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

[Randall Flagg]

Oh, I think you can entirely win with a team of O'Reilly's. Boston says 'Hello' 

I need new pants contemplating the impossibility of Hall, or even the possibility of OEL through Matthews. Stamkos does nothing for me though

Stamkos does nothing but Hall makes you wreck your pants? Is most of that difference just the difference in cap you'd have? Cause in a vacuum I definitely believe Stamkos is a tier above Hall. And that's before giving up an asset like Matthews for Hall versus just signing Stamkos

 

Beat me to it  :beer:

 

Though Flagg and True may kill you if you don't recognize Bergeron as a 'top line center'  :lol:

Bergeron may be a top 5 center in the league. 

 

I have Krejci as a legitimate top line center as well, though that might not have been the case when they won the cup.

 

Just checked, and he did have 62 points that year

Edited March 21, 2016 by Randall Flagg

[JJFIVEOH]

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?

[WildCard]

Stamkos does nothing but Hall makes you wreck your pants? Is most of that difference just the difference in cap you'd have? Cause in a vacuum I definitely believe Stamkos is a tier above Hall. And that's before giving up an asset like Matthews for Hall versus just signing Stamkos

Younger, cheaper, and better in....well, everything. Besides maybe scoring goals. Hall blows Stamkos out of the water

http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/

 

If I have Matthews, he's going for a legit, #1 d-man. As tempted as I would to trade for Hall, I'd much rather go after an OEL, or some other ~25 year old stud d-man

Edited March 21, 2016 by WildCard

[Neo]

You can't win with a team of O'Reilly's.    You need pure goal scorers mixed in with your O'Reilly's.    They're both valuable in their own way, and if you're going to pay for a goal scorer, Stamkos is as good as it gets.  

 

Would you rather have 2 Matt Moulsons or 1 Steven Stamkos?

Two Moulsons make me wish for two Molsons.

[TrueBlueGED]

ROR made 11 mil this year (not per year).

 

In a league where fans complain ad nauseam about the lack of scoring, you have to pay for a guy who actually can, and I think he'd be worth it.

And I'm still waiting for the Devils to finish below us in the standings since being told that the Kovalchuk contract would be the death of that franchise.

 

If by $11 million you mean $6.2 million, then yes, yes he did. Next year is what you're thinking of :)

Two Moulsons make me wish for two Molsons.

 

Personally, the thought of two Moulsons makes me wish for something with considerably higher alcohol content than two Molsons.

Edited March 21, 2016 by TrueBlueGED

[WildCard]

If by $11 million you mean $6.2 million, then yes, yes he did. Next year is what you're thinking of :)

 

Personally, the thought of two Moulsons makes me wish for something with considerably higher alcohol content than two Molsons.

Cyanide for me 

[Randall Flagg]

Younger, cheaper, and better in....well, everything. Besides maybe scoring goals. Hall blows Stamkos out of the water

 

If I have Matthews, he's going for a legit, #1 d-man. As tempted as I would to trade for Hall, I'd much rather go after an OEL, or some other ~25 year old stud d-man

http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/

Have you compared Risto's Warrior chart to Kris Russell's, or Alex Goligoski's, or Brayden McNabb's? Would you trade him for any of those guys?

 

 

[SwampD]

If by $11 million you mean $6.2 million, then yes, yes he did. 

 

Personally, the thought of two Moulsons makes me wish for something with considerably higher alcohol content than two Molsons.

Okay, he'll make 11 mil next year. Whatevs. He still hasn't scored in over 2 months. Apparently we would rather pay for hustle than pay for goals.

[TrueBlueGED]

Stamkos does nothing but Hall makes you wreck your pants? Is most of that difference just the difference in cap you'd have? Cause in a vacuum I definitely believe Stamkos is a tier above Hall. And that's before giving up an asset like Matthews for Hall versus just signing Stamkos

 

 

Younger, cheaper, and better in....well, everything. Besides maybe scoring goals. Hall blows Stamkos out of the water

http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/

 

 

 

I'll split the difference: though different players, I think Hall and Stamkos are on the same level.

[WildCard]

Have you compared Risto's Warrior chart to Kris Russell's, or Alex Goligoski's, or Brayden McNabb's? Would you trade him for any of those guys?

Those are two pretty different scenarios. Stamkos and Hall have both been in the league long enough for growing pains to stop. Both are given top line minutes, and with good/great linemates. Risto is not. In what stat, or area in general, other than goals, is Stamkos better than Hall?

Okay, he'll make 11 mil next year. Whatevs. He still hasn't scored in over 2 months. Apparently we would rather pay for hustle than pay for goals.

Gonna leave out that injury where he missed more than a month, huh?

[TrueBlueGED]

Okay, he'll make 11 mil next year. Whatevs. He still hasn't scored in over 2 months. Apparently we would rather pay for hustle than pay for goals.

 

Do you really care whether he's scoring goals or generating them from his play? The points have been there.

[SwampD]

Those are two pretty different scenarios. Stamkos and Hall have both been in the league long enough for growing pains to stop. Both are given top line minutes, and with good/great linemates. Risto is not. In what stat, or area in general, other than goals, is Stamkos better than Hall?

Gonna leave out that injury where he missed more than a month, huh?

If it proves my point more, absolutely.

[WildCard]

If it proves my point more, absolutely.

Just doing the same thing we're all doing in here? Got it  :lol:

[tom webster]

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?

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

[JJFIVEOH]

Ya know, Ennis hasn't scored much lately either.

[WildCard]

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

I think we only have 2, maybe 3. Outside shot at 4 if ROR isn't worked into 25m a night

[tom webster]

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.

[WildCard]

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.

I think a lot of Reinhart's goals-assists values rely on which position he plays. If he continues to play wing and is parked in front of the net, I could see him being a 25-30 guy more than the assist machine we envisioned. 

Edited March 21, 2016 by WildCard

[JJFIVEOH]

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.

[tom webster]

I think a lot of Reinhart's goals-assists values rely on which position he plays. If he continues to play wing and is parked in front of the net, I could see him being a 25-30 guy more than the assist machine we envisioned. 

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

[pi2000]

But that wasn't the point. The point was I get excited with the possibility of good players coming here, not miserable thinking they won't 'because Buffalo'

 

If we get Matthews, I trade him, all day. 

Well, no, they didn't.

 

Name the pure goal scorers on the Cup winning teams in the last decade:

 

2015 -- Chicago Blackhawks (nope)

2014 -- Los Angeles Kings (defniitely nope)

2013 -- Chicago Blackhawks (nope again)

2012 -- Los Angeles Kings (still, nope)

2011 -- Boston Bruins (hell nope)

2010 -- Chicago Blackhawks (nope some more)

2009 -- Pittsburgh Penguins (maybe?)

2008 -- Detroit Red Wings (maybe) 

2007 -- Anaheim Ducks (Perry) 

2006 -- Carolina Hurricanes (nope. I'd say Staal and Brindamour brought much more than pure goal scoring)

 

Good point, although I'd add a few names to that list... Selanne, Malkin, Kane, Lucic scored 30g for Boston that season but I wouldn't consider him a pure goal scorer (although he was that year!).     

 

Only 3 of those teams didn't have a 30 goal scorer during the season.  

 

If you have a chance to add a guaranteed 30g/yr to your roster for the next 5-6 years, I think you have to make that move.    But I don't see Stamkos as a one-trick pony like most everybody else on this forum.   He's team captain, he plays PK, is 50% on faceoffs, and he's been to the Cup finals.    

 

This article during the Cup finals talks about his leadership qualities, quotes from coaches and players... http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/jonathan-toews--steven-stamkos-and-how-leadership-is-born-203610118.html

[tom webster]

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.

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

[Randall Flagg]

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.

Do you by chance have Dudacek on block? Because whether you agree with him or not, he's absolutely put a respectable argument on the table.

[WildCard]

Good point, although I'd add a few names to that list... Selanne, Malkin, Kane, Lucic scored 30g for Boston that season but I wouldn't consider him a pure goal scorer (although he was that year!).     

 

Only 3 of those teams didn't have a 30 goal scorer during the season.  

 

If you have a chance to add a guaranteed 30g/yr to your roster for the next 5-6 years, I think you have to make that move.    But I don't see Stamkos as a one-trick pony like most everybody else on this forum.   He's team captain, he plays PK, is 50% on faceoffs, and he's been to the Cup finals.    

 

This article during the Cup finals talks about his leadership qualities, quotes from coaches and players... http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/jonathan-toews--steven-stamkos-and-how-leadership-is-born-203610118.html

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.

 

Ah, that article was written before the Cup Finals even started. Big difference IMO

Do you by chance have Dudacek on block? Because whether you agree with him or not, he's absolutely put a respectable argument on the table.

Dudacek has been one of the many posters on here making this a good discussion. To make it great, someone needs to go Hoss level on the Stamkos side

 

Where in the are you, Hoss?

[JJFIVEOH]

Do you by chance have Dudacek on block? Because whether you agree with him or not, he's absolutely put a respectable argument on the table.

No I don't. He's basically made the point that we can afford Stamkos if we work the system like the Blackhawks. I addressed that a few posts back. The Blackhawks are the exception to the rule. Ask Pittsburgh how it's worked out trying to afford a supporting cast. I appreciate his input, he addresses all angles without being condescending. Very good points.

Edited March 21, 2016 by JJFIVEOH