[Signing] Stajan signs 4yrs $3.125Mil AAV contract extension (limited NTC)

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Why do we care that three years from now it exists? We should be very clear that this team is taking at least a three year walk in the woods. Be under no illusions that by year four Stajan will still not be holding any players back. And even if he is, we trade him or waive him. There's really no downside to the extra year and some possible upside. That upside is that we get a dependable guy that can play tough minutes and shield developing players.

I think what many people are getting hung up on is that Stajan is somehow preventing some other player to come in and play better. But the reality is that it is extremely unlikely we could replace Stajan with a better UFA at this kind of contract, and not only that, that we could attract a single decent UFA center at all.

Hey come to Calgary, where the only team we're better than is the Oilers! If you think that attracting even UFAs like Boyd Gordon is a problem limited to Edmonton than I think these next 3 years is going to be a rude awakening.

So getting back to the point, here we have a bird in the hand. Sure he isn't great, I personally don't like him as a player at all, but he's definitely above replacement, playing a position we are terminally thin in, and he has hundreds of games of experience. That's something. That's someone you hold on to because it would actually be a stretch to think that we could sign a person that wouldn't be an even more ridiculous contract that would replace him even-steven on the ice.

First bold: because three years from now the Flames will still be operating an NHL team and trying to build the best team possible. Why would we not care?

Second bold: I never said he was holding anyone back - that is not how it works in the NHL. If someone is better, they will replace him. That isn't the point at all.

The point is flexibility. Imagine a scenario whereby they want to trade him next year. Maybe they draft Reinhart, who goes gangbusters, and Knight settles nicely into a 3rd line role (or whatever).

Now, they want to move Stajan. But he has 4 years remaining on his contract.

That would make him difficult to move.

Term matters. You can't just not care about it, or pretend it doesn't matter. Well, you can, but it wouldn't make for a good argument.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

If Stajan is sheltering young centers two years from now the rebuild is a fail.

My god.

If Monahan cannot play against a higher caliber competition in 2 years, and if our 1st pick this year cannot either, then yes, there is a significant problem with the rebuild. Stajan is not a rock defensively and struggles himself against tough competition. Those 2 young players really aren't competing with a lot.

"Failed"? I suppose that's harsh. I should have said "well on it's way to failing".

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The point is flexibility. Imagine a scenario whereby they want to trade him next year. Maybe they draft Reinhart, who goes gangbusters, and Knight settles nicely into a 3rd line role (or whatever).

Now, they want to move Stajan. But he has 4 years remaining on his contract.

That would make him difficult to move.

Term matters. You can't just not care about it, or pretend it doesn't matter. Well, you can, but it wouldn't make for a good argument.

Given the expected cap in the coming years, Stajan's contract won't be any sort of anchor for a 3rd line center.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

First bold: because three years from now the Flames will still be operating an NHL team and trying to build the best team possible. Why would we not care?

Second bold: I never said he was holding anyone back - that is not how it works in the NHL. If someone is better, they will replace him. That isn't the point at all.

The point is flexibility. Imagine a scenario whereby they want to trade him next year. Maybe they draft Reinhart, who goes gangbusters, and Knight settles nicely into a 3rd line role (or whatever).

Now, they want to move Stajan. But he has 4 years remaining on his contract.

That would make him difficult to move.

Term matters. You can't just not care about it, or pretend it doesn't matter. Well, you can, but it wouldn't make for a good argument.

What's wrong with having some center depth? And it would be an unqualified miracle if Knight could step in a replace Stajan on the third line 1 to 1 two years from now.

I mean I get the point, maybe Stajan is made expendable if everything goes right and then we have a $3 million anchor of a contract.

But two points to that then, 1) everything will most likely not go right we'll still likely need some veteran centres and depth and 2) the $3 million looks like peanuts in a rising cap world especially with the new huge TV deal.

[FlamesAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The thing is, if we still need Stajan around in even 2 years to shelter players, the rebuild will have already failed.

So if the rebuild goes according to plan and we don't need him to shelter players anymore, what do we do with his contract?

In both scenarios it's a mistake.

That's a pretty simplistic viewpoint.

At the moment it's between him and Backlund for who our "#1 C" is but it's not like he's having to completely shelter Monahan, Colborne, etc as well. I'd be very surprised if in 2 years he's the guy still "sheltering" the rest of our C's as it'd mean everyone else regressed, no one on the farm/we drafted stepped up and we didn't manage to acquire anyone else in the meantime.

And if it were to reach that point then it really says nothing about him or this new contract he signed.

If he no longer needs to play top C minutes then him and his contract go down to the 3rd or 4th line. It's not like we're hurting for cap space if it reaches this point and it's not like Stajan hasn't been in this role before on the team. Rest assured, if the younger guys start stepping up the organization will shuffle Stajan around to make room for them.

A big reason I'm happy with the signing is that Stajan not only can be a servicable guy in any role during or after the rebuild, but he's okay with playing any role as well. I think he understands where he fits into the team today and where he might fit in tomorrow, and he still chose to re-sign here.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

What's wrong with having some center depth? And it would be an unqualified miracle if Knight could step in a replace Stajan on the third line 1 to 1 two years from now.

I mean I get the point, maybe Stajan is made expendable if everything goes right and then we have a $3 million anchor of a contract.

But two points to that then, 1) everything will most likely not go right we'll still likely need some veteran centres and depth and 2) the $3 million looks like peanuts in a rising cap world especially with the new huge TV deal.

I don't disagree with any of that.

But that doesn't change the fact that a longer term contract is less flexible.

I like having him re-signed. But a 2 year deal would have kept him here as well.

Things do change. And if they do in this case, that contract will become a hindrance.

It's a pretty straight-forward argument. Saying 'they probably won't want to trade him in the next couple years so don't worry about it' isn't a rebuttal.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Given the expected cap in the coming years, Stajan's contract won't be any sort of anchor for a 3rd line center.

He's currently the third best centre on a third last place team with some of the worst centre depth in the league.

The cap hit on the contract isn't the anchor, the player it is tied to is.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I don't disagree with any of that.

But that doesn't change the fact that a longer term contract is less flexible.

I like having him re-signed. But a 2 year deal would have kept him here as well.

Things do change. And if they do in this case, that contract will become a hindrance.

It's a pretty straight-forward argument. Saying 'they probably won't want to trade him in the next couple years so don't worry about it' isn't a rebuttal.

Maybe a 2 year deal would not have kept him here.

Why is that so easily overlooked?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

He's currently the third best centre on a third last place team with some of the worst centre depth in the league.

The cap hit on the contract isn't the anchor, the player it is tied to is.

Yes so are you going to fire up that 3d printer and print a better 3rd line center for us for the next four years?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Maybe a 2 year deal would not have kept him here.

Why is that so easily overlooked?

If Stajan was playing hardball, let him go.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

If Monahan cannot play against a higher caliber competition in 2 years, and if our 1st pick this year cannot either, then yes, there is a significant problem with the rebuild. Stajan is not a rock defensively and struggles himself against tough competition. Those 2 young players really aren't competing with a lot.

"Failed"? I suppose that's harsh. I should have said "well on it's way to failing".

You are expecting a 20 and 21 year old to be leading the team in 2 years?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Maybe a 2 year deal would not have kept him here.

Why is that so easily overlooked?

I really can't see Stajan playing too hard to get.

And if so, you let it play out and see how the summer unfolds.

Just because a player asks for it, doesn't mean you have to give it to them. Some players you can't lose. For others, that doesn't apply and they are replaceable.

Is Stajan replaceable? I certainly think so.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

If Stajan was playing hardball, let him go.

This was my biggest issue with the contract.

I have no issue with bringing him back but IMO we over-payed to do it.

Where else is Stajan getting 4 years at $3 million per season?

Edmonton? Phoenix?

Can't see too many teams lining up to give him that term.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

You are expecting a 20 and 21 year old to be leading the team in 2 years?

Playing a top 6 centre role != leading the team.

Monahan needs to show progression into become a top 6 centre well before then yes.

Sam Bennett will likely return to junior and then debut in 2015. At that point we'll likely have drafted either McDavid or Eichel, who will both unquestionably start in the NHL.

So, our centre depth becomes:

Monahan
Bennett
McDavid/Eichel
Backlund
Colborne

So explain to me why we need Stajan to shelter any of those players?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Maybe a 2 year deal would not have kept him here.

Why is that so easily overlooked?

Because its too ridiculous to think about.

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Yes so are you going to fire up that 3d printer and print a better 3rd line center for us for the next four years?

Next one or even two? Maybe not. In three or four? That's when you could sign one, trade for one (there are dozens better) or finally have a guy in the system who would be ready to step up who can't get playing time forcing you to try and trade Stajan or bury him. Something easily avoided by not signing him for two years longer than makes sense.

[FBI]

My problem with this signing is that stajan is an average to below average hockey player. Why are we signing that for 4 years. Blah. 4 more years of me yelling Stajan you suck at the tv.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Playing a top 6 centre role != leading the team.

Monahan needs to show progression into become a top 6 centre well before then yes.

Sam Bennett will likely return to junior and then debut in 2015. At that point we'll likely have drafted either McDavid or Eichel, who will both unquestionably start in the NHL.

So, our centre depth becomes:

Monahan
Bennett
McDavid/Eichel
Backlund
Colborne

So explain to me why we need Stajan to shelter any of those players?

Because having top 3 centers being 21, 19 and 18 would be awful and what if we get 2nd pick and take Ekblad and miss out on McDavid/Eichel or they aren't ready that seems much more likely. Say we get one of Reinhart/Bennett or McDavid/Eichel still have:

Monahan
Draft pick
Stajan
Colborne

There are a lot worse things to have happen then having too many centers. Look at us last year with two natural centers in the line-up. A 3 game win streak at the end of this year could get us Dal Colle and then next year two teams tank and bad lottery luck and we have no McDavid/Eichel.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Playing a top 6 centre role != leading the team.

Monahan needs to show progression into become a top 6 centre well before then yes.

Sam Bennett will likely return to junior and then debut in 2015. At that point we'll likely have drafted either McDavid or Eichel, who will both unquestionably start in the NHL.

So, our centre depth becomes:

Monahan
Bennett
McDavid/Eichel
Backlund
Colborne

So explain to me why we need Stajan to shelter any of those players?

I think it's optimistic to be confident that's the group we'll have and any of them, even Monahan, will be ready for a heavy role by then.

But it's not like I *know* otherwise so carry on.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by moon

Because having top 3 centers being 21, 19 and 18 would be awful and what if we get 2nd pick and take Ekblad and miss out on McDavid/Eichel or they aren't ready that seems much more likely. Say we get one of Reinhart/Bennett or McDavid/Eichel still have:

Monahan
Draft pick
Stajan
Colborne

There are a lot worse things to have happen then having too many centers. Look at us last year with two natural centers in the line-up. A 3 game win streak at the end of this year could get us Dal Colle and then next year two teams tank and bad lottery luck and we have no McDavid/Eichel.

Backlund would be 26/27 at that time and is very capable defensively and perfect in a 3rd line role (though I know you disagree) and much better than Stajan in that regard.

How old were Crosby and Malkin when they won the Cup? Was Toews not the 1st line centre for Chicago when they won their 1st Cup?

Young players take the reins all the time in the NHL. It's the only way to win it seems nowadays. There's nothing wrong with having a 21 and 20 year old composing your top 2 centres, especially when they are top picks and have proven their capabilities. Not to mention Backlund is more than capable of moving anywhere in the lineup.

And then you have Reinhart who has played very well this season who can play both centre and wing.

Really, I just see Stajan as pointless in 2 years. This isn't a team that will be competing for the Cup at that time, but you have to prepare your young players. If they aren't ready or are overwhelmed, move Backlund up for a while.

Backlund would simply be a better option to shelter the younger players, and he also has a future being a strong player in the NHL, unlike Stajan.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

While I would have preferred a 2-3 year deal, the thing with Stajan is that he can play a decent 3rd line role and penalty killer. The value isn't terrible. Arguably replacable, but I just can't get worked up about this contract. Nothing to see here.