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

[Thorny]

I disagree. Passing stats, if they did exist, would be meaningless. Think of all of the passes completely unrelated to play making in a given game. Passing it behind your net, passing it across the neutral zone, passing it off for a zone change, playing catch on the pp, etc. 

 

 

 We want him to shoot more because he has an incredible shot, not because he's a pass-first guy.

 Seguin and Benn were split up, and Malkin/Crosby and Kane/Toews are only brought together in desperate situations to score a goal. Seguin being a play maker does not change my opinion on Jack

That quote is using scoring in terms of points, in general. He's a scoring forward, not a two way forward or a defensive specialist.

[WildCard]

I'm not saying that Stamkos needs to be brought into Bufflalo to play wing for Eichel so he can finish all his nice passes. (Would be nice, but still).

 

Bottom line, if I'm GMTM, I go to Stamkos' people and say: "You know, we've got an awful lot of centers with tons of skill. Maybe Steve would like to be part of that? You know, on the wing, dining on all the great feeds he's likely to get over the course of this exorbitant in both term and dollars contract?

 

He says he'd rather play center, well then. But it could be beautiful... I mean, goals. Actual pucks across the mother######ing line goals...

You're outta luck if you want goals in this league  :lol:

[TrueBlueGED]

Passing data, for those who want to take a deep dive: https://hockey-graphs.com/2015/12/18/passing-project-data-release-volume-i/

[Thorny]

 

What about Benn and Sharp? You can have 2 guys on a line that can both snipe. Are you arguing you cannot?

 

You missed my point on the passing stats. What I was saying was that amount of shots taken doesn't tell us anything.

[TrueBlueGED]

What about Benn and Sharp? You can have 2 guys on a line that can both snipe. Are you arguing you cannot?

 

They're sniping with putters right now  :w00t:

[Thorny]

Passing data, for those who want to take a deep dive: https://hockey-graphs.com/2015/12/18/passing-project-data-release-volume-i/

Cool, I'll check this out.

[WildCard]

That quote is using scoring in terms of points, in general. He's a scoring forward, not a two way forward or a defensive specialist.

I don't believe so. The other reports I've read all say the same thing, except one that also mention he can be a playmaker as well. Aslo, McDavid's says nothing about being a scoring center, despite him not being a defensive specialist.

[qwksndmonster]

I agree wholeheartedly that Eichel is a pass first player.  It just seems to be the way he sees the game, despite the fact that he has the skill set to be a sniper as well.

[WildCard]

What about Benn and Sharp? You can have 2 guys on a line that can both snipe. Are you arguing you cannot?

 

You missed my point on the passing stats. What I was saying was that amount of shots taken doesn't tell us anything.

I did not miss your point. I explained, IMO, why passing stats tell us nothing, and the alternative is therefore shooting stats. 

 

Look at the shot charts for Crosby, Eichel, and Stamkos. Eichel's shots are consistently further out than either other players. Why would he be shooting so far out if he was a play making center?

[TrueBlueGED]

I think the most successful teams in today's NHL take a balanced approach with the skill sets of their lines: 1 offensive dynamo and 2 two-way players. It doesn't mean that Jack with Stamkos couldn't work, but how many teams actually assemble their lines this way? 

[Thorny]

My initial lineup would be:

 

O'Reilly-Stamkos-competition

Girgensons-Eichel-Reinhart

Kane-Larsson-Gionta

Looks good to me.

 

WildCard, when the quote mentions his hockey IQ is what allows him to be a scoring power forward, generally hockey iq refers to passing/playmaking ability. It's not saying his playmaking ability allows him to be a goal scoring forward. It's saying his hockey IQ (playmaking) and skill set allow him to be a scoring (points) forward.

 

So you've read ONE article that said he can be a playmaker? Come on now. Is that why he has more assists than goals in nearly every season he's played at a competitive level? And Stamkos has more goals in nearly all?

 

You missed my point on the passing stats because I wasn't asking you to produce passing stats. Shooting stats don't tell me how often he is passing the puck and what you see when you watch him on the ice.

 

If you watched him play 81 games this season and didn't think he was a pass first player, I really don't know what to tell you.

 

"Eichel has a long and quick skating stride that gives him great speed, power, balance, and acceleration. He has the ability to blow by defenders whether it is walking out of the corner on the cycle game, or taking them wide on the rush. Once Eichel gets a step on a defender, they are in trouble. He also has top-notch stickhandling, outstanding hockey sense, great vision and passing skills and he can be a prime playmaker and makes his line mates better. Also add in a hard wrist shot with a lightning quick release and he can score goals as well. Quite simply Eichel has all the tools to be a future top line centre in the NHL. While the US NTDP has produced numerous elite prospects in recent years, Eichel could be a true NHL superstar, and the best prospect to come out of that program to date. He looks the part of the future top line centre that the Americans have lacked to pair with their top level wingers in the last two Olympics."

 

http://lastwordonsports.com/2015/02/10/2015-nhl-draft-february-rankings-part-one-1-5/

I think the most successful teams in today's NHL take a balanced approach with the skill sets of their lines: 1 offensive dynamo and 2 two-way players. It doesn't mean that Jack with Stamkos couldn't work, but how many teams actually assemble their lines this way?

 

I feel like you see lines with 2 offensive players all the time. Ovechkin Kuznetsov Oshie, Seguin Benn Sharp, Namestnikov Killorn Kucherov. Maybe Stamkos wouldn't work with Eichel but my guess is it's certainly worth a try. If it doesn't work, the option you posted looks really good too.

I agree wholeheartedly that Eichel is a pass first player.  It just seems to be the way he sees the game, despite the fact that he has the skill set to be a sniper as well.

Exactly. He really is both, a playmaker and a shooter. But he leans towards trying to find a teammate first. It's the way he sees the ice, his exceptional hockey-IQ.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Thorny

[WildCard]

Looks good to me.

 

WildCard, when the quote mentions his hockey IQ is what allows him to be a scoring power forward, generally hockey iq refers to passing/playmaking ability. It's not saying his playmaking ability allows him to be a goal scoring forward. It's saying his hockey IQ (playmaking) and skill set allow him to be a scoring (points) forward.

 

So you've read ONE article that said he can be a playmaker? Come on now. Is that why he has more assists than goals in nearly every season he's played at a competitive level? And Stamkos has more goals in nearly all?

 

You missed my point on the passing stats because I wasn't asking you to produce passing stats. Shooting stats don't tell me how often he is passing the puck and what you see when you watch him on the ice.

Then why isn't it ever mentioned in McDavid's reports? All of McDavid's scouting reports consist of the same praise for vision, but none for scoring. And no, I have not read ONE article. 

 

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2015/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Jack-Eichel

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2015/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Connor-McDavid'

 

I'm not saying Jack can't make plays, or that he has crappy vision, or anything even remotely like that. Even his scouting reports say his is a playmaker, but I don't think that makes him necessariy the pass-first guy he's being labeled as. What I am saying is, Jack is not the 75-25 percentage split between pass and shoot that I keep reading on here, IMO. He's not going to be as much of an assist machine as Thornton, he is going to shoot and score, from distance, a lot. 

 

As far as assists over goals, I find it highly relevant that there is such a large difference in shooting %.

 

Eichel: 10.1

 

Stamkos: 16.7

 

So, let's just say Jack shot at the same level as Stamkos. Something he probably would have done if he shot from closer areas instead of so far out, as his shooting charts show. We have 238sog * (.167) = 39.7 goals. So, Jack shoots more, but does it from worse locations, so he scores less, and therefore has more assists than points

 

I genuinely do not understand how I've missed the point on passing stats. Sorry if I'm being rude, but I don't. 

Edited May 30, 2016 by WildCard

[TrueBlueGED]

I feel like you see lines with 2 offensive players all the time. Ovechkin Kuznetsov Oshie, Seguin Benn Sharp, Namestnikov Killorn Kucherov. Maybe Stamkos wouldn't work with Eichel but my guess is it's certainly worth a try. If it doesn't work, the option you posted looks really good too.

 

Ovi and Kuznetsov aside (point of order: Ovi's most frequent linemates were Backstrom and Oshie, both of whom are quality two-way players), I think those other lines are more balanced than you give them credit for. Maybe we're talking past one another. I'm not saying that you have defensive specialists with your star offensive player, but you need guys who can play a 200 foot game if one guy on the line is a defensive black hole (I'm talking Eichel here, not Stamkos). 

[nfreeman]

My initial lineup would be:

 

O'Reilly-Stamkos-competition

Girgensons-Eichel-Reinhart

Kane-Larsson-Gionta

Put Ennis as the winger to be named later with ROR and Stammer, and switch Kaner and Girgy (which I would've thought was obvious) and I will be EXTREMELY psyched for opening night.

 

And Yandle plus Gogo instead of Stamkos is like preferring 2 quarters to a silver dollar.

[WildCard]

http://lastwordonsports.com/2015/02/10/2015-nhl-draft-february-rankings-part-one-1-5/

All of those scouting reports have each player with playmaking ability, that's why they're top 5 picks.

 

His passing is outstanding as the young centre has the ability to thread pucks through tight spaces and put passes tape to tape at high speeds. Connor McDavid also possesses an accurate shot, with a good release.

 

[Eichel has]  passing skills and he can be a prime playmaker and makes his line mates better.  Also add in a hard wrist shot with a lightning quick release and he can score goals as well.

 Marner has great speed, and very slick hands and is a threat to go end to end any time he touches the puck. His shot and release have really improved this season. That said, it is Marner’s outstanding vision and playmaking skill that make Marner a potential top pick. 

 

Strome has an outstanding wrist shot, and a great release.  He also has good hands and can be a real sniper. Strome has the ability to be a playmaker with great vision and passing skills. 

 

To me, that reads as Marner and McDavid lean towards pass first much more so than Strome or Eichel do

Put Ennis as the winger to be named later with ROR and Stammer, and switch Kaner and Girgy (which I would've thought was obvious) and I will be EXTREMELY psyched for opening night.

 

And Yandle plus Gogo instead of Stamkos is like preferring 2 quarters to a silver dollar.

Yeah, one's useless in everyday life  :nana:

Edited May 30, 2016 by WildCard

[Thorny]

Then why isn't it ever mentioned in McDavid's reports? All of McDavid's scouting reports consist of the same praise for vision, but none for scoring. And no, I have not read ONE article. 

 

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2015/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Jack-Eichel

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2015/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Connor-McDavid'

 

I'm not saying Jack can't make plays, or that he has crappy vision, or anything even remotely like that. Even his scouting reports say his is a playmaker, but I don't think that makes him necessariy the pass-first guy he's being labeled as. What I am saying is, Jack is not the 75-25 percentage split between pass and shoot that I keep reading on here, IMO. He's not going to be as much of an assist machine as Thornton, he is going to shoot and score, from distance, a lot. 

 

As far as assists over goals, I find it highly relevant that there is such a large difference in shooting %.

 

Eichel: 10.1

 

Stamkos: 16.7

 

So, let's just say Jack shot at the same level as Stamkos. Something he probably would have done if he shot from closer areas instead of so far out, as his shooting charts show. We have 238sog * (.167) = 39.7 goals. So, Jack shoots more, but does it from worse locations, so he scores less, and therefore has more assists than points

 

I genuinely do not understand how I've missed the point on passing stats. Sorry if I'm being rude, but I don't.

 

You aren't being rude. What I meant is that his shooting starts don't take into account his passing. They don't tell us anything about how much he is passing. The data isn't telling us how much he shoots relative to passing, it's just telling us how much he shoots. He still passes more than shoots.

 

I didn't say you only read one article. I was referring to when you said you read one article that said he was a playmaker, which made no sense to me.

 

I'm not disagreeing on the Thornton comparison. He won't be a 75/25 split like him. I think we aren't that far off, in actuality. I'm saying he's pass first because he more often tries to pass first before shooting. Not to the tune of 75/25. But maybe 60/40.

 

Did you see the scouting report I put in my long post? I added it after. I think that sums up Eichel well. His strongest assets is passing. His shot is great too.

[TrueBlueGED]

Put Ennis as the winger to be named later with ROR and Stammer, and switch Kaner and Girgy (which I would've thought was obvious) and I will be EXTREMELY psyched for opening night.

 

And Yandle plus Gogo instead of Stamkos is like preferring 2 quarters to a silver dollar.

 

Obvious? I watched Kane sabotaging offensive possessions with poor decisions all season. A handful of games contrary to that at the end of the season isn't enough to make me forget the first 60.

 

It's more akin to converting currency when traveling abroad rather than paying in American and the crappy exchange rate businesses give you. In a vacuum, I take Stamkos over Yandle and Goligoski. For this Sabres roster, I take the two defensemen.

[Thorny]

Edit - for your new post:

 

I don't care if McDavid is more pass first, I'm not trying to make that comparison. My argument is that that write up their clearly paints Eichel as a playmaker who also has a good shot.

Ovi and Kuznetsov aside (point of order: Ovi's most frequent linemates were Backstrom and Oshie, both of whom are quality two-way players), I think those other lines are more balanced than you give them credit for. Maybe we're talking past one another. I'm not saying that you have defensive specialists with your star offensive player, but you need guys who can play a 200 foot game if one guy on the line is a defensive black hole (I'm talking Eichel here, not Stamkos).

 

That's fair. But do we think Eichel is going to stay a defensive black hole? Or that Stamkos can't play D? From what I've seen Stamkos has a decent two way game. Also, I'm putting ROR on the left wing. That's a balanced line.

[WildCard]

You aren't being rude. What I meant is that his shooting starts don't take into account his passing. They don't tell us anything about how much he is passing. The data isn't telling us how much he shoots relative to passing, it's just telling us how much he shoots. He still passes more than shoots.

 

I didn't say you only read one article. I was referring to when you said you read one article that said he was a playmaker, which made no sense to me.

 

I'm not disagreeing on the Thornton comparison. He won't be a 75/25 split like him. I think we aren't that far off, in actuality. I'm saying he's pass first because he more often tries to pass first before shooting. Not to the tune of 75/25. But maybe 60/40.

 

Did you see the scouting report I put in my long post? I added it after. I think that sums up Eichel well. His strongest assets is passing. His shot is great too.

Ah, apologies for the snark then. My mistake  :beer:

 

I did see your article, and responded to it. I think his strongest asset is his vision, and play making. I don't necessarily believe that makes him a pass-first guy, nor does the 60-40 percent split (on which I would agree).

 

Edit - for your new post:

 

I don't care if McDavid is more pass first, I'm not trying to make that comparison. My argument is that that write up their clearly paints Eichel as a playmaker who also has a good shot.

 

The point of the comparison is to highlight the differences in scouting reports. If they all say the same exact thing about each player, that they're all playmakers, then what does that say about that praise? They're all going to be smart, they're all going to have great vision and playmaking abilities; if they didn't, they wouldn't be in the top 5. I find it telling that these reports differ in the fact that they mention Jack's shot and scoring. 

 

 

He'll be a six-foot two, two-hundred and ten pound strong, big center who passes like Adam Oates, shoots like Alex Ovechkin, and just a real committed, durable guy who doesn't get hurt, plays for 15 years and probably ends up in the Hall of Fame.

 

http://www.defendingbigd.com/2015/6/20/8755697/2015-nhl-draft-profile-jack-eichel-profile-and-scouting-report

 

 

Edited May 30, 2016 by WildCard

[TrueBlueGED]

Edit - for your new post:

 

I don't care if McDavid is more pass first, I'm not trying to make that comparison. My argument is that that write up their clearly paints Eichel as a playmaker who also has a good shot.

That's fair. But do we think Eichel is going to stay a defensive black hole? Or that Stamkos can't play D? From what I've seen Stamkos has a decent two way game. Also, I'm putting ROR on the left wing. That's a balanced line.

That's half the trouble putting this together is the uncertainty. I expect Eichel to be, at best average defensively. I also think Stamkos is average defensively. Different point, but I think running O'Reilly-Eichel-Stamkos, while all kinds of fun, makes the lineup too top heavy. I'd sub Girgensons there and put O'Reilly with Samson.

[Thorny]

Ah, apologies for the snark then. My mistake :beer:

 

I did see your article, and responded to it. I think his strongest asset is his vision, and play making. I don't necessarily believe that makes him a pass-first guy, nor does the 60-40 percent split (on which I would agree).

 

 

 

The point of the comparison is to highlight the differences in scouting reports. If they all say the same exact thing about each player, that they're all playmakers, then what does that say about that praise? They're all going to be smart, they're all going to have great vision and playmaking abilities; if they didn't, they wouldn't be in the top 5. I find it telling that these reports differ in the fact that they mention Jack's shot and scoring.

 

 

 

http://www.defendingbigd.com/2015/6/20/8755697/2015-nhl-draft-profile-jack-eichel-profile-and-scouting-report

Fair enough. I think we are agreeing here. I think we are arguing semantics at this point as to what pass-first means to each of us. It seems like you read that as Joe Thornton (who actually seems to rarely shoot), and when I say it I'm trying to convey it literally, in that he'll look for the pass more often than the shot. We agree on the 60/40 split, so that's that I suppose.

 

In the report I posted, it does say, at the end, "1st line elite playmaking center that will likely be a face of a franchise" when it sums up everything at the end under the heading "NHL potential".

 

The point is, we love Jack cause he can pass AND shoot. :beer:

That's half the trouble putting this together is the uncertainty. I expect Eichel to be, at best average defensively. I also think Stamkos is average defensively. Different point, but I think running O'Reilly-Eichel-Stamkos, while all kinds of fun, makes the lineup too top heavy. I'd sub Girgensons there and put O'Reilly with Samson.

You can do that too and it's still rather balanced. That works. But I still kinda like the idea of a dominant ROR - Eichel - Stamkos line, when the second line can be Kane - Reinhart - Girgensons. I haven't given up on Kane's ability to play with Sam. I rather like the look of that second line particularly when we would be getting an all-star top bunch. Edited May 30, 2016 by Thorny

[WildCard]

McKenzie on Stamkos (paraphrasing):

 

- Cap hell for TB right now; drafted and developed too many great young players (Kucherov, Stamkos, Killorn, Paquette, JT Brown, Namestnikov, Nesterov) all have to be paid this year

 

- Next year (Bishop, Hedman, Johnson, Palat, Drouin) all need to be paid after next season

 

- Heart of hearts Stamkos wants to be in Tampa, and TB wants him back, but A) Can TB even do a discount and B) Would he take one?

 

-  Health is really not an issue (blood clot). Vasilevsky had same issue, same condition, and he's fine. Nothing indicates he's genetically disposed towards clots, it shouldn't be a repeating theme

 

- Suitors:  speculates $9-10.5m. Focused on back to TB first, and will explore other places afterwards. 

 

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/toronto-1050/mckenzie-salary-cap-issues-could-hinder-stamkos-returning-to-tampa-1.496764

 

Dreger on the impact of Matthews for Stamkos and Toronto (paraphrasing): 

 

- Doubts Matthews is enough to lure Stamkos. He's not going to be that impact full right away, and neither will Marner or Nylander; Stamkos wants to win now, and that's why he jumped back in the lineup for a Game 7. Matthews, and Toronto, isn't ready for that. 

 

- Believes Stamkos and TB really want to stay together

 

- On a Bishop trade (for keeping Stamkos money wise): Toronto would be a possible place for Bishop to land. Doesn't get the sense that the Leafs are in any rush to make a move like that though. 

 

- On Drouin: TB will get a ton of calls and offers for Drouin. 

 

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/toronto-1050/dreger-matthews-impact-on-potential-stamkos-signing-1.496634

[Thorny]

So the most likely option is, after all, that he'll end up staying in Tampa? If true, that's a shame. There's a reason players of his caliber basically never get to FA. The quoted salary is intriguing, as well, should he hit the open market.

 

There's always.....Vesey?? :/

[beerme1]

I'm not sure I have the fortitude for another round of Stamkos debate, as the points haven't really changed :lol:

 

I'm very interested in Stamkos at a price I don't think there's a chance he signs for. If he was insulted by $8.5M x8 from Tampa, he would be okay with $9.5M x7 from us...why? I'm not interested in Stamkos at $11M (which is what I think he ultimately gets if he leaves Tampa) because I think it will prevent us from overhauling the blue line to the degree I view as necessary. If I'm way off on the price he'll command on the open market, or we find a way to shed some bad salary, the calculus changes considerably for me. 

 

Not advocating this, but I think investing $11M in Goligoski & Yandle makes us a better team next season than investing it in Stamkos. Admittedly, it's also considerably less fun. Obviously there are other options, just using this for illustration.

 

If we're insisting on a winger to play with Jack, getting Nash for peanuts (assuming NY will retain some salary). Nash at say $5.5M gets us somebody good for 25-40 goals while still leaving us the ability to improve the blue line.

 

 

I'll second your thoughts to a tee. 

[nucci]

I'm not sure I have the fortitude for another round of Stamkos debate, as the points haven't really changed :lol:

 

I'm very interested in Stamkos at a price I don't think there's a chance he signs for. If he was insulted by $8.5M x8 from Tampa, he would be okay with $9.5M x7 from us...why? I'm not interested in Stamkos at $11M (which is what I think he ultimately gets if he leaves Tampa) because I think it will prevent us from overhauling the blue line to the degree I view as necessary. If I'm way off on the price he'll command on the open market, or we find a way to shed some bad salary, the calculus changes considerably for me. 

 

Not advocating this, but I think investing $11M in Goligoski & Yandle makes us a better team next season than investing it in Stamkos. Admittedly, it's also considerably less fun. Obviously there are other options, just using this for illustration.

 

If we're insisting on a winger to play with Jack, getting Nash for peanuts (assuming NY will retain some salary). Nash at say $5.5M gets us somebody good for 25-40 goals while still leaving us the ability to improve the blue line.

I think Nash is slowing down considerably and is no longer good for 25-40