Steven Stamkos stays in Tampa Bay, 8.5mil x 8yrs

[K-9]

Kane would be great on the 3rd line

I seem to recall Kane playing with Larry and Gio this year, before Foligno got the job permanently. IIRC, he looked really good, too. 

 

GO SABRES!!!

[TrueBlueGED]

I seem to recall Kane playing with Larry and Gio this year, before Foligno got the job permanently. IIRC, he looked really good, too.

 

GO SABRES!!!

I loved Kane on that line, but it was a pretty brief stint there.

[dudacek]

 

I liked him on the 3rd line, but the chemistry in the top six started to come along with maturity.

This was a big year for Evander on a personal growth level. the dividends will come next year.

Kane scores close to 30 goals and more than 50 points next year, playing mostly in the top six.

[TrueBlueGED]

I liked him on the 3rd line, but the chemistry in the top six started to come along with maturity.

This was a big year for Evander on a personal growth level. the dividends will come next year.

Kane scores close to 30 goals and more than 50 points next year, playing mostly in the top six.

Are you assuming health? If healthy, for sure. But if he misses as much time as usual, I'm skeptical.

[dudacek]

Are you assuming health? If healthy, for sure. But if he misses as much time as usual, I'm skeptical.

70 games give or take.

[Beer]

DD already said he wasn't going to split up Eichel and Reinhart next year.

Kane-Stamkos-Ennis

OReilly-Eichel-Reinhart

Foligno-Larssen-Gionta

Moulson-Fasching-Bailey

I believe Girgensons will be part of a deal that brings in a QB for our power play. Either Fowler or PK Subban

That looks like a playoff roster to me, although your fourth line lacks a true center. I believe they're all wings. I'd also have Moulson as a healthy scratch assuming we still have Des. Stammer may be a wet dream. I hope he's going for championships and not $$$. I'd also like to understand his chances of coming back from a blood clot. Chris Bosh may be a better comparison than Cody McCormick, did he come back strong? I don't follow the NBA.

[qwksndmonster]

I liked him on the 3rd line, but the chemistry in the top six started to come along with maturity.

This was a big year for Evander on a personal growth level. the dividends will come next year.

Kane scores close to 30 goals and more than 50 points next year, playing mostly in the top six.

I hope you're right.

[dudacek]

Do you guys remember the oddly structured contract ROR got?

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/ryan-o-reilly-sabres-reach-7-year-deal-1.3137672

 

Made me think of two things

1) if TPegs offered to cut Stamkos a $50 million signing bonus cheque up front on top of a 7-year deal at $2 or $3 million per, how much of an advantage would that give the Sabres offer?

2) virtually everything Murray says about ROR in that article could also be said about Stamkos.

 

I remain convinced they go after him, hard.

[TrueBlueGED]

Do you guys remember the oddly structured contract ROR got?

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/ryan-o-reilly-sabres-reach-7-year-deal-1.3137672

 

Made me think of two things

1) if TPegs offered to cut Stamkos a $50 million signing bonus cheque up front on top of a 7-year deal at $2 or $3 million per, how much of an advantage would that give the Sabres offer?

2) virtually everything Murray says about ROR in that article could also be said about Stamkos.

 

I remain convinced they go after him, hard.

 

1) Well, you can't offer $50 million up front because contracts are only allowed to decline in value so much per year (I'm too lazy to look up the exact percentage). Or do you mean just that $50 million of the total contract would be in bonus? In any event, I'm not sure it's an advantage--at the very least, I'm sure Toronto would be willing to match structure.

 

2) You're probably right, although his end of year comments still give me pause about whether he's truly interested in a huge investment in the forwards.

[dudacek]

I don't know why ROR's contract is so bonus-heavy, but there must be some advantage - I was thinking taxes perhaps?

I thought maybe you might be able to overcome the Tampa tax advantage by paying Stamkos the bulk of his money while he is still a Tampa resident.

 

I didn't know bonuses were regarded the same as salaries in terms of the decline rule but was thinking there may be some way TPegs can use his available cash flow to his advantage.

 

Really like to read an explanation of the ROR salary structure.

 

Toronto can and probably would match anything we do financially and it would be stupid to get into a bidding war with them.

I firmly believe no other franchise will offer Stamkos more than $10 and am looking for advantages we might have over Montreal and Detroit at that ceiling.

Edited April 20, 2016 by dudacek

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't know why ROR's contract is so bonus-heavy, but there must be some advantage - I was thinking taxes perhaps?

I thought maybe you might be able to overcome the Tampa tax advantage by paying Stamkos the bulk of his money while he is still a Tampa resident.

 

I didn't know bonuses were regarded the same as salaries in terms of the decline rule but was thinking there may be some way TPegs can use his available cash flow to his advantage.

 

Really like to read an explanation of the ROR salary structure.

 

Toronto can and probably would match anything we do financially and it would be stupid to get into a bidding war with them.

I firmly believe no other franchise will offer Stamkos more than $10 and am looking for advantages we might have over Montreal and Detroit at that ceiling.

 

I think the only real advantage of the bonus structure is it's buyout-proof: player gets paid not matter what. And I think we're on different planets with respect to what we expect Stamkos to get paid--I have a hard time seeing any way he gets less than $10 million.

[dudacek]

I think the only real advantage of the bonus structure is it's buyout-proof: player gets paid not matter what. And I think we're on different planets with respect to what we expect Stamkos to get paid--I have a hard time seeing any way he gets less than $10 million.

We're not on different planets if we both see the contract coming in around $10.

I think it's weird that you guys have advanced so many good anti-Stamkos arguments, yet you seem to think NHL execs haven't come to similar conclusions.

 

Here's why I think $10 million-ish is a more reasonable number than the $12-plus that gets thrown around.:

1) it's an extraordinary contract, it makes him the third-highest-paid player in the game, just a fraction below the highest.

2) as many have pointed out, he's not what he was and may no longer be among the best players in the league.

3) the number of teams that have cap room for a $10 million player is very small.

4) the number of teams where is makes sense to add a $10 million player given other team-building issues is even smaller.

 

The exception is the Leafs.

If money is the only criteria for him, he could leverage the Leafs into making him the leagues highest-paid player.

 

A UFA of this age and caliber is completely new ground.

I think very few teams are in a position to take advantage.and that will put a drag on frenzied bidding

Edited April 20, 2016 by dudacek

[Thorner]

Good points there, dudacek. As for number 2, above, he better still be among the very best goal-scorers in the league or I want nothing to do with giving him a contract in the 10 million dollar range.

[TrueBlueGED]

We're not on different planets if we both see the contract coming in around $10.

I think it's weird that you guys have advanced so many good anti-Stamkos arguments, yet you seem to think NHL execs haven't come to similar conclusions.

 

Here's why I think $10 million-ish is a more reasonable number than the $12-plus that gets thrown around.:

1) it's an extraordinary contract, it makes him the third-highest-paid player in the game, just a fraction below the highest.

2) as many have pointed out, he's not what he was and may no longer be among the best players in the league.

3) the number of teams that have cap room for a $10 million player is very small.

4) the number of teams where is makes sense to add a $10 million player given other team-building issues is even smaller.

 

The exception is the Leafs.

If money is the only criteria for him, he could leverage the Leafs into making him the leagues highest-paid player.

 

A UFA of this age and caliber is completely new ground.

I think very few teams are in a position to take advantage.and that will put a drag on frenzied bidding

I simply don't believe the GMs in a spot to bid will be able to control themselves, because as you said, a player of this caliber hitting the market is basically unprecedented in the cap era. It's one thing to be smart and coldly calculating about Matt Beleskey, it's another when it's a guy who has scored 50 and 60 goals. I think he hits $11 million. Tampa might be able to get him for less due to the 8th year, but if he leaves, it's for $11 million.

[ct fab]

The reason for most of O'Reilly's contract being constructed as bonus vs salary is the players escrow payment. Players pay a ton into an escrow account used for such things as paying players during a lockout and bumping up the salary cap. This 20% or so payment comes from salaries not bonuses (which are exempt). So, if you give Stamkos $10m a year, all salary he only sees $8m of that pre tax. If that $10m is structured $9m bonus, $1m salary he sees $9.8m pre-tax. Huge difference. Advantage Buffalo as not a lot of teams are willing to do that

[beerme1]

Awesome points dudacek. I agree with Thorny in that if 2 is true that makes three ridiculous and also agree with TrueBlueGED that the silly season gm's will in no way be able to control themselves. Look what they've done over the last few years. Remember Clarkson's deal? Bwahahahahaaa ya, Stamkos is getting a new truck.

[dudacek]

The reason for most of O'Reilly's contract being constructed as bonus vs salary is the players escrow payment. Players pay a ton into an escrow account used for such things as paying players during a lockout and bumping up the salary cap. This 20% or so payment comes from salaries not bonuses (which are exempt). So, if you give Stamkos $10m a year, all salary he only sees $8m of that pre tax. If that $10m is structured $9m bonus, $1m salary he sees $9.8m pre-tax. Huge difference. Advantage Buffalo as not a lot of teams are willing to do that

 

Great explanation.

Thank you.

[LGR4GM]

For those who do want stamkos, what would you trade for his rights to get exclusive negotiations?

[nfreeman]

The reason for most of O'Reilly's contract being constructed as bonus vs salary is the players escrow payment. Players pay a ton into an escrow account used for such things as paying players during a lockout and bumping up the salary cap. This 20% or so payment comes from salaries not bonuses (which are exempt). So, if you give Stamkos $10m a year, all salary he only sees $8m of that pre tax. If that $10m is structured $9m bonus, $1m salary he sees $9.8m pre-tax. Huge difference. Advantage Buffalo as not a lot of teams are willing to do that

 

Great post, CT.  You should post more often!

 

I would just add that the other benefits to a huge upfront bonus are (i) the time value of money and (ii) elimination of risk of catastrophic injury, strike, terrorist attack, etc..  $50MM now is worth more than $50MM 5 years from now. 

 

Separately, another factor that may chill the bidding frenzy is Stammer's blood clot disorder.  I have no idea whether it's similar to Chris Bosh's disorder, but if it is, I would assume that GMs would consider that risk in their analysis (i.e. I think Bosh has had to stop playing mid-season in the last 2 seasons).

[That Aud Smell]

The reason for most of O'Reilly's contract being constructed as bonus vs salary is the players escrow payment. Players pay a ton into an escrow account used for such things as paying players during a lockout and bumping up the salary cap. This 20% or so payment comes from salaries not bonuses (which are exempt). So, if you give Stamkos $10m a year, all salary he only sees $8m of that pre tax. If that $10m is structured $9m bonus, $1m salary he sees $9.8m pre-tax. Huge difference. Advantage Buffalo as not a lot of teams are willing to do that

Great explanation.

Thank you.

Great post, CT.  You should post more often!

 

I would just add that the other benefits to a huge upfront bonus are (i) the time value of money and (ii) elimination of risk of catastrophic injury, strike, terrorist attack, etc..  $50MM now is worth more than $50MM 5 years from now. 

 

Separately, another factor that may chill the bidding frenzy is Stammer's blood clot disorder.  I have no idea whether it's similar to Chris Bosh's disorder, but if it is, I would assume that GMs would consider that risk in their analysis (i.e. I think Bosh has had to stop playing mid-season in the last 2 seasons).

 

Hear, hear on ct fab's posting - we need more of that from you, sir! Five posts in ~8 years?!

 

Anyway, this is all very good information. 

 

It's truly unfortunate about Stamkos's blood clot condition. That is really going to add an X-factor to his UFA prospects.

And, so, we've got many reasons that a bonus is preferred to salary: It makes the compensation immune to the effect of a buy-out, it excludes the money from that pesky escrow account, and, the present value of money/bird in the hand.

 

As for the mention of catastrophic injury: Is that a risk to future salary in the NHL?

[dudacek]

For those who do want stamkos, what would you trade for his rights to get exclusive negotiations?

 

How much of an advantage is this any more with the new discussion window prior to free agency opening?

[Brawndo]

How much of an advantage is this any more with the new discussion window prior to free agency opening?

You are the only team talking with him and if his rights are traded he can be signed to an eight year deal for possibly less AAV. After July 1st it can only be a seven year deal

[Taro T]

You are the only team talking with him and if his rights are traded he can be signed to an eight year deal for possibly less AAV. After July 1st it can only be a seven year deal

That is incorrect. He needs to be on the roster prior to the trade deadline to be eligible for an 8 year deal. The point of that 8 year exception is to allow teams an extra chit when trying to keep their team together.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Taro T

[bg17]

Regarding the blood clot - I fell into a suite for the Frozen Four. A high profile Lightning employee spent most of the second semifinal with us. He said that Stamkos situation was identical to that of Vasilevskiy this past September and arose after the same type of exercise. The type of exercise in question included the use of hanging ab straps. Lightning trainers have since eliminated the use of ab straps. Take it for what it's worth.

[ct fab]

I'll try - I lurk a lot but forget my password and am too lazy to reset it. My gut is that they are very interested in Stamkos but the fact he's a natural center isn't an ideal fit for a center rich team. I also think Stamkos would be interested in Buffalo given the fact he grew up 90 minutes away and wouldn't have the pressure of playing in a Canadian market. Two things would severely curtail their interest in Stamkos:

 

1. Being lottery lucky and winning one of the top 3 picks. Eichel's winger would be had here at a fraction of the price

 

2. Vesey's perceived interest in Buffalo. Again, a cheap alternative. 2 problems with Vesey; of course he's not as good as Stamkos nor will he ever be and he can't sign until Aug 15th where the sabres have to decide on Stamkos on July 1