Let us Dream: Steven Stamkos to Toronto 2016/2017

[Hyperglide]

lol who cares so I voted yes. So far though he's brought us a top tier GM, assistant GM's and Coach. Why not players too?

 

[Wafflewhipper]

He has delivered already after a lengthy observation of the entire organization. He was thorough in looking things over and decided he was going to part out some and crush the rest for scrap. Lol.

He is all about hiring the best to his knowledge. Hunter drafts skill and dubas crunches numbers on ufas. Now Lou has to getto work and remove a couple leftovers that quit and sucked.

Then Babs will paint a system into all there heads that is proven to be successful with the right players.

Its definitely rounding into shape slowly but surely.

Yeah he will make the team a contender annually with a little help from his friends.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I don't know man, he was putting up over 90-100 points well before Stamkos even came to town. It was also him who ran the show in the 2011 playoffs while Stamkos took the back seat (again). I think it was Stamkos who "benefitted" more from the "union," and there's more evidence on my side to back it than on yours. Based on the numbers, of course.



Definitely. He's a classy and respectful guy who wouldn't just leave Yzerman high and dry. My prediction is that he re-signs with Tampa around the end of the summer.

Don't know?

The Numbers don't lie.

St Louis the last season with Stamkos.

61 points in 62 games.

Without Stamkos

60 points in 93 games

Stamkos without had St Louis

72 points in 82 games.

It is not even close, St Louis' production fell off more without Stammer than vice versa. This is not even a debatable point. I think Stamkos made St Louis a better player at 38 than he looked at 39 without him. A player just doesn't drop off the table like that overnight.

Further after St Louis was traded away from Stamkos he struggled in the 19 games with the Rangers with only 8 points.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

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.

EDIT: I'll note as well that in 2012/13 (the year before the lockout, and the year Crosby signed his extension), the cap was at its highest point ever until this season, at $70.2M, and Crosby's contract was worth 12.39% of that.

Crosby's current contract (it was an extension) was signed before rules were changed. That was the era of front loaded contracts. Its a 12 year contract that has most of the money being paid in the first 9 years. If you look at the first 9 years, he is being paid an average of $10.6 m/year.

 

[Faltorvo]

Stamkos is pretty overrated. I don't think he is a franchise changing talent, not at the money he'll command. If I had the chance, I'd take Tavares, Subban, Ovie, Crosby, Malkin, Doughty, Kieth, Seabrook, Toews, Kane, and possibly a few others over him. Easily. I wouldn't pay him top dollar. I just don't think he is THAT good. He is a very good player, but I don't think we need to gush over him. It would be a big mistake shelling out 12, 13, million per season for him.

no player in the league is worth a 12, 13 million dollar cap hit

would I pay him like toews/kane, 10.5 cap hit, yups in a heart beat, full 7 year ride to boot

 

[Purity*]

Don't know?

The Numbers don't lie.

St Louis the last season with Stamkos.

61 points in 62 games.

Without Stamkos

60 points in 93 games

Stamkos without had St Louis

72 points in 82 games.

It is not even close, St Louis' production fell off more without Stammer than vice versa. This is not even a debatable point. I think Stamkos made St Louis a better player at 38 than he looked at 39 without him. A player just doesn't drop off the table like that overnight.

Further after St Louis was traded away from Stamkos he struggled in the 19 games with the Rangers with only 8 points.

Imagine the amount of numbers I could pull out for St. Louis' career without Stamkos (even a 100 point season!) Mother god I would have a field day debunking you but I think you can understand the point already.

If you need to resort to St. Louis' last years in the league then you have no leg to stand on in this argument. Seems like the numbers can lie after all eh? You know seeing as St. Louis' career years came WITHOUT Stamkos? Eh? Eh? We both know that Stamkos hasn't been the same since St. Louis left. We both know that St. Louis has already produced tremendous numbers without Stamkos. And I think we both know you are wrong too. Not even up for debate.

Stamkos seems to be much closer to a 70-75 point player without St. Louis than the 60-goal scorer we saw with St. Louis there. We'll see next year though, hopefully Drouin can provide him with some support. Very good chance he will remain under the shadow of Tyler Johnson and the triplets though.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Imagine the amount of numbers I could pull out for St. Louis' career without Stamkos (even a 100 point season!) Mother god I would have a field day debunking you but I think you can the point already.

If you need to resort to St. Louis' last years in the league then you have no leg to stand on in this argument. Seems like the numbers can lie after all eh? You know seeing as St. Louis' career years came WITHOUT Stamkos? Eh? Eh? We both know that Stamkos hasn't been the same since St. Louis left. We both know that St. Louis has already produced tremendous numbers without Stamkos. And I think we both know you are wrong too. Not even up for debate.

Stamkos seems to be much closer to a 70-75 point player without St. Louis than the 60-goal scorer we saw with St. Louis there. We'll see next year though, hopefully Drouin can provide him with some support. Very good chance he will remain under the shadow of Tyler Johnson and the triplets though.

Again, instead of just admitting you were wrong, when you said Stamkos' numbers slid to a terrible 74 points without St Louis, just to imply you know what. When challenged on this infact that it was St Louis' numbers that plummeted even more. You twist and turn to avoid the inaccuracy of your inferences.

Just answer me this, and we will be done. It was why I challenged your post. Whose production suffered more when St Louis was traded to NY?

 

[Purity*]

Again, instead of just admitting you were wrong, when you said Stamkos' numbers slid to a terrible 74 points without St Louis, just to imply you know what. When challenged on this infact that it was St Louis' numbers that plummeted even more. You twist and turn to avoid the inaccuracy of your inferences.

Just answer me this, and we will be done. It was why I challenged your post. Whose production suffered more when St Louis was traded to NY?

Buddy if you need to use the final years of someone's career to base your inferences on then there is nothing to argue, simple as that Why would I give you the satisfaction of answering that when you will just conveniently ignore the other cold-hard facts I brought up? It's only 1 cog of the argument. I guess Wayne Gretzky's legacy is tainted due to his shrinking numbers as his career progressed

Lemme know when Stamkos can put up a 100-point year without St. Louis. Everything once again; demonstrably false.

I don't wanna be done yet, I wanna see how you can prove Stamkos' clear drop in production without St. Louis. You answer me that, and I'll answer you yours. You're just too fun to argue with to end it there. If you wanna end it there since you've already been proven 100% wrong, that's cool too.

Oh, and *72* points, not 74 points. Check your facts before you dispute mine.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Buddy if you need to use the final years of someone's career to base your inferences on then there is nothing to argue, simple as that Why would I give you the satisfaction of answering that when you will just conveniently ignore the other cold-hard facts I brought up? It's only 1 cog of the argument. I guess Wayne Gretzky's legacy is tainted due to his shrinking numbers as his career progressed

Lemme know when Stamkos can put up a 100-point year without St. Louis. Everything once again; demonstrably false.

I don't wanna be done yet, I wanna see how you can prove Stamkos' clear drop in production without St. Louis. You answer me that, and I'll answer you yours. You're just too fun to argue with to end it there. If you wanna end it there since you've already been proven 100% wrong, that's cool too.

Oh, and *72* points, not 74 points. Check your facts before you dispute mine.

Did you forget this post of yours? http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=105501575&postcount=868

Now again, you brought up slippage of production to infer St Louis propped up Stamkos's numbers. He ended the year with 74 points. Still very good numbers. How did St Louis do without Stamkos? Better or worse? We know the answer to this, so stop ducking and diving and talking about what St. Louis did 10 years ago. Instead talk about what you brought up, when St Louis was traded. Who slipped the most!

 

[Purity*]

Did you forget this post of yours? http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=105501575&postcount=868

Now again, you brought up slippage of production to infer St Louis propped up Stamkos's numbers. He ended the year with 74 points. Still very good numbers? How did St Louis do with Stamkos? Better or worse? We know the answer to this, so stop ducking and diving and talking about what St. Louis did 10 years ago.

*72 points* how can you possibly argue anything when you can't get such a simple fact right.

St. Louis had **** all to prove once he got traded, he already put up godlike numbers before Stammer even came to town. Stammer, on the other hand, has EVERYTHING to prove now that St. Louis has left town. And first year since he left, he couldn't even get back to a point-per-game and got cast under the shadow of Tyler Johnson. So why exactly should I answer your gotcha-question when we already know the answer from previous years? There's no use, simple as that, both of us know that St. Louis has posted godlike numbers away from Stammer but Stammer hasn't done it himself. Just cause it was "zomg 10 years ago" doesn't take away from what he's accomplished, if you wanna try play that card, you're only proving yourself wrong again.

Back to you.

edit: come on we're not done already are we? I got **** all to do for the next 10 hours.

 

[Daisy Jane]

*72 points* how can you possibly argue anything when you can't get such a simple fact right.

St. Louis had **** all to prove once he got traded, he already put up godlike numbers before Stammer even came to town. Stammer, on the other hand, has EVERYTHING to prove now that St. Louis has left town. And first year since he left, he couldn't even get back to a point-per-game and got cast under the shadow of Tyler Johnson. So why exactly should I answer your gotcha-question when we already know the answer from previous years? There's no use, simple as that, both of us know that St. Louis has posted godlike numbers away from Stammer but Stammer hasn't done it himself. Just cause it was "zomg 10 years ago" doesn't take away from what he's accomplished, if you wanna try play that card, you're only proving yourself wrong again.

Back to you.

edit: come on we're not done already are we? I got **** all to do for the next 10 hours.

he's on vacation and went to bed, so you'll have to be bored I would offer to take his place, but as I'm on your side in the matter, it won't be a fair representation .

I do have to say next year for Stamkos would be v. interesting. Like he's established, etc - however, we can't deny Johnson was really, really good (and it appears - don't follow Tampa that hard so just from what I say during the playoffs) Cooper trusts/likes him a bit more. it would be an ineresting dynamic to follow.

 

[Purity*]

he's on vacation and went to bed, so you'll have to be bored I would offer to take his place, but as I'm on your side in the matter, it won't be a fair representation .

I do have to say next year for Stamkos would be v. interesting. Like he's established, etc - however, we can't deny Johnson was really, really good (and it appears - don't follow Tampa that hard so just from what I say during the playoffs) Cooper trusts/likes him a bit more. it would be an ineresting dynamic to follow.

I have no problem saying that his linemates weren't all that great last year. So that can definitely be used for an argument. But, it's not like Killorn/Calahan/Filpulla are bad players. We've seen Phil Kessel take 50-point guys on a line and still make it to a point-per-game (Yes I know everybody will lose their mind when I mention Stamkos and Kessel in the same breath). If he doesn't get back to atleast a point-per-game next year, you can't tell me that wouldn't cast some doubt to the majority of his supporters. And we already know his playoff track record which isn't too great.

For the record, I've always thought Stamkos was a little overrated.

 

[Daisy Jane]

I have no problem saying that his linemates weren't all that great last year. So that can definitely be used for an argument. But, it's not like Killorn/Calahan/Filpulla are bad players. We've seen Phil Kessel take 50-point guys on a line and still make it to a point-per-game (Yes I know everybody will lose their mind when I mention Stamkos and Kessel in the same breath). If he doesn't get back to atleast a point-per-game next year, you can't tell me that wouldn't cast some doubt to the majority of his supporters. And we already know his playoff track record which isn't too great.

For the record, I've always thought Stamkos was a little overrated.

why do you feel that he has always been overrated? (I know your views about the past few years), I'm just curious

 

[Purity*]

why do you feel that he has always been overrated? (I know your views about the past few years), I'm just curious

Widely regarded as a top-5 player... I simply do not view him as a top-5 player when you take everything into consideration. There are players like Doughty, Toews, Keith, Weber, Kopitar etc.. who I would indeed take over Stamkos. I also don't think he's going to ever score 60 goals again. 50? Definitely possible.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Widely regarded as a top-5 player... I simply do not view him as a top-5 player when you take everything into consideration. There are players like Doughty, Toews, Keith, Weber, Kopitar etc.. who I would indeed take over Stamkos. I also don't think he's going to ever score 60 goals again. 50? Definitely possible.

got you.
which is why I said pages and pages ago - if we had to 'dream choose' I would want Kopitar over Stamkos 10 times out of 10.

I think this whole thing is based on Babcock's statement that the Ontario Boys will come home, and I addressed that while that would be nice that people choose us - I honestly don't think that should be our goal. I know a lot of people are poo-pooing or handwaving the draft/development part aspect - why I do not know, considering most of these guys we covet so badly were drafted and developed by other teams.

all honesty, I wouldn't be upset if we were able to get Stamkos at a discount but all things considering, I would really and truly like to avoid any and all Kessel-like situations with this organization ever again, which is simply: installing an elite caliber player without an infrastructure in place to ensure that quality years, cap space, etc aren't being wasted.

but we will see, that's for sure

 

[bobermay]

got you.
which is why I said pages and pages ago - if we had to 'dream choose' I would want Kopitar over Stamkos 10 times out of 10.

I think this whole thing is based on Babcock's statement that the Ontario Boys will come home, and I addressed that while that would be nice that people choose us - I honestly don't think that should be our goal. I know a lot of people are poo-pooing or handwaving the draft/development part aspect - why I do not know, considering most of these guys we covet so badly were drafted and developed by other teams.

all honesty, I wouldn't be upset if we were able to get Stamkos at a discount but all things considering, I would really and truly like to avoid any and all Kessel-like situations with this organization ever again, which is simply: installing an elite caliber player without an infrastructure in place to ensure that quality years, cap space, etc aren't being wasted.

but we will see, that's for sure

If an elite C or D Free Agent wants to join your franchise(and you can fit him in the cap), it would be foolish not to pursue it IMO (no matter where you are at with 'infrastructure'). You would be adding quality without wasting any assets.

The Kessel dilemma was enhanced from 'The Trade' and his piss-poor attitude.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

This thread is nonsense. I could care less. We can draft our Stammer and likely already did twice in Nylander and Marner. I am solely draft orientated right now.

We will get by one way or another. I like stammer though. I wouldn't bet on getting him. Where would you rather live tbay with cheap taxes or canada with pathetic rip off taxes on income.

 

[Stephen]

got you.
which is why I said pages and pages ago - if we had to 'dream choose' I would want Kopitar over Stamkos 10 times out of 10.

I think this whole thing is based on Babcock's statement that the Ontario Boys will come home, and I addressed that while that would be nice that people choose us - I honestly don't think that should be our goal. I know a lot of people are poo-pooing or handwaving the draft/development part aspect - why I do not know, considering most of these guys we covet so badly were drafted and developed by other teams.

all honesty, I wouldn't be upset if we were able to get Stamkos at a discount but all things considering, I would really and truly like to avoid any and all Kessel-like situations with this organization ever again, which is simply: installing an elite caliber player without an infrastructure in place to ensure that quality years, cap space, etc aren't being wasted.

but we will see, that's for sure

Adding Stamkos would be nothing like adding Kessel.

If we added Stamkos by trading the Marner and Nylander picks, that would resemble the Kessel trade.

But right now we have our kids we have more picks on the way and oodles of cap space. Even if Stamkos cost $11.5 million, that's about the same amount of money we normally pay out for Lupul and Clarkson the past two years. So the question is would you rather have an elite player, or what we've been doing with the money over the past few years?

 

[Kurisu]

This thread is nonsense. I could care less. We can draft our Stammer and likely already did twice in Nylander and Marner. I am solely draft orientated right now.

We will get by one way or another. I like stammer though. I wouldn't bet on getting him. Where would you rather live tbay with cheap taxes or canada with pathetic rip off taxes on income.

we're be lucky if they're half as good as Stammer is.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Adding Stamkos would be nothing like adding Kessel.

If we added Stamkos by trading the Marner and Nylander picks, that would resemble the Kessel trade.

But right now we have our kids we have more picks on the way and oodles of cap space. Even if Stamkos cost $11.5 million, that's about the same amount of money we normally pay out for Lupul and Clarkson the past two years. So the question is would you rather have an elite player, or what we've been doing with the money over the past few years?

Except that's not the question at all.

 

[Bomber0104]

This thread is nonsense. I could care less. We can draft our Stammer and likely already did twice in Nylander and Marner. I am solely draft orientated right now.

We will get by one way or another. I like stammer though. I wouldn't bet on getting him. Where would you rather live tbay with cheap taxes or canada with pathetic rip off taxes on income.

This is how I feel as well.

If he's available, make a pitch, but don't count on it at all.

The two year focus should be shedding unproductive contracts in favor of productive ones and drafting in the top-5.

 

[Bomber0104]

Widely regarded as a top-5 player... I simply do not view him as a top-5 player when you take everything into consideration. There are players like Doughty, Toews, Keith, Weber, Kopitar etc.. who I would indeed take over Stamkos. I also don't think he's going to ever score 60 goals again. 50? Definitely possible.

Breaking his tibia was a major setback in his career.

You can rehabilitate all you want but your skating stride won't ever be where it was, pre-injury.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

we're be lucky if they're half as good as Stammer is.

I will give you my hockeyfan guarantee they will be 1/2 as good as stammer.

 

[Gabriel426]

got you.
which is why I said pages and pages ago - if we had to 'dream choose' I would want Kopitar over Stamkos 10 times out of 10.

I think this whole thing is based on Babcock's statement that the Ontario Boys will come home, and I addressed that while that would be nice that people choose us - I honestly don't think that should be our goal. I know a lot of people are poo-pooing or handwaving the draft/development part aspect - why I do not know, considering most of these guys we covet so badly were drafted and developed by other teams.

all honesty, I wouldn't be upset if we were able to get Stamkos at a discount but all things considering, I would really and truly like to avoid any and all Kessel-like situations with this organization ever again, which is simply: installing an elite caliber player without an infrastructure in place to ensure that quality years, cap space, etc aren't being wasted.

but we will see, that's for sure

Normally I agree with you but not this. IF Toews is UFA this year and hinted at wanting to be a Leafs and Shanny and company did not pursue him, I will be pretty piss.
Or someone like Subban, Doughty.

Thing with Kessel is that Burke made him into someone that could push the Leafs over by trading 2 first round picks, which ended up being Seguin/a top C and Hamilton/a top pairing D. If the Leafs actually made the playoffs those two yrs, a lot of people would be a lot easier on Kessel.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Normally I agree with you but not this. IF Toews is UFA this year and hinted at wanting to be a Leafs and Shanny and company did not pursue him, I will be pretty piss.
Or someone like Subban, Doughty.

Thing with Kessel is that Burke made him into someone that could push the Leafs over by trading 2 first round picks, which ended up being Seguin/a top C and Hamilton/a top pairing D. If the Leafs actually made the playoffs those two yrs, a lot of people would be a lot easier on Kessel.

as I've stated before -
for me, there is a difference between paying for that elite defenseman vs. paying for that elite scoring forward. It might sound like I am talking out of both sides of my mouth, but if I had to pay for one, I'd pay for the defenseman. Depending on defenseman, because quite frankly, I wouldn't be going to Subban and saying "here take all my money have fun." Doughty, yes, Keith, obviously, and down the line.

if Toews vs. Stamkos was available I'd choose Toews over Stamkos hands down.

but honestly, I'm tired of debating this for the most part. For where the Leafs are right now, I don't think them getting an elite player at maximum dollars is a good thing. I just don't. It would be different if it were a defenseman, or a more elite-defensive forward, because I think you could somewhat be a little patient. not for players like Stamkos that need to have a lot of good players around him to make him go. On top of things i've stated over and over again. I just personally feel it would not work well.

Obviously, other people feel different, so that's where I'm just going to say, we're going to have to agree to disagree.