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

[Tinordi]

Drink!

[Daradon]

I don't dislike him as much as I did before, in fact I kinda like him. But the term definitely seems long.

Also, I'm really beginning to hate this use of 'well remember, this contract will be in dollars in expanding cap years, so it's not as much as it was before in relation to the cap' reasoning that has recently become so popular in defending contracts that are bigger than they should be. It's a decent secondary reason in a borderline decision, but should never be used to defend a bad contract. It's flawed. Not picking on anyone here if they've used it, but the heads on TV and radio who seem to use it more and more recently.

Here's why. 1. There's almost never any guarantee the cap will be going up. We know it's going up next year because of the TV contracts, but the years after? I guess it's reasonable to assume it's going to go up a little each year, but to bet on it? Yikes.

2. It's still the same amount of money. Yes it becomes proportionally less as the cap goes up, but it's still useful money. If you have a great contract, you free up money to get other better players. The cap goes up, guess what, maybe you've saved up enough to get a bonafide star, or a rent-a-player for a run. Just because it becomes proportionally less (by small amounts may I add) doesn't make a bad contract good.

3. The savings are less than the people using the argument seem to think they are. A few percentages a year aren't going to make that much of a difference, especially in the beginning of a contract. Sure it snowballs a little at the end of longer contracts, but even then you might have a total 15-20% proportional savings on the final year. Hardly the reason to justify a contract that might be a 25% overpay. (Numbers are obviously speculative, but you see what I'm getting at)

[Bill Bumface]

Stajan should have done his best DeRo goal scoring celebration after the goal last night:

[sureLoss]

Didn't see this mentioned but according to Francis during the 1st intermission of the Phoenix game, Stajan has a limited NTC where he has to provide a list of 10 teams he would accept a trade to.

[Ashasx]

His current contract or the one he just signed?

[sureLoss]

one he just signed i believe

capgeek has a modified NTC listed on his new contract too

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Did anyone link Burke's quotes on him? I didn't see them yet.

http://flames.nhl.com/club/news.htm?...id=DL|CGY|home

“I thought Matt was a good player in Toronto,” the Flames’ president of hockey operations said via phone during the first intermission of Calgary’s 3-2 loss in San Jose. “The only reason we traded him was that Darryl Sutter insisted that he be in the deal for Dion Phaneuf. That’s the only reason I traded him. I told him that when I came here.

“But he’s a far better hockey player now than he was then. He’s just more alert, his positional play is stronger, he goes where he’s supposed to go without hesitation, his reaction time is much less, which is typical as players get older, but his work ethic has been consistent since he turned pro. His hockey sense has finely developed.

“He does a lot of things well and if our team performance were better, that would be reflective with higher numbers, too.”

“People may point out his point production isn’t great but we’re not a team that scores a lot of goals,” he said. “His contributions come in many other ways -- faceoffs, forechecking, penalty kill. He just does a lot of things well.”

“He’s a leader on our team and he’s a disciple in terms of our system, in terms of training camp, how hard we’ve worked and just buying into the system to work with these younger players,” Burke said. “He’s been terrific for us.”

“It’s critical,” he said. “We have to change the culture here so when you get a guy who’s buying into the new culture, buying into what the coach is teaching and then passing that along and re-enforcing it, encouraging it with the younger players, those are critical things.

“I think Matt’s an important player for our hockey team and I’m glad he’s under contract now. I think it’s an important day for us.”

So Burke thinks playing with Stempniak and Cammalleri has hurt Stajan's numbers? Having the 80th and 200th top scoring wingers kind of hampers collecting the easy points.

[foshizzle11]

why does 4 years seem long? that isn't even close to the max he could sign, so is 4 years not an average term? I don't get it.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by foshizzle11

why does 4 years seem long? that isn't even close to the max he could sign, so is 4 years not an average term? I don't get it.

Just because 4 is the number between 1 and 7 doesn't make it the average term in the NHL.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

So Burke thinks playing with Stempniak and Cammalleri has hurt Stajan's numbers? Having the 80th and 200th top scoring wingers kind of hampers collecting the easy points.

I am guessing more the fact that we are 29th in the league in Goals per game and that Stajan is relied upon to play our toughest defensive minutes is the reason Burke feels his numbers are down.

Averaging 0:23 of PP TOI per game isn't helping his offensive stats either.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

So Burke thinks playing with Stempniak and Cammalleri has hurt Stajan's numbers? Having the 80th and 200th top scoring wingers kind of hampers collecting the easy points.

That isn't what was said.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Just because 4 is the number between 1 and 7 doesn't make it the average term in the NHL.

Do you want Matt Stajan at 3.125 for four years or Boyd Gordon at 3 for three years?

Not even a discussion as far I can tell.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Didn't see this mentioned but according to Francis during the 1st intermission of the Phoenix game, Stajan has a limited NTC where he has to provide a list of 10 teams he would accept a trade to.

That's a pretty restrictive NTC. As per the Burke session at the UofC, reaching the cap floor is such a major issue and agents/players know it, that Stajan is able to negotiate this sort of contract with this level of NTC. Remarkable.

[Jacks]

If he has a 10 team NTC that is a load of steaming crap. I could see giving him a "no oiler" clause but that's about it. I just went from not minding this signing to not liking it.

[Niemo]

Although a 3 year term at 3.125 per would've been more ideal, I don't think the extra year hurts.

If he is traded at the deadline of the 3rd year, then all is golden even if we had to retain 1M in his final year, thus reducing his cap hit to 2.125M for the team acquiring him.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Do you want Matt Stajan at 3.125 for four years or Boyd Gordon at 3 for three years?

Not even a discussion as far I can tell.

Uh, it certainly is a discussion. Boyd Gordon is a solid bottom 6 hockey player.

Hell, Stajan only has 2 more points than he does.

He makes slightly less and his contract will expire in two fewer years.

Yeah, I take Gordon, though I'd rather have neither considering their contracts.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Niemo

Although a 3 year term at 3.125 per would've been more ideal, I don't think the extra year hurts.

If he is traded at the deadline of the 3rd year, then all is golden even if we had to retain 1M in his final year, thus reducing his cap hit to 2.125M for the team acquiring him.

Yes, that would be no problem.

But that would be March, 2017. What if we want to trade him prior to that?

[sureLoss]

Stajan's contract is front loaded as well.

Year 1: $3,625,000
Year 2: $3,875,000
Year 3: $3,000,000
Year 4: $2,000,000

[Jacks]

Not really surprising, owners probably prefer to pay a bit more in the low payroll years and less as the payroll starts ramping up.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I think Stajan will be traded anywhere from next year through to the 4th year at the deadline.

Flames just re-signed a guy who has been decent as a center in helping to shoulder the load, and to add veteran presence.

If any 3-4 centers surpass Stajan between now and then, Stajan gets traded. Term and cap hit are fine, front-loaded deal makes it even more flexible. Calgary will probably draft another center or two in the next couple of drafts. Backlund, Colborne, Monahan, Granlund, Arnold, Jankowski + possible 2014 pick + possible 2015 pick + possible trade... 3 or 4 of these surpass Stajan, Stajan gets moved.

No problem with the term. Gives the Flames flexibility and insurance, provides an easy-to-trade contract unless Stajan suddenly drops off considerably for some reason.