Will Leafs Pursue Stamkos? Part 2

[Jerkini]

To those that don't think there will be Board pressure for a short cut, consider what Scott Moore, President of Sportsnet and NHL Hockey at Rogers had to say:

How would ratings improve if the Leafs were a winning team?

Twenty per cent. We did the analysis. Leaf ratings on Saturday nights are down 20 per cent and overall Saturday night is down 15 to 20 per cent. If the Leafs were winning, their ratings would be up 20 per cent. If they were clearly a playoff team, it would be 30 or 40 per cent. They’re going to be .500 or better next season, and hopefully we’ll see some increase in the ratings.

Do you think Rogers and Bell — as co-owners of the Leafs — would interfere with Brendan Shanahan’s rebuilding program, to try to speed it up, for ratings purposes?

I don’t think the right word is interference. There’s pressure. I believe he is doing the right thing. I think he and the team and us all need to look at the messaging. I don’t think saying there’s four or five years of pain is necessarily the messaging we want. It’s: ‘There’s a plan. There’s progress. There’s going to be legitimate stars on this team over the next number of years that you’ll be able to watch as they progress, whether that’s Leo Komarov, (William) Nylander, or Mitch Marner.’

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/spor...e-on-hockey-hokey-and-hope-for-the-leafs.html

- Jan 17, 2016

It's interesting he's blaming the on-ice product for the reduced ratings, but it doesn't help that they butchered the heart and soul of HNIC. That deserves more criticism than the Maple Leafs.

 

[Jerkini]

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.

It would be interesting to see how indepth the rules are regarding this type of thing. Surely there's a way to pay a player under the table through shell companies and lawyers, so that the money can't be traced back to Rogers/BCE? Man, i'd be so damn crooked if i was the owner of an NHL team and had near infinite wealth.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

It would be interesting to see how indepth the rules are regarding this type of thing. Surely there's a way to pay a player under the table through shell companies and lawyers, so that the money can't be traced back to Rogers/BCE? Man, i'd be so damn crooked if i was the owner of an NHL team and had near infinite wealth.

Heh heh. Until they closed the loophole (assuming one exists), go big or go home:

Offer him 7 years at $5 M per then BCE and Rogers each offer $3.5 per in endorsements. $12 M per for 7 years with a sweet cap hit! LOL

All your free agents are belong to us!!!

Actually it would be an interesting break even study. They say every home playoff game is $3 M in pure profit. Without even factoring in all the other sources of income that drives up, reality is both Rogers and Bell's endorsement investment would be covered off with two home games. How many big names could you afford?

EDIT - Scratch that, at $5 per the after tax comes in slightly lower than Tampa's offer so up it to $6 per. Beauty of that (not that I care but maybe he's like Crosby) is the total comes to $91 M (his number). LOL

 

[mini]

I don't think there's much of a debate as to whether you sign Stamkos... as far as his effect on the 'rebuild' goes. If you can get him you do it. We can't be terrible forever if we draft properly, and if we draft properly you don't worry about where you draft as much. We seem to have the organizational structure in place (scouts, $$, coaches, management direction) that is doing the right things.

You ideally front-load the contract as much as possible (if it matters) in order to pay for our younger guys (hopefully stars) later on as their entry contracts become due.

Which brings me to my questions:

1. If we sign him to a (hypothetical) 7year $77 million dollar deal, does it count as $11 million per year on our CAP regardless of 'front-loading'?

2. What is the allowed % of front-loading a deal (using this hypothetical 7year $77 million)?

If cap hit is determined by AAV regardless of 'loading', then we have to decide how high to go I guess. Sorry for my ignorance, I haven't followed the CBA in a very long time.

 

[Slush]

I say the Leafs should definitely pursue Stamkos. It would be great to have him on the team for the rebuild. The Leafs could build the team around him and he'll instantly be a fan favorite.

 

[Budsfan]

Jones: Steven Stamkos to Toronto makes sense

http://www.tampabay.com/sports/hockey/lightning/jones-steven-stamkos-to-toronto-makes-sense/2262849

Which leads us to this point: When you watch Lightning captain Steven Stamkos skating tonight, it won't take much imagination to picture him in a Toronto sweater.

Unfortunately for Lightning fans, next year at this time it might not take any imagination at all. Stamkos actually could be a member of the Maple Leafs.

Stamkos can become a free agent this summer, and you can't get through a couple of hockey shifts without speculation that the Toronto-born Stamkos will end up playing for his hometown team. Rumors ramp up even more when the Lightning plays the Maple Leafs.

So far, everybody is saying the right things.

So Toronto wants Stamkos, but would Stamkos want Toronto?

First, dismiss this crazy idea that Stamkos doesn't want to play in Toronto because of the pressure of playing there.

True, some players would rather avoid such a burden. Vinny Lecavalier never wanted to go back to Montreal; the Canadiens have a history of incredible success that Lecavalier would have felt immense pressure to continue. He would have been expected to be the next Guy Lafleur, the next Jean Beliveau, the next Rocket Richard.

That's not the case in Toronto. The Leafs have been one of the NHL's most disappointing franchises over the past 40 years. They haven't won — or even played for — a Stanley Cup since 1967. Since then, franchises in nontraditional markets Tampa Bay, Dallas, Carolina and Anaheim have won Cups. Heck, the Florida Panthers have appeared in more Cup finals than the Leafs over the past four decades.

The bar is not very high for Toronto, and any success Stamkos might bring would be welcomed by the Leafs faithful.

 

[studebaker17]

Jones: Steven Stamkos to Toronto makes sense

http://www.tampabay.com/sports/hockey/lightning/jones-steven-stamkos-to-toronto-makes-sense/2262849

I think that writer has no idea what it's like in Toronto lol

 

[Brewsky]

Will they? Don't know. Should they? I say they should.

In this decade, Steven Stamkos has gotten the most points aside from 3 other players.

In this decade, he has the third highest PPG of any player. 2nd in goals behind some jabroni named Ovechkin. Also, 2nd in game winning goals behind that same roody poo.

This is the same Stamkos that Lightning fans were ******** on in December as how he sucks yet he's the team's second best player behind a blossoming Kucherov.

If he comes to TOR, he'll have way better linemates than what he's got now in TB. Drouin was suppose to be his but it doesn't look like it and the triplets line of Palat-TJ-Kuch is going to keep their two best wingers on that line.

I can't wait if next year we got a PP of JVR in front of the net, Nylander and Marner on the half boards, Rielly dishing off to Stamkos on the point for that one timer.

This is not a reach, sure we won't get his prime years as NHL players seems like the early 20s is their prime (which sucks), you will always ponder about the leg, but he did score 40+ goals. Who was the last Leaf to score 40+ goals? Sundin 14 years ago? Want to wait another 14 years for another Sundin that we "draft and cradle and breed on our own". You can have the best of both.

 

[studebaker17]

Will they? Don't know. Should they? I say they should.

In this decade, Steven Stamkos has gotten the most points aside from 3 other players.

In this decade, he has the third highest PPG of any player. 2nd in goals behind some jabroni named Ovechkin. Also, 2nd in game winning goals behind that same roody poo.

This is the same Stamkos that Lightning fans were ******** on in December as how he sucks yet he's the team's second best player behind a blossoming Kucherov.

If he comes to TOR, he'll have way better linemates than what he's got now in TB. Drouin was suppose to be his but it doesn't look like it and the triplets line of Palat-TJ-Kuch is going to keep their two best wingers on that line.

I can't wait if next year we got a PP of JVR in front of the net, Nylander and Marner on the half boards, Rielly dishing off to Stamkos on the point for that one timer.

This is not a reach, sure we won't get his prime years as NHL players seems like the early 20s is their prime (which sucks), you will always ponder about the leg, but he did score 40+ goals. Who was the last Leaf to score 40+ goals? Sundin 14 years ago? Want to wait another 14 years for another Sundin that we "draft and cradle and breed on our own". You can have the best of both.

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.

 

[Menzinger]

There is no such thing as a "proper" rebuild.

True, there are different paths. But the consistent trend among recent cup winners has been that the bulk of their cores are home drafted.

The Leafs tried under a rule and Nonis to place the emphasis on trades and free agency to dismal results

Doesn't mean they can't sign Stamkos though - it all comes down to how management adjusts their rebuild strategy with him in the equation.

 

[gabeliscious]

the argument about state taxes etc etc is a weak argument imo. sure it is a fact but what happens if stamkos is traded?

8.5 in tampa may = 10 in toronto but if stamkos is every moved at some point over his 8 years then the advantage is lost. why take a gamble if you were stamkos?

given tampa track record with long term contracts it is entirely possible stamkos wouldnt last 8 years in tampa. see: lecavalier, st louis

 

[Gallagbi]

the argument about state taxes etc etc is a weak argument imo. sure it is a fact but what happens if stamkos is traded?

8.5 in tampa may = 10 in toronto but if stamkos is every moved at some point over his 8 years then the advantage is lost. why take a gamble if you were stamkos?

given tampa track record with long term contracts it is entirely possible stamkos wouldnt last 8 years in tampa. see: lecavalier, st louis

I thought everyone assumes he'd have a NTC? At the very least a restrictive modified version.

 

[Budsfan]

 

[egd27]

It's interesting he's blaming the on-ice product for the reduced ratings, but it doesn't help that they butchered the heart and soul of HNIC. That deserves more criticism than the Maple Leafs.

Didn't make any changes to HFBoards and the GDT have gone from 80-100 pages down to 20-30 pages.

It's the on ice product that's responsible for the reduced ratings.

 

[Gallagbi]

Didn't make any changes to HFBoards and the GDT have gone from 80-100 pages down to 20-30 pages.

It's the on ice product that's responsible for the reduced ratings.

Judging by hfboards they should play Marlies games on prime time.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Judging by hfboards they should play Marlies games on prime time.

you'd honestly think that TSN would be ALL over that right now.
show them on tsn....2? 4? whatever "leafs region" is. show the future. - build up excitement that way.

 

[Daisy Jane]

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.

hm. i am thinking
how many teams in the NHL are owned by like a massive corporation...
Philly is (comcast, right?)
Montreal (Molson)

is that it?

like if it's a different branch....(like. TSNradio/Sportsnet they're owned by Rogers/Bell - but they can still do whatever ie: roast/bless the team, make "tampering" signs (which then the Leafs say "um no"), etc etc. so like if TSN decides to do something and sponsors Stamkos - is that BELL itself? or is it a branch separate?)

 

[TML1967]

I don't think there's much of a debate as to whether you sign Stamkos... as far as his effect on the 'rebuild' goes. If you can get him you do it. We can't be terrible forever if we draft properly, and if we draft properly you don't worry about where you draft as much. We seem to have the organizational structure in place (scouts, $$, coaches, management direction) that is doing the right things.

You ideally front-load the contract as much as possible (if it matters) in order to pay for our younger guys (hopefully stars) later on as their entry contracts become due.

Which brings me to my questions:

1. If we sign him to a (hypothetical) 7year $77 million dollar deal, does it count as $11 million per year on our CAP regardless of 'front-loading'?

2. What is the allowed % of front-loading a deal (using this hypothetical 7year $77 million)?

If cap hit is determined by AAV regardless of 'loading', then we have to decide how high to go I guess. Sorry for my ignorance, I haven't followed the CBA in a very long time.

AAV is just the average. Doesnt matter front or back loaded. But there are rules as to how high and low a contract can be. No year can be below 50% of the previous year. So 7 years @ aav of 9.5 = 66.5
Any banker or economist will tell you, money now is worth more than future money (CPI, etc)
So 14-13-10-9-8-7-6 = 67 million or aav of 9.57.

Bonus** if he starts to strugle, you can move him in year 6 or 7, and teams will get a free 2.5-3.5 on the cap, for teams looking to reach the floor.

 

[WTFMAN99]

you'd honestly think that TSN would be ALL over that right now.
show them on tsn....2? 4? whatever "leafs region" is. show the future. - build up excitement that way.

I'd watch a Marlies game on TSN over a Leafs game on Sportsnet. Enjoyed the Leaf game against Florida so much more just because it was on TSN and had good people on the air.

 

[Daisy Jane]

AAV is just the average. Doesnt matter front or back loaded. But there are rules as to how high and low a contract can be. No year can be below 50% of the previous year. So 7 years @ aav of 9.5 = 66.5
Any banker or economist will tell you, money now is worth more than future money (CPI, etc)
So 14-13-10-9-8-7-6 = 67 million or aav of 9.57.

Bonus** if he starts to strugle, you can move him in year 6 or 7, and teams will get a free 2.5-3.5 on the cap, for teams looking to reach the floor.

that... actually wouldn't bother me.
I realised yesterday... i was arguing about dollars. then it hit me that i wasn't really considering AAV (and % of the cap).

If we could get Stamkos for an AAV of 9.57 - and pay him real dollars of 14 million, 13, 12 <<----- the Babcock Payout so to speak (sorry we suck, here's your money).

then like you said - drop to 9-8-7-6. that's reallly dooable for me.

 

[Daisy Jane]

I'd watch a Marlies game on TSN over a Leafs game on Sportsnet. Enjoyed the Leaf game against Florida so much more just because it was on TSN and had good people on the air.

agreed. i am beyond mystified why they aren't doing it. like - Rogers took everything (and they always had the CHL). they showed some college because of Eichel - but really: SHOW college hockey. SHOW the marlies. do something

i refuse to watch sportsnet unless it's an all Canadian matchup (because then I can't escape it). it's poop.

 

[WTFMAN99]

agreed. i am beyond mystified why they aren't doing it. like - Rogers took everything (and they always had the CHL). they showed some college because of Eichel - but really: SHOW college hockey. SHOW the marlies. do something

i refuse to watch sportsnet unless it's an all Canadian matchup (because then I can't escape it). it's poop.

My buddy has been PVRing it, we start like 45 minutes after the official start time, and then we can fast forward through intermissions (although we'll watch if Friedman is on the air talking trades etc because he's actually a good one) and so far that's been the best way to do it.

Only problem is reminding myself mentally not to check twitter etc.

 

[Gary Nylund]

My buddy has been PVRing it, we start like 45 minutes after the official start time, and then we can fast forward through intermissions (although we'll watch if Friedman is on the air talking trades etc because he's actually a good one) and so far that's been the best way to do it.

Only problem is reminding myself mentally not to check twitter etc.

I do that almost every game. The only thing I ever watch in the intermissions is Coaches Corner. Fast forward through commercials and intermissions and save maybe an hour or so every game.

It's especially awesome for NBA, you can watch the last 2 minutes of a game in under half an hour.

 

[Pookie]

It's interesting he's blaming the on-ice product for the reduced ratings, but it doesn't help that they butchered the heart and soul of HNIC. That deserves more criticism than the Maple Leafs.

Well, I think the story within the story is that Rogers is selling its advertisers on the idea of a .500 or better hockey club next year…. which in itself is silly as .500 in the NHL loser point system isn't anything special… 24 of 30 teams are over .500.

If those are the projections, how is this team… which should sell its better players at the deadline… and promote rookies… going to anywhere close to .500 next year?

What's also telling is that when asked about "Interference" the reply was "I wouldn't call it interference. There's pressure."

That's a lot different than we have faith in the plan or we have patience that this needs to be done the right way.

Put those two together and you have pressure on Shanahan to deliver a winning record next year. Stamkos would help that but if he isn't available… what then? Seems like we are potentially en route for an accelerated rebuild regardless.

 

[Suntouchable13]

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.