Jump to content

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


LGR4GM

Stamkos' show me the money poll  

110 members have voted

  1. 1. How much $$$$$ will Stamkos get per year?

    • $8 - 9.9million
      6
    • $10 - 10.9million
      37
    • $11 - 11.9million
      34
    • $12mil or more
      23
  2. 2. How much $$$$$ would YOU pay Stamkos per year? It is safe to assume he gets max deal of 7 years.

    • $8 - 9.9million
      40
    • $10 - 10.9million
      34
    • $11 - 11.9million
      15
    • $12mil or more
      11


Recommended Posts

Lindholm's defense metrics are insane. Like, top 10 in the league, I'm pretty sure. If people want exact numbers, I'm not good at getting those, so ask True or someone. And he's young. He's already a top pairing defenseman. Evander Kane is a 20 goal winger that gets hurt a lot. I think he's worth more on this team than what we could get for him, and I like having him around. I don't think he could get us close to Lindholm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friendly reminder: Just because somebody suggests a player could be moved doesn't mean they are undervalued.

 

I just bought Kane's jersey, FFS. I think the guy is awesome and I want him here long term, but we can't pay forwards 99.9% of the cap. He would be the obvious option of big-money forwards to go. He's got two years left on his contract, so if you think he's not somebody you can retain with the new cap structure you'll have in adding Stamkos then it's better to see what teams will give for a player with some control left.

Edited by Hoss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think many tend to undervalue Kane. No way I part with him.

 

Nope. 

 

See below .

 

Lindholm's defense metrics are insane. Like, top 10 in the league, I'm pretty sure. If people want exact numbers, I'm not good at getting those, so ask True or someone. And he's young. He's already a top pairing defenseman. Evander Kane is a 20 goal winger that gets hurt a lot. I think he's worth more on this team than what we could get for him, and I like having him around. I don't think he could get us close to Lindholm.

Imagine this top pairing 

 

http://public.tableau.com/shared/BPQ2FF5CJ?:display_count=yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to respectfully say NFW on this, at least not until his contract year (and probably not then either).

 

 

I see it as roughly 50/50 that Kane is here beyond his current contract, but I agree it's very unlikely Murray would consider moving him before then.

 

Friendly reminder: Just because somebody suggests a player could be moved doesn't mean they are undervalued.

I just bought Kane's jersey, FFS. I think the guy is awesome and I want him here long term, but we can't pay forwards 99.9% of the cap. He would be the obvious option of big-money forwards to go. He's got two years left on his contract, so if you think he's not somebody you can retain with the new cap structure you'll have in adding Stamkos then it's better to see what teams will give for a player with some control left.

Yup, pretty much. If we sign Stamkos, I'd say there is a 25% chance we keep Kane after his current deal is done. I think we would keep him until then, though, either way.

 

I really like having him on the team, hopefully he sticks around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dreger "for me that is a contentious issue. He sees himself as a center. The veteran coaches see him fit better at wing."

 

Dreger when asked about Stamkos wanting to play center and Buffalo being set at center.

 

Dreger "look I applaud this move by the Buffalo Sabres" on Buffalo trading for Jimmy Vesey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dreger "for me that is a contentious issue. He sees himself as a center. The veteran coaches see him fit better at wing."

 

Dreger when asked about Stamkos wanting to play center and Buffalo being set at center.

 

Dreger "look I applaud this move by the Buffalo Sabres" on Buffalo trading for Jimmy Vesey.

 

Called it a bit of a stretch....

 

Hearing conflicting reports/opinions. Just gotta wait and see. Damn I hate the suspense. 

Brent Burns may be interesting. He is a defenseman able to play forward. Not that Buffalo needs him to do that, but an in game switch from defenseman to forward could be beneficial. 

 

And I still do not want the Sabres to pay 12 mill for Stamkos. 

Edited by GoPre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, is there talk Burns is available? What in the world?

 

Guys on WGR were talking about him and few other defensemen this morning. Talked of how Murray can be aggressive. It'd take a lot to get San Jose to trade him. Just relaying the info. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys on WGR were talking about him and few other defensemen this morning. Talked of how Murray can be aggressive. It'd take a lot to get San Jose to trade him. Just relaying the info.

Gotcha. Yea, San Jose isn't trading Burns. They're fully in win now mode and it would make zero sense. Even if they did, the price we'd have to pay would likely make zero sense for us either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotcha. Yea, San Jose isn't trading Burns. They're fully in win now mode and it would make zero sense. Even if they did, the price we'd have to pay would likely make zero sense for us either.

Who started this rumor? It's beyond stupid. If it were somehow true you are looking at Reinhart or Ristolainen and that might not be enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...