Doc300c
Registered User
I was just trying to fill it out to show how much room we actually have
Could end up any number of ways
- Status
I was just trying to fill it out to show how much room we actually have
Could end up any number of ways
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,131
- 12,263
Alright.
Just alarming when people just have guys like Timashov already in top 6 spot in future line ups, while it's nice, it's not a slam dunk and if the plan counts on something like Zaitsev just immediately being a 2nd pairing guy or Vesey being anything beyond a 3rd line guy to start, it just seems weird to me.
Zaitsev could start on the 3rd pairing and if he excels we could move him up in the line up, he could bomb and go the way of Belov too (don't think he will but it could happen).
Vesey could end up like every other college UFA (outside of Bozak) and not cut it at the NHL level. I've heard good things though, again it might be a nice idea to start him on the 3rd line and go from there.
See I'm kinda of with you as well. If we don't get Matthews I'd like Stamkos but I'm still ok with not getting him. If we get Matthews then I'm leaning more towards not getting Stammer while using that cap space to bolster our D as Matthews, Nylander, Kadri (or a cheaper option) and the Goat down the middle seems like top team centre depth.
Doc300c
Registered User
We are already seeing they are starting new players in lower roles.
Leivo is not a 4th line guy but he plays 4th line over players with less skill.
I agree they will have a better idea of where Zaitsev and Vasey slot in through training camp.
Even if Vasey plays for the Marlies it still only leaves 1 extra spot available for a UFA or rookie to make the team. Nothing that will make or break our season or cap
Inigo Montoya
Registered User
Nike has no class restrictions over Canadian Tire. He could have both endorsement packages. Nike also wouldn't ditch him. Stamkos is arguably one of the top five most marketable athletes in the sport, you don't abandon that particularly when he is going to market that has a high amount of return for your hockey-related products.
Moving Toronto would increase his Canadian brand for sure. He would have no issue lining up Canadian endorsements, particularly companies based out of Toronto.
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,131
- 12,263
Matthews-Nylander-?-Gauthier is a solid foundation for centre.
I agree. It was frustrating to see Leivo start so low in the line up, hoping after we sell off guys he gets 2nd-3rd line minutes to see how he slots in the future. I think ideally he's a solid 3rd line winger with size who can win a lot of puck/board battles and can chip in offense.
Doc300c
Registered User
I agree but, with the addition of Stamkos and Matthews to Nylander and the Goat it will give us the possibility to trade Kadri and Bozak for D help.
I don't think we will be getting any top D-men wanting to come to the Leafs next season even if we sign Stamkos. Using Kadri and Bozak + in a trade for a top D-man might make it easier.
Doc300c
Registered User
I agree, I was hoping to see him on a line with Kadri or Nylander as the big body to go into the corners and fish out the puck. He did a great job last night going into the scrum behind the Flames net and stealing the puck and holding covering it while waiting for his line mates to make a change. If he could do that and then dish it to someone with the skill to put it in the net his point total would go up for sure. Winnik and Boyes just don't have the skill he is used to playing with.
Babcocks Marner
It's a magical time
I wouldn't even think about Stamkos if we win the lotto.
However, if we get 2/3 and draft one of the Finns.... Stamkos looks more interesting to me.
Starting to wonder about Kadri as well.... I really don't think they re-sign Kadri if Stamkos is the plan. With Bozak, Stammer, and Nylander, we are good enough for 3 lines, toss the Goat/Holland maybe on the 4th as a shut down line.
We got all the money in the world now, it's insane. I think the Leafs are now the best cap team in the NHL. Put it this way, in 3.5 years, this is our roster:
Gardnier
Rielly (We know he will be signed)
Kessel retention
Horton
That's it folks. I might be changing to the Stamkos team now that Dion is gone.
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,131
- 12,263
I see Nylander as a centre, so I see a problem with Stamkos-Nylander-Matthews for various reasons.
Their role on the team, and keeping them together long term ($$$) while trying to actually add to our defense, I don't want just focus on offense like Edmonton did.
You're betting off still going Matthews-Nylander-?-Gauthier and trying to flip guys like Kadri and Bozak for help on the back end, even if you have to add.
Wow , I'm on the other side of the fence on that one.
If we draft AM then I'm even more for Stammer.
It's not a stretch to think a kid like AM could hit the ground running like say Eichel.
JVR, Stammer, Marner
Milan Michalek, Auston Matthews, Nylander
Leo Komarov ,Bozak ,Kadri
Winnik ,Holland ,Lupul
that is one hella strong start to the rebuild.
not to mention what else we have in the minor system or other pending UFAs
Shore up the D and figure out the tenders and this could be a playoff contender as early as 2017/2018 season.
I am a diehard tanker , have been since we drafted Luke Schenn but if the opportunity to add AM and Stammer in the same year and NO personnel or draft pick assets going out, it has to be strongly considered
Babcocks Marner
It's a magical time
Well I know when I have to take the QEW, I always see this bill board with Phaneuf selling some watch.... Stamkos can have that
Honest question: Would it be illegal (Conflict of interest) for Bell or Rogers to offer him something? I could see Stamkos trying to sell us Leafs TV, or NHL center ice etc....
Doc300c
Registered User
Yup, not having to pay Stamkos $10+ a year would help with our cap but we also have to remember that we still need to somehow get these players to want to sign with us. UFA top pairing D-men aren't going to be lining up to sign with us at a reasonable price.
Also remember Babcock likes top 9 with bottom line as the shut down line. Who do you propose to continue to score for us on the 3rd line without Stamkos, Bozak and Kadri?
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,131
- 12,263
I wouldn't even think about Stamkos if we win the lotto.
However, if we get 2/3 and draft one of the Finns.... Stamkos looks more interesting to me.
Starting to wonder about Kadri as well.... I really don't think they re-sign Kadri if Stamkos is the plan. With Bozak, Stammer, and Nylander, we are good enough for 3 lines, toss the Goat/Holland maybe on the 4th as a shut down line.
We got all the money in the world now, it's insane. I think the Leafs are now the best cap team in the NHL. Put it this way, in 3.5 years, this is our roster:
Gardnier
Rielly (We know he will be signed)
Kessel retention
Horton
I might be changing to the Stamkos team now that Dion is gone.
If we drafted Laine, Stamkos is fine for sure.
Just wouldn't add both Matthews+Stamkos if we already have Nylander who in my opinion is going to be at the very least a good 2C
You have Nylander as a winger which I disagree with, ditto randomly having Kadri at wing on the 3rd line.
I feel like Holland would be pretty terrible for a shut down line.
Doc300c
Registered User
If Stamkos isn't going to be playing C he wont be a Leaf.
Nylander and Marner would be a bad line because they will both want them puck constantly. Same with Kadri
I think you would need each of those 3 on a different line.
That's why I was suggesting Kadri as an awesome 3rd line C behind Stamkos and Matthews/Nylander.
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,131
- 12,263
It's hard to land top pairing defenseman for sure, if they ever get to UFA..
JVR-Matthews-Marner
?-Nylander-?
Leivo-?-Komarov
?-Gauthier-?
Rielly
Gardiner-?
?-?
I don't feel comfortable penciling in anyone else just yet - We have Timashov, Lindberg, Leipsic, Kapanen, Brown, Bracco, Johnson - Hope to god we have some NHLers in there, I think we do!
Defense - Loov, Percy, Harrington, Valiev, Dermott, Nielsen, maybe Zaitsev - I think we have some NHL defenseman there
Now we also have to consider other draft picks, returns for guys like Bozak, Kadri etc etc to help try to fill needs.
It's hard to predict the future, Matthews isn't even likely.
If we don't get Matthews we could go for Stamkos, and then suddenly you're looking at Laine, or Chychrun/Sergachev in there.
It's fun to actually think about what the future holds for this team.
I'm just really against the idea of adding Matthews AND Stamkos - I think it's redundant when we have centres like Nylander in the system.
oh easy now 99 , that was just a quick put together , all I did was use who we have under contract and two guys I think they will re up as RFAs, that's all.
One of Kadri/Bozak could be dealt for a D man or both if one wants the Goat long term as 3 C.
but I completely disagree with your issue on Nylander , If he can be a good/great winger in this set up who cares? better yet , a winger so versatile that he can also play C for what ever reason, that's some gold right there my friend.
top 4 of Stammer,AM,Nylander,Marner , that's some serious O skill sets in there.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 81,403
- 59,036
Nylander could be a Giroux type at center or he could be a Kane type at wing. Who cares? All I know is if you can stick one of Nylander or Marner on a playmaking puck possession role on the wing to feed Stamkos sniping from center, running Matthews out there like a horse at center and having the other one of Nylander or Marner riding shotgun with him.
That Stephen is exactly my thinking and having the added bonus of having extra skilled C depth if it is needed or even for face offs, who knows.
HarrisonFord
President of the Drew Doughty Fan Club
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,131
- 12,263
I like Matthews-Marner with Nylander controlling the 2nd line more.
You'll have more money available for defense later on.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to me that they'd have spent a full season developing him as a centre just to shift him to wing now.
UMMM common 99 the answer is pretty simple,no?
We don't have either Stammer or AM do we? So it is best to prepare him to play C right now but if the near impossible "what if" can happen and we land both AM/Stammer so be it.
I have looked long and hard at our cap situation going forward and a 10 ish Stammer will do nothing at all to hamper our ability to add money to the back end.
WTFMAN99
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 34,131
- 12,263
I think we should both accept that neither one of us will change our mind on this. My stance is if we land Matthews, forget about Stamkos. We're set at centre in the event we land Matthews and have Nylander in waiting. You think differently and that's okay.
The beauty of this is we might have a 15% chance to land Matthews or something along those lines. So ultimately I wouldn't worry too much about the possibility of landing both. Just wouldn't bother with Stamkos if lottery goes our way.
I wouldn't go above 9-9.5 to land Stamkos either. People are just attaching a value to him based upon his name.
I've watched a LOT of Lightning games this season, because I actually consider Stamkos as a potential future investment. He isn't a 10+ million player though.
His passing/vision/puck handling isn't as good as you'd expect from a player of his caliber. He looks unengaged some nights and playing not to get hurt. I don't see the intensity. I don't know if he's just trying to save himself for the playoffs or just doesn't want to get injured before signing a new contract, but Stamkos isn't what the majority of this board thinks.
He isn't taking over games or winning them singlehandedly for the Lightning. He isn't Kane, Crosby, Ovechkin etc etc and he doesn't provide enough defensively to make up for the offense like Toews-Kopitar.
This board will quickly turn on him if he plays like he has this season in a Leafs uniform.
Frankly, I think the biggest thing is that he is missing marty Stlooo and I think we have 2 kids that could play wing and offer the same skill sets.
TBVH, if we did not have those two kids, I would not think for 1 second on getting Stammer. I believe we have two great options, when it comes to bringing out the best in Stammer.
- Status
