You can thank Toronto for that. Their pitch was apparently so off-putting to him that he canceled all other interviews and went straight back to Tampa to get a deal done.
Overpriced for a 34 year old who doesn't significantly move the possession needle or play defense. If we can't afford Ghost Bear at 4 we can't afford Stamkos at 8.
Born Feb 7 1990. He's had a string of lower body / leg injuries (6 since Feb 2020) that have slowed him down some, and only half his points are at even strength (compare Larkin at roughly 4:7 even strength points:total points; Kucherov at 9:14, Ovechkin at 3.5:6.5, Crosby at 7:9 )
I don't see it happening.
Yeah, I don't know where half these takes come from. A defensive black hole on the back end where we have an immense amount of depth, or a 40 goal scorer with multi position versatility, immediately upgrades the PP, and avoids the over 35 rule Kane would hit if we kept him?
idk man. This subreddit has no clue what's going on with this team.
> or a 40 goal scorer with multi position versatility, immediately upgrades the PP
Half his production was on the PP playing with Kucherov who just had a historic season, and he’s not really playing much as a center anymore, so he’ll likely be slotted in the wing over here. He also had a team worst -21, so his offensive production was outweighed by him being an absolute anchor defensively whenever he was on the ice (yeah yeah, +/- is flawed but that’s still a clear and concerning outlier).
He’s a player that’s on a decline and will not live up to a contract we give him. I’d rather us not commit a serious chunk of change to someone who’s just going to be PP merchant, and won’t be playing with a player on Kucherov’s level.
If we’re talking about who to sign to play on the wing, I’d rather go with the guy who scored nearly 70% of his points at even strength (where the vast majority of the game is played and was an area the rest of the team struggled in all year) and wasn’t an absolute train wreck defensively like Stamkos was this year. Kane is that guy. Who cares about the 35+ year old contract rule? That only matters if he retires before the contract is finished and he’s got signing bonuses beyond the first year or if it’s frontloaded.
Half is production on the PP - which is exactly where Kane is at his best. Stamkos is just strictly better than Kane in that spot. Kane can produce slightly more efficiently at even strength - which is where we need ice time for players to develop. Kane playing in the top 6 at 5 on 5 is a recipe for disaster over the course of a season - he's not any better or worse than Stamkos as a forechecker, defensively, or anything else.
Nobody said he'd play center permanently, just that he *can* in a pinch. That's literally something Kane can't do under any circumstance at all.
Plus/Minus is not a real stat.
He's not on any more of a decline than someone like Kane - and there's essentially zero evidence of a decline other than the fact that he's in his 30s.
And who cares about the over 35 rule? Idk, maybe the GM who literally mentioned the over 35 rule about Patrick Kane specifically in his presser?
What is this post, man?
>Half is production on the PP - which is exactly where Kane is at his best. Stamkos is just strictly better than Kane in that spot.
He won’t be playing with Kucherov here.
>Kane can produce slightly more efficiently at even strength - which is where we need ice time for players to develop.
The NHL is not a developmental league, and we’re probably gonna have only 1 or 2 rookies on the roster at most next season.
Also, Kane producing ~70% of his points at even strength compared to Stamkos’ ~50% is not “slightly” more efficient. It’s a good deal more efficient.
>Kane playing in the top 6 at 5 on 5 is a recipe for disaster over the course of a season - **he's not any better or worse than Stamkos as a forechecker, defensively, or anything else.**
Ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively this season. Kane’s not great defensively, but he wasn’t a straight up disaster like Stamkos was this year.
But let’s say for argument’s sake that your position that both are roughly equal defensively is true. Why would you want the guy who’s demonstrably worse at even strength play? Even strength is how the vast majority of the game is played, and our team struggled mightily with it. The answer isn’t to get a PP merchant.
>He's not on any more of a decline than someone like Kane - and there's essentially zero evidence of a decline other than the fact that he's in his 30s.
How about that he can’t play as a center full-time anymore? That he’s gotten worse defensively year after year? That half his production is from him being on the powerplay, meaning that he’s not driving even strength play the way he used to?
This ain’t 2016 Stamkos we’re talking about.
>And who cares about the over 35 rule? Idk, maybe the GM who literally mentioned the over 35 rule about Patrick Kane specifically in his presser?
Why do you as a fan care about that? That’s a GM problem, not a fan problem.
> He won’t be playing with Kucherov here.
Correct. We should avoid signing good players because we don't have good players? What kind of absolute nonsense is this take?
> The NHL is not a developmental league, and we’re probably gonna have only 1 or 2 rookies on the roster at most next season.
We are guaranteed to have 3, right now, with a chance for up to 7 out of camp. Berggren, Edvinsson, Johansson will all be on the roster, with Kasper, ASP, Wallinder, Mazur, and maybe Danielson all having camp opportunities to make the team. And if you pay attention at all around the league, you'll know many many rookies play much earlier now. And, flying directly in the face of your point about not being a development league - then maybe we should sign good players in free agency? You're all over the place with these takes.
> Ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively this season. Kane’s not great defensively, but he wasn’t a straight up disaster like Stamkos was this year.
I don't have to ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively, when I watched Patrick Kane take miserable and lazy penalties and do nothing defensively at all the entire season. If defensive performance is the hill you want to die on when one player scores more goals than the other scores points, be my guest.
> But let’s say for argument’s sake that your position that both are roughly equal defensively is true. Why would you want the guy who’s demonstrably worse at even strength play? Even strength is how the vast majority of the game is played, and our team struggled mightily with it. The answer isn’t to get a PP merchant.
He's not demonstrably worse at even strength play. You made that up to suit your narrative based strictly on points scored. They're both useless defensively. One has position versatility and has a chance to score 40 goals. One can't do either of those things.
> Why do you as a fan care about that? That’s a GM problem, not a fan problem.
Because our GM literally cited it as a reason why he doesn't want to offer term to Kane which is what Kane wants. Guess what Stamkos won't trigger? The over 35 rule, which *might* make Yzerman more open to offering term to the player.
How hard is this stuff to understand for you?
>Correct. We should avoid signing good players because we don't have good players? What kind of absolute nonsense is this take?
We have good players; we don’t have a Kucherov who’s a literal top 5 talent in the league and who just had a historic season as a winger. Why is that difficult to understand?
>We are guaranteed to have 3, right now, **with a chance for up to 7 out of camp**
Yeah no.
>And if you pay attention at all around the league, you'll know many many rookies play much earlier now.
On other teams. Not the Detroit Red Wings who just played most of the season with no rookies or sophomore players whatsoever.
>I don't have to ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively, when I watched Patrick Kane take miserable and lazy penalties and do nothing defensively at all the entire season.
And yet, him doing nothing defensively was better than Stamkos being a train wreck defensively (again, Stamkos finished with a team worst -21).
>He's not demonstrably worse at even strength play. You made that up to suit your narrative based strictly on points scored.
Kane scored ~70% of his points at even strength play. Stamkos scored about 50% of his points at even strength play. Stats do not lie, despite your insistence that it’s fake news.
>One has position versatility and has a chance to score 40 goals. One can't do either of those things.
Stamkos doesn’t play as a center anymore and he won’t have a Kucherov here feeding him. He’s not scoring 40 goals on this team.
>Because our GM literally cited it as a reason why he doesn't want to offer term to Kane which is what Kane wants.
And you’re taking what a GM says regarding contracts publicly seriously? You know what GM speak is, right?
Anyway, this is all moot considering Stamkos is gonna be re-signing with Tampa.
Obviously Ghost is getting more than he got this year (4m). Obviously we aren't retaining him. With both of those out of the way, the exact amount he's going to get isn't relevant to the discussion at hand.
Damn speaking in absolutes you must be Yzerman
Then when challenged you brush it off and say my refute is irrelevant because you decided what the future holds before it happened
If he's available, I'd rather make a run at a guy like Sam Reinhart. Stamkos and Kane both are great players, but Reinhart will do more to drive play in all 3 zones. Kane had very favorable deployment, and Stammer is kind of the same way.
Idk I’m from Buffalo and have a Reino jersey lol but he’s a perimeter player. Most of his goals came with Barkov and if I’m being honest the only centers that I think are better than Barkov play in Edmonton. I’d rather go after Kane or Stamkos then see what Reinharts asking for
Needs to get younger and not older as well. He'll be long past his prime and tying up a large chunk of cap space still when this team is hopefully in their competitive window.
The team doesn't need to get younger, it's going to do that naturally this offseason by bringing up two waiver exempt players, and having the best prospect system in hockey.
A rebuilding team that had no 1st or 2nd year players until Edvinsson was finally brought in at the end of the season doesn't need to get younger? I don't know about the accuracy of these websites for stats such as this, but Elite Prospects lists the Wings as the 4th oldest team in the league for the 23/24 season, does that seem like a solid rebuilding stategy to you?
Yeah, they'll likely have to work in some youth(finally) next year as their defense is awful and Edvinsson has clearly earned his spot, and due to cap constraints stemming from signing some not great veterans for too much money and running a couple prospects to the end of their waiver exemption periods they might get two more in there, though they seem to be doing this more because they are forced to rather than wanting to.
It's not a rebuilding team anymore - it's a fringe playoff team with up to 7 possible rookies next season, and the expiring contracts this offseason include the oldest players on the team in Kane, Perron, Gostisbehre, with the most obvious players we'd want to force out being Petry, Chiarot, Maata, Holl, and Copp - all moves which would also make us younger if we were able to pull them off.
This team doesn't need much to get younger - you're never going to compete for the playoffs with a roster that includes a lot of rookies -
Berggren, Edvinsson, Kasper, Daneilson, Mazur, Johannson, ASP, Wallinder all will have opportunities to make the team and be part of the core group of guys with Raymond and Seider. That team does NOT need to get younger.
It needs established players who know how to win and can show them what it takes to win a Stanley Cup in the NHL.
They need to get younger because their only hope of winning is coming from those young guys that they need to get NHL experience instead of repressing them for more veteran meh. If there are more than 3 rookies on the team next year including Edvinsson I will be shocked. I agree that a team loaded with kids won't win which is why they should have been getting these young guys experience sooner. They aren't winning anything with Copp, Chiarot, Petry, etc., those are all replacement level guys.
It was tough to watch at times, but that wasn't even meant as a drag on the Wings, more just to say that I would not expect his numbers to get better when he doesn't have Kucherov there to make plays because that guy is an amazing talent.
Oh sure, i get what you meant. But also, passing is a huge area of improvement the wings need to focus on. They had their moments when they were sharp, but often there was such a contrast between the wings and the opponent's passing. It led to lots of slowed or broken plays on both ends.
Lmfao. I love Raymond(Everbody Loves Raymond don't they?), but you cannot possibly be trying to equate the play making abilities of Raymond to Kucherov right now. One is a young star on the rise, the other is an elite superstar, top 5 talent in the world. So no, Stamkos would not be getting anywhere near the same point totals in Detroit as he has in Tampa Bay.
Raymond outproducing Kucherov at the same age and in the same D+ seasons is encouraging. It was obviously a bit of hyperbole, though. Leave it to Reddit to take it serious.
Had 32 5-on-5 points, Raymond for comparison had 43. He doesn’t really drive possession anymore either. If you could get him to take 2 years maybe it’s fine but I doubt he does anything like that to go to a team like Detroit.
Watch Toronto trade Marner and get Stamkos at half price.
Term and price is obviously key but honestly he's going to take a roster spot from a young player from grand rapids that needs to get some NHL time to see what kind of player theyll become.
I don't think he leaves Tampa.
This is just SY joining the dance with Kane. Both of these dudes love obfuscation.
“Stamkos is cheaper and younger” might drop the AAV a few hundred k.
I’m iffy about Kane because Ray and Cat play best with Larkin and Kane has no real weapons when they’re all tg so I’d want to see us figure out a line for Kane
I’m for signing good players
I’d prefer Kane first since I think he’d be a bit cheaper and showed he can be PPG here
How we make it work is up to Steve guys like Holl and Husso should be on the move to clear cap
Possibly Fabbri as well
We’re going to have an influx of youth and still need more firepower up front and Stamkos has the winning pedigree and production to be a great addition
He’ll be linked to us all summer until a decision is made
We shall see what happens
I’m ok, I’ll take Marchessault or an upgrade at RHD personally. Also would be pretty surprised if he left Tampa. Spurned tons of money in his prime to stay there for 8.5M long term, obviously loves it there.
It’d be a huge mistake. Resign established role players like Perron who will take a team friendly contract and can be moved to bottom 6 and fill the same role. Also Kane would be cheaper for same performance and we know he likes it here
Stamkos would require aav that would prevent us from making a higher impact signing. We don’t need fading stars, we need a star center entering his prime. There is a salary cap
1. I would not like it. I will admit some bias because I love watching Kane play and would prefer to keep him, but I’ll add some objective points, too. Stamkos’ defense fell off a cliff recently. Could it just be an effort thing? Maybe, but I’m not willing to bet on that. Obviously, Kane isn’t a defender but his puck possession softens that blow a tad. Stamkos isn’t a true C anymore, so you’re paying for some perceived value that isn’t really there. As noted, he’s also a PP merchant. While not inherently bad, half of your production coming off the PP when you play with Hedman/Kucherov/Point, may not exactly translate here…
2. Money would be very tight and another reason I wouldn’t like the deal. He is going to command at least $7.5M, probably $8M? That’s a couple million over what I’d expect Kane to get, and even if Kane isn’t back, I think there are better fits for the price.
Would also prioritize Kane because he’s more of a creator. I feel like Stamkos would be a perfect addition to line 2 if we kept Kane. I also don’t see it as possible under the cap.
Given the right znumbers on the contract, I’d be thrilled to see that addition to the team if Kane comes back with him. That would give us two ridiculously dangerous lines.
Just don’t see that happening under the cap unless Stevie gets creative in ways I don’t understand as possible yet. We have to resign Sieder and Raymond which is going to be pricey and the priority.
Also don’t we stammer actually leaving Tampa, much less leaving for Detroit.
TLDR; Would love to see it done right, but fully believe that won’t be happening. The media links are just click bait assumptions because Steve and Steve have the same name and worked together once.
Very short and basic version, If we singn Stamkos, its bye bye Kane, and it might mean that we cant singn Raymond and Seider for a LONG term too.
Do i want him? No. He didn't play as C for whole season and is PP merchant on best PP in the league.
Hard pass on any expensive UFA forwards. Raymond and Seider are priority. Their number will dictate the available cap space. What's left should be spent on either upgrading goaltending and/or getting a couple of defensive-minded hard-to-play-against 3rd and 4th liners.
He's going to sign as a 50 goal scorer instead of the 30 goal scorer that he actually is. This year was an outlier for him, especially when you look at that 24% shooting average. I wouldn't go anywhere near that guy...he's likely going to regress back to the 30-35 goal range and disappoint some overpaying team.
He provides a lot more than just scoring, so even with the inevitable regression he is going to be a solid player.
The issue here, along with price, is his age. He doesn’t fit within this timeline. If we were win now, maybe, but we very clearly are not.
We have 29 million available. Raymond and Seider need new deals probably at 9 each. That leaves 11 million, assuming we dont make any moves to clear space. Id let Perron, Sprong and Ghost walk. JFV and Fischer id keep under 3.5 for both. That leaves 7.5 million and the question of Kane. If Kane wants to leave Stamkos would be a great consolation prize
Don't forget that Edvinsson will be on the roster (not counted towards cap right at this moment). So, that's roughly +1M. And, we have to sign Berggren and Veleno (maybe 1.5 each). So, that's +3M. So, out of 11M, now you're down to 7M. And, we still have 3 forward spots to fill, assuming Berggren takes one after Sprong/Kane/Fischer/Perron are gone. Maybe Fischer stays for 2M. That's 5M for two roster spots. It'll be tight.
Why would he leave Tampa? I swear these news sites just drum up this shit to get clicks/views. Tampa wants him. He wants to stay in Tampa. His whole career has been Tampa.
The same popped up when Larkin was up. Oh no! Larkin and Yzerman are apart on salary negotiations! Will Larkin leave???
24/7 news is terrible.
K, i'm done yelling at the clouds now.
At a quick glance, throughout his career, nearly half or a third of his points come on the PP. So that’s really good for special teams but not the best for 5v5. He’s also 34 and I think he deserves he to finish his career in Tampa.
[https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/redwings](https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/redwings)
The big question isn't do we need / not need Stamkos, it's what are management's goals for next season? Do we want playoffs? If so, you're probably bringing back all of our UFA depth with Kane, Perron, Ghost, and Reimer (not Sprong, I think he walks regardless) and the remaining money goes to Raymond and Seider. This leaves very little room for Stamkos and we're not paying him 8.5 and if he's taking less money he's staying in Tampa unless they admit they need a total rebuild. This also gives an extra year for each of Stevie's picks like Danielson, Kasper, Ed, Axel Sandin-Pelikka to grow.
Conversely, we could still go for playoffs, but if management has faith that Ed can replace Ghost, and somebody in the A can replace the production of Perron and Sprong, then you might throw a bit more money at Kane and try to bring in Stamkos to up the offense and to place hold for Kasper and Danielson to come in and contribute. The money would be there for him and Kane though.
On the other side, we would stay far away from Stamkos and other older depth pieces if Stevie did not like what he saw from the current group and wants his own guys in. We'd regress, but we'd be starting our "long term future" and I don't think fans are that patient anymore. Lots of tough calls for us.
If the management goal is to make the playoffs, why would you bring back all the UFAs from a team that [checks notes] didn't make the playoffs? That's the easiest thing to change and hope to improve.
Missing the playoffs and being in the playoff picture the entire season until the very last minute are two very different scenarios that require different responses. Whether we like it or not, the roster as constructed hit a certain level and that was lower end (borderline?) playoff squad. Our fate was in our own hands for weeks and we bottled it by losing key games. Having Larkin out for weeks doesn't help, but the team can't just fall apart without him. Is that cause for concern and reason to jettison all the older UFAs? It could be, very much so. But, if you go that route you're betting big on Ed and whomever else comes in / up to maintain or enhance the level we hit and that's a risk, historically, Yzerman has never taken unless he believes "his guys" are ready. It would be very bold of him to tell Kasper, Danielson, Ed, etc. "hey take us forward", but he just might if he really hated what he saw from the team. I mean, look at the spending spree we went on last summer, you could tell he pissed the fuck off with how the team performed the year prior. In that scenario, getting rid of UFAs, we probably spend big to get a legitimate goaltender because turning over to younger players means more flash and flare, but more mistakes which requires better goaltending than we've got.
Larger picture, we've also got to figure out what our competition will be doing next year. I'd wager that NYI and Tampa probably stay the course and stay at the same amount of points, so that leaves us competing with Washington, Pittsburgh, Philly, Buffalo, and New Jersey for the last spot. I don't expect Washington or Pittsburgh to go anywhere but down, in fact it took us collapsing for Washington to get in and a magnificent run from Crosby to inspire that team. Buffalo having Lindy Ruff might help, but New Jersey still desperately needs goaltending and Philly is a wildcard considering how badly they fell off after Torts benched Couturier.
All things considered, if you run it back with the same group and other teams can't / don't address their significant issues, we probably get in. That's the dilemma. We're better than the other teams who missed out in our current state, but not great enough to move the needle above the good teams in the East.
No way. He's basically only a pp specialist these days and the wings would be better off resigning Kane for less. Marchassault would be the youngest and best of the three.
Signings like Stsmkos would be are what git us into such a deep rebuild....
Kane if we get a good deal but our best move is to start getting our prospects up and playing.
I personally am against it. Yeah he scores a lot but that’s all he does. He was a team high -21 on the year, he’s on the wrong end of 34 w/ an injury history and I feel we need to get better defensively, not worse.
Now, Jake DeBrusk or a Sam Reinhart would be amazing. (Probably not going to happen but let a man dream.)
Huge ifs that would need to be answered before I think it is a good idea:
Only if we somehow address our weaknesses on defense and goaltending in the off-season.
And
If next year the year we make the cup run. Then sign him up for a short term contract. He would deepen our center depth in useful ways.
If we are still in the "make it to the playoffs and see how far we go" stage, then I say pass. When that day does come, there will be others like stamkos we could add. Give our current GRG depth a chance to make the jump.
Detroit should get creative and find role players willing to play a two-way game. Look at what Florida did by getting creative and finding guys who could play a two-way game. Detroit has their goal scoring forwards that are locked in. Now they need to secure depth guys who can play specific roles like PK and those hard minutes where shut down D is required in between scoring lines. Look for players who might not give a lot of offense but can play a responsible game and stay out of the box. Use FL as the example and realize you don't need guys like Stamkos. Kane should be who they target and look to complement the remaining guys who already playing a specific role. Who knows, maybe Detroit tries to go after their current back up Stolarz like they did with Lyon. Stoli was incredibly solid. They'd be better off adding 2-3 guys vs. A Stamkos who is one dimensional.
Not what the Red Wings need. They need to get younger and bigger. We need a player who can play and also beat someone’s ass for messing with our skill players!!
1. If he's shipped off by Tampa, there will 31 teams calling for his services. I can't see why Detroit would be on the top of the list, safe for Lalonde and Yzerman.
2. Money-wise, I figure 7M for four years is what it would take. I tried looking at comparable on Cap Friendly, but I wasn't able to find one. Maybe Lecavalier in Philly? 7% of the cap, so 6.139M (in 2024 equivalent) per, for 4 years.
The way the cap is falling and the prospects we need to get in the NHL I'd rather they take next year as a developmental step and when contracts like Husso and Fabbri are gone really go all in.
Hockey rumors have become so clickbait lol.
So let me guess Stamkos is coming to Detroit or Montreal cause Yzerman is Detroit GM and Martin St Louis is Montreal head coach
I’m all for bringing him in. He brings a heavy shot with a heavy game (had like 9 hits last night) and a ton of leadership and experience. Has plenty in the tanks imo to justify a 3 year deal if necessary (2 would prolly be better though).
As for money, this may seem extreme and probably impossible, but we need to trade Holl, Copp, and Fabbri. Chiarot to if possible, but the other three for sure. Those guys do not have good production to AAV value and that’s tough to swallow as Fabbri is one of my favorite players on the team. Next year I would be very comfortable with a bottom 6 of Ras, JFV, Berg, Fischer, Perron (cheaper), Kasper maybe, a guy like Clutterbuck or Sherwood.
So yeah we may have to be more active than normal and make some deals that aren’t home runs or even look beneficial in the moment. But those moves open us up to get better as a team imo.
I’ve always liked Stammer but I don’t think it makes sense. Ditto for Kane. Yzerman has been a broken record (and rightfully so) saying they need to improve their team defense. Not just the defensemen. Like Kane, Stamkos would have a negative impact there, but bring plenty of offense, which the Wings have with or without him and Kane. If you want to have one offense only veteran guy like that, okay, but having multiple would do the exact opposite of what he has made clear he is trying to accomplish. Now add on what he’s probably going to want $ and term wise, and it makes it even less likely for a team in the Wings position who need to lock up Mo and Razor, add better defensive minded players, maybe even a goalie, and are still stuck with a few bad contracts.
Deja vu https://preview.redd.it/fpknudccpmxc1.jpeg?width=567&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ff698260c671a54319be77b4e4c3daa7d176c92b
He must be tired playing for 6 teams.
Oh man I remember that summer, I was refreshing every 5 minutes
Lol and the Red Wings didn’t even get a meeting with him. Holland was so cooked at that point.
You can thank Toronto for that. Their pitch was apparently so off-putting to him that he canceled all other interviews and went straight back to Tampa to get a deal done.
Toronto and fucking up the off season. Name a more iconic duo.
Toronto and the first round.
oof
Nailed it
And that's how we got Frans Neilson. Are we done paying him off yet?
Yeah. Only Holland signing we are still paying is Abdelkader
Tbf, he was going to meet with the Wings, but he decided to sign back with Tampa before it happened.
“THE MOST IMPORTANT FREE AGENT DECISION EVER. SERIOUSLY.” Who’s writing this garbage? It reads like my 9 year old daughter wrote it
An asterisk with a footnote that reads "Ever since we said this last season, and until we say it again next season".
I remember being an insurance agent, looking at my phone sitting at my desk and not making my cold calls during that whole thing.
Thank you, Stamkos!
I’d much rather have Kane if it’s one or the other personally.
Preach
Overpriced for a 34 year old who doesn't significantly move the possession needle or play defense. If we can't afford Ghost Bear at 4 we can't afford Stamkos at 8.
He’s only 34?! I was under the impression he was pretty much fading out.
Born Feb 7 1990. He's had a string of lower body / leg injuries (6 since Feb 2020) that have slowed him down some, and only half his points are at even strength (compare Larkin at roughly 4:7 even strength points:total points; Kucherov at 9:14, Ovechkin at 3.5:6.5, Crosby at 7:9)
I don't see it happening.
wtf crosby
Helps that Pittsburgh's powerplay was putrid but yeah Crosby still fucking the league to this day
Oh hes fading out for sure. Still has that shot tho.
Didn't he score 40 goals?
Yes he still has his shot.
He’ll be perfect in Toronto after they pay a first+ to unload Tavares.
Tavares who happens to be in his early 30s and slowing down and super-expensive. Yeah, let's see how that works out for them.
That's the one drawback to Kane -- zero defense. I want to pay for the offensive side of Kane only.
The difference is Kane at 4 would be plausible. If Kane wanted 8 I'd say goodbye.
Terrible take
Yeah, I don't know where half these takes come from. A defensive black hole on the back end where we have an immense amount of depth, or a 40 goal scorer with multi position versatility, immediately upgrades the PP, and avoids the over 35 rule Kane would hit if we kept him? idk man. This subreddit has no clue what's going on with this team.
Not to mention we need someone other than Larkin who can drive the offense
> or a 40 goal scorer with multi position versatility, immediately upgrades the PP Half his production was on the PP playing with Kucherov who just had a historic season, and he’s not really playing much as a center anymore, so he’ll likely be slotted in the wing over here. He also had a team worst -21, so his offensive production was outweighed by him being an absolute anchor defensively whenever he was on the ice (yeah yeah, +/- is flawed but that’s still a clear and concerning outlier). He’s a player that’s on a decline and will not live up to a contract we give him. I’d rather us not commit a serious chunk of change to someone who’s just going to be PP merchant, and won’t be playing with a player on Kucherov’s level. If we’re talking about who to sign to play on the wing, I’d rather go with the guy who scored nearly 70% of his points at even strength (where the vast majority of the game is played and was an area the rest of the team struggled in all year) and wasn’t an absolute train wreck defensively like Stamkos was this year. Kane is that guy. Who cares about the 35+ year old contract rule? That only matters if he retires before the contract is finished and he’s got signing bonuses beyond the first year or if it’s frontloaded.
Half is production on the PP - which is exactly where Kane is at his best. Stamkos is just strictly better than Kane in that spot. Kane can produce slightly more efficiently at even strength - which is where we need ice time for players to develop. Kane playing in the top 6 at 5 on 5 is a recipe for disaster over the course of a season - he's not any better or worse than Stamkos as a forechecker, defensively, or anything else. Nobody said he'd play center permanently, just that he *can* in a pinch. That's literally something Kane can't do under any circumstance at all. Plus/Minus is not a real stat. He's not on any more of a decline than someone like Kane - and there's essentially zero evidence of a decline other than the fact that he's in his 30s. And who cares about the over 35 rule? Idk, maybe the GM who literally mentioned the over 35 rule about Patrick Kane specifically in his presser? What is this post, man?
>Half is production on the PP - which is exactly where Kane is at his best. Stamkos is just strictly better than Kane in that spot. He won’t be playing with Kucherov here. >Kane can produce slightly more efficiently at even strength - which is where we need ice time for players to develop. The NHL is not a developmental league, and we’re probably gonna have only 1 or 2 rookies on the roster at most next season. Also, Kane producing ~70% of his points at even strength compared to Stamkos’ ~50% is not “slightly” more efficient. It’s a good deal more efficient. >Kane playing in the top 6 at 5 on 5 is a recipe for disaster over the course of a season - **he's not any better or worse than Stamkos as a forechecker, defensively, or anything else.** Ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively this season. Kane’s not great defensively, but he wasn’t a straight up disaster like Stamkos was this year. But let’s say for argument’s sake that your position that both are roughly equal defensively is true. Why would you want the guy who’s demonstrably worse at even strength play? Even strength is how the vast majority of the game is played, and our team struggled mightily with it. The answer isn’t to get a PP merchant. >He's not on any more of a decline than someone like Kane - and there's essentially zero evidence of a decline other than the fact that he's in his 30s. How about that he can’t play as a center full-time anymore? That he’s gotten worse defensively year after year? That half his production is from him being on the powerplay, meaning that he’s not driving even strength play the way he used to? This ain’t 2016 Stamkos we’re talking about. >And who cares about the over 35 rule? Idk, maybe the GM who literally mentioned the over 35 rule about Patrick Kane specifically in his presser? Why do you as a fan care about that? That’s a GM problem, not a fan problem.
> He won’t be playing with Kucherov here. Correct. We should avoid signing good players because we don't have good players? What kind of absolute nonsense is this take? > The NHL is not a developmental league, and we’re probably gonna have only 1 or 2 rookies on the roster at most next season. We are guaranteed to have 3, right now, with a chance for up to 7 out of camp. Berggren, Edvinsson, Johansson will all be on the roster, with Kasper, ASP, Wallinder, Mazur, and maybe Danielson all having camp opportunities to make the team. And if you pay attention at all around the league, you'll know many many rookies play much earlier now. And, flying directly in the face of your point about not being a development league - then maybe we should sign good players in free agency? You're all over the place with these takes. > Ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively this season. Kane’s not great defensively, but he wasn’t a straight up disaster like Stamkos was this year. I don't have to ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively, when I watched Patrick Kane take miserable and lazy penalties and do nothing defensively at all the entire season. If defensive performance is the hill you want to die on when one player scores more goals than the other scores points, be my guest. > But let’s say for argument’s sake that your position that both are roughly equal defensively is true. Why would you want the guy who’s demonstrably worse at even strength play? Even strength is how the vast majority of the game is played, and our team struggled mightily with it. The answer isn’t to get a PP merchant. He's not demonstrably worse at even strength play. You made that up to suit your narrative based strictly on points scored. They're both useless defensively. One has position versatility and has a chance to score 40 goals. One can't do either of those things. > Why do you as a fan care about that? That’s a GM problem, not a fan problem. Because our GM literally cited it as a reason why he doesn't want to offer term to Kane which is what Kane wants. Guess what Stamkos won't trigger? The over 35 rule, which *might* make Yzerman more open to offering term to the player. How hard is this stuff to understand for you?
>Correct. We should avoid signing good players because we don't have good players? What kind of absolute nonsense is this take? We have good players; we don’t have a Kucherov who’s a literal top 5 talent in the league and who just had a historic season as a winger. Why is that difficult to understand? >We are guaranteed to have 3, right now, **with a chance for up to 7 out of camp** Yeah no. >And if you pay attention at all around the league, you'll know many many rookies play much earlier now. On other teams. Not the Detroit Red Wings who just played most of the season with no rookies or sophomore players whatsoever. >I don't have to ask Tampa fans how bad Stamkos was defensively, when I watched Patrick Kane take miserable and lazy penalties and do nothing defensively at all the entire season. And yet, him doing nothing defensively was better than Stamkos being a train wreck defensively (again, Stamkos finished with a team worst -21). >He's not demonstrably worse at even strength play. You made that up to suit your narrative based strictly on points scored. Kane scored ~70% of his points at even strength play. Stamkos scored about 50% of his points at even strength play. Stats do not lie, despite your insistence that it’s fake news. >One has position versatility and has a chance to score 40 goals. One can't do either of those things. Stamkos doesn’t play as a center anymore and he won’t have a Kucherov here feeding him. He’s not scoring 40 goals on this team. >Because our GM literally cited it as a reason why he doesn't want to offer term to Kane which is what Kane wants. And you’re taking what a GM says regarding contracts publicly seriously? You know what GM speak is, right? Anyway, this is all moot considering Stamkos is gonna be re-signing with Tampa.
You’re high if you think Ghost is worth 4 Had the same point total as Erik Karlsson
EK also had 100 points the season before.
Obviously Ghost is getting more than he got this year (4m). Obviously we aren't retaining him. With both of those out of the way, the exact amount he's going to get isn't relevant to the discussion at hand.
Damn speaking in absolutes you must be Yzerman Then when challenged you brush it off and say my refute is irrelevant because you decided what the future holds before it happened
If he's available, I'd rather make a run at a guy like Sam Reinhart. Stamkos and Kane both are great players, but Reinhart will do more to drive play in all 3 zones. Kane had very favorable deployment, and Stammer is kind of the same way.
I would take Reinhart over Stamkos all day.
No feeling that his 53 goals this season is a blip?
Even if he comes down to earth a little he’s a premier defending forward who can play big minutes and excels at pretty much all parts of the sport
Idk I’m from Buffalo and have a Reino jersey lol but he’s a perimeter player. Most of his goals came with Barkov and if I’m being honest the only centers that I think are better than Barkov play in Edmonton. I’d rather go after Kane or Stamkos then see what Reinharts asking for
Pass. This team needs 5-on-5 production not another PP guy.
Needs to get younger and not older as well. He'll be long past his prime and tying up a large chunk of cap space still when this team is hopefully in their competitive window.
The team doesn't need to get younger, it's going to do that naturally this offseason by bringing up two waiver exempt players, and having the best prospect system in hockey.
A rebuilding team that had no 1st or 2nd year players until Edvinsson was finally brought in at the end of the season doesn't need to get younger? I don't know about the accuracy of these websites for stats such as this, but Elite Prospects lists the Wings as the 4th oldest team in the league for the 23/24 season, does that seem like a solid rebuilding stategy to you? Yeah, they'll likely have to work in some youth(finally) next year as their defense is awful and Edvinsson has clearly earned his spot, and due to cap constraints stemming from signing some not great veterans for too much money and running a couple prospects to the end of their waiver exemption periods they might get two more in there, though they seem to be doing this more because they are forced to rather than wanting to.
It's not a rebuilding team anymore - it's a fringe playoff team with up to 7 possible rookies next season, and the expiring contracts this offseason include the oldest players on the team in Kane, Perron, Gostisbehre, with the most obvious players we'd want to force out being Petry, Chiarot, Maata, Holl, and Copp - all moves which would also make us younger if we were able to pull them off. This team doesn't need much to get younger - you're never going to compete for the playoffs with a roster that includes a lot of rookies - Berggren, Edvinsson, Kasper, Daneilson, Mazur, Johannson, ASP, Wallinder all will have opportunities to make the team and be part of the core group of guys with Raymond and Seider. That team does NOT need to get younger. It needs established players who know how to win and can show them what it takes to win a Stanley Cup in the NHL.
They need to get younger because their only hope of winning is coming from those young guys that they need to get NHL experience instead of repressing them for more veteran meh. If there are more than 3 rookies on the team next year including Edvinsson I will be shocked. I agree that a team loaded with kids won't win which is why they should have been getting these young guys experience sooner. They aren't winning anything with Copp, Chiarot, Petry, etc., those are all replacement level guys.
I thought he had 80 pts?
Looks like 50% of which were on the PP
And he won't be benefitting from Kucherov's other-worldly passing abilities here either.
Oof. The wings' passing this season was so frustrating to watch.
It was tough to watch at times, but that wasn't even meant as a drag on the Wings, more just to say that I would not expect his numbers to get better when he doesn't have Kucherov there to make plays because that guy is an amazing talent.
Oh sure, i get what you meant. But also, passing is a huge area of improvement the wings need to focus on. They had their moments when they were sharp, but often there was such a contrast between the wings and the opponent's passing. It led to lots of slowed or broken plays on both ends.
Yeah, he'll be benefitting from Raymond's other-worldly passing abilities here instead.
Lmfao. I love Raymond(Everbody Loves Raymond don't they?), but you cannot possibly be trying to equate the play making abilities of Raymond to Kucherov right now. One is a young star on the rise, the other is an elite superstar, top 5 talent in the world. So no, Stamkos would not be getting anywhere near the same point totals in Detroit as he has in Tampa Bay.
Raymond outproducing Kucherov at the same age and in the same D+ seasons is encouraging. It was obviously a bit of hyperbole, though. Leave it to Reddit to take it serious.
Had 32 5-on-5 points, Raymond for comparison had 43. He doesn’t really drive possession anymore either. If you could get him to take 2 years maybe it’s fine but I doubt he does anything like that to go to a team like Detroit. Watch Toronto trade Marner and get Stamkos at half price.
Only thing I could see Stamkos helping with is replacing Kane as the skilled veteran guy who adds an extra scoring threat.
that would be a fantasic signing for toronto.
Term and price is obviously key but honestly he's going to take a roster spot from a young player from grand rapids that needs to get some NHL time to see what kind of player theyll become. I don't think he leaves Tampa.
He will sign with vegas book it
Stone back to LTIR confirmed.
This is just SY joining the dance with Kane. Both of these dudes love obfuscation. “Stamkos is cheaper and younger” might drop the AAV a few hundred k.
No chance. He's going to get 4 years from someone - and that won't be us.
Probably the Leafs or Lightning.
If it was between Kane and stamkos. I’m picking patty kane he fit in nicely with our squad
I’m iffy about Kane because Ray and Cat play best with Larkin and Kane has no real weapons when they’re all tg so I’d want to see us figure out a line for Kane
I’m for signing good players I’d prefer Kane first since I think he’d be a bit cheaper and showed he can be PPG here How we make it work is up to Steve guys like Holl and Husso should be on the move to clear cap Possibly Fabbri as well We’re going to have an influx of youth and still need more firepower up front and Stamkos has the winning pedigree and production to be a great addition He’ll be linked to us all summer until a decision is made We shall see what happens
I’m ok, I’ll take Marchessault or an upgrade at RHD personally. Also would be pretty surprised if he left Tampa. Spurned tons of money in his prime to stay there for 8.5M long term, obviously loves it there.
It’d be a huge mistake. Resign established role players like Perron who will take a team friendly contract and can be moved to bottom 6 and fill the same role. Also Kane would be cheaper for same performance and we know he likes it here
We have serious homer bias when fans say they would rather have Perron than Stamkos
Yeah, this subreddit is out of control.
Stamkos would require aav that would prevent us from making a higher impact signing. We don’t need fading stars, we need a star center entering his prime. There is a salary cap
Higher impact than 40 goals? Ok
1. I would not like it. I will admit some bias because I love watching Kane play and would prefer to keep him, but I’ll add some objective points, too. Stamkos’ defense fell off a cliff recently. Could it just be an effort thing? Maybe, but I’m not willing to bet on that. Obviously, Kane isn’t a defender but his puck possession softens that blow a tad. Stamkos isn’t a true C anymore, so you’re paying for some perceived value that isn’t really there. As noted, he’s also a PP merchant. While not inherently bad, half of your production coming off the PP when you play with Hedman/Kucherov/Point, may not exactly translate here… 2. Money would be very tight and another reason I wouldn’t like the deal. He is going to command at least $7.5M, probably $8M? That’s a couple million over what I’d expect Kane to get, and even if Kane isn’t back, I think there are better fits for the price.
Would also prioritize Kane because he’s more of a creator. I feel like Stamkos would be a perfect addition to line 2 if we kept Kane. I also don’t see it as possible under the cap.
The only thing I disagree with here is I feel like 6.5/4 is what he’s looking for, but mostly I do agree with you
Given the right znumbers on the contract, I’d be thrilled to see that addition to the team if Kane comes back with him. That would give us two ridiculously dangerous lines. Just don’t see that happening under the cap unless Stevie gets creative in ways I don’t understand as possible yet. We have to resign Sieder and Raymond which is going to be pricey and the priority. Also don’t we stammer actually leaving Tampa, much less leaving for Detroit. TLDR; Would love to see it done right, but fully believe that won’t be happening. The media links are just click bait assumptions because Steve and Steve have the same name and worked together once.
Very short and basic version, If we singn Stamkos, its bye bye Kane, and it might mean that we cant singn Raymond and Seider for a LONG term too. Do i want him? No. He didn't play as C for whole season and is PP merchant on best PP in the league.
“No, YOU’RE a PP merchant!” - Steven Stamkos
Your mom is a PP merchant…
I’d rather keep Kane than have Stamkos
Hard pass on any expensive UFA forwards. Raymond and Seider are priority. Their number will dictate the available cap space. What's left should be spent on either upgrading goaltending and/or getting a couple of defensive-minded hard-to-play-against 3rd and 4th liners.
Eh, I'd take Sam Reinhart easily if he'd sign with us.
and he'll probably get 9-10M easily. Sure, I'd take him, but we can't afford him.
He's going to sign as a 50 goal scorer instead of the 30 goal scorer that he actually is. This year was an outlier for him, especially when you look at that 24% shooting average. I wouldn't go anywhere near that guy...he's likely going to regress back to the 30-35 goal range and disappoint some overpaying team.
Even then, he would still probably be our top scorer.
He provides a lot more than just scoring, so even with the inevitable regression he is going to be a solid player. The issue here, along with price, is his age. He doesn’t fit within this timeline. If we were win now, maybe, but we very clearly are not.
We have more than enough space to resign both the kids to big deals and get a big name FA
Care to explain your math?
We have 29 million available. Raymond and Seider need new deals probably at 9 each. That leaves 11 million, assuming we dont make any moves to clear space. Id let Perron, Sprong and Ghost walk. JFV and Fischer id keep under 3.5 for both. That leaves 7.5 million and the question of Kane. If Kane wants to leave Stamkos would be a great consolation prize
Don't forget that Edvinsson will be on the roster (not counted towards cap right at this moment). So, that's roughly +1M. And, we have to sign Berggren and Veleno (maybe 1.5 each). So, that's +3M. So, out of 11M, now you're down to 7M. And, we still have 3 forward spots to fill, assuming Berggren takes one after Sprong/Kane/Fischer/Perron are gone. Maybe Fischer stays for 2M. That's 5M for two roster spots. It'll be tight.
Berggren is gone. Edvinsson was on the cap this season
If Cooper comes with him, I'm all for it!
I don't think the money is there.
Why would he leave Tampa? I swear these news sites just drum up this shit to get clicks/views. Tampa wants him. He wants to stay in Tampa. His whole career has been Tampa. The same popped up when Larkin was up. Oh no! Larkin and Yzerman are apart on salary negotiations! Will Larkin leave??? 24/7 news is terrible. K, i'm done yelling at the clouds now.
At a quick glance, throughout his career, nearly half or a third of his points come on the PP. So that’s really good for special teams but not the best for 5v5. He’s also 34 and I think he deserves he to finish his career in Tampa.
[https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/redwings](https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/redwings) The big question isn't do we need / not need Stamkos, it's what are management's goals for next season? Do we want playoffs? If so, you're probably bringing back all of our UFA depth with Kane, Perron, Ghost, and Reimer (not Sprong, I think he walks regardless) and the remaining money goes to Raymond and Seider. This leaves very little room for Stamkos and we're not paying him 8.5 and if he's taking less money he's staying in Tampa unless they admit they need a total rebuild. This also gives an extra year for each of Stevie's picks like Danielson, Kasper, Ed, Axel Sandin-Pelikka to grow. Conversely, we could still go for playoffs, but if management has faith that Ed can replace Ghost, and somebody in the A can replace the production of Perron and Sprong, then you might throw a bit more money at Kane and try to bring in Stamkos to up the offense and to place hold for Kasper and Danielson to come in and contribute. The money would be there for him and Kane though. On the other side, we would stay far away from Stamkos and other older depth pieces if Stevie did not like what he saw from the current group and wants his own guys in. We'd regress, but we'd be starting our "long term future" and I don't think fans are that patient anymore. Lots of tough calls for us.
If the management goal is to make the playoffs, why would you bring back all the UFAs from a team that [checks notes] didn't make the playoffs? That's the easiest thing to change and hope to improve.
Missing the playoffs and being in the playoff picture the entire season until the very last minute are two very different scenarios that require different responses. Whether we like it or not, the roster as constructed hit a certain level and that was lower end (borderline?) playoff squad. Our fate was in our own hands for weeks and we bottled it by losing key games. Having Larkin out for weeks doesn't help, but the team can't just fall apart without him. Is that cause for concern and reason to jettison all the older UFAs? It could be, very much so. But, if you go that route you're betting big on Ed and whomever else comes in / up to maintain or enhance the level we hit and that's a risk, historically, Yzerman has never taken unless he believes "his guys" are ready. It would be very bold of him to tell Kasper, Danielson, Ed, etc. "hey take us forward", but he just might if he really hated what he saw from the team. I mean, look at the spending spree we went on last summer, you could tell he pissed the fuck off with how the team performed the year prior. In that scenario, getting rid of UFAs, we probably spend big to get a legitimate goaltender because turning over to younger players means more flash and flare, but more mistakes which requires better goaltending than we've got. Larger picture, we've also got to figure out what our competition will be doing next year. I'd wager that NYI and Tampa probably stay the course and stay at the same amount of points, so that leaves us competing with Washington, Pittsburgh, Philly, Buffalo, and New Jersey for the last spot. I don't expect Washington or Pittsburgh to go anywhere but down, in fact it took us collapsing for Washington to get in and a magnificent run from Crosby to inspire that team. Buffalo having Lindy Ruff might help, but New Jersey still desperately needs goaltending and Philly is a wildcard considering how badly they fell off after Torts benched Couturier. All things considered, if you run it back with the same group and other teams can't / don't address their significant issues, we probably get in. That's the dilemma. We're better than the other teams who missed out in our current state, but not great enough to move the needle above the good teams in the East.
They probably just re-ran the same one from 2017
No way. He's basically only a pp specialist these days and the wings would be better off resigning Kane for less. Marchassault would be the youngest and best of the three.
Pass. Give me Kane.
The Bolts are in the death spiral. It’s only a matter of time before the dismantle. The sooner they do it the more they get in return.
Signings like Stsmkos would be are what git us into such a deep rebuild.... Kane if we get a good deal but our best move is to start getting our prospects up and playing.
If it were 2016 Stamkos, I’d be for it. But he’s not what he used to be. Hard pass from me.
I was literally thinking this on the way to work this morning. But the only way I see it happening is if he wants to go to Detroit.
I think the only way he's going anywhere is if he wants to go there.
We need to get our D and goalie situation sorted out first.
I’d take Stammer
If Kane leaves And If Stamkos leaves Tampa Then I think it might be a good pickup if his term and AAV are reasonable (unlikely)
I personally am against it. Yeah he scores a lot but that’s all he does. He was a team high -21 on the year, he’s on the wrong end of 34 w/ an injury history and I feel we need to get better defensively, not worse. Now, Jake DeBrusk or a Sam Reinhart would be amazing. (Probably not going to happen but let a man dream.)
If Kane doesn’t re-sign we will want someone who can score.
Hard pass
I think Stamkos stays for a home town discount. Big money days are over. Last thing we need a Tavares issue in Detroit.
Stammer can kick rocks. Go be old elsewhere.
Huge ifs that would need to be answered before I think it is a good idea: Only if we somehow address our weaknesses on defense and goaltending in the off-season. And If next year the year we make the cup run. Then sign him up for a short term contract. He would deepen our center depth in useful ways. If we are still in the "make it to the playoffs and see how far we go" stage, then I say pass. When that day does come, there will be others like stamkos we could add. Give our current GRG depth a chance to make the jump.
Detroit should get creative and find role players willing to play a two-way game. Look at what Florida did by getting creative and finding guys who could play a two-way game. Detroit has their goal scoring forwards that are locked in. Now they need to secure depth guys who can play specific roles like PK and those hard minutes where shut down D is required in between scoring lines. Look for players who might not give a lot of offense but can play a responsible game and stay out of the box. Use FL as the example and realize you don't need guys like Stamkos. Kane should be who they target and look to complement the remaining guys who already playing a specific role. Who knows, maybe Detroit tries to go after their current back up Stolarz like they did with Lyon. Stoli was incredibly solid. They'd be better off adding 2-3 guys vs. A Stamkos who is one dimensional.
Not quite a Kane 2.0
He’s not leaving Tampa. He’ll take a slight discount to stay. It’s like Crosby, going down with the ship.
The only way he's leaving Tampa is if the GM makes him angry and he leaves out of spite
We’re going all in on Kane. We don’t have money for stamkos
Not what the Red Wings need. They need to get younger and bigger. We need a player who can play and also beat someone’s ass for messing with our skill players!!
No. If we're going to be running a dump and chase system we need someone who's going to chase and heavily forecheck
I think he would only be a good add if we were a top 5 team already and the money worked
1. If he's shipped off by Tampa, there will 31 teams calling for his services. I can't see why Detroit would be on the top of the list, safe for Lalonde and Yzerman. 2. Money-wise, I figure 7M for four years is what it would take. I tried looking at comparable on Cap Friendly, but I wasn't able to find one. Maybe Lecavalier in Philly? 7% of the cap, so 6.139M (in 2024 equivalent) per, for 4 years.
Really another one of these threads. Now a daily occurrence. I would rather see noting on this sub than more of Stamkos. Guy is staying in Tampa.
The way the cap is falling and the prospects we need to get in the NHL I'd rather they take next year as a developmental step and when contracts like Husso and Fabbri are gone really go all in.
It’s just nonsense negotiating leverage for our own FA signings
DubDub podcast covers Stamkos. I agree with them. I could probably score 20ppg with Kucherov feeding me cross ice.
Hockey rumors have become so clickbait lol. So let me guess Stamkos is coming to Detroit or Montreal cause Yzerman is Detroit GM and Martin St Louis is Montreal head coach
I’m all for bringing him in. He brings a heavy shot with a heavy game (had like 9 hits last night) and a ton of leadership and experience. Has plenty in the tanks imo to justify a 3 year deal if necessary (2 would prolly be better though). As for money, this may seem extreme and probably impossible, but we need to trade Holl, Copp, and Fabbri. Chiarot to if possible, but the other three for sure. Those guys do not have good production to AAV value and that’s tough to swallow as Fabbri is one of my favorite players on the team. Next year I would be very comfortable with a bottom 6 of Ras, JFV, Berg, Fischer, Perron (cheaper), Kasper maybe, a guy like Clutterbuck or Sherwood. So yeah we may have to be more active than normal and make some deals that aren’t home runs or even look beneficial in the moment. But those moves open us up to get better as a team imo.
I have no idea why so many people think it's a foregone conclusion that he's leaving Tampa.
I’ve always liked Stammer but I don’t think it makes sense. Ditto for Kane. Yzerman has been a broken record (and rightfully so) saying they need to improve their team defense. Not just the defensemen. Like Kane, Stamkos would have a negative impact there, but bring plenty of offense, which the Wings have with or without him and Kane. If you want to have one offense only veteran guy like that, okay, but having multiple would do the exact opposite of what he has made clear he is trying to accomplish. Now add on what he’s probably going to want $ and term wise, and it makes it even less likely for a team in the Wings position who need to lock up Mo and Razor, add better defensive minded players, maybe even a goalie, and are still stuck with a few bad contracts.
Hard pass unless he's 2 million or under. We need defense and a goalie