tom webster

Not to mention that if they made the NCAA's he wouldn't have been going to classes anyway.

And Russo is as good as it gets.

What's that, Stamkos was tied for 2nd in the league in 5X5 goal scoring last year? During a particularly bad year for him, he and the great 5 on 5 Patrick Kane were virtually dead even on points per 60 minutes of 5 on 5. How is that possible? Again, if I have the time, I will put together a "Hoss type" argument for Stamkos but quite frankly, it seems like a waste of time. Most people here have put up pretty good arguments for both sides and my guess is that my stat argument would be met by an anti stat argument. I just hope the Sabres do one of three things, add the top level defense that True wants or add Stamkos or add someone that JJ thinks is better. Then we all win.

Still doesn't get old, makes me laugh everytime.

I can't argue that but either way its way premature to count him as a 30 goal guy.

I think the only one you can really count on is Jack. Sam has had a great year but I see him settling in as a 20 goal, 50 assist guy, same with ROR. Kane is what he is, a highly valuable 25 goal scorer. Whether you want Stamkos or not, they need another scorer. There is chance that Bailey or Fasching could develop into that but in the meantime, you need a little more from your wingers.

Who exactly are you counting on to be legitimate 30 goal scorers?

I know, its the stuff dreams are made of. Fowler at $4M for two more years, Larsson at $5M for the 3 years and Risto at between $4.8/$5.5M for 6 or more years. I think they could win with that.

It comes back top the same argument for me, and again, I respect the well thought rebuttals of both Wildcard and True, but Drew Doughty, Eric Karlsson and players of their ilk are not available. Yandle and Stamkos are and they can afford them both. The only potential other option is Oliver Ekman Larsson who I believe will be offered to whomever wins the draft lottery. (wouldn't that be amazing as with his contract you could afford him, Fowler and Stamkos,) Stamkos, despite JJ's disbelief, is an elite talent and scores goals in a league that doesn't score. I leave it up to those that scout these things to determine if his decline is going to continue, level off or reverse itself. I personally believe that as long as he puts up 35/40 goals at today's games value he is worth $10M per year and with being available on the open market will get more. Without knowing what will happen between now and July, I have no idea if he fits TM's plan.

You consider Ovechkin and Patrick Kane multi dimensional ? Exactly, and like I said before. You don't get many chances to acquire elite goal scorers without giving up anything. As for that srtivle, WildCard, that was the first that came up when I started my research. My only two questions which I hsvent had time to look up, have things changed since it was written in January? It feels like he has come on but I haven't looked it up yet. Other question, writers motives. Statistics have been my life and I know a writers motives can make stats day what they want. It is definitely a concern that he may be tailing off, especially as True says since his leg injury. On the other hand we've heard about the demise of Crosby and Ovechkin that may have been pre-mature. These are the things Murray and his staff have yo determine.

So it's just some fan?

You should just copy and paste this every year this conversation comes up. It's been a long time since that fax machine malfunction

In two years, when Kane's deal is done, Mouldon will only have one year left. You won't lose Kane because if Moulson. Kane will be gone because hopefully he's your 6th best forward and you don't pay your 6th forward what he'll want.

OK, I've hot one more thing, those teams don't pay the 5th and 6th best forwards over $5/6M per year and that's what Kane and Ennis will be. They find good value veterans, kids on the rise and then add at the deadline. there is plenty of room and the unique opportunity of having two of your best players on entry level deals and the potential that you could rotate goaltenders still on their second deal for the next few years.

Cool. I had that, might still somewhere. I don't do the estate sale thing but my in laws do and gave done quite well over the years.

Disagree with the part about the defenseman and I am not interested in spending a lot on depth forwards. With Stamkos, O'Reilly, Sam and Jack, two years of Evander and Zemgus plus an intact third line, the rest of the forwards will be kids and interchangeable pieces you add and subtract at the deadline and prior to every year. Again, I'm not even advocating for Stamkos just stating that it's very doable for at least two years and after that is dependant on the cap and choosing the right players to keep. One thing I'm sure of, if the contracts are good value, you will never lose good players for nothing. I feel like we are going in circles so I'm done for now but I will spend some time on putting together a statistical argument to support his worth.

A) maybe I didn't make my point well B) adding Stamkos doesn't prevent adding a top pair defensemand and extending Risto

I think you missed my point. There seem to be hundreds of data bases measuring every part of every game and quantifying every players impact on that game. Is there one stat that is the be all, end all? No. So what stats do you use. JJ seems to like 5 on 5 goal scoring but what is the proper filter? I say over 15 minutes per game, someone else will say well jeez, if you give player X that many minutes he'd score as well. Anyway, I have a day off this week, maybe I'll put together 20 categories and measure his ranking in those categories. One thing I can probably guarantee without doing it? Out of all the players that fall into the elite category in those rankings, he is going to be one of the only ones available without giving up any assets. That's what creates this debate. Whether you believe he is top 10 or top 50, you can add him to your team without weekending any other part of your team for at least two years.

And if you compare apples to apples Stamkos is 13th in the league in a down year when you filter out everyone playing less then 15 minutes per game. Like I said, a little info in the wrong hands. If anyone wants, I'll spend a day researching stats to prove how good he is or we can just assume that hockey's brightest minds will be bidding on him because he is. Two scenarios, I got tired of playing Jeckyl and Hyde, especially when I won my own contest, or that wasn't a voice in my head telling me he needed a little time away.

I'm not sure there is a forward that I would consider a playoff specialist. My point was that referring to anyone as a "specialist" infers that he is a liability to your team in other parts of the game. Guys like Stamkos and Ovechkin bring so much more to the game. Do they excel on the power play? Of course but to state that they shouldn't play 5 on 5 is, well, laughable.

Sorry, yes

You are talking about a $10 million investment into something no other franchise has done. Sounds like something is expect would come from the top and I'm sure GMTM was part of the discussion from the start. Comings and goings, hiring and firings are part and parcel with an organization trying everything to get an edge. The alternative is stagnation snd contentment and a "country club atmosphere" were no one fears for their job.

1) you make a lot of good points as to why if you were Stamkos you wouldn't come here. Fact is, no one but he and his inner circle know what factors will influence his decision. I think it was Hoss who said it earlier, everyone is motivated toward a decision by their own value system. It's no different then people assuming guys want to play for their hometown; some guys want to be anywhere but. 2) I consider a player like Franson a playoff specialist. Guys like Ovechkin and Stamkos bring a whole lot more.

Only 10 at large bids. We will know by noon

Have to admit I don't follow college that closely but no one seems to think there is any chance of an at large bid