Speculation: 2023-2024 General Lightning Discussion - Part 4

[Rschmitz]

Well if he doesn’t Stamkos probably walks because Stamkos is not taking 4 million per season

I understand that. Truth is, Stamkos is not a priority for JBB or he would have signed him before he acquired McDonagh

 

[JTBF81]

Well if he doesn’t Stamkos probably walks because Stamkos is not taking 4 million per season

Not really. I have little doubt that JBB will line up trades for all three of Jeannot, Sheary, and Perbix before he chooses to jettison a player he committed 8 years to playing for him. They'll have 10.825 available after moving all three, which is more than enough for Stamkos at the speculated 5.5-6 range. If Lilleberg and Crozier take the 6 and 7 defensive spots, and Motte re-signs for another year at 900k, the team still 2.1-2.6 available for the last 2 spots. Goncalves or another Crunch promote gets one at 800k, and then JBB finds a ufa for 1.3-1.8. That's the most likely scenario. This offseason the blueline was addressed, and next offseason, if needed, they'll have enough space, provided the cap moves to ~92 million, to address the F group.

 

[DFC]

Not really. I have little doubt that JBB will line up trades for all three of Jeannot, Sheary, and Perbix before he chooses to jettison a player he committed 8 years to playing for him. They'll have 10.825 available after moving all three, which is more than enough for Stamkos at the speculated 5.5-6 range. If Lilleberg and Crozier take the 6 and 7 defensive spots, and Motte re-signs for another year at 900k, the team still 2.1-2.6 available for the last 2 spots. Goncalves or another Crunch promote gets one at 800k, and then JBB finds a ufa for 1.3-1.8. That's the most likely scenario. This offseason the blueline was addressed, and next offseason, if needed, they'll have enough space, provided the cap moves to ~92 million, to address the F group.

< 6 feels really low for Stamkos.

And are you factoring replacement contracts in? If we are replacing those 3 with league min contracts, it's a step backward.

 

[Todd1a]

Not really. I have little doubt that JBB will line up trades for all three of Jeannot, Sheary, and Perbix before he chooses to jettison a player he committed 8 years to playing for him. They'll have 10.825 available after moving all three, which is more than enough for Stamkos at the speculated 5.5-6 range. If Lilleberg and Crozier take the 6 and 7 defensive spots, and Motte re-signs for another year at 900k, the team still 2.1-2.6 available for the last 2 spots. Goncalves or another Crunch promote gets one at 800k, and then JBB finds a ufa for 1.3-1.8. That's the most likely scenario. This offseason the blueline was addressed, and next offseason, if needed, they'll have enough space, provided the cap moves to ~92 million, to address the F group.

What picks do you have to throw in to get rid of the mistakes JBB made on Sheary and jeannot ?

Currently we don’t have a 1st or 2nd in 2025 and in 2024 we don’t have a 1st , 2nd or 3rd

 

[JTBF81]

What picks do you have to throw in to get rid of the mistakes JBB made on Sheary and jeannot ?

Currently we don’t have a 1st or 2nd in 2025 and in 2024 we don’t have a 1st , 2nd or 3rd

They shouldn't have to throw in anything for Jeannot imo. They may not get much, if anything, but they shouldn't have to pay to move him. Sheary shouldn't take more than a 3rd+maybe something small. Until last year he was still a 30-40 point type player. His cap hit if burned is only 850k as well, so not a huge drain. He does have a 16 team ntc, so that could make things a little more difficult, but not impossible. JBB would certainly move a mid round/late round pick if needed.to make the cap work.

 

[JTBF81]

< 6 feels really low for Stamkos.

And are you factoring replacement contracts in? If we are replacing those 3 with league min contracts, it's a step backward.

Yes, and Stamkos was projected at 6.1 in one model. Him taking 5.5 wouldn't be a huge surprise in terms of aav. Yes, I have factored in replacement costs. Perbix is replaced by Crozier and Lilleberg to reach 7 dmen, so there's no downgrade there. Jeannot and Sheary didn't exactly bring much, so replacing them with an 800k Crunch guy and a 1.5-2 million ufa isn't exactly some big loss either.

 

[DFC]

Yes, and Stamkos was projected at 6.1 in one model. Him taking 5.5 wouldn't be a huge surprise in terms of aav. Yes, I have factored in replacement costs. Perbix is replaced by Crozier and Lilleberg to reach 7 dmen, so there's no downgrade there. Jeannot and Sheary didn't exactly bring much, so replacing them with an 800k Crunch guy and a 1.5-2 million ufa isn't exactly some big loss either.

Jeannot and Sheary might not have brought much, but most league min players are going to be actual liabilities, rather than net neutral. We are going to need actual players.

I really don't think Stamkos is taking anything in the neighborhood of 6. We have a 3rd pairing D making 8.5.

 

[JTBF81]

Jeannot and Sheary might not have brought much, but most league min players are going to be actual liabilities, rather than net neutral. We are going to need actual players.

I really don't think Stamkos is taking anything in the neighborhood of 6. We have a 3rd pairing D making 8.5.

Neither Jeannot nor Sheary brought anything. They were both net negatives. Sheary was healthy scratched for the playoffs, and both missed significant time due to injury. I find it difficult, very difficult, to believe any player they replaced them with would be any worse.

If Stamkos wants 7 or 8, more power to him. I'm sure he can get that in ufa from a team, but if he wants to continue in Tampa, it needs to be 5.5-6. Maybe JBB can stretch it to 6.5, but that would be about the absolute max given what Tampa will have after (hopefully) moving Jeannot, Sheary, and maybe Perbix.

I don't see JBB trading any of the main 3 rfa's that were recently extended. If he does, Serg is the only one that makes any sense, at least in the short term. He would have the best trade value, and the space opened, in addition to moving the 2 or 3 lesser value contracts, would allow Tampa to add a Top 4 RD in ufa, likely 2 middle 6 F, and maybe add a little to the aav of Stamkos. I think it could potentially weaken the defense considerably after the next 3 years, but if it's all about win now, then maybe.

 

[Sky04]

Jeannot and Sheary might not have brought much, but most league min players are going to be actual liabilities, rather than net neutral. We are going to need actual players.

I really don't think Stamkos is taking anything in the neighborhood of 6. We have a 3rd pairing D making 8.5.

I don't really understand this logic of "we can keep all our guys if we just keep adding league minimum players!" the point is trying to be competitive right? You're not doing that icing 6-7 league minimum players just to keep bad value contracts. Most of these ideas are just calling for us to ice a bunch of rookies from Syracuse too. Point is to trim the fat not add on scraps.

 

[Todd1a]

 

[Sky04]

I'd be looking at Seattle as a potential trading partner, they have capspace and would be interested in both Cirelli & Sergachev.

Gourde at 50% would look really juicy, same with Adam Larsson next to Hedman.

 

[Felonious Python]

I'd be looking at Seattle as a potential trading partner, they have capspace and would be interested in both Cirelli & Sergachev.

Gourde at 50% would look really juicy, same with Adam Larsson next to Hedman.

Seattle is going for that small market feel. No stars.

 

[Rschmitz]

I don't really understand this logic of "we can keep all our guys if we just keep adding league minimum players!" the point is trying to be competitive right? You're not doing that icing 6-7 league minimum players just to keep bad value contracts. Most of these ideas are just calling for us to ice a bunch of rookies from Syracuse too. Point is to trim the fat not add on scraps.

First off I agree with your point, but I do think Sheary and Jeannot is part of that fat that could be trimmed.

Chaffee:

Sheary:

Jeannot:

Having said that I think trading one of the "big 3" makes the most sense, I just don't see JBB doing it. I give it 60-40 he lets Stamkos walk.

 

[These Are The Days]

I'd be looking at Seattle as a potential trading partner, they have capspace and would be interested in both Cirelli & Sergachev.

Gourde at 50% would look really juicy, same with Adam Larsson next to Hedman.

This is the way. Gourde isn't a dog. He's a "f***ing dog" and constantly finds a way to be disruptive. And if he doesn't, he will purposely start something and be disruptive that way. A very, very poor man's Marchand but same idea. I'd take him in a heartbeat.

I'm imagining him and Hagel together and it is delicious chaos

 

[Rschmitz]

Seattle is going for that small market feel. No stars.

Shane Wright and Matthew Beiners are gonna be stars

 

[Rschmitz]

I'd be looking at Seattle as a potential trading partner, they have capspace and would be interested in both Cirelli & Sergachev.

Gourde at 50% would look really juicy, same with Adam Larsson next to Hedman.

I like both of those guys but they are downgrades and are on the last year of their contracts. What else would we be getting back? If it's just cap space, we can do a lot better.

 

[DFC]

I like both of those guys but they are downgrades and are on the last year of their contracts. What else would we be getting back? If it's just cap space, we can do a lot better.

Yeah I think either Sergachev of Cirelli would get legit returns. Sergachev would be a blockbuster. The way he's viewed around the league is not in line at all with his value to our team. Not saying he isnt valuable, but he's seen as a 1b defenseman. He could be a good offensive #1 defenseman on a bad team. But I think his trade value starts at a 2C.

 

[Todd1a]

First off I agree with your point, but I do think Sheary and Jeannot is part of that fat that could be trimmed.

Chaffee:
View attachment 875929

Sheary:
View attachment 875930

Jeannot:
View attachment 875931

Having said that I think trading one of the "big 3" makes the most sense, I just don't see JBB doing it. I give it 60-40 he lets Stamkos walk.

JBB knew he had around 11-12 million in cap space even before the season started because they had the salary cap projection and it was pretty much dead on .

He had no desire to extend Stamkos out 1 year early so he didn’t make Stamkos a priority at all then last week adds 6.75 million to our salary cap with the McDonogh trade . He was dead set on getting Noah Hanifin this offseason for sure .

So with 5 million in cap space I don’t know what to think anymore

 

[b0lthed]

JT, cmon now. You have summarily dismissed every suggestion that includes trading Cirelli, insisting that there is no scenario that improves the team. Yet somehow, this guy who is so valuable is also not worth an unproven scoring winger like Jack Quinn. Huh? Maybe the Sabres wouldn’t do Peterka for Cirelli, but Quinn fits the bill as a guy with potential who’s on an ELC. If I’m JBB, I’m asking for Peterka and settling for Quinn and a pick. Buffalo fans might not like it but their GM oughta be interested. Cirelli is exactly the kind of proven playoff veteran that is needed by a talented team that can’t get into the playoffs. He sets a tone, physically and defensively and has two rings to prove it. They need to make a move like that and they’ve got plenty of scoring depth to do so.

Meanwhile, please stop naysaying everyone’s ideas for making the Lightning more competitive while you are also suggesting the Bolts should ice Hagel-Cirelli-Paul or Stamkos-Cirelli-Paul as a second line.

Seriously, trade Cirelli for an ascending young forward still on his ELC and use the extra $5M in cap savings to finish off the top6. This is my main point, and I think it might be the best way to improve the team while paying Stamkos between $5-6M. Either trade Cirelli for someone who can play center and sign a scoring wing or trade him for a scorer and sign someone who can play center.

This is the way. JBB did not sound like someone who just addressed his top4 dmen only to turn around and trade Sergachev or Cernak.

 

[CupsOverCash]

Bringing back mcd was probably big for bringing back stamkos too. I think trading cirelli and serg are possibilities because of how much cap it opens up and it would be kind of a retool but with core players still there you can build around that and probably have a chance to actually do what you want with the core rather than just hoping some guys sign at min salary. It's still an attractive place to play but we probably need to pay a little more than min to convince some good players to come now as it's a little later on in our window. However Jbb could easily do a lot more positive change with some more cap to play with. And honestly we have seen this team be successful without some players in the lineup we consider core players. It's what we do with that cap that matters. No doubt Jeannot and sheary should be gone because they just don't contribute much at all. Every little but helps. The cap will go up too I think it's just a time to make some big decisions if we want to extend the window and not be the Chicago Blackhawks and Pittsburgh penguins kind of crash. I want to dominate the panthers in a road to the cup again lol. Hopefully it's done soon because the sooner the better.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Shane Wright and Matthew Beiners are gonna be stars

Beniers is a low end star whose defensive prowess will outshine his offensive inconsistencies.

Wright is trending more in the direction of a 2C who puts up a lot of points but leaves you underwhelmed at times. Comparable to Scheifele.

 

[JTBF81]

JT, cmon now. You have summarily dismissed every suggestion that includes trading Cirelli, insisting that there is no scenario that improves the team. Yet somehow, this guy who is so valuable is also not worth an unproven scoring winger like Jack Quinn. Huh? Maybe the Sabres wouldn’t do Peterka for Cirelli, but Quinn fits the bill as a guy with potential who’s on an ELC. If I’m JBB, I’m asking for Peterka and settling for Quinn and a pick. Buffalo fans might not like it but their GM oughta be interested. Cirelli is exactly the kind of proven playoff veteran that is needed by a talented team that can’t get into the playoffs. He sets a tone, physically and defensively and has two rings to prove it. They need to make a move like that and they’ve got plenty of scoring depth to do so.

Meanwhile, please stop naysaying everyone’s ideas for making the Lightning more competitive while you are also suggesting the Bolts should ice Hagel-Cirelli-Paul or Stamkos-Cirelli-Paul as a second line.

Seriously, trade Cirelli for an ascending young forward still on his ELC and use the extra $5M in cap savings to finish off the top6. This is my main point, and I think it might be the best way to improve the team while paying Stamkos between $5-6M. Either trade Cirelli for someone who can play center and sign a scoring wing or trade him for a scorer and sign someone who can play center.

This is the way. JBB did not sound like someone who just addressed his top4 dmen only to turn around and trade Sergachev or Cernak.

Quinn and a pick downgrades the team now that's in a win now position, but at least it's more fair(depending on the pick), than most offers on here. Quinn has also had some significant injury problems already in his young career, and the last thing the team needs is another player with injury problems. Also, don't tell me how I can think or post on a public forum full of opinions. Thanks!

If the team wants to trade one of the big names, gain the most space and return, all while actually improving the team, it's clearly Serg that should be going. In the end, I don't see JBB moving any of them, though. The roster works fine with a top 6 of Stamkos-Point-Kuch and Hagel-Cirelli-Paul or keep Paul at 3C and either try someone from Syracuse with Hagel-Cirelli or a 1.5-2 million ufa up there. There's going to be at least one spot in the top 9 that's not as strong this season regardless, so be it. That's what happens when JBB overspend on the dman acquisition this offseason instead of the 4-5 he likely should have.

Even if the team moved all three of Jeannot, Sheary, and Cirelli, they'd have 15.935 available. Stamkos eats 6-7 based on most people's thinking, so now the team the team 8.9-9.9 left, the 7th dman takes another 870k, so now 8-9 for 4 forwards to reach a 22 player roster. If Motte is re-signed, or someone else in that range, there's another 900k-1 million, so now 7-8 million for 3 guys, They are now still missing two top 6 spots instead of one, and still need a 3rd line addition, or if Paul is on line 2, 1 top 6 and 2 3rd liners. If a prospect of some kind takes one of those spots(say from the supposed Cirelli trade), they now have low 6.x to low 7.x available(depending on the Stamkos aav). All they really "gain" from trading their current 2C is instead of Cirelli and a 1.5-2 million player plus an 800-900k prospect/additional ufa, is for w guys in the 3-3.5 range, one of which has to replace Cirelli. I don't see the upgrade as being worth losing Cirelli over, especially not long term when Cirelli is now entering his prime years and actually showed improvement to his offense this past season.

 

[Felonious Python]

Shane Wright and Matthew Beiners are gonna be stars

Seattle's got to have the star power of Columbus, Carolina, or Anaheim.

The Kraken could only wish they were Winnipeg.

 

[JTBF81]

For example, trading Sergachev likely returns the equivalent of 2 1sts between picks and prospects, and moving out Jeannot, Perbix and Sheary in addition leaves the team over 19 million in space. There are a fair number of RD that could be entering ufa(if Tampa didn't acquire the rights to one in the trade) to sign in the ~4.5 range. Any one of DeMelo, Tanev, Walker, Roy, or Chatfield would boost the right side(all but Roy in this price range more than likely) and still give Tampa a solid top 4. They'd have enough to re-sign Stamkos in the 6 range, make the other replacements with the lower cost dmen(Lilleberg and Crozier in this case) and 2 F(Motte+one additional 800k type), and still have enough for 2 3-3.5 million middle 6 adds, with exact cap availability dependent on the Stamkos and new RD aav.

So, by trading Sergacbev, the path is there to get the likely best return possible for the future, still add help at RD(although granted not quite as good as what Sergachev could be if he hits his ceiling), and help the top 9 F group. Again, I don't see any of the 3 more recent larger extensions ultimately getting moved, but if actually improving the team the most, both now and possibly long term(depending on how the assets from the Serg trade pan out/are used), then if one has to go it should be Serg.

 

[Stammertime91]

JT, cmon now. You have summarily dismissed every suggestion that includes trading Cirelli, insisting that there is no scenario that improves the team. Yet somehow, this guy who is so valuable is also not worth an unproven scoring winger like Jack Quinn. Huh? Maybe the Sabres wouldn’t do Peterka for Cirelli, but Quinn fits the bill as a guy with potential who’s on an ELC. If I’m JBB, I’m asking for Peterka and settling for Quinn and a pick. Buffalo fans might not like it but their GM oughta be interested. Cirelli is exactly the kind of proven playoff veteran that is needed by a talented team that can’t get into the playoffs. He sets a tone, physically and defensively and has two rings to prove it. They need to make a move like that and they’ve got plenty of scoring depth to do so.

Meanwhile, please stop naysaying everyone’s ideas for making the Lightning more competitive while you are also suggesting the Bolts should ice Hagel-Cirelli-Paul or Stamkos-Cirelli-Paul as a second line.

Seriously, trade Cirelli for an ascending young forward still on his ELC and use the extra $5M in cap savings to finish off the top6. This is my main point, and I think it might be the best way to improve the team while paying Stamkos between $5-6M. Either trade Cirelli for someone who can play center and sign a scoring wing or trade him for a scorer and sign someone who can play center.

This is the way. JBB did not sound like someone who just addressed his top4 dmen only to turn around and trade Sergachev or Cernak.

It's honestly reminiscent of the guy that defended Callahan at all costs, only to later find out Callahan was a personal client of his and then it all made sense.

Quinn and a pick downgrades the team now that's in a win now position, but at least it's more fair(depending on the pick), than most offers on here. Quinn has also had some significant injury problems already in his young career, and the last thing the team needs is another player with injury problems. Also, don't tell me how I can think or post on a public forum full of opinions. Thanks!

If the team wants to trade one of the big names, gain the most space and return, all while actually improving the team, it's clearly Serg that should be going. In the end, I don't see JBB moving any of them, though. The roster works fine with a top 6 of Stamkos-Point-Kuch and Hagel-Cirelli-Paul or keep Paul at 3C and either try someone from Syracuse with Hagel-Cirelli or a 1.5-2 million ufa up there. There's going to be at least one spot in the top 9 that's not as strong this season regardless, so be it. That's what happens when JBB overspend on the dman acquisition this offseason instead of the 4-5 he likely should have.

Even if the team moved all three of Jeannot, Sheary, and Cirelli, they'd have 15.935 available. Stamkos eats 6-7 based on most people's thinking, so now the team the team 8.9-9.9 left, the 7th dman takes another 870k, so now 8-9 for 4 forwards to reach a 22 player roster. If Motte is re-signed, or someone else in that range, there's another 900k-1 million, so now 7-8 million for 3 guys, They are now still missing two top 6 spots instead of one, and still need a 3rd line addition, or if Paul is on line 2, 1 top 6 and 2 3rd liners. If a prospect of some kind takes one of those spots(say from the supposed Cirelli trade), they now have low 6.x to low 7.x available(depending on the Stamkos aav). All they really "gain" from trading their current 2C is instead of Cirelli and a 1.5-2 million player plus an 800-900k prospect/additional ufa, is for w guys in the 3-3.5 range, one of which has to replace Cirelli. I don't see the upgrade as being worth losing Cirelli over, especially not long term when Cirelli is now entering his prime years and actually showed improvement to his offense this past season.

There's no legitimate finisher on the second line. It's all two way forwards that lack a playmaker unless Hagel takes that role and feeds elite sniper Anthony Cirelli. Cirelli and Stamkos are lousy. You admitted Paul and Stamkos are garbo together. So, if it's not precisely Stamkos that is the problem and you load up one scoring line because at least he's good enough to warrant putting there, where does the offense come from on the bottom nine? Lol. Not to mention now you're recommending someone from Syracuse to play in the top 6 or someone in the 1.5-2 million range that *you* repeatedly denied would be an improvement by any stretch over Cirelli. You said "no thanks" and "I doubt that would work" when I gave you 3-4M range guys. Lol. But now suddenly someone like Lafferty/Sheary is going to log +16mins a night and mesh? Those guys are 20-30pt guys and unproven commodities like "someone from Syracuse" that's suddenly going to jump into the NHL under the radar and play a top 6 role? Goncalves and Groshev were your picks, those two? Lol.

You are literally contradicting yourself by the day on how to improve the team without possibly stating that moving Cirelli is a logical option and quite reasonable seeing as a forward making half of what he makes can fill his shoes. Hell, the winger you want to pair him with outscores him by 20-30 points only makes 250k more - which he deserves.

Aaaaaannddddd circling back to my point from a week ago, Anthony Cirelli has been and still remains a luxury on this team. Others can claim the same about Sergachev and while I would rather see us move Cirelli before Sergachev at this point, I would also agree with that assessment. Both are luxuries that if allocating their AAV to areas of need, such as middle six wingers, would be much more wisely spent. People seem to forget without Cirelli, we have three centers capable of hitting over 20 goals, two hitting +40 goals, and two out of those three (Stamkos & Paul) are much better on the draw than Cirelli (56% and 54% to Cirelli's 49%). What the hell does a $6.25M player at this point have in his arsenal that team defense couldn't mask when production is matched and exceeded by players half his cap hit?

*Also, even if Paul has a "down" year and nets 15g 15a 30pts, at least he's paid his worth and living up to it. If he wasn't streaky for a third of the year, he would've hit 30 at 3M. That's f***ing wild that anybody can still defend non-Selke Cirelli at this point when we are talking cutthroat to move players and make the team better. Like, I love the guy. He is the epitome of a hockey player, but I would absolutely be on Stamkos' ass (like I have plenty of times) when he's playing subpar or any player isn't worth his cap hit. This isn't new, either. This is yearly Cirelli. We have Hagel now who is far superior offensively. We are better off putting Stamkos at center with Hagel on his wing and grabbing a legitimate winger to play top 6. That is precisely the case I have been making for a week.