Steve Stamkos?

[sneakyray]

What about police and firemen who put their lives on the line every day?  Or soldiers?  What about construction workers who take a way bigger toll on their bodies plus they risk death every day on the job.

Or the children. Why won't someone think of the children?

This made me laugh heartily.

[sneakyray]

Seriously though Stamkos is good...the leafs should get that guy.

[LuncheonMeat]

As much as I'd love for Stamkos to be a Leaf, I know it's not going to happen. I really hope he signs an extension with the Bolts this summer so we don't have to deal with a year full of absurd rumours and speculation about how he's sure to sign with the Leafs, only to see him re-sign with Tampa.

I had to do it (my apologies).   

Yzerman's top priority was to get Stamkos signed to an extension this summer. He didn't. Instead, Steven took batting practice with the Blue Jays.

Timing aside, perhaps sickbeast was on to something!

Please take this with a grain of salt, I heard this from my father...

He was saying that the Leafs may be about to sign Steve Stamkos.

I assume he heard this somewhere in the media.

Anyhow I just thought I would throw that one out there.  Enjoy.

[pnjunction]

I'm not sure how Stamkos even fits with the long term outlook of the team.  I don't see how we contend inside 5 years and after that he will be 30, starting to decline and sucking up big cap space that we might need for younger players entering their prime at that time.  I mean it was obvious that we missed the boat on Kessel and he is only 2 years older.

I look at a guy like Lecavalier that I would have loved to see the Leafs get when he was 25 and was putting up over a point per game, but after 30 his production fell off a cliff.  Stamkos might not fall off the same but just an example of what we might be getting into.

[LuncheonMeat]

I'm not sure how Stamkos even fits with the long term outlook of the team.  I don't see how we contend inside 5 years and after that he will be 30, starting to decline and sucking up big cap space that we might need for younger players entering their prime at that time.  I mean it was obvious that we missed the boat on Kessel and he is only 2 years older.

I look at a guy like Lecavalier that I would have loved to see the Leafs get when he was 25 and was putting up over a point per game, but after 30 his production fell off a cliff.  Stamkos might not fall off the same but just an example of what we might be getting into.

Assuming the unlikely, he would be 26 when he signs with the Leafs. Max contract for a UFA would be 7 years, putting him at 32 in his last year. That's a gamble I would be willing to take in getting one of the best centers in the game, entering his prime.

[Dappleganger]

Signing Stamkos for 7 years at league-leading money is a no brainer. He'll still be productive at age 32. Most upper echelon players are still productive at that age. It would actually be a good age to get out of that type of contract.

[pnjunction]

If the team were going to be any good in the next 3-4 years I would agree, what I question is what the team would accomplish during the contract and what the cap limitations would be ie. who might have to go due to cap limits while he was here.   

I suppose he could always be moved if it's clear we are going to miss his window in the last few years.  The nightmare scenario would be that he declines to unmoveable status (ie Phaneuf if he doesn't turn it around, Lecavalier, many others) and then we're handcuffed with big cap. Tampa got a (cap-)free buyout on Lecavalier a luxury that won't be available in the future.

Still if he's willing to sign here you almost have to do it because of how hard it is to land that kind of talent outside the draft without giving up assets...

[bustaheims]

Signing Stamkos for 7 years at league-leading money is a no brainer. He'll still be productive at age 32. Most upper echelon players are still productive at that age. It would actually be a good age to get out of that type of contract.

It's a no brainer for a team in position to take advantage of more than the last couple seasons of that contract. It's not much use to a team that's going to waste the most productive years of it.

[Frank E]

It's a no brainer for a team in position to take advantage of more than the last couple seasons of that contract. It's not much use to a team that's going to waste the most productive years of it.

Not that I'm saying that this should be pursued, but with all the talk of culture change and bringing in discipline and all that stuff, Stamkos would be a guy that sort of personifies that work-ethic message.

[LuncheonMeat]

If the team were going to be any good in the next 3-4 years I would agree, what I question is what the team would accomplish during the contract and what the cap limitations would be ie. who might have to go due to cap limits while he was here.   

I suppose he could always be moved if it's clear we are going to miss his window in the last few years.  The nightmare scenario would be that he declines to unmoveable status (ie Phaneuf if he doesn't turn it around, Lecavalier, many others) and then we're handcuffed with big cap. Tampa got a (cap-)free buyout on Lecavalier a luxury that won't be available in the future.

Still if he's willing to sign here you almost have to do it because of how hard it is to land that kind of talent outside the draft without giving up assets...

Lecavalier put up 54 points in 65 games as a 30/31-year-old (25 goals), and 49 points in 64 games as a 31/32-year-old (22 goals). Not bad production, and given that this would be the end-point of Stamkos' contract, and taking into account that Stamkos is a better player, I would still sign Stamkos without hesitation.

[LuncheonMeat]

Signing Stamkos for 7 years at league-leading money is a no brainer. He'll still be productive at age 32. Most upper echelon players are still productive at that age. It would actually be a good age to get out of that type of contract.

It's a no brainer for a team in position to take advantage of more than the last couple seasons of that contract. It's not much use to a team that's going to waste the most productive years of it.

So, if you're GM next year and Stamkos is available for nothing but $$, do you sign him? I realize the timing may not be the best, but do you pass up that opportunity because it doesn't make sense in the short term? I'm not being argumentative, just curious.

[bustaheims]

Not that I'm saying that this should be pursued, but with all the talk of culture change and bringing in discipline and all that stuff, Stamkos would be a guy that sort of personifies that work-ethic message.

That's true, but you don't need a Stamkos to bring about that kind of culture change and enforce that message. I also don't really think one guy can accomplish that any way. That sort of message starts at the top, and the Leafs have gone a long way to getting that going. I'm not sure Stamkos - or any individual player - would help much outside of being the poster boy for the media to point to. You need a group of guys to do that, and you can probably bring in that group cheaper, on shorter contracts and that better serve the current, short-term goals of the organization.

[herman]

Not that I'm saying that this should be pursued, but with all the talk of culture change and bringing in discipline and all that stuff, Stamkos would be a guy that sort of personifies that work-ethic message.

That's true, but you don't need a Stamkos to bring about that kind of culture change and enforce that message. I also don't really think one guy can accomplish that any way. That sort of message starts at the top, and the Leafs have gone a long way to getting that going. I'm not sure Stamkos - or any individual player - would help much outside of being the poster boy for the media to point to. You need a group of guys to do that, and you can probably bring in that group cheaper, on shorter contracts and that better serve the current, short-term goals of the organization.

Work ethic from the top? Are you talking about this guy?

Invalid Tweet ID

[bustaheims]

Work ethic from the top? Are you talking about this guy?

Man, I hope I'm in that good shape when I'm 46. Heck, I'm nowhere close to being in that shape now!

[herman]

Work ethic from the top? Are you talking about this guy?

Man, I hope I'm in that good shape when I'm 46. Heck, I'm nowhere close to being in that shape now!

Seriously. 6 years since retirement and he's still clearly eating right, and working out hard.