Yes, and this devalues scoring even more. Once again, you all act like we are talking about a guy that is capable of 60 to 70 goals. The league isn't like that and he isn't like that.
- Slump Buster

Dude seriously, you just called him a 40 goal guy, which only a select few people do, meaning he is in an elite category. Which would mean he is one of the best.

I am now seriously convinced you are Mike Schoop level trolling now.

I think you missed my point. Saying he slowed down to a 40 goal scorer is an oxymoron.
- Mentalorgasm5

Looks at the top scores in the NHL ....


Puts Head through a wall

They absolutely could. They are just being smart with their assets.
- Slump Buster

Ok, so if WE had the choice to keep Kucherov, Hedman, Bishop or keep Stamkos, I would side with Kucherov, Bishop, Hedman.

Guess who doesn't have the luxury to choose?

Toronto
Buffalo
Detroit
Pittsburgh(if they move Malkin and Fluery)
NYR
NYI
Dal(if they can move goalies)
Montreal
Stl
Tampa(if they move Bishop)
- dadeadhead

The only two teams that would pay him that are most likely Buffalo and Toronto.

EDIT: the Rangers would as well. They have a history of awful FA signings.

Looks at the top scores in the NHL ....


Puts Head through a wall
- GERBE!!!75PTS

So a one-dimensional 40 goal scorer (future projections) is worth 84 mill over 7 years? That's good value?

They absolutely could. They are just being smart with their assets.
- Slump Buster

Having an embarrassment of riches and making some decisions that pan out doesn't make you smart. Just ask Donald Trump.

So a one-dimensional 40 goal scorer (future projections) is worth 84 mill over 7 years? That's good value?
- Slump Buster

Yes

So a one-dimensional 40 goal scorer (future projections) is worth 84 mill over 7 years? That's good value?
- Slump Buster

Um, his advanced stats say otherwise.

He is a + player in most categories.
his team controls play when he is on the ice.

So a one-dimensional 40 goal scorer (future projections) is worth 84 mill over 7 years? That's good value?
- Slump Buster

Yes the goal is to put the puck in the net correct

Dude seriously, you just called him a 40 goal guy, which only a select few people do, meaning he is in an elite category. Which would mean he is one of the best.

I am now seriously convinced you are Mike Schoop level trolling now.
- ImThatGuy

28 guys in the league had 30+ goals last year. Several more were just below that. Surely many guys at that level are available (and will even play a hint of defense). I am not willing to pay an extra 5 to 7 mill a year to get another 10 goals that Stamkos would get.

I did. I wouldn't pay 12 mill for a one-dimensional 40 goal guy. That's the difference.
- Slump Buster

I wouldn't say he's one-dimensional. He hits, backs up his teammates, leads by example, isn't a tire fire in the d-zone like you think. He also has a ton of assists, so he sets up his teammates as well. If that's one-dimensional, sign me up for another.

So a one-dimensional 40 goal scorer (future projections) is worth 84 mill over 7 years? That's good value?
- Slump Buster

Value isn't what wins

Yes
- Mentalorgasm5

Teams having to choose to either matchup with the Eichel line, Stamkos, line or O'Reilly line makes it worth it alone

Yes the goal is to put the puck in the net correct
- GERBE!!!75PTS

Last I checked the goal was to score more than your opponent. Let me know if I have an old rule book.

Value isn't what wins
- cabin

It does when it affects how you construct the rest of your roster. That's why Tampa is showing him the door. Rather than trading several good young players they are letting him walk out the door. I don't hear anyone killing them for it.

So a one-dimensional 40 goal scorer (future projections) is worth 84 mill over 7 years? That's good value?
- Slump Buster

28 guys in the league had 30+ goals last year. Several more were just below that. Surely many guys at that level are available (and will even play a hint of defense). I am not willing to pay an extra 5 to 7 mill a year to get another 10 goals that Stamkos would get.
- Slump Buster

0 of them played for us.
1 or 2 of them would be available for just cap space
26 of them would require some decent assets going the other way

28 guys in the league had 30+ goals last year. Several more were just below that. Surely many guys at that level are available (and will even play a hint of defense). I am not willing to pay an extra 5 to 7 mill a year to get another 10 goals that Stamkos would get.
- Slump Buster

Of those 28.. Who is available and at what cost to get them?

Garth... is that you?
- Aetherial

Did you find misspellings and/or grammatical disasters in the post?

Last I checked the goal was to score more than your opponent. Let me know if I have an old rule book.
- Slump Buster

I did not know he was the only one on the team not playing defense

It does when it affects how you construct the rest of your roster. That's why Tampa is showing him the door. Rather than trading several good young players they are letting him walk out the door. I don't hear anyone killing them for it.
- Slump Buster

They aren't just several "good players"

One is a Norris candidate defensemen

The others would be all stars on other teams.

Teams having to choose to either matchup with the Eichel line, Stamkos, line or O'Reilly line makes it worth it alone
- sbroads24

Yup, having Stamkos on line 1, and Eichel on 2. That would create some very interesting matchups.

28 guys in the league had 30+ goals last year. Several more were just below that. Surely many guys at that level are available (and will even play a hint of defense). I am not willing to pay an extra 5 to 7 mill a year to get another 10 goals that Stamkos would get.
- Slump Buster

What about the extra goals he helps others get?

The addition of his 40 goals puts us 4th in the league last year.

28 guys in the league had 30+ goals last year. Several more were just below that. Surely many guys at that level are available (and will even play a hint of defense). I am not willing to pay an extra 5 to 7 mill a year to get another 10 goals that Stamkos would get.
- Slump Buster

You said 40 goals, now you are changing the Lower limit to better support your argument.

Can you list me of those 28 guys who is available? I count one and that is Louis Eriksson, he misses more games and has more injury concerns than Stamkos.

Stamkos plays defense you, He has + numbers in all of those categories, stop making stuff up

0 of them played for us.
1 or 2 of them would be available for just cap space
26 of them would require some decent assets going the other way
- sbroads24

I takek Nash, Corey Perry or Hoffman for some assets and pocket a ton of extra cap space (potentially tens of millions).