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

[pi2000]

I think we have some 30 goal scorers. Malkin, Kane, Lucic, Selanne....not sure if you're saying they were pure scorers in that season, but if you were, I disagree and will contest that point.

 

What's your definition of "pure scorer"?

[WildCard]

What's your definition of "pure scorer"?

A guy who's only talent is scoring goals. Stamkos does not produce assists, especially primary assists; does not play defensively minded, or even that well in his own end; is set up more than he generates, which is concerning as a center. 

[Randall Flagg]

WC, I'm going to look more in-depth at the Hall/Stamkos comparison later, just because it sounds fun. I'm going to have to learn how to analyze some stats, we'll see what ends up happening

 

As for my official stance on Stamkos...

My favorite post in this thread was Neo's, a few pages back. He more eloquently outlined exactly what I want to do. Assuming we don't pick 1st, I'd like to get a defenseman with our first round pick. I'd then avoid emptying the cupboards for Fowler/Lindholm/Brodin/any other wet dream LHD, and I'd sign a Campbell/Goligoski as a cheaper vet (probably excluding Yandle in this scenario too) for a couple years while Chych/Sergachyov/Juolevi simmer. I'd then shoot for Stamkos, not giving him more than a ~$10 million cap hit. I could wind up totally wrong, but I don't think he's going to get that much money. 

 

I agree with balking at Stamkos for anything north of that cap hit. 

 

As for Sabres' 30 goal scorers, I would bet that ROR scores 30 once at most for this team, Kane never, and Reinhart once or twice in his prime. Jack's the only one that will do it with any regularity, IMO.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Randall Flagg

[TrueBlueGED]

I almost want to change my stance on Stamkos just to argue against JJ :angel:

[JJFIVEOH]

I almost want to change my stance on Stamkos just to argue against JJ :angel:

Who said you need to change your stance? :D

[Randall Flagg]

This isn't meant to be an argument for Stamkos, just something fun I stumbled across. He's clearly not the same player as he was during his 60 goal season.

 

That year, he scored 48 even strength goals. That's insane. For comparison, Seguin leads the way with 25 this year so far, Nash finished first with 32 last year (Stammer was second with 30), Perry had 35 in 2013-14, Stamkos/Tlusty/Toews/Tavares tied for a pace of 32 in the lockout season, Malkin finished second to his 48 with 38 in 11/12, Perry again with 32 in 10/11, and then several years of Ovechkin, who peaked with 43 in his 65-goal season. 

[tom webster]

This isn't meant to be an argument for Stamkos, just something fun I stumbled across. He's clearly not the same player as he was during his 60 goal season.

 

That year, he scored 48 even strength goals. That's insane. For comparison, Seguin leads the way with 25 this year so far, Nash finished first with 32 last year (Stammer was second with 30), Perry had 35 in 2013-14, Stamkos/Tlusty/Toews/Tavares tied for a pace of 32 in the lockout season, Malkin finished second to his 48 with 38 in 11/12, Perry again with 32 in 10/11, and then several years of Ovechkin, who peaked with 43 in his 65-goal season. 

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.

[jsb]

We keep forgetting about the fact that the Sabres already have at least four 30+ goal scorers. Not this year, but soon. Why do we keep making it like there is no offensive firepower already on the team?

Since we're going with facts, except for Kane we don't have ANYONE that has scored 30 goals in a NHL season. And you're badmouthing a guy in his off year has already scored 33 this year????? Unfortunately your facts are BS or crystal ball facts.

[JJFIVEOH]

Since we're going with facts, except for Kane we don't have ANYONE that has scored 30 goals in a NHL season. And you're badmouthing a guy in his off year has already scored 33 this year????? Unfortunately your facts are BS or crystal ball facts.

1. We have at least 4 that have scored 30 goals, another with 28.

2. Of the two I included in my four, two of them have yet to even complete a full season.

3. Show me where I'm bad mouthing Stamkos. I've repeatedly said he is an elite goal scorer with one dimension. Am I wrong?

4. The facts I've posted are backed up directly from advanced stats websites, if you find them inaccurate, take it up with them.

Edited March 21, 2016 by JJFIVEOH

[dudacek]

We keep forgetting about the fact that the Sabres already have at least four 30+ goal scorers. Not this year, but soon. Why do we keep making it like there is no offensive firepower already on the team?

 

This reminds me of the people who said the Sabres don't need Briere and Drury. Vanek, Pominville, Roy and Stafford are going to score 30.

Something something chickens hatching....

 

A guy who's only talent is scoring goals. Stamkos does not produce assists, especially primary assists; does not play defensively minded, or even that well in his own end; is set up more than he generates, which is concerning as a center. 

 

You are losing me here. Steven Stamkos has averaged nearly an assist every second game. His worst full season is 29 assists.

Besides, we have ROR, Eichel and Reinhart. We'd be bringing Stamkos in to be a finisher.

 

 

And Taylor Hall?

You are crucifying Stamkos for "only" scoring 33 goals this year.

Taylor Hall is a year younger and has never hit 30 goals.

Nothing against Hall, but has a far worse pedigree for defence, injuries and inability to lift his team than Stamkos.

This year's declining Stamkos has virtually identical numbers to the peaking Hall.

 

I'm starting to think you are confusing Stamkos with Alexander Semin.

Edited March 21, 2016 by dudacek

[pi2000]

A guy who's only talent is scoring goals. Stamkos does not produce assists, especially primary assists; does not play defensively minded, or even that well in his own end; is set up more than he generates, which is concerning as a center. 

 

For years he's been the only guy on that team that can score goals so his lack of assists isn't a concern at all.    We're not paying him to be a setup guy... he's the trigger man.    The entire league knows this, game plans around taking away his shooting lanes and he still scores 30+ genos.    

 

He's a career plus player who's been on some terrible TBL teams.     He also kills penalties... again, what's not to like?

Edited March 21, 2016 by pi2000

[WildCard]

This reminds me of the people who said the Sabres don't need Briere and Drury. Vanek, Pominville, Roy and Stafford are going to score 30.

Something something chickens hatching....

 

 

You are losing me here. Steven Stamkos has averaged nearly an assist every second game. His worst full season is 29 assists.

Besides, we have ROR, Eichel and Reinhart. We'd be bringing Stamkos in to be a finisher.

 

 

And Taylor Hall?

You are crucifying Stamkos for "only" scoring 33 goals this year.

Taylor Hall is a year younger and has never hit 30 goals.

Nothing against Hall, but has a far worse pedigree for defence, injuries and inability to lift his team than Stamkos.

This year's declining Stamkos has virtually identical numbers to the peaking Hall.

 

I'm starting to think you are confusing Stamkos with Alexander Semin.

If Stamkos is a finisher, he's a winger. Good luck telling him that. He gets a ton of secondary assists, not primary assists, which indicates he isn't the one really creating the plays

 

The bold simply isn't true, not even remotely. Taylor Hall's possession numbers and ability are some of the best in the game for his age, and overall really. He is very good in his own zone, and maintaining possession elsewhere. Stamkos isn't even in the same universe as Hall when it comes to defense/possession

 

Hall has, for his career, a .51 assists/game. Stamkos has a .44. How does that happen, for the miracle of offensive talent that is Steven Stamkos?

 

They each have 58 points, Stamkos is older, costs, at least, $3m more, and Hall is better than him in every single category other than pure goal scoring ability. Injuries concern me with Hall, that's about it

For years he's been the only guy on that team that can score goals so his lack of assists isn't a concern at all.    We're not paying him to be a setup guy... he's the trigger man.    The entire league knows this, game plans around taking away his shooting lanes and he still scores 30+ genos.    

 

He's a career plus player who's been on some terrible TBL teams.     He also kills penalties... again, what's not to like?

I don't believe that at all. St.Louis was still putting up 30 goals per year when he played with Stamkos, and Lecavlier was hitting his usual 20's.

 

+/- might be the worst stat ever conceived. I would kill it if I could.

 

I don't know why he kills penalties. I have a hard time believing he's any good at it

Edited March 21, 2016 by WildCard

[WildCard]

WC, I'm going to look more in-depth at the Hall/Stamkos comparison later, just because it sounds fun. I'm going to have to learn how to analyze some stats, we'll see what ends up happening

 

As for my official stance on Stamkos...

My favorite post in this thread was Neo's, a few pages back. He more eloquently outlined exactly what I want to do. Assuming we don't pick 1st, I'd like to get a defenseman with our first round pick. I'd then avoid emptying the cupboards for Fowler/Lindholm/Brodin/any other wet dream LHD, and I'd sign a Campbell/Goligoski as a cheaper vet (probably excluding Yandle in this scenario too) for a couple years while Chych/Sergachyov/Juolevi simmer. I'd then shoot for Stamkos, not giving him more than a ~$10 million cap hit. I could wind up totally wrong, but I don't think he's going to get that much money. 

 

I agree with balking at Stamkos for anything north of that cap hit. 

 

As for Sabres' 30 goal scorers, I would bet that ROR scores 30 once at most for this team, Kane never, and Reinhart once or twice in his prime. Jack's the only one that will do it with any regularity, IMO.

Looking forward to it.

 

And Kane, never? I'll bet you he hits 30 next year, if he's healthy. Right there with you on ROR though

[nucci]

A high risk, one dimensional goal scorer who would demand an elite contract, special treatment and captaincy is a terrible move. It doesn't get any more simple than that.

I've backed up my points with numbers, I have yet to see the other side.

Fact or your speculation?

[Randall Flagg]

Looking forward to it.

 

And Kane, never? I'll bet you he hits 30 next year, if he's healthy. Right there with you on ROR though

Hope he proves me wrong, but I expect 25 the rest of the way, and that's fine with me.

[pi2000]

I don't believe that at all. St.Louis was still putting up 30 goals per year when he played with Stamkos, and Lecavlier was hitting his usual 20's.

 

+/- might be the worst stat ever conceived. I would kill it if I could.

 

I don't know why he kills penalties. I have a hard time believing he's any good at it

 

Yep, Stamkos had +45 assists when St. Louis was scoring in the 30's.    46 assists alone would make him our #3 scorer.  

[JJFIVEOH]

Fact or your speculation?

 

I'm basing it on  the general consensus that he will want to be captain and he will sign a contract on the condition he is a center.  

[dudacek]

1) If Stamkos is a finisher, he's a winger. Good luck telling him that. He gets a ton of secondary assists, not primary assists, which indicates he isn't the one really creating the plays

 

2) The bold simply isn't true, not even remotely. Taylor Hall's possession numbers and ability are some of the best in the game for his age, and overall really. He is very good in his own zone, and maintaining possession elsewhere. Stamkos isn't even in the same universe as Hall when it comes to defense/possession

 

3) Hall has, for his career, a .51 assists/game. Stamkos has a .44. How does that happen, for the miracle of offensive talent that is Steven Stamkos?

 

4) They each have 58 points, Stamkos is older, costs, at least, $3m more, and Hall is better than him in every single category other than pure goal scoring ability. Injuries concern me with Hall, that's about it

 

1) This seems like remarkably rigid thinking. Phil Esposito led the league in goals multiple times as a centre. Stamkos is a finisher. 2nd best in the league by most accounts. Mostly as a centre. And again, all this certainty with the pouty Steve meme.

2) Haven't seen the proof. I'll take your word for it. Hasn't translated into results on the ice.

3) Hall is what a 42-assist man? Stamkos a 37-assist man? That's supposed to signify a huge difference? Why are you so fixated on Stamkos assist numbers, yet so willing to ignore the fact that Stamkos gets about as many goals per game as Hall gets assists per game? Is it because that would mean that Stamkos creates more offence?

4) So to be clear, you'd rather have Taylor Hall and, say, Cody Franson than Stamkos, the sixth pick in this draft and Tyler Ennis? Cause Franson is what is what $3 million gets you in the UFA market and it would probably take more than Ennis and our top pick to land Hall.

I'm basing it on  the general consensus that he will want to be captain and he will sign a contract on the condition he is a center.  

 

The general consensus among internet posters? Because I don't think you even have that.

Edited March 21, 2016 by dudacek

[nucci]

I'm basing it on  the general consensus that he will want to be captain and he will sign a contract on the condition he is a center.  

general consensus by whom? He's not even a free agent yet or begun negotiations with other teams. It's pure speculation. Has any player ever negotiated a contract to only play one position?

[JJFIVEOH]

general consensus by whom? He's not even a free agent yet or begun negotiations with other teams. It's pure speculation. Has any player ever negotiated a contract to only play one position?

 

Of course it's speculation, but it's been mentioned in here several times over. It's no different than his salary demands, we don't know that either. 

1) This seems like remarkably rigid thinking. Phil Esposito led the league in goals multiple times as a centre. Stamkos is a finisher. 2nd best in the league by most accounts. Mostly as a centre. And again, all this certainty with the pouty Steve meme.

2) Haven't seen the proof. I'll take your word for it. Hasn't translated into results on the ice.

3) Hall is what a 42-assist man? Stamkos a 37-assist man? That's supposed to signify a huge difference? Why are you so fixated on Stamkos assist numbers, yet so willing to ignore the fact that Stamkos gets about as many goals per game as Hall gets assists per game? Is it because that would mean that Stamkos creates more offence?

4) So to be clear, you'd rather have Taylor Hall and, say, Cody Franson than Stamkos, the sixth pick in this draft and Tyler Ennis? Cause Franson is what is what $3 million gets you in the UFA market and it would probably take more than Ennis and our top pick to land Hall.

 

The general consensus among internet posters? Because I don't think you even have that.

 

General consensus among SS posters, hence the reason we talk about it. It's also the general consensus that Stamkos actually wants to come to BFLO, or else there would be no reason to talk about it. 

[dudacek]

Of course it's speculation, but it's been mentioned in here several times over. It's no different than his salary demands, we don't know that either. 

 

By you and Wildcard. Repeating something enough times until it becomes fact might work in politics, but it won't hold up here.

[WildCard]

1) This seems like remarkably rigid thinking. Phil Esposito led the league in goals multiple times as a centre. Stamkos is a finisher. 2nd best in the league by most accounts. Mostly as a centre. And again, all this certainty with the pouty Steve meme.

2) Haven't seen the proof. I'll take your word for it. Hasn't translated into results on the ice.

3) Hall is what a 42-assist man? Stamkos a 37-assist man? That's supposed to signify a huge difference? Why are you so fixated on Stamkos assist numbers, yet so willing to ignore the fact that Stamkos gets about as many goals per game as Hall gets assists per game? Is it because that would mean that Stamkos creates more offence?

4) So to be clear, you'd rather have Taylor Hall and, say, Cody Franson than Stamkos, the sixth pick in this draft and Tyler Ennis? Cause Franson is what is what $3 million gets you in the UFA market and it would probably take more than Ennis and our top pick to land Hall.

 

The general consensus among internet posters? Because I don't think you even have that.

 

Look at Hall's Hero charts, his advanced stats, anything. Hall dominates Stamkos in possession and defensive pplay

 

In a vacuum, I take Hall over Stamkos without blinking.  Hall isn't the reason why his team sucks. Take away Hedman and Bishop and see what Stamkos does. 

 

I truly think Stamkos chooses a destination where he can play center, and probably would prefer one where he is the main guy on the team

By you and Wildcard. Repeating something enough times until it becomes fact might work in politics, but it won't hold up here.

It's a logical conclusion. He can go anywhere, and is very public about his desire to play center. It's also logical to think that given his history and status he's had his entire career, he wouldn't throw that away willingly to play 2nd fiddle to someone else on another team. 

Yep, Stamkos had +45 assists when St. Louis was scoring in the 30's.    46 assists alone would make him our #3 scorer.  

2 rookies are our leading scorers. Not really too much of a comparison there

Edited March 21, 2016 by WildCard

[JJFIVEOH]

By you and Wildcard. Repeating something enough times until it becomes fact might work in politics, but it won't hold up here.

 

Sigh.................................

 

Would you care to address the rest of the post, or just grasp at straws? Eliminate special treatment and captaincy from my post............. it's still a terrible move. 

 

A high risk, one dimensional goal scorer who would demand an elite contract, special treatment and captaincy is a terrible move. It doesn't get any more simple than that.

I've backed up my points with numbers, I have yet to see the other side.

[dudacek]

In a vacuum, I take Hall over Stamkos without blinking.  Hall isn't the reason why his team sucks. Take away Hedman and Bishop and see what Stamkos does

 

I truly think Stamkos chooses a destination where he can play center, and probably would prefer one where he is the main guy on the team

 

In a vacuum I would too. This isn't a vacuum.

Hall is not the reason his team sucks, but you can't deny he sure hasn't done much to make it better.

Stamkos was scoring buckets long before Hedman (who is great) and Bishop (who is average) emerged.

I truly think Stamkos chooses a destination that offers the best combination of allowing him to succeed on the ice while meeting most of his goals off the ice.

Sigh.................................

 

A high risk, one dimensional goal scorer who would demand an elite contract is a terrible move. It doesn't get any more simple than that.

 

I agree with this statement.

I also think you are confusing Steve Stamkos with Alexander Semin.

 

This is the first Stamkos scouting report I found. Seems to match the player I've seen:

Skates very well, has awesome hand/eye coordination and can score in a variety of ways. His one-timer when parked high in the slot is deadly. Displays solid playmaking and two-way upside. Plays with enough grit and aggression to keep opponents honest. Flaws: Needs more polish in the face-off circle, as well as continue to up his defensive-zone coverage (which isn't bad at all). He's a shooter first and foremost, but could still improve his passing skills a tad to maximize production. Also needs to limit his scoring slumps.

 

It ended by calling him elite.

 

Look, I don't even love Stamkos, I just like addressing flawed arguments.

I need to take a break.

Webster etc. Please feel free to carry the flag for a while.

Edited March 21, 2016 by dudacek

[beerme1]

Hall had ONE shift that I noticed him when Edmonton was recently here. I expected more. Just sayin.