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

[Rasmus_]

I want to go on record as the only one to say that I think Stamkos will score 60 again.

 

I could easily see 50, not sure about 60.  But it's not impossible.

[LGR4GM]

I want to go on record as the only one to say that I think Stamkos will score 60 again.

His sh% went from .172 (career average) to .198% in the year he hit 60.  He also played 82 games. Could he, yes. Will he, idk.

[Beer]

His sh% went from .172 (career average) to .198% in the year he hit 60.  He also played 82 games. Could he, yes. Will he, idk.

Next year will be interesting with goalie pads shrinking.  There may be some more holes for the snipers to hit.  I guess we'll have to see if it works.

 

I think with the right line mates he can get back to 50-60  goals.  He's only 26.  He'd also have to get prime PP time.  I love to see an Eichel, ROR, Stamkos, Reinhart, and Risto PP unit. 

[LGR4GM]

I agree with that idea Beer.  I like the idea of Stamkos on Buffalo, my real concern is cost and will his production be sustained for say 5 years into his deal.

[Beer]

I agree with that idea Beer.  I like the idea of Stamkos on Buffalo, my real concern is cost and will his production be sustained for say 5 years into his deal.

 

It's a very real concern and I've expressed it either earlier in this thread or another.  I want Stammer but for the right price and term.  It would be a tragedy if we put ourselves in cap purgatory when Eichel and Reinhart are hitting their prime (say 4-5 years from now).  I want a dynasty dammit. 

 

If not Stamkos now, are there any other superstars (or high-end talent... think Hossa) that are up for UFA in the next 2-3 years when we're really contenders?  I know that is probably difficult to know now.

[7+6=13]

I agree with that idea Beer.  I like the idea of Stamkos on Buffalo, my real concern is cost and will his production be sustained for say 5 years into his deal.

 

I think you're one of the most reasonable posters and I enjoy reading your comments.  I can see that you clearly like Stamkos and would like to see him here but you have concerns about the cost.  My guess is that you're really worried about his prime years and does the cost coincide with our young talent being ready at the same time.  My answer to that concern is that they do - maybe not next year or the year after but in year 3 they'd be ready to roll together. 

 

My second point would be what's the alternative because I don't personally think Jack, Sam and ROR is enough to win a cup.   We'd need at least 2 other of our youngsters to develop into top 6 offensive players and we'd have to pay Kane to stay.  Stamkos IMO opinion removes the need to be totally dependent on a player like Fasching, Bailey or even Zemgus.  IMO when these players are 23-24 they won't be near the player Stamkos will be at 28-29.

[ct fab]

And Stamkos is very good for 5 years, and we win, say 2 cups, I would be okay if he wasn't so good in year 6 and 7. Just give me a cup before I friggin die!!

[Thorner]

I mean, it'd be really fun to watch, it really would. But depth and defense win in the postseason, not flashy talent. Penguins had all the talent in the world for years, and didn't do ######

Can I go on record saying I'd gladly take 1 cup, and 3 finals appearances, all while having the joy of watching these great players make the playoffs every year? Good enough for me.

 

True, and it's not going to get any better. He deserved that contract last time around, not now. We'll be paying for 2009-2013 Stamkos, briefly getting 2014-2016 Stamkos, and then have a whole different version for the last 3/4 years of that deal, or when Jack and Reinhart are in their prime

 

 

By the same token as people saying we can't know that Stamkos will be able to return to his prior form, one can't know that he won't. He can very potentially return to 09-13 form. He may not. We don't know. But he'll certainly still be as good as this year for several years, and he was a top 10 goal scorer.

 

Re: the remarks about patience.

I don't believe attempting to add a star player like Stamkos reflects a lack of patience.

It was always part of the plan to be in a position like we are now: loaded with a talented young core, upwardly mobile, with plenty of money under the cap to add crucial pieces, whether they are available in free agency or through trade.

 

I think we have been patient in order to add a player like Stamkos.

Whether he is the right player, or at what contract he becomes a liability, those are legitimate questions.

But not to investigate an opportunity like this when it presents itself?

That would be patience wasted.

Agreed.

 

 

The thing is, the majority of UFA deals turn out to be bad ones, largely because you are paying declining players for past performance.

I think it is highly unlikely Stamkos ever scores 60 or even 50 goals again.

I do think it is quite likely he will score 200-250 over the seven-year term of his next contract.

And to me, that is far better value than you typically get from a UFA signing.

 

Question:

Is this team better off in three years by signing Stamkos at $10 million per over seven?

Or by signing Goligoski and Yandle for about $12 million per over the next four to six?

 

 

Sign Stamkos, and one of the 2 D.

 

 

I think it's a win now move IMO. If Jack and Sam were 2-3 years older, or Stamkos 2-3 years younger, it'd be a different story

 

 

One example - Sid was in the finals in his 3rd season, winning in his 4th. Say Eichel follows a similar pattern, that's 2/3 years away for us. Stamkos will be in his 20s, 27 and 28 respectively. It's a fine time to add him. Toews got there quickly, too.

 

 

Either this season or next season jack eichel will score more goals then Stamkos. He already out produced Stamkos in there respective rookie years.

I don't think so, Stamkos is more of a pure sniper, don't see Eichel scoring 50, although it's possible.

[Hoss]

If we win one cup every single contract on that roster is worth every penny.

[Hoss]

Bob McKenzie said the only offer Tampa Bay has made to Stamkos was $8.5 million for 5 or 6 years. Said Tampa can't make it work if it goes above $9 mill.

Dregs said Detroit is very interested.

[nfreeman]

Bob McKenzie said the only offer Tampa Bay has made to Stamkos was $8.5 million for 5 or 6 years. Said Tampa can't make it work if it goes above $9 mill.

Dregs said Detroit is very interested.

If TB really is capped at $9MM x 6 years, he is gone.

[inkman]

If TB really is capped at $9MM x 6 years, he is gone.

All the talking heads I've heard have said as much

[nucci]

It's a very real concern and I've expressed it either earlier in this thread or another.  I want Stammer but for the right price and term.  It would be a tragedy if we put ourselves in cap purgatory when Eichel and Reinhart are hitting their prime (say 4-5 years from now).  I want a dynasty dammit. 

 

If not Stamkos now, are there any other superstars (or high-end talent... think Hossa) that are up for UFA in the next 2-3 years when we're really contenders?  I know that is probably difficult to know now.

Doesn't everybody?

[WildCard]

Bob McKenzie said the only offer Tampa Bay has made to Stamkos was $8.5 million for 5 or 6 years. Said Tampa can't make it work if it goes above $9 mill.

Dregs said Detroit is very interested.

Called it. Rescinded it later on, but I'll stick with still calling it.  :D

[LGR4GM]

Well regardless of the outcome, learned a hell of a lot about Stamkos

[TrueBlueGED]

Bob McKenzie said the only offer Tampa Bay has made to Stamkos was $8.5 million for 5 or 6 years. Said Tampa can't make it work if it goes above $9 mill.

Dregs said Detroit is very interested.

Cautionary tale for those who don't think the cap hit would matter for us down the road.

[Hoss]

Cautionary tale for those who don't think the cap hit would matter for us down the road.

Tampa's biggest contracts are coming this year and next. Ours are much further down the road with much more time to manage.

 

Here's a rough projection of the 2019-20 contract situation. Contracts in italics are projections.

 

Kane ($6.5M) - Eichel ($8M) - Reinhart ($6M)

O'Reilly ($7.5M) - Stamkos ($10.5M) - Bailey ($3.5M)

FA/DRAFT ($3M) - Girgensons ($4M) - Fasching ($2.5M)

Deslauriers ($1.8M) - Vet C ($2.5M) - Baptiste ($2M)

 

Draftee ($900K) - Ristolainen ($6M)

McCabe ($3M) - Bogosian ($5.1M)

Guhle ($900K) - Vet D ($2M)

 

Lehner ($5M) - Backup ($1.4M)

 

Hodgson: $791K dead

 

This comes to $82.9M. That could easily fit under a projected cap raise or be managed by moving a few. I'm sure some of these projections are low and some are high. A guy like Kane could be out and replaced by a young player. I think it's very manageable.

[qwksndmonster]

I think Eichel will be 10+ mil and Reinhart will be 8+

 

At least.

[Drunkard]

Tampa's biggest contracts are coming this year and next. Ours are much further down the road with much more time to manage.

 

Here's a rough projection of the 2019-20 contract situation. Contracts in italics are projections.

 

Kane ($6.5M) - Eichel ($8M) - Reinhart ($6M)

O'Reilly ($7.5M) - Stamkos ($10.5M) - Bailey ($3.5M)

FA/DRAFT ($3M) - Girgensons ($4M) - Fasching ($2.5M)

Deslauriers ($1.8M) - Vet C ($2.5M) - Baptiste ($2M)

 

Draftee ($900K) - Ristolainen ($6M)

McCabe ($3M) - Bogosian ($5.1M)

Guhle ($900K) - Vet D ($2M)

 

Lehner ($5M) - Backup ($1.4M)

 

Hodgson: $791K dead

 

This comes to $82.9M. That could easily fit under a projected cap raise or be managed by moving a few. I'm sure some of these projections are low and some are high. A guy like Kane could be out and replaced by a young player. I think it's very manageable.

Is Pysyk the vet RHD on the 3rd pair or did you trade him in this scenario?

 

Also, what did we get for Foligno and Larsson? Just wondering. Either way I like the projected lineup. I think it could contend for a cup (and rack up a ton of cusps) assuming the unnamed spots are filled with quality bargains.

Edited June 4, 2016 by Drunkard

[Hoss]

Is Pysyk the vet RHD on the 3rd pair or did you trade him in this scenario?

 

Also, what did we get for Foligno and Larsson? Just wondering. Either way I like the projected lineup. I think it could contend for a cup (and rack up a ton of cusps) assuming the unnamed spots are filled with quality bargains.

It's 2019. I have a feeling even fewer of the current roster players will be here than I projected.

I think Eichel will be 10+ mil and Reinhart will be 8+

 

At least.

On their second contracts? Not quite sure on that. They'd both need to have two consecutive seasons of at least 70 points to get there, in my opinion.

[Hoss]

If you take a look at how the Blackhawks cap structure is currently there's a good chance a player like Kane will not be here.

Basing off the lines they used in their last playoff game this season:

 

Panik ($975K) - Toews ($10.5M) - Kane ($10.5M)

Panarin ($812K) - Anisimov ($3.3M) - Teravainen ($894K)

Ladd ($2.8M) - Kruger ($1.5M) - Hossa ($5.3M)

Desjardins ($800K) - Shaw ($2M) - Weise ($717K)

 

Keith ($5.5M) - Seabrook ($5.8M)

van Riemsdyk ($925K) - Hjalmarsson ($4.1M)

Gustafsson ($600K) - Rundblad ($1M)

 

Crawford ($6M) - Darling ($587K)

 

$1.1M in retained salary (Scuderi). Bickell ($4M), Ehrhoff ($1.3M) scratched.

 

That's $40.1M for forwards, $17.9M for defense and $6.6M for goalies.

In my Sabres scenario we see $57.8M for forwads, $17.9M for defense and $6.4M for goalies.

 

So considering this Blackhawks team wasn't to the cap and I tried my best to keep real names of current players in the mix for my Sabres lineup it's not insanely far off. Blackhawks playoff lineup wasn't to the cap and the cap will go up. If the Sabres want to make it work they'll have tough decisions in the coming years (Kane, other free agent spending, depth spending) but can make it work. They'll need to hit on some late-rounders and/or college/European free agents.

 

I don't think it's going to take a lot to manage this. The cap increase (or lack thereof) will be a huge factor.

[Norcal]

Why is the assumption from some that Eichel and Reinhart will get $8-10 mil in their second contracts? If they are our Toews and Kane, which IMO they are, I could see them getting similiar contracts to Toews and Kane. Both got matching $6.3 million dollar contracts between their entry level deals and their current contracts and both had stanley cups sitting on their negotiating tables as well. It's a bit assuming to think Jack or Sam will completely skip the next level of contract IMO

[Hoss]

Toews' second contract was 5 years, $31M ($6.3M per). That was coming off his first cup championship and he was captain of the team at the time. Conn Smythe winner. Had seasons of 54, 69 and 68 points.

Kane's second contract was 5 years, $31M ($6.3M per). Seasons of 72, 70 and 88 points.

 

Projecting $8M for Eichel's second contract might be excessive.

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm not in a position to look it up: what percentage of the cap were those $6.3 million contracts when signed?

[Hoss]

I'm not in a position to look it up: what percentage of the cap were those $6.3 million contracts when signed?

About 10.6% but it was also coming off the CBA agreement where it was known the cap would have scheduled jumps. The next season it was $64.3M (9.8%) and then it jumped to $70.2M (8.9%).

We're not at the point where the expectation is a significant jump in the coming years (that could change) which is something I accounted for when projecting $8M and $6M respectively. $8M would be 10.7% of the current salary cap.

 

Also factor in that it's somewhere between likely and highly likely that neither Eichel nor Reinhart match the production or accolades either player had to that point and I think $8M and $6M is somewhat of a ceiling for their second contracts.

Edited June 4, 2016 by Hoss