Let us Dream: Steven Stamkos to Toronto 2016/2017

[ACC1224]

Crosby first signed a contract worth $8.7M a year in 08/09, which was worth 15.35% of the $56.7M cap that year.

His current contract, still worth $8.7M a year, kicked in in 2013/14, and was worth 13.53% of the $64.3M cap.

This year, his contract will be worth 12.18% of the $71.4M cap.

Thanks.
The 15.35% on todays cap would translate to around 11M.

 

[TheProspector]

Stamkos is not the type of 1C who makes his teammates markedly better. He's still an elite player, but he's a shoot-first centerman, or a winger if you will who happens to be good at faceoffs.

Seems like you are annointing him the next great #1C for us, when in fact, he'd likely be more of a winger for us who occasionally takes faceoffs, but routinely ends up having way more goals than assists.

We should be more excited at the potential for Marner to become a Giroux-type 1C than have Stamkos the saviour come here to be a #1 Winger.

He's definitely not a stellar possession driver. He actually has a lower impact on linemates corsi for % than Phil Kessel.

I'd honestly rather have Tyler Johnson, who is nearly as productive, but a much better possession driver, and better defensively.

 

[IBeL34f]

Thanks.
The 15.35% on todays cap would translate to around 11M.

Yep, at the time it was a massive contract. I amended my last post as well to show that by the time that contract ended, it was worth 12.39% of the cap, already proving to be a much more reasonable deal. But he clearly cares more about that 87 than he does about a true value-based contract.

His current contract is one of the few remaining "cap circumvention" deals, and doesn't expire until 2025/26. I'd imagine by that time it will be under 10% of his team's cap space.

 

[IFK]

Pure goal scorers like Stamkos age much faster. They usually peak in their early to mid 20's.

Teemu Selänne, Brett Hull, Mike Gartner, Luc Robitaille, Brendan Shanahan, Dave Andreychuk and Jarome Iginla says HI!

 

[Stephen]

Stamkos is not the type of 1C who makes his teammates markedly better. He's still an elite player, but he's a shoot-first centerman, or a winger if you will who happens to be good at faceoffs.

Seems like you are annointing him the next great #1C for us, when in fact, he'd likely be more of a winger for us who occasionally takes faceoffs, but routinely ends up having way more goals than assists.

We should be more excited at the potential for Marner to become a Giroux-type 1C than have Stamkos the saviour come here to be a #1 Winger.

Yeah but we also have Marner and Nylander who look like those dynamic puck possession types, so what better way to augment their abilities than to give them one of the most dynamic finishers in the game? Let Marner be the new Marty St. Louis for Stamkos.

We don't need Stamkos to be the savior, but we can add him to our emerging core.

 

[Gary Nylund]

He's definitely not a stellar possession driver. He actually has a lower impact on linemates corsi for % than Phil Kessel.

I'd honestly rather have Tyler Johnson, who is nearly as productive, but a much better possession driver, and better defensively.

I'm a bit surprised that nobody has jumped all over you (yet) for comparing him to Kessel but those defensive metrics do look pretty awful.

 

[Menzinger]

At the end of the day, how much better is Stamkos than Kessel?

Most would (correctly) say he's the better player, at least offensively. But is he worth 4 million more per season than what Kessel already brought to the team?

 

[ACC1224]

At the end of the day, how much better is Stamkos than Kessel?

Most would (correctly) say he's the better player, at least offensively. But is he worth 4 million more per season than what Kessel already brought to the team?

Assuming he signs for 4 million more, seems like a lot.

He certainly brings a lot more to the table than Kessel did, IMO.

 

[Stephen]

At the end of the day, how much better is Stamkos than Kessel?

Most would (correctly) say he's the better player, at least offensively. But is he worth 4 million more per season than what Kessel already brought to the team?

That's an interesting question.

One thing to consider is he had a very poor season by his own standards, and yet scored 5-6 more goals than Kessel's career high. So there's the purely production based comparison.

Another thing to consider is what made Kessel a bad contract at $8 for the next 7 years? Was flirting with 40 goals the issue? To me, it was the likelihood of rapid physical decline coupled with a rotten apple personality the organization is trying to distance itself from.

So for me, if I'm paying between 2-4 million more for Stamkos, I'd be betting on getting more goals, more longevity, better work habits.

 

[Gary Nylund]

That's an interesting question.

One thing to consider is he had a very poor season by his own standards, and yet scored 5-6 more goals than Kessel's career high. So there's the purely production based comparison.

Another thing to consider is what made Kessel a bad contract at $8 for the next 7 years? Was flirting with 40 goals the issue? To me, it was the likelihood of rapid physical decline coupled with a rotten apple personality the organization is trying to distance itself from.

So for me, if I'm paying between 2-4 million more for Stamkos, I'd be betting on getting more goals, more longevity, better work habits.

Consider goals only, ignore assists. Gee I wonder why?

 

[IBeL34f]

Consider goals only, ignore assists. Gee I wonder why?

Well, goal scoring is really the only upgrade on production that Stamkos provides. Kessel's been pretty consistently a better playmaker than Stamkos, a trait that was always quite underrated.

Unless that's your point, in which case, my bad.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Well, goal scoring is really the only upgrade on production that Stamkos provides. Kessel's been pretty consistently a better playmaker than Stamkos, a trait that was always quite underrated.

Unless that's your point, in which case, my bad.

Yeah my point was the the poster I was responding to isn't even trying to be objective (he is even willing to pay Stamkos 14m for 4 years) so ...

The Kessel situation became a circus so just having that over with is a good thing. As far just play on the ice, I would take Stamoks over Kessel but I don't think the difference is enormous and they are somewhat similar players (good offence, poor defence).

And I agree, Kessel's playmaking is under-rated. Some people think all he can do is skate fast and shoot but he thinks the game with the best of them when it comes to offence.

 

[ACC1224]

Yeah my point was the the poster I was responding to isn't even trying to be objective (he is even willing to pay Stamkos 14m for 4 years) so ...

The Kessel situation became a circus so just having that over with is a good thing. As far just play on the ice, I would take Stamoks over Kessel but I don't think the difference is enormous and they are somewhat similar players (good offence, poor defence).

And I agree, Kessel's playmaking is under-rated. Some people think all he can do is skate fast and shoot but he thinks the game with the best of them when it comes to offence.

I thought the biggest issue everyone had with Kessel was his compete level.
Is that not something Stamkos has a decided edge on Kessel?

 

[IBeL34f]

I do think the Kessel thing is important to bring up when talking about bringing in a new big offensive fish.

Kessel did nothing but produce his entire time in Toronto and people absolutely blasted him. I had my criticisms as well, I'm not trying to say he was without fault. But he wasn't seen as the guy who could put the team on his back and carry them, lead them. Combined with a lack of intensity in other aspects of the game, it makes sense to me that people don't want him as "the guy" on such a large contract when we can't provide him with the proper support.

Does Stamkos offer all of the things Kessel didn't, is he the guy that you can build your Championship team around? Yes, he's one of the best players in the League, but what we need to ask ourselves before bringing in any elite players from now on is whether or not he's one of the best franchise cornerstones in the League.

If yes, bring him in. If not, don't.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I thought the biggest issue everyone had with Kessel was his compete level.
Is that not something Stamkos has a decided edge on Kessel?

People seem to have many issues with Kessel. Some of the are legit, some are overblown. But yes, I think it's fair to say Stamkos does have an edge there.

I do think the Kessel thing is important to bring up when talking about bringing in a new big offensive fish.

Kessel did nothing but produce his entire time in Toronto and people absolutely blasted him. I had my criticisms as well, I'm not trying to say he was without fault. But he wasn't seen as the guy who could put the team on his back and carry them, lead them. Combined with a lack of intensity in other aspects of the game, it makes sense to me that people don't want him as "the guy" on such a large contract when we can't provide him with the proper support.

Does Stamkos offer all of the things Kessel didn't, is he the guy that you can build your Championship team around? Yes, he's one of the best players in the League, but what we need to ask ourselves before bringing in any elite players from now on is whether or not he's one of the best franchise cornerstones in the League.

If yes, bring him in. If not, don't.

I don't know about Stamkos being our cornerstone because by the time we are ready to contend, he will be past his prime and hopefully he wouldn't be our best player by then.

I think he'd be worth more to a team that can win the cup in the next 3 years or so and for this reason unless he's willing to take a "hometown discount", we should stay patient and continue on the draft/develop course.

 

[Stephen]

Consider goals only, ignore assists. Gee I wonder why?

Stamkos has outscored Kessel every year based on point totals every year other than 2014, if that makes you happy.

 

[Menzinger]

That's an interesting question.

One thing to consider is he had a very poor season by his own standards, and yet scored 5-6 more goals than Kessel's career high. So there's the purely production based comparison.

Another thing to consider is what made Kessel a bad contract at $8 for the next 7 years? Was flirting with 40 goals the issue? To me, it was the likelihood of rapid physical decline coupled with a rotten apple personality the organization is trying to distance itself from.

So for me, if I'm paying between 2-4 million more for Stamkos, I'd be betting on getting more goals, more longevity, better work habits.

Personally I doubt neither Kessel or Stamkos suffers a major regression for the next 7 or so years.

I'd pay Stamkos more than Kessel, but I don't think he deserves 12. 10ish is more reasonable (Toews money). Id be fine if the leafs offered him that.

 

[Purity*]

Stamkos is not the type of 1C who makes his teammates markedly better. He's still an elite player, but he's a shoot-first centerman, or a winger if you will who happens to be good at faceoffs.

Seems like you are annointing him the next great #1C for us, when in fact, he'd likely be more of a winger for us who occasionally takes faceoffs, but routinely ends up having way more goals than assists.

We should be more excited at the potential for Marner to become a Giroux-type 1C than have Stamkos the saviour come here to be a #1 Winger.

His numbers have actually dropped considerably since Martin St. Louis was traded from Tampa. As far as Kessel vs Stamkos offensively, it is much closer than people think or will even acknowledge. Stamkos certainly has the edge compete level/work ethic wise though. Funny thing is, for Kessel's small sample size in the playoffs, he has produced considerably more than Stamkos in the playoffs.

 

[schenneuf]

I'm pretty sure Sundin was a shoot first centermen as well. Just he doesn't have the shot Stamkos does.

Sundin was more of a playmaker than Stamkos.

 

[The Thin White Duke]

Hopefully Stamkos has an Yzerman-like development curve. Right now he's "worth" 11 or so mil just based on his compareables but I wouldn't feel comfortable with his current playstyle as the offensive focus of a team.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

His numbers have actually dropped considerably since Martin St. Louis was traded from Tampa. As far as Kessel vs Stamkos offensively, it is much closer than people think or will even acknowledge. Stamkos certainly has the edge compete level/work ethic wise though. Funny thing is, for Kessel's small sample size in the playoffs, he has produced considerably more than Stamkos in the playoffs.

Since you brought it up. How does St Louis' numbers look without Stamkos since he was traded?

 

[Daisy Jane]

Since you brought it up. How does St Louis' numbers look without Stamkos since he was traded?

not good either.

both, in my opinion worked very well with each other and were kinda meh apart. (yes, people, I know he had 43 goals, but I don't think he looked as great as he had when he was with MSL).

 

[Confucius]

We'd just running him out of town anyway. Could you imagine not even 1 goal in the finals. Lol da bum..

 

[Snow Dog]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned or not,but Stamkos broke his leg not much more than a year ago.Is it at all possible that could have affected his performance last season.I know when I broke my leg i was limping around for a couple of years before it was 100%.
What i find strange is that MSL was traded to the Rangers the same day that Stammer was cleared to return from injury.

 

[Gabriel426]

The thing is, I think Stamkos would be a good piece if Nylander and Marner are ready and are real deals. since it is mush easier and less pressure on those kids to be the # 2,3 or 4 options in scoring and leading the team than be the #1 guy.