fact.

 

[Suntouchable13]

Leafs were interested, lou admitted that today, and they reportedly offered 5 years due to health concerns.

Thems the breaks.

That's not even a competitive offer. No wonder he decided to take Tampa's offer and re-sign there.

 

[Daisy Jane]

That's not even a competitive offer. No wonder he decided to take Tampa's offer and re-sign there.

that's the exact same offer that yzerman gave him in Dec.
the 8 years came when Stamkos accepted the 8.5. (that was never on that table until Wednesday).

 

[Legion34]

Toronto offered him 5 years so 8 years was a no brainer to return to TB where he really wanted to be anyways.

Leafs helped him greatly in deciding what was best for him.

Is there a link to that? Would be cool to see. I like that we held to
Our termS and he didnt take it. So be it

 

[AlmightyPO]

Leafs were interested, lou admitted that today, and they reportedly offered 5 years due to health concerns.

Thems the breaks.

That is interesting, when did Lou say that? Any links or transcripts?

Doesn't surprise me though, they must have been even more skeptical than most of the people here.

 

[Heart]

right. like. the Stamkos thing was intriguing because of all the little bread crumbs. and there are some variables - ie: if he won the cup instead of Chicago, would he be more inclined to be "whatever, i've won, now i can help Toronto win." or if we weren't 30th - - say we were... 10th-14thish - do we look "close" to being playoff ready. and if the rumour was true (though it's a rumour in this city which means bumpkis now) - we offered Stamkos pretty much the same thing that Yzerman offered. 5 years 8.5 m. So with that - why not stay in Tampa for that (and he got the extra few years so good for him).

Butkus, and yes I agree with you; screw these home growns, free agency isn't the way anyways. I'm sure this just drives home the point of draft and develop even further.

 

[Daisy Jane]

That is interesting, when did Lou say that? Any links or transcripts?

Doesn't surprise me though, they must have been even more skeptical than most of the people here.

Lou wouldn't tell you if the sun was rising in the east and setting in the west. but it's floating out there. it may/may not be true. but - and this is just my conspiracy theory here - I personally believe - and always had, that it was between Toronto & Tampa. everyone else could have made offers, but I never once felt that Steve was going out money chasing and all of that jazz - but I do think considering our position we had to pay more. and going by a lot of people here - they would have been prepared to pay for it.

if the rumoured amount was 8.5x5 (the exact same as Tampa), then all of a sudden it's, i can play for a "discount" and be a cup favourite, or I can play for a discount and really have a harder go at it. with his leg, coming close (and not winning) and the clots, he chose, the easier path.

and the fact that Lou looked kinda disgusted when he said he felt that way too much money was spent today - it seems to me he's not going to be overpaying anyone - or rather, without just cause or reason. ultimately, he felt that Stamkos wasn't worth just cause. then Yzerman kicked in the 8th year because Stamkos capitulated on the 8.5 (tampa's original offer was 5-6 years and 8.25 - so a slight cave in on both sides, easy peasy).

 

[AlmightyPO]

Lou wouldn't tell you if the sun was rising in the east and setting in the west. but it's floating out there. it may/may not be true. but - and this is just my conspiracy theory here - I personally believe - and always had, that it was between Toronto & Tampa. everyone else could have made offers, but I never once felt that Steve was going out money chasing and all of that jazz - but I do think considering our position we had to pay more. and going by a lot of people here - they would have been prepared to pay for it.

if the rumoured amount was 8.5x5 (the exact same as Tampa), then all of a sudden it's, i can play for a "discount" and be a cup favourite, or I can play for a discount and really have a harder go at it. with his leg, coming close (and not winning) and the clots, he chose, the easier path.

and the fact that Lou looked kinda disgusted when he said he felt that way too much money was spent today - it seems to me he's not going to be overpaying anyone - or rather, without just cause or reason. ultimately, he felt that Stamkos wasn't worth just cause. then Yzerman kicked in the 8th year because Stamkos capitulated on the 8.5 (tampa's original offer was 5-6 years and 8.25 - so a slight cave in on both sides, easy peasy).

Great summary, thanks!

Honestly I always thought it was only between us and Tampa as well. Might just be my Toronto bias talking though haha.

I figured management would be careful with Stamkos but thought they would at least offer max length. Not doubting them though, I bet they did lots of looking into his health issues and determined he was a risk, much like many of the posters here brought up.

Either way I am glad management didn't get swept up in the madness that is FA and stuck to their plan. As much as I wanted Stamkos (and still think 7 years would have been fine) I trust their decision and it is very reassuring to see they are willing to stay the course.

 

[Stephen]

Your offering your opinion that its "not a bad idea" which is OK. But, that's what it is, an "opinion". And, its not "all of a sudden", at least for some.

And for some, he was either highly unlikely to come here, or he wasn't come here at all ever.

You (not literally you, just figuratively) probably don't need thousands of posts and hundreds of pages when you've digested that fact.

I really don't understand what you're trying to say.

 

[BayStreetBully]

Toronto offered him 5 years so 8 years was a no brainer to return to TB where he really wanted to be anyways.

Leafs helped him greatly in deciding what was best for him.

Well, there you go. I had an inkling Tampa was Stamkos' 2nd choice, and Toronto was his 1st choice.

You can piece the puzzle together here that he went back to Tampa once he realized Toronto wasn't going to give him a good offer. It doesn't matter how badly you want to play for your hometown if you don't get the recognition you feel you deserve. Stamkos will interpret a 5 year offer as a matter of being denied "recognition" or "respect", for lack of a better term. Had we offered a 7 year deal, it sounds like he would've been ours.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Toronto offered him 5 years so 8 years was a no brainer to return to TB where he really wanted to be anyways.

I am skeptical of that. They had to know that was a non-competitive offer.

If true though, the idea they offered Stamkos one more year than Matt Martin would be pretty damn hilarious.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

I think upset is probably the wrong word. We have a lot to look forward to here in Toronto. But I'd say my perspective on Stamkos has soured somewhat because he didn't want to embrace the Leafs, and I'm not overly eager to discuss the possibility of Tavares, Seguin or anybody like that from a "hometown" angle. If we're addressing a positional need like a Subban, go and look into it, but I'm not that interested in the prodigal son storyline anymore.

I hope fellow Leafs fans follow in your footsteps. Enough of the hometown stuff. Lets actually build a winner like every other organization has instead of relying on home town superstars to leave good things to come and save the franchise.

 

[BayStreetBully]

I am skeptical of that. They had to know that was a non-competitive offer.

If true though, the idea they offered Stamkos one more year than Matt Martin would be pretty damn hilarious.

If true, perhaps they were comfortable with up to 5 years because it's less of a cap commitment for a player they aren't that crazy about.

If true, that would have to be Toronto's way of saying "we tried" without not really trying. And if Stamkos were to accept the 5 year offer, then even better.

Now with that said, where is this idea coming from that the Leafs only offered 5 years?

 

[HoweHullOrr]

If Stamkos isn't going to come, you have to say "screw it". That doesn't mean trying to add him is a bad idea all of a sudden.

Your offering your opinion that its "not a bad idea" which is OK. But, that's what it is, an "opinion". And, its not "all of a sudden", at least for some.

And for some, he was either highly unlikely to come here, or he wasn't come here at all ever.

You (not literally you, just figuratively) probably don't need thousands of posts and hundreds of pages when you've digested that fact.

I really don't understand what you're trying to say.

I'm debating the "bad idea" versus "good idea" point that you identified just recently, and that was also roundly debated for a long time.

Let's examine what reportedly happened.

Lou and company were offering a 5-year deal. Based on their actions, it appears (i.e., logical deduction) that they thought that having Stamkos on a large contract when he was 30 years of age and older was not a good idea. Bad idea and bad timing you'd think (conclude) .....?

Looks like the people that talked about that were aligned to the Lou/Shanny's thinking.

Then, there is the CBA rule that his current team can offer him a 8-year deal, which is a large advantage to the current team. It's long odds thinking that a player like this will sign elsewhere.

When you add it up, maybe its was neither a great idea, and/or very likely. Even Babcock made a a statement about this to the press.

Yet, people in the nay camp were scorned and heavily criticized by the pro Stamkos camp. Looks like they were right all along.

It makes it even more ironic given the vitriol that was thrown at those that were not in favour of acquiring Stamkos.

Same thing happened in the Kessel bidding wars/sweepstakes debate. Looks like the people that were skeptical of that were also correct ..... again. Trend maybe ......

 

[Stephen]

I'm debating the "bad idea" versus "good idea" point that you identified just recently, and that was also roundly debated for a long time.

Let's examine what reportedly happened.

Lou and company were offering a 5-year deal. Based on their actions, it appears (i.e., logical deduction) that they thought that having Stamkos on a large contract when he was 30 years of age and older was not a good idea. Bad idea and bad timing you'd think (conclude) .....?

Looks like the people that talked about that were aligned to the Lou/Shanny's thinking.

Then, there is the CBA rule that his current team can offer him a 8-year deal, which is a large advantage to the current team. It's long odds thinking that a player like this will sign elsewhere.

When you add it up, maybe its was neither a great idea, and/or very likely. Even Babcock made a a statement about this to the press.

Yet, people in the nay camp were scorned and heavily criticized by the pro Stamkos camp. Looks like they were right all along.

It makes it even more ironic given the vitriol that was thrown at those that were not in favour of acquiring Stamkos.

Lou Lamoriello's actions has no bearing on whether going all in on Stamkos would have been a good decision or not because that's Leafs management's evaluation.

The true indicator of whether or not they should have made a more competitive bid is Stamkos' performance over the next 8 years. If he factors heavily in some Tampa Bay championships, scores 50 goals on a number of occasions and is completely healthy, then you'll know the No camp is wrong. If he's Nathan Horton by 2018, then the yes camp is wrong.

 

[Pookie]

I'm debating the "bad idea" versus "good idea" point that you identified just recently, and that was also roundly debated for a long time.

Let's examine what reportedly happened.

Lou and company were offering a 5-year deal. Based on their actions, it appears (i.e., logical deduction) that they thought that having Stamkos on a large contract when he was 30 years of age and older was not a good idea. Bad idea and bad timing you'd think (conclude) .....?

Looks like the people that talked about that were aligned to the Lou/Shanny's thinking.

Then, there is the CBA rule that his current team can offer him a 8-year deal, which is a large advantage to the current team. It's long odds thinking that a player like this will sign elsewhere.

When you add it up, maybe its was neither a great idea, and/or very likely. Even Babcock made a a statement about this to the press.

Yet, people in the nay camp were scorned and heavily criticized by the pro Stamkos camp. Looks like they were right all along.

It makes it even more ironic given the vitriol that was thrown at those that were not in favour of acquiring Stamkos.

Same thing happened in the Kessel bidding wars/sweepstakes debate. Looks like the people that were skeptical of that were also correct ..... again. Trend maybe ......

Yup

Thing is, (some) people want to see themselves as right and everyone else as wrong and worse, inferior when it comes to hockey knowledge.

I am sure (some) people have a clouded vision of what I was saying. I found it frustrating, as I do other topics here, because (some) people tell you what you are saying never responding to what is actually said.

Eg, I was a "joke" for predicting Stamkos wouldn't sign here.

Except a) I never predicted anything other than to say he's got a lot of reason to stay. Predictions are ridiculous and only serve to allow an ego serving person to say I told you so while ignoring everything else they have got wrong.

And b) my main point was that I felt a lengthy contract was a bad thing when the ELCs burn out and Rielly needs a deal to keep him from UFA status.

Now, as it turns out, seems like myself and others were thinking the same way that the management team was. Long term was risky, let's not risk a good thing we've started.

Lou's a genius and I'll bet that myself and others are still going to get the "joke" label on the next issue. Yet the point is the same.

In the end, it's too bad but I certainly wouldn't recommend getting ones confidence and self worth from keyboard warriors on the Internet. We know who they are. Water off a ducks back when the comments come.

There are some good discussions here (and some good trading of barbs at times). But the audience you are trying to reach won't change.

Accept and move on I guess.

 

[Stephen]

Yup

Thing is, (some) people want to see themselves as right and everyone else as wrong and worse, inferior when it comes to hockey knowledge.

I am sure (some) people have a clouded vision of what I was saying. I found it frustrating, as I do other topics here, because (some) people tell you what you are saying never responding to what is actually said.

Eg, I was a "joke" for predicting Stamkos wouldn't sign here.

Except a) I never predicted anything other than to say he's got a lot of reason to stay. Predictions are ridiculous and only serve to allow an ego serving person to say I told you so while ignoring everything else they have got wrong.

And b) my main point was that I felt a lengthy contract was a bad thing when the ELCs burn out and Rielly needs a deal to keep him from UFA status.

Now, as it turns out, seems like myself and others were thinking the same way that the management team was. Long term was risky, let's not risk a good thing we've started.

Lou's a genius and I'll bet that myself and others are still going to get the "joke" label on the next issue. Yet the point is the same.

In the end, it's too bad but I certainly wouldn't recommend getting ones confidence and self worth from keyboard warriors on the Internet. We know who they are. Water off a ducks back when the comments come.

There are some good discussions here (and some good trading of barbs at times). But the audience you are trying to reach won't change.

Accept and move on I guess.

Stamkos didn't come here and we all have to move on, but that doesn't mean we actually know how he'll perform over the life of that new contract.

If he repeats his last few seasons for the life of the contract and doesn't win anything in Tampa while being a major contributor, it's meh value.

If he declines or suffers more injuries and misses significant time, Lou and you will be proved correct.

If he returns to his 50 goal scoring ways on a number of occasions and the Lightning win the cup once or twice and the Lightning destroy the Leafs year after year, then that will mean Lou should have tried harder and you were wrong.

This is an 8 year prop bet.

 

[Pookie]

Stamkos didn't come here and we all have to move on, but that doesn't mean we actually know how he'll perform over the life of that new contract.

If he repeats his last few seasons for the life of the contract and doesn't win anything in Tampa while being a major contributor, it's meh value.

If he declines or suffers more injuries and misses significant time, Lou and you will be proved correct.

If he returns to his 50 goal scoring ways on a number of occasions and the Lightning win the cup once or twice and the Lightning destroy the Leafs year after year, then that will mean Lou should have tried harder and you were wrong.

This is an 8 year prop bet.

Not sure what you are arguing or trying to debate here...?

Based on the all the risk reward parameters and mix them with Stamkos' own factors, both parties moved on.

You make decisions based on the information you have at the time. Looking at things in the rearview is a hell of a way to think yourself into a life of couldas and shouldas. I wouldn't recommend it.

 

[Stephen]

Not sure what you are arguing or trying to debate here...?

Based on the all the risk reward parameters and mix them with Stamkos' own factors, both parties moved on.

You make decisions based on the information you have at the time. Looking at things in the rearview is a hell of a way to think yourself into a life of couldas and shouldas. I wouldn't recommend it.

Howehullorr is trying to use Lou's thought process as confirmation that your side's multidimensional naysaying was the correct take on the matter, but the real proof is Stamkos' real production over the next 8 years.