Roster Speculation Part XI...$teven $tamko$?? Pony up for PK?

[Chainshot]

I'm actually kind of surprised to see LA's offense was that low both years. Interesting.

They're a Sutter team.

 

[Chemical]

Your math shown above doesn't work. You're at $72m without goalies....the cap isn't going up nearly as quickly as projected.

How would we re-sign Chychrun in your scenario? What about that other mysterious ELC? McCabe? girgensons isn't signing a 8x3.5.

In your math, we're POSSIBLY a contender for MAYBE 2 years before we have to rebuild our D and bottom 6.

I'm more interested in building something that can be kept together for years with only minor modifications here and there as necessary (it's going to be hard enough keeping ROR/Sam/Jack/Girgensons/Larsson as it is).....one built around a tough-to-play-against D (be it physically or positionally) and our existing high-end forward talents.

Am I going to do the math? Maybe eventually. Not right now. I don't know who's available yet, nor will I waste time theorizing about anyone who may become available.

I'll take it. In the cap area there's no avoiding having to rebuild your bottom 6 and at least some D. In my scenario we would have the top 2 D locked up. You draft well and lock guys up to to good contracts in hopes that one day a player as good as Stamkos hits the market when you have the cap room to sign him.

 

[Ace]

People are confusing having the puck with having great defensemen. Half of LAs D are bad and it doesn't matter because they always have the puck. The concept of building D is flawed. The concept of having D that can move the puck up ice quick and forwards who can keep it there isn't

 

[NotABadPeriod]

There are definitely some positives to look at the bright side on. Johan gets more defensive responsibility, Eichel gets more overall responsibility, Reinhart plays center, opportunities open up on the PP and PK units, someone else will have to be "the guy" for important draws, and, not to start a whole thing with anyone who'd disagree, it will almost certainly keep us from jumping up the standings. It still sucks, but so long as there's a full recovery it might have be a beneficial turn of events. Bylsma was never going to stop riding ROR hard in every situation.

I sincerely hope that other guys step up and give Bylsma the confidence to scale back ROR's minutes. I mean, he'll still be the go to guy in most situations, but his total ice time may go down a minute or two and that could make all the difference down the stretch (next year).

Especially if he ends up playing for Canada in the World Cup (certainly not a lock, but he has to be in the consideration right now). Selfishly hoping they don't pick him so he'll have that time off.

 

[Myllz]

They're a Sutter team.

I knew they weren't a powerhouse offensively or anything, but I didn't think they were ranked THAT low.

 

[kirby11]

I'll take it. In the cap area there's no avoiding having to rebuild your bottom 6 and at least some D. In my scenario we would have the top 2 D locked up. You draft well and lock guys up to to good contracts in hopes that one day a player as good as Stamkos hits the market when you have the cap room to sign him.

Or you sign lesser top 6 talents--guys who can contribute 20 or so goals while not being awful defensively, ideally--to Kane/Stafford/Moulson type money and have extra cap space in place to either extend someone or upgrade a position. I'd rather do that than back the money truck up for Stamkos

 

[Chemical]

Or you sign lesser top 6 talents--guys who can contribute 20 or so goals while not being awful defensively, ideally--to Kane/Stafford/Moulson type money and have extra cap space in place to either extend someone or upgrade a position. I'd rather do that than back the money truck up for Stamkos

Upgrade what position? extend who? I'm just trying to figure out what everyone is so afraid of. Be specific, tell me what we will miss out on by signing the best free agent to hit the market in as long as I can remember.

Everyone is saying we need D, well why can't we trade for a guy on a decent contract/draft a blue chipper and still pay Stamkos. At some point it doesn't matter if the player is "worth" the money, you're paying extra because it's impossible to find someone with his skills without drafting them yourself.

These 20 goal scorers you're talking about are replaceable. You want two of them instead of Stamkos? How many guys in today's NHL are capable of scoring 40 let alone 50 goals? You pay a premium for that skill set.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

years of, "these guys are never available"

now one is available

"we don't need him"

Yes, I'd rather have Keith or Doughty but they aren't on their way to being a free agent.

 

[TehDoak]

What I find humorous is the ONLY reason we don't have one of these huge contracts on the payroll already is that players have rebuffed us.

Brad Richards, Shane Doan, Suter/Parise. What if Gorges wouldn't have came loose, would we have bid big on Orpik? Would we have Callahan right now instead of Gionta if Callahan hit the market?

It's been a blessing in disguise for the rebuild.

None of those players we have tried to bid on have had the same pedigree as Stamkos. Yes, he's having a down year. He's 26. 300 G in 550 games. Thats averaging 40+ goals a season.

If you can add him for JUST the cost of a contract, you do it. You sort out the details later.

 

[Djp]

What I find humorous is the ONLY reason we don't have one of these huge contracts on the payroll already is that players have rebuffed us.

Brad Richards, Shane Doan, Suter/Parise. What if Gorges wouldn't have came loose, would we have bid big on Orpik? Would we have Callahan right now instead of Gionta if Callahan hit the market?

It's been a blessing in disguise for the rebuild.

None of those players we have tried to bid on have had the same pedigree as Stamkos. Yes, he's having a down year. He's 26. 300 G in 550 games. Thats averaging 40+ goals a season.

If you can add him for JUST the cost of a contract, you do it. You sort out the details later.

remember Richards was under Darcy. They likely would have used a buy out on him. They signed him they wouldn't have signed Leino.

With TM he signed Gionta and McCormick to 3 yr contracts. by 2017 Buffalo would have young players and look to add someone using McCormick+Gionta cap space. Gorges went to 2018, then signed Ennis and Moulson to 2019 figuring 2014 high pick and 2015 high pick wouldn't be due their 2nd contract till 2019. Now its 2018, I see Moulson retire afer the 17/18 season and Ennis traded before the 18/19 season.

 

[Djp]

The way I see SJ/TOR trade...

Polak=2nd
Spalling=3rd

With retention/cap dump being sent back that turns the 3rd into a 2nd


If Polak=2nd then Weber=2nd

they are both defensive Dmen, Weber is a little younger, both UFAs to be.

 

[Zip15]

The way I see SJ/TOR trade...

Polak=2nd
Spalling=3rd

With retention/cap dump being sent back that turns the 3rd into a 2nd


If Polak=2nd then Weber=2nd

they are both defensive Dmen, Weber is a little younger, both UFAs to be.

Best of luck convincing another GM of this. Polak has name recognition and the always overrated playoff experience. He also wasn't being healthy scratched before an injury opened a lineup spot for him. I imagine other GM's would simply say SJ made a bad trade and that bad trade isn't binding precedent on them to make a similarly bad trade.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[Sabresfansince1980]

So will Bylsma play ROR less minutes now or put him out for 21 mins with a boot on? I'm thinking he might pull him off the PK until ROR gets a soft brace on.

 

[gallagt01]

I think Buffalo has something in Foligno-Larsson-Gionta. It seemed that all three played early this season unsure of their roles exactly -- Foligno has been in that boat for years, really -- and it clearly affected their play.

Since they formed a line, though, I've been impressed with all three. I think they're strong in goal prevention and I think they can out-possess the opposition.

Foligno, a player I'm generally hard on, has looked very good in this checking role and Larsson has been outstanding. It's also the ideal role for Gio.

I'd like Foligno-Larsson to be the third line "pair" long-term provided their play calls for it.

Now how do we go about upgrading the fourth line? Is Schaller the answer at 4C? Deslauriers is awful and Legwand is on the way out. Is Dupuy legit? Carrier? Worthwhile UFAs that might be had for cheap?

 

[dkollidas]

I think Buffalo has something in Foligno-Larsson-Gionta. It seemed that all three played early this season unsure of their roles exactly -- Foligno has been in that boat for years, really -- and it clearly affected their play.

Since they formed a line, though, I've been impressed with all three. I think they're strong in goal prevention and I think they can out-possess the opposition.

Foligno, a player I'm generally hard on, has looked very good in this checking role and Larsson has been outstanding. It's also the ideal role for Gio.

I'd like Foligno-Larsson to be the third line "pair" long-term provided their play calls for it.

Now how do we go about upgrading the fourth line? Is Schaller the answer at 4C? Deslauriers is awful and Legwand is on the way out. Is Dupuy legit? Carrier? Worthwhile UFAs that might be had for cheap?

I think that if we want to be a team that challenges for cups, Larsson-Foligno will be our 4th line regulars. That will give us the depth that injuries will put them into the top-9, but with a fully healthy roster, I'd prefer them as our 4th line and allow them to play that shutdown role from there.

 

[JThorne]

To all of you saying to sign Stamkos at any price, why wouldn't Tampa do it then? Theres an inherit risk you folks are unconsciously blind to.

 

[Ralonzo]

Fisher doubles down on the idea of shipping Pysyk to the Oilers.

However he raises his offer from Dillon Simpson and a 2017 3rd, to Musil/Lagesson and a 2016 2nd.

 

[haseoke39]

Fisher doubles down on the idea of shipping Pysyk to the Oilers.

However he raises his offer from Dillon Simpson and a 2017 3rd, to Musil/Lagesson and a 2016 2nd.

Who's this clown?

 

[Myllz]

Fisher doubles down on the idea of shipping Pysyk to the Oilers.

However he raises his offer from Dillon Simpson and a 2017 3rd, to Musil/Lagesson and a 2016 2nd.

Still doesn't make any sense. Our defense is bad, so let's ship out one of our better defenseman for a pick and a prospect? Yeah, no.

 

[kirby11]

Upgrade what position? extend who? I'm just trying to figure out what everyone is so afraid of. Be specific, tell me what we will miss out on by signing the best free agent to hit the market in as long as I can remember.

Everyone is saying we need D, well why can't we trade for a guy on a decent contract/draft a blue chipper and still pay Stamkos. At some point it doesn't matter if the player is "worth" the money, you're paying extra because it's impossible to find someone with his skills without drafting them yourself.

These 20 goal scorers you're talking about are replaceable. You want two of them instead of Stamkos? How many guys in today's NHL are capable of scoring 40 let alone 50 goals? You pay a premium for that skill set.

It's hard to be too specific looking down the road, given we don't know what could happen with signings/prospects/trades, but let's say we had a mediocre or worse 3rd pair of defensemen, or had an extremely poor 4th line. We could upgrade some of those positions to average or above average with some extra $, and that would take pressure off other guys, as the replacements could be relied upon for better play more often and eat more ice time with better results.

As to the 2 bolded points: First, I think having a player be worth their money should matter. Stamkos' game is extremely reliant on other guys being playmakers. I've watched a decent bit of TB this year, and he rarely drives the play. He's got the elite shot going for him, but is at best average at most other aspects of the game. The other reason I'd rather not go all in on Stamkos is because lots of top heavy offensive teams struggle in the playoffs. Look at Colorado. Two years ago, they had RoR, Duchene, Mackinnon, Landeskog, and Stasny making up nearly their whole top 6. This handicapped their ability to get decent depth pieces, which meant if those top players failed to produce or just couldn't produce quite enough, their team struggled as a result. We'd be in a somewhat similar position with having to pay Jack, Sam, RoR, and Stamkos.

Second: I like that those 20 goal scorers are replaceable. They will have an easier time potting 20, 25, or even 30+ playing with Reinhart, Eichel, or RoR, like Moulson did w/ Tavares. Ideally, you grab a wing like that (someone like Vrbata, Loui Eriksson, Stempniak, Stafford, etc). they outperform their $4-5 mil contract, and when the contract is up, you move on (or flip them for more than they're worth because our stud centers have inflated their value). And then continue the cycle.

 

[TehDoak]

To all of you saying to sign Stamkos at any price, why wouldn't Tampa do it then? Theres an inherit risk you folks are unconsciously blind to.

I'd argue that it's silly for Tampa to let Stamkos walk, especially considering they can use the 8th year to lower his overall cap number.

If its PURELY a dollar/sense issue:

If let's say it's Stamko's goal to be a the highest paid NHLer, then the argument would be 7 year, 77M should do it.

Tampa could offer a 8 year, 76M deal now, 8 years, 9.5M per. The 1M total he'd "lose" on the contract would be risk that he would take of getting injured between now and 7/1 which could cost him significantly more than that.

Now, I suspect that IF he walks, there is more at play that merely dollars and sense. TB still makes sense if he wants to win long term as the team is setup. Does Yzerman's commitment to Cooper irk him? Maybe in the way the St. Louis situation was handled? Maybe he just doesn't like playing in the sunbelt?

Lot's of things that could be at play.

 

[Jim Bob]

Disco Dan put Pysyk on the 2nd PP unit and he got a helper on one of Bogo's bombs.

Maybe there is hope that Pysyk wil stay?

 

[OkimLom]

Still doesn't make any sense. Our defense is bad, so let's ship out one of our better defenseman for a pick and a prospect? Yeah, no.

Come on now, trades aren't all about affecting both teams in a positive way, only one team should ever come out ahead in trades.

I love how he first states that at first he didn't know how high we were on him, and then still doesn't offer anything of substance for him.

 

[Team Cozens]

To all of you saying to sign Stamkos at any price, why wouldn't Tampa do it then? Theres an inherit risk you folks are unconsciously blind to.

Stamkos will sign with the Leafs. Done deal.

This is how it will happen.

1/ Leafs will let it be known they are not interested.
2/ Pictures come out with Stamkos & TM at the 716 Club... late at night.
3/ Tweeter blows up that Stamkos has signed with the Sabres.
4/ Stamkos signs with the Leafs. States that the wife he doesn't have wanted to
sign in Toronto.