Will Leafs Pursue Stamkos? Part 2

[slozo]

The fact that he is not the most valuable player for Tampa is concerning to me. He is probably not even in the top 3 valuable players on his team. That is something that should be taken into account.

That's a ridiculous statement.
Sure, I would take Bishop and Hedman ahead of Stamkos ... but it's close, and they're different positions. I would still have Stamkos as the top forward, no doubt.

But hey - here's a question : why?
Why should that be taken into account?

 

[Stephen]

So far so good for Stamkos in his audition LOL.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

If a company owns a team, are they able to offer a player endorsements?

One would think it would not be allowed, just thinking it would be comical if both Rogers and BCE offered him the difference in endorsements.

Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to this question. A thing to remember here is that this isn't a unique advantage to Toronto though. Most NHL owners own other businesses and could do the same thing.

I'd think there are rules against this, but I cannot say for certain.

If I recall correctly, at the beginning of the last two CBAs, the salary cap was based on a percentage of the total profit picture for all NHL clubs. There were quite a few rules in place to identify allowable expenses. I would think the NHLPA would have accountants and lawyers that would audit that document to try to determine its veracity. Hence, if there were a bunch of irregularities or fishy looking stuff, it might get revealed then.

However, I cannot claim any kind of expertise in this domain.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to this question. A thing to remember here is that this isn't a unique advantage to Toronto though. Most NHL owners own other businesses and could do the same thing.

I'd think there are rules against this, but I cannot say for certain.

If I recall correctly, at the beginning of the last two CBAs, the salary cap was based on a percentage of the total profit picture for all NHL clubs. There were quite a few rules in place to identify allowable expenses. I would think the NHLPA would have accountants and lawyers that would audit that document to try to determine its veracity. Hence, if there were a bunch of irregularities or fishy looking stuff, it might get revealed then.

However, I cannot claim any kind of expertise in this domain.

I have no doubt others COULD as well and WOULD try to if someone pulled it off but I'm sure the league would quickly work to plug such holes. I remember when we hired Lou I said I hope he stays out of player management but makes his two most useful skills abundant to us: his connections and his uncanny ability to twist and skirt the rules.

It'd be interesting whether you could pull it off. I'm quite familiar with some of the inner workings of the empire made up by the 3rd richest person(s) in Canada. They have more different groups or names or numbered companies than you can shake a stick at.

 

[Snow Dog]

I have watched Stamkos as closely as I can tonight and he doesn't look bad on the defensive side of the puck.

 

[studebaker17]

Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to this question. A thing to remember here is that this isn't a unique advantage to Toronto though. Most NHL owners own other businesses and could do the same thing.

I'd think there are rules against this, but I cannot say for certain.

If I recall correctly, at the beginning of the last two CBAs, the salary cap was based on a percentage of the total profit picture for all NHL clubs. There were quite a few rules in place to identify allowable expenses. I would think the NHLPA would have accountants and lawyers that would audit that document to try to determine its veracity. Hence, if there were a bunch of irregularities or fishy looking stuff, it might get revealed then.

However, I cannot claim any kind of expertise in this domain.

Wouldn't show up on an audit though against the team. A separate Comp that happens to be part owner of the team could have an endorsement deal and i wouldn't think that would have to be disclosed because it's not a team business expense. Seems to simple to get away with though. It's a good question.

 

[Gabriel426]

Wouldn't show up on an audit though against the team. A separate Comp that happens to be part owner of the team could have an endorsement deal and i wouldn't think that would have to be disclosed because it's not a team business expense. Seems to simple to get away with though. It's a good question.

I am sure it happens all the time. Key is not to overpaid too much. Like if Stamkos had been getting paid by Nike say 1 mil a yr. If a shell company comes in and paid Stamkos 5mil a yr just for playing in TO, thats unreasonable. If the deal is 1.5mil, then nobody will say anything. Just need a few companies to line up and pay Stamkos.

 

[Cor]

If we are lucky enough to walk away with Matthews, does that change anything?

 

[tmlfan98]

If we are lucky enough to walk away with Matthews, does that change anything?

Probably. Thinking long term, if we sign Stamkos to 11 million per, when Matthews' ELC is done after year 3 of Stamkos' contract, he'll probably already be one of the best two-way centres in the game and we'll have to sign him to a huge contract as well, while at the same time still have 4 years of Stamkos at 11 million per. We would probably end up with a Pittsburgh kind of situation where we have an extremely expensive centre duo, which would greatly hinder our spending elsewhere. It wouldn't be smart to sign Stamkos if we win the lottery and Matthews projects to be better than him.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Probably. Thinking long term, if we sign Stamkos to 11 million per

That's not long term thinking.

 

[Cor]

That's not long term thinking.

.... Did you just not read the rest of the post? You know, the stuff you deleted from the quote to cherry pick that line?

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to this question. A thing to remember here is that this isn't a unique advantage to Toronto though. Most NHL owners own other businesses and could do the same thing.

I'd think there are rules against this, but I cannot say for certain.

If I recall correctly, at the beginning of the last two CBAs, the salary cap was based on a percentage of the total profit picture for all NHL clubs. There were quite a few rules in place to identify allowable expenses. I would think the NHLPA would have accountants and lawyers that would audit that document to try to determine its veracity. Hence, if there were a bunch of irregularities or fishy looking stuff, it might get revealed then.

However, I cannot claim any kind of expertise in this domain.

I have no doubt others COULD as well and WOULD try to if someone pulled it off but I'm sure the league would quickly work to plug such holes. I remember when we hired Lou I said I hope he stays out of player management but makes his two most useful skills abundant to us: his connections and his uncanny ability to twist and skirt the rules.

It'd be interesting whether you could pull it off. I'm quite familiar with some of the inner workings of the empire made up by the 3rd richest person(s) in Canada. They have more different groups or names or numbered companies than you can shake a stick at.

Alright, it sounds like you've made up your mind then and didn't need to ask the question.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Wouldn't show up on an audit though against the team. A separate Comp that happens to be part owner of the team could have an endorsement deal and i wouldn't think that would have to be disclosed because it's not a team business expense. Seems to simple to get away with though. It's a good question.

Good point.

 

[thewave]

I have watched Stamkos as closely as I can tonight and he doesn't look bad on the defensive side of the puck.

He's not an this team is dying for a Stamkos. Nobody we have currently can score. With th current goalies drafting should be about...

Speed
Shot(goal scoring ability)
The rest

Thank goodness we have some scorers in the system but premature to call them solutions.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Alright, it sounds like you've made up your mind then and didn't need to ask the question.

Not really sure how you reached that conclusion?

 

[Erndog]

That's not long term thinking.

Finish reading what he said. Jeez.

 

[Stephen]

It's kind of funny seeing TSN (Bell) and Sportsnet (Rogers) fan the flames of controversy over Stamkos and speculate on his signing in Toronto when those two are owned by parent companies that in turn own the Leafs.

 

[Brewsky]

[/B]

We didn't draft and cradle Sundin though. The last 40+ goal scorer we drafted ourselves would of been Clark himself. Boyes would be the last that was drafted but did it for another team. Scorers like that don't grow on trees and in todays age are even rarer.

Yeah I know Sundin wasn't, the point was the focus is so much on grabbing prospects from the get go instead of a trade or signing. Sundin was a trade. We don't have to have that mindset.

We go after Stamkos all guns blazing.

 

[Mess]

Big picture thinking.

For me it might not be such a bad thing if Stamkos does re-sign in TB for $10 mil plus and then Leafs go hard after his teammate Viktor Hedman who is a potential UFA the following year.

Hedman as a #1D might have a much bigger impact paired with Rielly as Leafs top pairing then Stamkos might add.

TB might have a hard time fitting both Stamkos and Hedman and all their other RFAs.

 

[Rielly4]

Big picture thinking.

For me it might not be such a bad thing if Stamkos does re-sign in TB for $10 mil plus and then Leafs go hard after his teammate Viktor Hedman who is a potential UFA the following year.

Hedman as a #1D might have a much bigger impact paired with Rielly as Leafs top pairing then Stamkos might add.

TB might have a hard time fitting both Stamkos and Hedman and all their other RFAs.

I thimk they would more likely move out Johnson/Palat/Kucherov then Hedman.

 

[Daisy Jane]

It's kind of funny seeing TSN (Bell) and Sportsnet (Rogers) fan the flames of controversy over Stamkos and speculate on his signing in Toronto when those two are owned by parent companies that in turn own the Leafs.

if anything - it kind of strengthens what Bell/Rogers said when they took over the team - they don't really put their thumbs on what they do/do not say re: the Leafs which was a big fear. like i've heard a lot of TSN/Sportsnet pundits flat out go "no - don't sign stamkos" and of course the equal amount saying they should so.yay for that at least

 

[Suntouchable13]

Yeah I know Sundin wasn't, the point was the focus is so much on grabbing prospects from the get go instead of a trade or signing. Sundin was a trade. We don't have to have that mindset.

We go after Stamkos all guns blazing.

How old was Sundin when we got him? Wasn't he around the same age as Stamkos? If we get him, I see it playing out about the same with the Leafs naming him captain shortly after

 

[Tak7]

How old was Sundin when we got him? Wasn't he around the same age as Stamkos? If we get him, I see it playing out about the same with the Leafs naming him captain shortly after

Mats was 23

 

[Mess]

I thimk they would more likely move out Johnson/Palat/Kucherov then Hedman.

I agree they will try to keep Hedman however they are talking Subban range money here and can TB afford not just Stamkos at $10 mil but Hedman also at $9 mil?

I was simply thinking from a Leafs perspective if the Leafs had to pick either Stamkos or Hedman as an UFA option then I believe investing in the Dman as much as I like Stamkos might be the smarter team building move.

So the silver lining of missing out on Stamkos might open another potential door that in fact might be the better long-term outcome.

 

[Stephen]

I think Yzerman might be prioritizing it like this:

Hedman (cornerstone)
Kucherov (emerging as their best forward)
Stamkos/Palat (current superstar they may be moving away from/elite two way forward)
Johnson (injured a lot, small, terrible statistical year)

But then Vasilevskiy, Namestnikov, etc. will need deals down the line too.