Official Tank Thread of the Toronto Maple Leafs

[WTFMAN99]

You have honestly no idea what a real rebuild is like.

We were not rebuilding when we drafted Rielly, Nor were we when we got Nylander. He was a good pick up and a steal from our 8 spot, but during that time we were signing stupid contracts and trying to make a run for the cup with lazy players.

Starting the 1st year of a REAL rebuild by signing an FA to a HUGE contract going long term is just plain stupid!. and pretty much walking in Nonis/Burkes shoes.. lets not role the dice like that again.

Tampa won't commit to that money then why should we when we are rebuilding and not contending?

Tampa has run into a few problems - Carle and Callahan contracts.

Hedman/Palat/Johnson/Kucherov will all need new contracts.

 

[nsleaf]

Is believing in the "tank rebuild" idea the same as believing the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence?

 

[OvenMittz*]

Tampa has run into a few problems - Carle and Callahan contracts.

Hedman/Palat/Johnson/Kucherov will all need new contracts.

Exactly, they have growing prospects they need to commit contracts for, and they have to manage money for Stamkos.

We will be in the same problem in the future, but instead of having the option of just letting the older players walk, we will have to keep an older stamkos and let one of our younger prospects walk once their ELC are up.

why even risk that when we are rebuilding.. and its not like we are almost done rebuilding, we just started.

I just don't see any of that making sense for Torontos vision.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Holy crap are these people being purposely obtuse

Chicago signed Hossa to a cap-circumventing contract that didn't make him the highest paid player in the league. THEY MADE THE WESTERN CONFERENCE FINALS THE YEAR BEFORE SIGNING HIM.

I don't even know why you brought up Jeff Carter and LA. Again, the cap hits and contracts are nowhere near the same and LA had (still has) a bunch of players in their prime. Situations are nowhere near alike.

Purposely annoying?

No, that is your pretentiousness coming through. Before a mod bothers to warn me, feel free to warn the obtuse poster I am responding toward as the double standard toward warnings or policing any of the 'rules' around here is laughable. AND I CAN USE CAPS TOO BUT YELLING DOESNT MEAN I KNOW ANY MORE THEN ANYONE ELSE OR HELP PROVE A POINT ANY BETTER.

Using a veteran player as an example of how teams look for veteran talent to reach that elusive 'next level' does not have to be some magical direct correlation to our state today as if there's some magical duplicate found in the hockey world.

No 2 situations are the same, and you can obtusely post facts that support your view that I would obtusely laugh at and also call irrelevant.

Point is that in order to get better, NHL teams generally look to proven NHL talent to help that happen. You can mock, LOL, post obtusely or whatever the **** else you like about that fact but it doesn't change the truth any.

 

[Gary Nylund]

So you're expecting Marner/Nylander to just bust onto the scene and become impact players right away?

It could take as long as 5 years. Goal-scorers already decline around Stamkos' current age (with obvious exceptions), he won't be the same player.

Not only that, his playoff performances are bad.

This is just shiny-new-toy syndrome that fans of this franchise always rave over.

How is a player like Stamkos going to hurt in any way you ask? I wouldn't be worried about the fist few years of the contract, but once he starts declining (he will), that contract is going to extremely restrictive as far as signing young talent/depth goes.

You need to look at the bigger picture here.

This is what I keep saying. I'm a bit surprised this isn't obvious to everyone. Hey maybe he plays great and it turns out OK, but maybe not. There's always risk involved in giving someone a huge contract and the bigger the contract, the bigger the risk. That's why cost must be considered very carefully.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Is believing in the "tank rebuild" idea the same as believing the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence?

Yes, those are the ones already ready to toss away Marner for not scoring 3ppg at the OHL level and always looking at the next shiny prospect as the saviour while the last shiny prospect suddenly isn't as good since he's now drafted and being developed.

It's laughable how often that flip flopping happens around here from July to October or so. The past seasons draft class is ripped apart due to over analyzing while the next group only has their positives exploited.

 

[Daisy Jane]

okay. let's take Stamkos out of this and just use the term. High End/Talented Free Agent.

I think for some of us - it's not about being afraid (which I have seen people bandy about), and it's not about wanting to be in a perpetual tank, or anything like that. It is also not discounting the fact that this team will need some UFAs (and players over the age of 30+ who can still play hockey, so not a Robidas). - we can all acknowledge the fact that you can not just "draft" a core.

What people are arguing is - basically, the team isn't "ready" yet. and there are a lot of examples being tossed around, and I don't think they apply. As Leafswillrulesometime has pointed out - Hossa was signed after the Blackhawks made the WCF. KNOWING that's what they needed and that's what he could bring (as well as, again: being on a cap-circumventing deal).

Minnesota keeps being brought up (as the best "bring 'em home) example, and i will point out I think they are on CCD's as well? and they have some issues.

We're very much still at the infancy of this build. As much as we hope, and want everyone to click in, and do well without issues - that's not necessarily the case. and I don't, nor will I ever get the point of signing a High End/Talented Free Agent (who is REALLLLY good at one thing - and not so much at the other thing), when we still don't have the pieces in place to make it make sense - which regardless of how people felt about the OTHER high end/talented player we had here - was the biggest problem.

I think, there needs to be more building of the "infrastructure" so to speak (more "bit" players, those supporting characters so we can see what we have in place in Nylander et.al. and then work on getting the High End Talent via trade (or if they come up in UFA, via UFA).


We WANT to be Chicago (in how they imlemented things)
We do NOT Want to be Edmonton (in how they did things)

but we could be Florida here. some really good pieces, but some pieces don't take so it takes longer than you expect. we want to be sort of in the middle between Florida/NYI & I'd use LA(ideal) and St Louis - who were around the same drafting stage we were 7ish years ago.

 

[Purity*]

Purposely annoying?

No, that is your pretentiousness coming through. Before a mod bothers to warn me, feel free to warn the obtuse poster I am responding toward as the double standard toward warnings or policing any of the 'rules' around here is laughable. AND I CAN USE CAPS TOO BUT YELLING DOESNT MEAN I KNOW ANY MORE THEN ANYONE ELSE OR HELP PROVE A POINT ANY BETTER.

Using a veteran player as an example of how teams look for veteran talent to reach that elusive 'next level' does not have to be some magical direct correlation to our state today as if there's some magical duplicate found in the hockey world.

No 2 situations are the same, and you can obtusely post facts that support your view that I would obtusely laugh at and also call irrelevant.

Point is that in order to get better, NHL teams generally look to proven NHL talent to help that happen. You can mock, LOL, post obtusely or whatever the **** else you like about that fact but it doesn't change the truth any.

Let's look at the truth.

Where in any of the recent cup winners do you see a contract to a playoff choker like Stamkos?

Do you seriously expect us to be contending for a cup while Stamkos is in his prime? Do you have any idea how long this rebuild might take? Stamkos could be leaving his prime very soon, hell he's already gone from a 90 point player to a 70 point player. Not to mention this guy's playoff performances are CRAP.

But no no no just use your appeals to mockery and strawman fallacies to dodge all these objective things I'm bringing up.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Exactly, they have growing prospects they need to commit contracts for, and they have to manage money for Stamkos.

We will be in the same problem in the future, but instead of having the option of just letting the older players walk, we will have to keep an older stamkos and let one of our younger prospects walk once their ELC are up.

why even risk that when we are rebuilding.. and its not like we are almost done rebuilding, we just started.

I just don't see any of that making sense for Torontos vision.

I'm just keeping an open mind about this. What I say on here doesn't really matter anyway. I don't mind discussing a Stamkos to Toronto scenario because...well we have a lot of time to kill, draft isn't for a while yet! lol.

 

[McDeathbyCheerios*]

Oilers fan here.

Tank rebuilds only work if you have a good ahl development team, and you have good vets that can shelter rookies and hold the fort while the young guys develop.

Throwing them to the wolves only works with generational talents and even then its risky.

 

[Jack Bauer]

This is what I keep saying. I'm a bit surprised this isn't obvious to everyone. Hey maybe he plays great and it turns out OK, but maybe not. There's always risk involved in giving someone a huge contract and the bigger the contract, the bigger the risk. That's why cost must be considered very carefully.

I would argue that 1 contract can't kill an organization.

Only numerous, as in 3-5, bad deals can really do that.

Signing Stamkos to a big money deal while the majority of the future is entering ELC's should not harm anything in the future.

Now signing Stamkos then giving Kadri, Rielly, and Gardiner big money to go with Phaneuf...and I agree you're getting into a territory where money needs to be moved around.

But I will say that I would rather gamble on 10 Stamkos' calibre players as UFA then 1 Clarkson who even at his best is a 3rd liner. At least Stamkos has game breaking ability, even if it's in his past, and a pedigree that should allow him to transition to a great role player. Some veteran experience to rub off on the youth is also something that's hard to put a price tag on. And god knows we need someone more then just Phaneuf to carry that load.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Oilers fan here.

Tank rebuilds only work if you have a good ahl development team, and you have good vets that can shelter rookies and hold the fort while the young guys develop.

Throwing them to the wolves only works with generational talents and even then its risky.

Agreed, because those talents are going to develop and be great regardless of their environment.

Our big change here is focusing on the AHL with youth rather then some BS success brought on by late 20/early 30yr old journeymen. Now it's Nylander, Brown, Kapanen, Percy, etc leading the way down there.

Now we need to add some solid veterans, players like Winnick help but another Phaneuf in terms of a large presence on the ice and in the room would be a huge addition.

As we then start to ease in the young talent we move the Winnick's for picks and let the vets like Phaneuf open up the ice for the young should feel more confident and be more prepared for a real NHL system and the pace of the play.

We are on the right track, just missing some pieces that are still necessary, but over time I am confident we see those pieces added.

 

[egd27]

Pretty simple answer.

Until our homegrown talent can actually get us contending for a playoff spot.

The Hossa answer is not only laughable, but completely irrelevant. They signed him after making the WCF.

One of the biggest things about winning in the league today is bargain contracts. You are severely choking out your chances at having good depth by signing a player like Stamkos to a massive deal.

So in your opinion, they should engineer the team to finish near the bottom for another 3-4 years beyond this one? More?

 

[OvenMittz*]

okay. let's take Stamkos out of this and just use the term. High End/Talented Free Agent.

I think for some of us - it's not about being afraid (which I have seen people bandy about), and it's not about wanting to be in a perpetual tank, or anything like that. It is also not discounting the fact that this team will need some UFAs (and players over the age of 30+ who can still play hockey, so not a Robidas). - we can all acknowledge the fact that you can not just "draft" a core.

What people are arguing is - basically, the team isn't "ready" yet. and there are a lot of examples being tossed around, and I don't think they apply. As Leafswillrulesometime has pointed out - Hossa was signed after the Blackhawks made the WCF. KNOWING that's what they needed and that's what he could bring (as well as, again: being on a cap-circumventing deal).

Minnesota keeps being brought up (as the best "bring 'em home) example, and i will point out I think they are on CCD's as well? and they have some issues.

We're very much still at the infancy of this build. As much as we hope, and want everyone to click in, and do well without issues - that's not necessarily the case. and I don't, nor will I ever get the point of signing a High End/Talented Free Agent (who is REALLLLY good at one thing - and not so much at the other thing), when we still don't have the pieces in place to make it make sense - which regardless of how people felt about the OTHER high end/talented player we had here - was the biggest problem.

I think, there needs to be more building of the "infrastructure" so to speak (more "bit" players, those supporting characters so we can see what we have in place in Nylander et.al. and then work on getting the High End Talent via trade (or if they come up in UFA, via UFA).


We WANT to be Chicago (in how they imlemented things)
We do NOT Want to be Edmonton (in how they did things)

but we could be Florida here. some really good pieces, but some pieces don't take so it takes longer than you expect. we want to be sort of in the middle between Florida/NYI & I'd use LA(ideal) and St Louis - who were around the same drafting stage we were 7ish years ago.

Hit the nail on the head.

I'm not against a Stamkos, it just doesn't make sense to go for that type of player right now. Also to commit that much money and term into. We are not at that stage yet. We have to draft and see what we got then if the talent is good enough we fill in the gaps with what we need.

We want a Dynasty, not a "lets put a team together to make a run for it now and worry about it later" type of situation.

Signing Stamkos now when we know we are not going anywhere yet, and then try to convince ourselves that contracts and ELCs being up will be something to worry about later, is exactly what makes a franchise panic and turns them into a bubble team. Also i don't think the franchise will have the balls to look the fans in the face and tell us we have to rebuild again.

SO LETS GET IT ****IN RIGHT THIS TIME!

 

[Purity*]

So in your opinion, they should engineer the team to finish near the bottom for another 3-4 years beyond this one? More?

 

[Jack Bauer]

Let's look at the truth.

Where in any of the recent cup winners do you see a contract to a playoff choker like Stamkos?

Do you seriously expect us to be contending for a cup while Stamkos is in his prime? Do you have any idea how long this rebuild might take? Stamkos could be leaving his prime very soon, hell he's already gone from a 90 point player to a 70 point player. Not to mention this guy's playoff performances are CRAP.

But no no no just use your appeals to mockery and strawman fallacies to dodge all these objective things I'm bringing up.

Stamkos is a choker?

Just....stop.

Using your logic the only NHL talent anyone should sign already plays for Chicago or LA. Everyone else is a choker or declining in production.

Great athletes don't need championships to earn the title of being great. Especially in the 30+ team era of pro sports.

Nobody has even suggested a contract # and you're throwing the player under the bus saying he chokes and can add no value to this franchise. Do you realize how immature and childish that is?

Do you also realize that up until June 1996 the exact same comments were said about Steve Yzerman? He was a choker. Best was behind him. Peaked.

You'd swear Tampa didn't even want Stamkos to stay with the way some of you are trying to trash his play and character. Pretty pathetic.

 

[carko32]

I am all for bringing Stamkos home, but I am afraid what will have in 5 years. But if he was going to sign for 9M or something around that, for 6, maybe 7 years, that should be ok.

I would love to have Stamkos shelter our young guys when they come up. And maybe he will sometime in the future agree to play on a wing of Nylander.

One of the reasons for signing Stamkos is that he would take a spotlight from our younger guys and give them time to become great players. That is one of big pluses for me. But I am worried about our cap problems after those guys are of their ELC. Even though, if we could sign Stamkos for 6 years, that would mean that you could do a bridge contract on most of our most promising players, so Nylander, Marner, 2016 draftee, Kapanen, Dermott, and then sign them after his contract is up.

If he were to come here for a contract of 9M for 6 years, I am in. Even though I know already now, that he will very hardly score 50 goals in that time. Even though, it might happen, if you give him a really good playmaker, like Ovie has in Backstrom.

 

[mallory67]

I would argue that 1 contract can't kill an organization.

Only numerous, as in 3-5, bad deals can really do that.

Signing Stamkos to a big money deal while the majority of the future is entering ELC's should not harm anything in the future.

Now signing Stamkos then giving Kadri, Rielly, and Gardiner big money to go with Phaneuf...and I agree you're getting into a territory where money needs to be moved around.

But I will say that I would rather gamble on 10 Stamkos' calibre players as UFA then 1 Clarkson who even at his best is a 3rd liner. At least Stamkos has game breaking ability, even if it's in his past, and a pedigree that should allow him to transition to a great role player. Some veteran experience to rub off on the youth is also something that's hard to put a price tag on. And god knows we need someone more then just Phaneuf to carry that load.

It's not the worst idea, and I think you have some decent points. But buying expensive centers on the open market? Is that who we want to be? Stamkos is great ... but why can't we find and develop our own Stamkos?

To support your argument ... do we have some good recent examples of teams going out and buying their top center and winning a cup? Did not work for LA/Gretzky for sure ... hasn't worked for Dallas/Seguin so far. Looking back to 2004 or so ... I don't see an example. But maybe I missed one?

Pittsburgh drafted Crosby
Detroit drafted Datsyuk (171st overall. Shoot me now.)
Chicago drafted Toews
Boston drafted Krejci
LA drafted Kopitar
Anaheim drafted Getzlaf.
Carolina drafted Staal.
Tampa Bay drafted Richards

 

[Duckrider]

So what if our youth comes up at the end of the year and they do well, and next year we are at the playoff's door?

 

[Purity*]

Stamkos is a choker?

Just....stop.

Uhh yeah. Against Chicago in the finals, that was a fine example of choking. 1 point in 6 games when his team needed him to come through the most (he wasn't even matched against Toews, Paquette was). That's choking my friend.

Using your logic the only NHL talent anyone should sign already plays for Chicago or LA. Everyone else is a choker or declining in production.

See: Picture above

Great athletes don't need championships to earn the title of being great. Especially in the 30+ team era of pro sports.

Irrelevance o-meter redlining

Nobody has even suggested a contract # and you're throwing the player under the bus saying he chokes and can add no value to this franchise. Do you realize how immature and childish that is?

Do you also realize that up until June 1996 the exact same comments were said about Steve Yzerman? He was a choker. Best was behind him. Peaked.

You'd swear Tampa didn't even want Stamkos to stay with the way some of you are trying to trash his play and character. Pretty pathetic.

The 11-12M$ has been widely speculated by both experts and fans alike. I'm bringing up objective facts here and you just keep appealing to mockery by calling me immature and childish. If you don't like how I post, don't respond to me, simple as that.

You know who else they said that about too? Joe Thornton. So how exactly do we know what Stamkos is, Yzerman or Thornton? You can't say Thornton doesn't have great character himself.

"You'd swear Tampa didn't even want Stamkos..."

WELL we're all wondering why they haven't signed him yet! Me thinks they're seriously considering re-investing in other players. If he is actually the player some of you want him to be, Tampa would re-sign him no questions asked. A prime contender and a franchise player in his prime.

 

[Duckrider]

It's not the worst idea, and I think you have some decent points. But buying expensive centers on the open market? Is that who we want to be? Stamkos is great ... but why can't we find and develop our own Stamkos?

To support your argument ... do we have some good recent examples of teams going out and buying their top center and winning a cup? Did not work for LA/Gretzky for sure ... hasn't worked for Dallas/Seguin so far. Looking back to 2004 or so ... I don't see an example. But maybe I missed one?

Pittsburgh drafted Crosby
Detroit drafted Datsyuk (171st overall. Shoot me now.)
Chicago drafted Toews
Boston drafted Krejci
LA drafted Kopitar
Anaheim drafted Getzlaf.
Carolina drafted Staal.
Tampa Bay drafted Richards

Has a player with Stammers ability been on the open market at an age of 26?

 

[Duckrider]

Uhh yeah. Against Chicago in the finals, that was a fine example of choking. 1 point in 6 games when his team needed him to come through the most (he wasn't even matched against Toews, Paquette was). That's choking my friend.



See: Picture above



Irrelevance o-meter redlining



The 11-12M$ has been widely speculated by both experts and fans alike. I'm bringing up objective facts here and you just keep appealing to mockery by calling me immature and childish. If you don't like how I post, don't respond to me, simple as that.

You know who else they said that about too? Joe Thornton. So how exactly do we know what Stamkos is, Yzerman or Thornton? You can't say Thornton doesn't have great character himself.

"You'd swear Tampa didn't even want Stamkos..."

WELL we're all wondering why they haven't signed him yet! Me thinks they're seriously considering re-investing in other players. If he is actually the player some of you want him to be, Tampa would re-sign him no questions asked. A prime contender and a franchise player in his prime.

and again not for max contract...

 

[egd27]

So in your opinion, they should engineer the team to finish near the bottom for another 3-4 years beyond this one? More?

Not sure where the strawman or the "victory claim" is. It was simply a question to understand what you meant in the post I quoted.

Feeling a touch defensive?

BTW, the original question wasn't even directed to you.

 

[Jack Bauer]

It's not the worst idea, and I think you have some decent points. But buying expensive centers on the open market? Is that who we want to be? Stamkos is great ... but why can't we find and develop our own Stamkos?

To support your argument ... do we have some good recent examples of teams going out and buying their top center and winning a cup? Did not work for LA/Gretzky for sure ... hasn't worked for Dallas/Seguin so far. Looking back to 2004 or so ... I don't see an example. But maybe I missed one?

Pittsburgh drafted Crosby
Detroit drafted Datsyuk (171st overall. Shoot me now.)
Chicago drafted Toews
Boston drafted Krejci
LA drafted Kopitar
Anaheim drafted Getzlaf.
Carolina drafted Staal.
Tampa Bay drafted Richards

Our system isn't bare. Can't a Brown, Marner, or Nylander be a future Krejci or Getzlaf in terms of impact on our team? We're kind of banking on that, anyway.

I think it's a tad bit early to say a team like Dallas has done things wrong. I think they're much farther ahead with Benn/Seguin then they've been at any time since losing their 99 Cup winning core.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Irrelevance o-meter redlining