PDA

View Full Version : [Brooks] Stepan In Line to Double Salary/AAV on Next Contract



Phil in Absentia
07-14-2014, 01:03 PM
Do you know how many players under the age of 24 as of last Feb. 1 recorded at least 101 points over the last two seasons?

Six, and one of them is Derek Stepan.

Which is why, if Stepan has any kind of a season this year (and why wouldn’t he?), the Rangers’ No. 1 center will be in line to nearly double his cap hit from its current $3.075 million when he becomes an arbitration-eligible Group II free agent next summer.

http://nypost.com/2014/07/12/rick-nash-is-not-leaving-the-garden/

--

It's closer to one of his Slapshots-type quick hits, but there's quite a bit of evidence to support the theory that we're probably looking at a $6M~ player per year in Stepan at the conclusion of this upcoming season, provided he's not dealt before then.

As underwhelming a player as he's been at times, the stats argue in his favor, not against it.



2010-11
21-24-45 in 82 games played. 0.55 P/G

2011-12
17-34-51 in 82 games played. 0.62 P/G

2012-13
18-26-44 in 48 games played. 0.92 P/G

2013-14
17-40-57 in 82 games played. 0.70 P/G


It's clear his 0.92 P/G year was an anomaly, but even if you average the remaining three and presume another 0.6 or 0.7 P/G pace this season, we're talking about a a 0.6 P/G player, which in this league is a $6M player. Especially when you consider the point he's at in his contractual status, and the fact that any long-term extension will in fact purchase multiple UFA years from the player.

ThirtyONE
07-14-2014, 01:08 PM
I honestly think he'll have a big season this year. That said, I don;t know what fair market value is for anyone anymore.

AmericanJesus
07-14-2014, 01:53 PM
Forget the arbitrary 100 point cut off, since Stepan just barely made that. Here are the players of similar age to Stepan and younger who he might compare to along with their point totals the past two years and current contracts if applicable:

Taylor Hall 130p (120gp) 7X$6M
Tyler Seguin 116p (128gp) 6X$5.75M
John Tavares 113p (107gp) 6X$5.5M
Matt Duchene 113p (118gp) 5X$6M
Jordan Eberle 102p (128gp) 6X$6M
Derek Stepan 101p (130gp)
Nazem Kadri 94p (126gp)
Ryan O'Reilly 84p (109gp)
Ryan Nugent-Hopkins 80p (120gp) 7X$6M
Jeff Skinner 78p (113gp) 6X$5.75M
Evander Kane 74p (111gp) 6X$5.25M

This presents Stepan with bargaining issues. Guys like Hall, Seguin, Tavares and Duchene all out produced him while being younger and with higher ceilings, yet they're all at or just under that $6M mark. They were the top guys on their lines, while Stepan was always the second best guy on his lines. He compares with Jordan Eberle well, unfortunately for Stepan here, Eberle was paid after a reasonably strong couple of seasons and then was dealt when his second recent season production dropped (and put him in line with Stepan's 2 year production).

Then we have guys who produced less than Stepan but are a little less experienced, in Kadri and O'Reilly, so they are comparable and are in the same boat as Stepan. Of course, we all know the O'Reilly situation.

Finally, we have Nugent-Hopkins, Skinner and Kane. Hopkins is on his way up and much younger, and Skinner and Kane are both disappointments and parts of trade rumors, largely because they had the promise, but have so far failed to deliver even though they get paid just under that $6M mark Brooks talks about for Stepan. If anything, they along with Eberle are the cautionary tale of why you don't give a guy like Stepan $6M/year on a long term deal.

Stepan's a valuable player to this team and if he gets closer to his point production of 2 years ago this year then $6M may be in the conversation if we're buying UFA years. But that's a big "if".

Ranger Lothbrok
07-14-2014, 02:50 PM
Jesus. Can we for ONCE have somebody come through our system who doesn't look to take us to the cleaners? I mean, I know hometown discounts are a thing of the past, and in fact were probably a myth in the first place. But I mean, come on. Callahan was our captain. A fan favorite. A locker room leader. EVERYONE wanted him around...until they saw the asking price. And he didn't budge on it by even a nickel. There was no, "you know what? I love being here, and the fans love me. I've got a good deal going and I'm close to my family. I think $5.5 is probably enough." It was $6 mil or bust, despite the fact that he had never really given us more than 3rd line production.

I don't know, I guess I'm just annoyed that guys don't ask for what they're actually worth; they ask for what they could get on the free agency. It's that kind of thing that prompted my latest Slats thread. We can't seem to keep our guys for anything less than full price.

CreaseCrusader91
07-14-2014, 02:56 PM
The number add up. He is still young and if you discredit his lockout season he's trended up each and every year. He's a good center and this year will be big when it comes to tipping the needle. I think he's going to get paid, but he deserves to.

Cash or Czech?
07-14-2014, 03:03 PM
Jesus. Can we for ONCE have somebody come through our system who doesn't look to take us to the cleaners? I mean, I know hometown discounts are a thing of the past, and in fact were probably a myth in the first place. But I mean, come on. Callahan was our captain. A fan favorite. A locker room leader. EVERYONE wanted him around...until they saw the asking price. And he didn't budge on it by even a nickel. There was no, "you know what? I love being here, and the fans love me. I've got a good deal going and I'm close to my family. I think $5.5 is probably enough." It was $6 mil or bust, despite the fact that he had never really given us more than 3rd line production.

I don't know, I guess I'm just annoyed that guys don't ask for what they're actually worth; they ask for what they could get on the free agency. It's that kind of thing that prompted my latest Slats thread. We can't seem to keep our guys for anything less than full price.

If someone is willing to pay them a certain salary, that's their so-called worth. With the numbers behind it, that's what Stepan is worth. These are their careers. A lot of guys don't have a plan for 'after hockey' so they make as much as they can when they're pro to not worry about it later in life. It's a plain concept, IMO.

It's scary, but it's also true when it comes to Stepan. We're going to need to clear some space somehow. It's probably going to cost us both Staal and Klein in the next couple of years, so we need to start developing some talent.

Phil in Absentia
07-14-2014, 03:08 PM
Forget the arbitrary 100 point cut off, since Stepan just barely made that. Here are the players of similar age to Stepan and younger who he might compare to along with their point totals the past two years and current contracts if applicable:

Taylor Hall 130p (120gp) 7X$6M
Tyler Seguin 116p (128gp) 6X$5.75M
John Tavares 113p (107gp) 6X$5.5M
Matt Duchene 113p (118gp) 5X$6M
Jordan Eberle 102p (128gp) 6X$6M
Derek Stepan 101p (130gp)
Nazem Kadri 94p (126gp)
Ryan O'Reilly 84p (109gp)
Ryan Nugent-Hopkins 80p (120gp) 7X$6M
Jeff Skinner 78p (113gp) 6X$5.75M
Evander Kane 74p (111gp) 6X$5.25M

This presents Stepan with bargaining issues. Guys like Hall, Seguin, Tavares and Duchene all out produced him while being younger and with higher ceilings, yet they're all at or just under that $6M mark. They were the top guys on their lines, while Stepan was always the second best guy on his lines. He compares with Jordan Eberle well, unfortunately for Stepan here, Eberle was paid after a reasonably strong couple of seasons and then was dealt when his second recent season production dropped (and put him in line with Stepan's 2 year production).

Then we have guys who produced less than Stepan but are a little less experienced, in Kadri and O'Reilly, so they are comparable and are in the same boat as Stepan. Of course, we all know the O'Reilly situation.

Finally, we have Nugent-Hopkins, Skinner and Kane. Hopkins is on his way up and much younger, and Skinner and Kane are both disappointments and parts of trade rumors, largely because they had the promise, but have so far failed to deliver even though they get paid just under that $6M mark Brooks talks about for Stepan. If anything, they along with Eberle are the cautionary tale of why you don't give a guy like Stepan $6M/year on a long term deal.

Stepan's a valuable player to this team and if he gets closer to his point production of 2 years ago this year then $6M may be in the conversation if we're buying UFA years. But that's a big "if".

Bolded do not apply. At all. Not just on contract signing date (old CBA), but on P/G complete inaccuracy.

I'd say of the list, the two most compelling players to look at are Ryan O'Reilly and Nazem Kadri.

The other guy I have as a comparable is Logan Couture who is a year older at 25 and just signed a contract extension with the Sharks for five years at $6M per season. Stats-wise, he's above Stepan (which should help the Rangers), but close enough to be a comparable. 0.83, 0.77, 0.81, 0.71 P/G the last four seasons there.

I agree with your overall point, though, in that it's probably not wise to really lock up this kind of player to a long-term contract, especially with his historical propensity to drop off in the playoffs.

And frankly, a lot of this is hinging on what happens with Brassard, because I'm not sure the Rangers can afford both on long-term deals. A long-term contract extension for Brassard might spell the end for Stepan, who would be a solid trade chip in wanting to get a bigger, tougher 1C.

Future
07-14-2014, 03:30 PM
Jesus. Can we for ONCE have somebody come through our system who doesn't look to take us to the cleaners?
You mean like Ryan McDonagh?

RangersFan
07-14-2014, 03:50 PM
Jesus. Can we for ONCE have somebody come through our system who doesn't look to take us to the cleaners? I mean, I know hometown discounts are a thing of the past, and in fact were probably a myth in the first place. But I mean, come on. Callahan was our captain. A fan favorite. A locker room leader. EVERYONE wanted him around...until they saw the asking price. And he didn't budge on it by even a nickel. There was no, "you know what? I love being here, and the fans love me. I've got a good deal going and I'm close to my family. I think $5.5 is probably enough." It was $6 mil or bust, despite the fact that he had never really given us more than 3rd line production.

I don't know, I guess I'm just annoyed that guys don't ask for what they're actually worth; they ask for what they could get on the free agency. It's that kind of thing that prompted my latest Slats thread. We can't seem to keep our guys for anything less than full price.

I agree. The Callahan contract situation sucked because they even went up to 6 mil for 6 years and he STILL said no. Captain of the NYR making 6 mil a year and he turned it down over a NMC or whatever it was. I think that surprised all of us

RangersFan
07-14-2014, 03:52 PM
Bolded do not apply. At all. Not just on contract signing date (old CBA), but on P/G complete inaccuracy.

I'd say of the list, the two most compelling players to look at are Ryan O'Reilly and Nazem Kadri.

The other guy I have as a comparable is Logan Couture who is a year older at 25 and just signed a contract extension with the Sharks for five years at $6M per season. Stats-wise, he's above Stepan (which should help the Rangers), but close enough to be a comparable. 0.83, 0.77, 0.81, 0.71 P/G the last four seasons there.

I agree with your overall point, though, in that it's probably not wise to really lock up this kind of player to a long-term contract, especially with his historical propensity to drop off in the playoffs.

And frankly, a lot of this is hinging on what happens with Brassard, because I'm not sure the Rangers can afford both on long-term deals. A long-term contract extension for Brassard might spell the end for Stepan, who would be a solid trade chip in wanting to get a bigger, tougher 1C.


I think Brassard woule be moved before Stepan

Phil in Absentia
07-14-2014, 03:53 PM
I think Brassard woule be moved before Stepan

Because?

RangersFan
07-14-2014, 04:01 PM
Because?

Stepan is the better player, younger too.

Gorilla Salad
07-14-2014, 05:49 PM
I hate salary caps in sports. Especially hockey. I say no salary cap BUT non-guaranteed contracts like in football. If you suck, you're ass can get CUT. I know, pipe dream, but wouldn't that be nice? Also, put in a luxury tax like in baseball to havily penalize teams that try to sign every player to a $10MM a year contract.

yea, yea, no system works across all sports, I understand, but I'm sick of not being able to build a young team and have it grow into a powerhouse. It would be nice to see a team win 3-4 cups in a row and not have to worry how many players they're going to lose in the off season.

AmericanJesus
07-14-2014, 05:49 PM
Stepan is the better player, younger too.

Brassard may become the better cost controlled player depending on what he gets this year. We should know that soon. Stepan is a decent player, but I'd argue he isn't as good as his stats indicate because he's consistently been paired with the best wingers we have to offer. That he does produce in that situation is good, but not $6m good.

I'd like to see him at like 5x$5m on his next deal and then he can cash in ay 29 as a UFA.

Gorilla Salad
07-14-2014, 05:52 PM
St. Louis comes off the books so that'll give us some breathing room, but more than likely, not enough to keep him if he has a big year.

RangersFan
07-14-2014, 06:16 PM
Brassard may become the better cost controlled player depending on what he gets this year. We should know that soon. Stepan is a decent player, but I'd argue he isn't as good as his stats indicate because he's consistently been paired with the best wingers we have to offer. That he does produce in that situation is good, but not $6m good.

I'd like to see him at like 5x$5m on his next deal and then he can cash in ay 29 as a UFA.

If we keep Brassard and trade Stepan, that would be bad management imo. Stepan is a better two way player and puts up more points and he is our top line center. His numbers are impoving every year and Brassard hasnt even cracked 50 points yet. How much more is Stepan going to make than Brassard? I would give Stepan 5.5 for 6 years and thats all, 6 mil is a bit much for him but after seeing what guys like Callahan and Dubinsky make, Stepan making 6 mil doesnt sound too crazy but it doesnt make it right either. I would give Brassard 4.5 for 4 years and Stepan 5.5 for 6 years and call it a day. The cap is going up

momentum
07-14-2014, 06:46 PM
Unless Stepan steps up next season and plays like a TRUE top line center there is no way in hell I would pay him 6 mil, don't really care what his stats say, I use my eye balls for that judgment, he's simply not worth 6 mil a year. 5 mil is tops I'd ever consider paying Stepan unless something in his play changes DRASTICALLY.

momentum
07-14-2014, 06:48 PM
You mean like Ryan McDonagh?

He didn't come through OUR system, he was acquired in a trade :)

CreaseCrusader91
07-14-2014, 06:50 PM
I think it is hard to understand these salaries. We are in. World where the league is turning record revenue almost every year. The salary cap will continue to rise as will salaries. Getting him on a deal close to $6M may not be the worst thing. Obviously there are risks but his production is in line with comparables posted. When you disregard shortened season, he has elevated production each year so he has a case to make.

That said, I'd deal him no questions asked of we get Brassard on a favorable deal with solid production. Let's see how things play out, because it is an interesting situation for sure.

The Dude
07-14-2014, 06:54 PM
Soooo, Stepan straight up for Thornton?

Pete
07-14-2014, 06:58 PM
If we keep Brassard and trade Stepan, that would be bad management imo. Stepan is a better two way player and puts up more points and he is our top line center. His numbers are impoving every year and Brassard hasnt even cracked 50 points yet. How much more is Stepan going to make than Brassard? I would give Stepan 5.5 for 6 years and thats all, 6 mil is a bit much for him but after seeing what guys like Callahan and Dubinsky make, Stepan making 6 mil doesnt sound too crazy but it doesnt make it right either. I would give Brassard 4.5 for 4 years and Stepan 5.5 for 6 years and call it a day. The cap is going up

What we would give a player isn't always the same thing as what a player is willing to take.

Phil in Absentia
07-14-2014, 07:13 PM
I hate salary caps in sports. Especially hockey. I say no salary cap BUT non-guaranteed contracts like in football. If you suck, you're ass can get CUT. I know, pipe dream, but wouldn't that be nice? Also, put in a luxury tax like in baseball to havily penalize teams that try to sign every player to a $10MM a year contract.

yea, yea, no system works across all sports, I understand, but I'm sick of not being able to build a young team and have it grow into a powerhouse. It would be nice to see a team win 3-4 cups in a row and not have to worry how many players they're going to lose in the off season.

Yeah, none of this will ever happen. The NHLPA is never giving in on guaranteed contracts. Ever. And the BOG are unlikely to rescind on the hard cap either.


Brassard may become the better cost controlled player depending on what he gets this year. We should know that soon. Stepan is a decent player, but I'd argue he isn't as good as his stats indicate because he's consistently been paired with the best wingers we have to offer. That he does produce in that situation is good, but not $6m good.

I'd like to see him at like 5x$5m on his next deal and then he can cash in ay 29 as a UFA.

Might work, but it most definitely assures they walk away from MSL at the end of this deal, and that Brassard probably can't be kept long-term. Thinking one or two-year deal in arbitration there and then straight to UFA.

I think I'd sooner flip him to a team willing to move a better cost-controlled 1/2 or a "true" 1.


He didn't come through OUR system, he was acquired in a trade :)

Yes, he did. He was acquired as a prospect with no NHL or AHL experience, played an additional year or two in the NCAA and then a season in the AHL before being called up full-time.

Doesn't matter that his name wasn't called by the Rangers' at the draft. He still came through the system.

RangersFan
07-14-2014, 10:17 PM
What we would give a player isn't always the same thing as what a player is willing to take.

Ok but how much more will Stepan cost than Brassard? Not much imo

Faiz
07-15-2014, 12:19 AM
In my opinion, Stepan will have a spectacular season. Hopefully we see a matchup with him a MSL, and maybe Hagelin?
But Stepan with MSL on the wing will be dangerous, Marty even at his age is still an amazing player and being with Stepan will not only help him with points but help him grow as a player through his leadership.


If someone is willing to pay them a certain salary, that's their so-called worth. With the numbers behind it, that's what Stepan is worth. These are their careers. A lot of guys don't have a plan for 'after hockey' so they make as much as they can when they're pro to not worry about it later in life. It's a plain concept, IMO.

It's scary, but it's also true when it comes to Stepan. We're going to need to clear some space somehow. It's probably going to cost us both Staal and Klein in the next couple of years, so we need to start developing some talent.

It sucks but it's true, if another team is willing to offer up $6+ mil for him, then that is what he is worth. In this game sometimes it just don't matter what they're worth as a player but what other people are willing to offer to take him.
Even with the "discounts" it's hard to battle if team with a lot of cap space offer up a lot of dough for him. I believe in Stepan, I believe he's gonna have NYR 1st on his list and be willing to even take a bit of a pay cut, but like past experiences show us we never know what will happen.

Slobberknocker
07-15-2014, 08:39 AM
Interesting post. I went back to the game log stats. I wanted to see what he did after the break when he stated to AV he wanted to take a more active role. from my perspective he didnt really turn in on as far as the score sheet goes. it really looked like his production was stable for both halves of the season.

Bottom line in my book is he is a nice player. i dont know what that equivocates too contract wise but if you seriously want to keep him i'd try to sign him while still under contract. given the amount of quality center's in this league if he goes FA, you probably lose him as someone will surely overpay, just like they did for certain players this year (see Orpik). Just the nature of the beast.

Put me down for trying to keep him. I think he's the type of guy where you don't actually appreciate him while he's here but your surely sad to see him on another team, ala Dubi or going back some Zubov.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 08:51 AM
Interesting post. I went back to the game log stats. I wanted to see what he did after the break when he stated to AV he wanted to take a more active role. from my perspective he didnt really turn in on as far as the score sheet goes. it really looked like his production was stable for both halves of the season.

Bottom line in my book is he is a nice player. i dont know what that equivocates too contract wise but if you seriously want to keep him i'd try to sign him while still under contract. given the amount of quality center's in this league if he goes FA, you probably lose him as someone will surely overpay, just like they did for certain players this year (see Orpik). Just the nature of the beast.

Put me down for trying to keep him. I think he's the type of guy where you don't actually appreciate him while he's here but your surely sad to see him on another team, ala Dubi or going back some Zubov.

Huh? He put up 22 points in 23 games after the Olympic break. He certainly didn't do that the entire season.

Shanahammer
07-15-2014, 09:45 AM
Yeah, none of this will ever happen. The NHLPA is never giving in on guaranteed contracts. Ever. And the BOG are unlikely to rescind on the hard cap either.



Might work, but it most definitely assures they walk away from MSL at the end of this deal, and that Brassard probably can't be kept long-term. Thinking one or two-year deal in arbitration there and then straight to UFA.

I think I'd sooner flip him to a team willing to move a better cost-controlled 1/2 or a "true" 1.



Yes, he did. He was acquired as a prospect with no NHL or AHL experience, played an additional year or two in the NCAA and then a season in the AHL before being called up full-time.

Doesn't matter that his name wasn't called by the Rangers' at the draft. He still came through the system.

Not necessarily. He took way below market value on his current contract to stay with TB after a 99 point season. This is where he wants to be. He's close to his family, and he (probably/hopefully) believes he has a chance at a final Cup here. I don't think he'd cripple the teams ability to compete just for a few extra dollars. It's not like he hasnt made a shit ton of money throughout his career. Also, I know its like beating a dead horse at this point, but the cap is going way up with the Rogers tv deal next year, on top of growing league revenue.

As for Stepan, if second half Derek is the Derek we can expect for a full year, I'd be fine with giving him between $5 & $6 mil per.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 09:48 AM
I agree with the above if anything MSL will go Selanne route with 1-year deals until retirement.

Pete
07-15-2014, 10:08 AM
If Stepan wants $6, he needs to stop being a passenger and start being the driver, so to speak.

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 10:25 AM
Not necessarily. He took way below market value on his current contract to stay with TB after a 99 point season. This is where he wants to be. He's close to his family, and he (probably/hopefully) believes he has a chance at a final Cup here. I don't think he'd cripple the teams ability to compete just for a few extra dollars. It's not like he hasnt made a shit ton of money throughout his career. Also, I know its like beating a dead horse at this point, but the cap is going way up with the Rogers tv deal next year, on top of growing league revenue.

As for Stepan, if second half Derek is the Derek we can expect for a full year, I'd be fine with giving him between $5 & $6 mil per.


I agree with the above if anything MSL will go Selanne route with 1-year deals until retirement.

I don't think he'd cripple the team either, but that's not to say that the $4-6M a year he'll likely make won't be prohibitive to retaining the younger players on their second, third and fourth contracts in the coming seasons.

I really think this hinges on what happens with Brassard, because if he's kept on a long-term extension, you've got a big problem if you ever intend to upgrade at center from outside the organization. We'll end up with a Sam Gagner or Jordan Staal-like situation where our third-line center is making $5-6M per season.

No matter how much the cap goes up, that's just not wise.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 10:26 AM
If Stepan wants $6, he needs to stop being a passenger and start being the driver, so to speak.

I just think he needs to do it more frequently. He's shown that he's capable and capable of doing it for stretches at a time, but when he's not taking charge and playing to the best of his ability, he sucks.

Pete
07-15-2014, 10:33 AM
I just think he needs to do it more frequently. He's shown that he's capable and capable of doing it for stretches at a time, but when he's not taking charge and playing to the best of his ability, he sucks.

Sometimes during the regular season you get a stretch of games where you're playing bad teams, or a team playing bad hockey, our a January game against a west coast opponent...and that's when you see certain players go on a tear.

But in the playoffs, when all the teams are good, the intensity is there, you see what people are made of.

That's the reason Stepan doesn't impress me, and Brassard does. Brassard is what he is, but he raises his game in the playoffs. Stepan hasn't.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 10:41 AM
Sometimes during the regular season you get a stretch of games where you're playing bad teams, or a team playing bad hockey, our a January game against a west coast opponent...and that's when you see certain players go on a tear.

But in the playoffs, when all the teams are good, the intensity is there, you see what people are made of.

That's the reason Stepan doesn't impress me, and Brassard does. Brassard is what he is, but he raises his game in the playoffs. Stepan hasn't.

I can't argue with the idea that he has to step it up in the playoffs. He's too easy to shut down for sure.

But there are still 82 games in which he has to play that can't be discredited because some nights teams are bad or don't have it. It's zero-sum anyway. For every Tuesday night snoozer vs. the Florida Panthers, there's a Wednesday Night Rivalry™ vs. the Philadelphia Flyers.

Pete
07-15-2014, 10:43 AM
I can't argue with the idea that he has to step it up in the playoffs. He's too easy to shut down for sure.

But there are still 82 games in which he has to play that can't be discredited because some nights teams are bad or don't have it. It's zero-sum anyway. For every Tuesday night snoozer vs. the Florida Panthers, there's a Wednesday Night Rivalry™ vs. the Philadelphia Flyers.

I agree, just speaking to the stat you posted earlier about 22 points in 23 games.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 10:47 AM
I agree, just speaking to the stat you posted earlier about 22 points in 23 games.

22 points in 23 games to end the season and help the team secure a playoff spot is a good thing no matter how you slice it. The problem is that it didn't carry over into the playoffs.

Pete
07-15-2014, 10:49 AM
22 points in 23 games to end the season and help the team secure a playoff spot is a good thing no matter how you slice it. The problem is that it didn't carry over into the playoffs.

I mean...I guess? Point is, it isn't like he ever looked dominant. So in my eyes, he needs to start driving the line, and not being a passenger on it.

Slobberknocker
07-15-2014, 11:28 AM
he did show a ton of heart playing through that jaw injury though. lost 15 lbs too. so he might be entitled to some form of a pass for his lack of playoff production.

Pete
07-15-2014, 11:30 AM
His jaw wasn't broken the last 3 years...

Future
07-15-2014, 11:36 AM
His jaw wasn't broken the last 3 years...
What can you realistically expect from a 21 year old in the playoffs?

Strictly on PPG, this past year was his best playoffs, and that was without Kreider for a chunk and with Nash being a ghost. Plus, he couldn't eat...I don't care how tough you are, that takes its toll.

Pete
07-15-2014, 11:39 AM
What can you realistically expect from a 21 year old in the playoffs?

Strictly on PPG, this past year was his best playoffs, and that was without Kreider for a chunk and with Nash being a ghost. Plus, he couldn't eat...I don't care how tough you are, that takes its toll.

Which is fine, but you can't pay these players based on what you think they may do. You pay them on what they actually do. I don't feel that Stepan is a player we should commit $6 million to, until he actually earns it.

Future
07-15-2014, 11:51 AM
Which is fine, but you can't pay these players based on what you think they may do. You pay them on what they actually do. I don't feel that Stepan is a player we should commit $6 million to, until he actually earns it.
Every contract is signed based on what players are going to do, in every sport.

Pete
07-15-2014, 11:58 AM
Every contract is signed based on what players are going to do, in every sport.

No, contracts are signed based on expectations of what a player can do —*those expectations are based on what the player has shown they can do, previously, with a little bit of forecasting mixed in.

Slobberknocker
07-15-2014, 12:06 PM
your arguing semantics here.

if I'm Stepan I'm training damn hard right now. Sculpt that body, conditioning drills, skating, quickness etc...

I'm rooting for him.

Future
07-15-2014, 12:25 PM
No, contracts are signed based on expectations of what a player can do —*those expectations are based on what the player has shown they can do, previously, with a little bit of forecasting mixed in.
Of course its based on expectations, nobody has a crystal ball. That's exactly what I'm saying.

The point is, with a young guy like Stepan, the forecasting is way more important than what he has done previously.

Pete
07-15-2014, 12:37 PM
Of course its based on expectations, nobody has a crystal ball. That's exactly what I'm saying.

The point is, with a young guy like Stepan, the forecasting is way more important than what he has done previously.

You can only forecast based on what he's done previously. What else are you basing your forecast on? Would you say Stepan will be a 100 point player? Why not? Because he's previously never shown that ability. When he does it, he can get paid like a 90 point player.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 01:09 PM
You can only forecast based on what he's done previously. What else are you basing your forecast on? Would you say Stepan will be a 100 point player? Why not? Because he's previously never shown that ability. When he does it, he can get paid like a 90 point player.

How much do you think Stepan should get paid?

Pete
07-15-2014, 01:11 PM
How much do you think Stepan should get paid?Around $5-$5.5.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 01:12 PM
Around $5-$5.5.

I agree. What if it took 6 mil?

MacTruck
07-15-2014, 01:49 PM
If Stepan shot the puck last year as well as he has throughout his career, he would've been a 65 point player. I see him at 60-70 points for the next 5 years. I'd do $6mil x 5 and be happy with it. He's also excellent defensively and can play in any game situation. He may not be an exceptional #1 center, but I consider him a top line player in this league.

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 01:53 PM
I see Stepan like I see Bozak. Bozak is just older. Neither is an ideal (let's stop using the word 'true') top line center, but both fill in in the role on their respective teams. Both are 0.6 P/G players, in essence.

Bozak's hit? $4.2M.

AmericanJesus
07-15-2014, 01:59 PM
If Stepan shot the puck last year as well as he has throughout his career, he would've been a 65 point player. I see him at 60-70 points for the next 5 years. I'd do $6mil x 5 and be happy with it. He's also excellent defensively and can play in any game situation. He may not be an exceptional #1 center, but I consider him a top line player in this league.

Either that or because of a lack of finish this season, he started just throwing more low percentage shots on net. It's also opportunistic to look at his 8.5% shooting percentage this past year and say if only he had better luck, but then not look at his 16.7% shooting percentage the season before and use that as an indicator that his stats that year were inflated by good luck.

To use trends like that, I'd like to see more consistency. If he was at around 11-12% every season then suddenly dipped to 8.5%, while his shot totals were consistent as well, then I might agree. But his shooting percentage has fluctuated while his shots on goal have risen every season.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 02:05 PM
I see Stepan like I see Bozak. Bozak is just older. Neither is an ideal (let's stop using the word 'true') top line center, but both fill in in the role on their respective teams. Both are 0.6 P/G players, in essence.

Bozak's hit? $4.2M.

Stepan is better than Bozak in my opinion. In terms of actual production, Stepan has been consistent in growth year to year. In addition, the four year difference really makes things clearer. Bozak has missed games and that inflates his production numbers.

Having watched some Leaf games with my college roommate, his actual production is deceiving. When he played in a full season or close to it, he had 32 and 47 points. That's worse than Stepan. Lockout year was 28 in 46 and last year was 49 in 58.

Ideally Stepan will go up and Bozak likely goes down. I understand your basis on comparison but the age difference for me just is too much.

In addition Stepan is closer to 0.70 at 0.67 and Bozak is a 0.60 player at 0.62.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 02:30 PM
I see Stepan like I see Bozak. Bozak is just older. Neither is an ideal (let's stop using the word 'true') top line center, but both fill in in the role on their respective teams. Both are 0.6 P/G players, in essence.

Bozak's hit? $4.2M.


Stepan is a million times better than Bozak. Stepan is younger, produces more and is a better two way player. Bozak couldnt shine Stepans shoes and Bozak never even hit 50 points while Stepan did and is still improving.

If Stepan isnt a true top line center, who is? Unless you mean he isnt Crosby or Getzlaf then i agree but who said he was them?

Pete
07-15-2014, 02:39 PM
We need to really stop with these arbitrary terms like "he's better", when comparing similar players. Especially if we're going to preface it with something outlandish like "a million times better".

No, Stepan is not a million times better than Bozak. There are some things that Stepan does better than Bozak, and some things that Bozak does better. Bozak is a reliable penalty killer, and was also +2 on a team full of minuses, so why are we saying that Stepan is a better 2 way player?

Now I'm not saying I'd rather have Bozak, or any of that. I'm just saying, when you're trying to have a serious conversation, it get really hard when arbitrary terms and arguments without basis are being thrown around with abandon.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 02:46 PM
We need to really stop with these arbitrary terms like "he's better", when comparing similar players. Especially if we're going to preface it with something outlandish like "a million times better".

No, Stepan is not a million times better than Bozak. There are some things that Stepan does better than Bozak, and some things that Bozak does better. Bozak is a reliable penalty killer, and was also +2 on a team full of minuses, so why are we saying that Stepan is a better 2 way player?

Now I'm not saying I'd rather have Bozak, or any of that. I'm just saying, when you're trying to have a serious conversation, it get really hard when arbitrary terms and arguments without basis are being thrown around with abandon.

Understood, I think in this situation that there is a lot of data that shows that the comparison isn't too spot on IMO.

Pete
07-15-2014, 02:48 PM
your arguing semantics here.

if I'm Stepan I'm training damn hard right now. Sculpt that body, conditioning drills, skating, quickness etc...

I'm rooting for him.

Absolutely not.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 02:49 PM
We need to really stop with these arbitrary terms like "he's better", when comparing similar players. Especially if we're going to preface it with something outlandish like "a million times better".

No, Stepan is not a million times better than Bozak. There are some things that Stepan does better than Bozak, and some things that Bozak does better. Bozak is a reliable penalty killer, and was also +2 on a team full of minuses, so why are we saying that Stepan is a better 2 way player?

Now I'm not saying I'd rather have Bozak, or any of that. I'm just saying, when you're trying to have a serious conversation, it get really hard when arbitrary terms and arguments without basis are being thrown around with abandon.

Stepan is better than Bozak, if anything Stepan should be compared to Krejci or Bergeron since he is still improving and can be a very similar players to those guys,not Bozak. Stepan and Bozak arent similar players

Pete
07-15-2014, 02:55 PM
Stepan is better than Bozak, if anything Stepan should be compared to Krejci or Bergeron since he is still improving and can be a very similar players to those guys,not Bozak. Stepan and Bozak arent similar players

Based on what?

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:03 PM
Based on what?

Based on almost everything. Stepan is younger and is still improving as a player while Bozak is at his peak and will most likely get worse. Stepan scored 50+ points twice in his career and Bozak scored 49 this year, a career high for him. Stepan is more durable and never missed a single season game in his career while Bozak did. Bozak never scored 20 goals in his career, Stepan did. Stepan was the #1 center on a team that just made it to the cup finals and Bozak cant even make the playoffs. Bozak cant hit 50 points playing with guys like Kessel, JVR and Lupul while Stepan hit 50 playing with lesser players not named Nash or Gaborik. Just a bad comparison imo

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:09 PM
Based on almost everything. Stepan is younger and is still improving as a player while Bozak is at his peak and will most likely get worse. That does not, today, make Stepan a better player.


Stepan scored 50+ points twice in his career and Bozak scored 49 this year, a career high for him. Stepan in .67 P/G and Bozak is .62.


Stepan is more durable and never missed a single season game in his career while Bozak did. Again, health doesn't make a player "better". Just more durable.


Bozak never scored 20 goals in his career, Stepan did. Stepan's average is 20.3 goals per 82 games. Bozak is 19.9.


Stepan was the #1 center on a team that just made it to the cup finals and Bozak cant even make the playoffs. How is this a reflection on the individual players? It's not.


Bozak cant hit 50 points playing with guys like Kessel, JVR and Lupul while Stepan hit 50 playing with lesser players not named Nash or Gaborik. Just a bad comparison imoI don't even know what this means, Stepan has played with premier wingers since being in the NHL, barring his rookie year.

Again, the difference, outside of age and health, is negligible.

AmericanJesus
07-15-2014, 03:13 PM
Stepan is better than Bozak, if anything Stepan should be compared to Krejci or Bergeron since he is still improving and can be a very similar players to those guys,not Bozak. Stepan and Bozak arent similar players

Krejci got a 3 year, $5.25M deal as a third contract. He has put up 73p, 52p, 62p, 62p, 33p (in 47) and 69p last season. He signed that contract after putting up the 62p in back to back years. Stepan has yet to actually crack 60p, let alone consistently put up those kinds of numbers.

Bergeron got an 8 year, $6.5M contract. He's won Selkes (plural). He put up 73p, 70p, 39p (in 64), 52p, 57p, 64p, 32p (in 42) and 62p.

Oh and Krejci (51.2%) and Bergeron (58.6%!!!!) were significantly better on faceoffs than Stepan (45.2%) last year. And last year was a down year for both Boston centers when you look back over the past few seasons prior.

Stepan is a poor man's Krejci and an poorer man's Bergeron.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:14 PM
That does not, today, make Stepan a better player.

Stepan in .67 P/G and Bozak is .62.

Again, health doesn't make a player "better". Just more durable.

Stepan's average is 20.3 goals per 82 games. Bozak is 19.9.

How is this a reflection on the individual players? It's not.

I don't even know what this means, Stepan has played with premier wingers since being in the NHL, barring his rookie year.

Again, the difference, outside of age and health, is negligible.


Lots of this still points to Stepan being better.

The wings make sense. Bozak played with better wings than Stepan has and Stepan still produced better. JVR and Kessel are better LW and RW than Hagelin and Nash or Hagelin and Gaborik, maybe not Nash and Gaborik but Bozak has 2 30 goal scorers on his wings and he cant even crack 50 points or score 20 goals. Stepan does more with less

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 03:14 PM
If anyone is interested, here's a list of comparable from last season for players like Stepan. Centers who played 18 minutes a game, and were between 0.50 and 0.75 in points per game. This is a nice little tool if you want to play around with some stats.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&year_min=2014&year_max=2014&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&birth_country=&franch_id=&is_active=Y&is_hof=N&pos=C&handed=&c1stat=points_per_game&c1comp=gt&c1val=0.50&c2stat=time_on_ice&c2comp=gt&c2val=18&c3stat=points_per_game&c3comp=lt&c3val=0.75&c4stat=&c4comp=lt&c4val=&order_by=points_per_game

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:14 PM
Krejci got a 3 year, $5.25M deal as a third contract. He has put up 73p, 52p, 62p, 62p, 33p (in 47) and 69p last season. He signed that contract after putting up the 62p in back to back years. Stepan has yet to actually crack 60p, let alone consistently put up those kinds of numbers.

Bergeron got an 8 year, $6.5M contract. He's won Selkes (plural). He put up 73p, 70p, 39p (in 64), 52p, 57p, 64p, 32p (in 42) and 62p.

Oh and Krejci (51.2%) and Bergeron (58.6%!!!!) were significantly better on faceoffs than Stepan (45.2%) last year. And last year was a down year for both when you look back over the past few seasons prior.

Stepan is a poor man's Krejci and an poorer man's Bergeron.

I'll take a poor man Krejci over a Bozak any day of the week.

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:16 PM
Lots of this still points to Stepan being better.

The wings make sense. Bozak played with better wings than Stepan has and Stepan still produced better. JVR and Kessel are better LW and RW than Hagelin and Nash or Hagelin and Gaborik, maybe not Nash and Gaborik but Bozak has 2 30 goal scorers on his wings and he cant even crack 50 points or score 20 goals. Stepan does more with less

I think you're rationalizing here again with your "better" talk.

Either way, Stepan isn't "a million times better."

The funny thing is, the way fans jack up the players and then when the contracts are being handed out, everyone got too much and no one was worth it. Meanwhile, we'd be insanely lucky if Stepan got Bozak's contract. Or Kreijci's.

AmericanJesus
07-15-2014, 03:17 PM
I'll take a poor man Krejci over a Bozak any day of the week.

Sure, but you don't give a poor man's Krejci $6M per year. If you're eating up UFA years, you give him $5M per.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:17 PM
I think you're rationalizing here again with your "better" talk.

Either way, Stepan isn't "a million times better."

Stepan is better than Bozak tho. Maybe a million times better is overkill but he is better. I would put Stepan on my top line before i put Bozak

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:18 PM
Sure, but you don't give a poor man's Krejci $6M per year. If you're eating up UFA years, you give him $5M per.

Who said to give him 6 mil? I sure didnt. I say 5-5.5 for 6 years

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:23 PM
Stepan is better than Bozak tho. Maybe a million times better is overkill but he is better. I would put Stepan on my top line before i put Bozak

And yet you'd get about the same numbers from both of them, and one will be about $2 million cheaper.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:24 PM
And yet you'd get about the same numbers from both of them, and one will be about $2 million cheaper.

You will get 55-60 points from Stepan and 45 from Bozak. I'll take Stepan

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:28 PM
And better two way play and most likely 82 games

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:29 PM
You will get 55-60 points from Stepan and 45 from Bozak. I'll take Stepan

The actual facts say that Stepan is a 55 point player, and Bozak a 51 point player over 82 games, and both will score 20. That is not my opinion, that is a fact based on their point per game stats.

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:30 PM
And better two way play and most likely 82 games

Just your opinion, and I'm not sure what you're basing it on.

AmericanJesus
07-15-2014, 03:34 PM
Who said to give him 6 mil? I sure didnt. I say 5-5.5 for 6 years

We're not comparing Stepan to other players for fun or to argue for the sake of arguing. We're trying to determine market value. So when someone brings up Bozak or Krejci or whomever, it's to figure out what comparable players make. If Stepan compares favorably to a guy like Bozak ($4.2M) then the market would be higher. If he compares less favorably to a guy like Krejci ($5.25M) then his market value would be lower.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:43 PM
The actual facts say that Stepan is a 55 point player, and Bozak a 51 point player over 82 games, and both will score 20. That is not my opinion, that is a fact based on their point per game stats.

Bozak didnt play 82 games this year so that doesnt matter. By that logic Nash is a 30 goal scorer every year

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:44 PM
We're not comparing Stepan to other players for fun or to argue for the sake of arguing. We're trying to determine market value. So when someone brings up Bozak or Krejci or whomever, it's to figure out what comparable players make. If Stepan compares favorably to a guy like Bozak ($4.2M) then the market would be higher. If he compares less favorably to a guy like Krejci ($5.25M) then his market value would be lower.
I think Stepan is worth 5 mil and thats it. 5.5 is the most i would go but it doesnt matter what we think. The cap is rising and that means salaries will rise too. I'm sure there are GMs out there that would give Stepan 6 mil

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:45 PM
Bozak didnt play 82 games this year so that doesnt matter. By that logic Nash is a 30 goal scorer every year

He is.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 03:47 PM
Bozak didnt play 82 games this year so that doesnt matter. By that logic Nash is a 30 goal scorer every year

It does matter. Points per game are important. Not every player is going to play 82 games every season. Just because Sidney Crosby got 36 points in 2011-2012, doesn't mean he's a 36 point player because he did it in 22 games...

And Rick Nash is a 30 goal (pace) scorer pretty much every year.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:48 PM
He is.

But then if you look at the stats he scored 26 so he wasnt a 30 goal scorer this year. He could have been but we will never know since he didnt play those games. Same as Bozak.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:49 PM
It does matter. Points per game are important. Not every player is going to play 82 games every season. Just because Sidney Crosby got 36 points in 2011-2012, doesn't mean he's a 36 point player because he did it in 22 games...

And Rick Nash is a 30 goal (pace) scorer pretty much every year.

Bozak isnt better than Stepan because even the years that Bozak played almost full season he didnt outproduce Stepan. He came close this year but still didnt do it.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 03:49 PM
But then if you look at the stats he scored 26 so he wasnt a 30 goal scorer this year. He could have been but we will never know since he didnt play those games. Same as Bozak.

It's a pretty good indicator, dude.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:50 PM
It's a pretty good indicator, dude.

Sure it is, but compare Stepans career and Bozaks, Stepans is better

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 03:50 PM
Bozak isnt better than Stepan because even the years that Bozak played almost full season he didnt outproduce Stepan. He came close this year but still didnt do it.

He only played 58 games. He came up 8 points short in 24 less games.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:51 PM
He only played 58 games. He came up 8 points short in 24 less games.

What about every other year?

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:52 PM
But then if you look at the stats he scored 26 so he wasnt a 30 goal scorer this year. He could have been but we will never know since he didnt play those games. Same as Bozak.

You don't think he would have scored 4 goals in the 15+ games he missed? Come on. Let's get serious.

Future
07-15-2014, 03:54 PM
And yet you'd get about the same numbers from both of them, and one will be about $2 million cheaper.
If you're only going by what they've done in the past, no you wouldn't Bozak has never had 50 points, and there's no way he's going to maintain a shooting percentage of over 21 like he had last year. Bozak's best career +/- was last year...he was a 3, also the only time he has ever been positive. Stepan's worst was a +8 as a 20 year old. Statistically, Stepan is pretty clearly a better 2-way player.

The whole/better worse argument, in terms of contract, doesn't even tell the whole story. When it comes to money...it is about value. Stepan is far more valuable than Bozak, especially since he's 4 years younger.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 03:54 PM
What about every other year?

I'd say it's about even. In terms of career, Bozak is at .62 p/g and Stepan is at .67 p/g. It's a lot closer than you're letting on. That .05 p/g difference equates to 4 points over the course of an entire season.

And when those 4 points may cost you $2M more per year, then it's hardly worth it.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:55 PM
You don't think he would have scored 4 goals in the 15+ games he missed? Come on. Let's get serious.

I think he would have but it doesnt matter because those games didnt exist

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 03:56 PM
I'd say it's about even. In terms of career, Bozak is at .62 p/g and Stepan is at .67 p/g. It's a lot closer than you're letting on. That .05 p/g difference equates to 4 points over the course of an entire season.

And when those 4 points may cost you $2M more per year, then it's hardly worth it.

But Stepan is still improving as a player and hasnt had a bad injury during the season yet. If we gave Stepan 5.5 while Bozak makes 4.2 or whatever it is, would you trade Bozak for Stepan?

Pete
07-15-2014, 03:59 PM
I think he would have but it doesnt matter because those games didnt exist

This is what's called a "non-point". There are times where you can use "pace" to determine output. This is one of them.

fletch
07-15-2014, 03:59 PM
Stepan is exactly the kind of player the Rangers should be investing 5-6 million per year. He's 24 years old, and coming into the prime of his career.

If you think his contract holdout (last summer) and attitude are potential red flags, then find a trade partner, because there would be a long line of suitors.

McDonagh, Kreider, Stepan - these are Rangers you could potentially enjoy for 5+ more years. As much as I enjoy MSL, I'm not going to see him for the same length of time.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 03:59 PM
But Stepan is still improving as a player and hasnt had a bad injury during the season yet. If we gave Stepan 5.5 while Bozak makes 4.2 or whatever it is, would you trade Bozak for Stepan?

Yeah, but I'm assuming that Stepan is going to make $6M, not $5.5M, because that's what Brooks' report says and it makes sense given his age/potential and production.

And if he's making $6M while Bozak is making $4.2, I'd rather have Bozak.

For the record, I'm fine with giving Stepan $6M if he shows that he is actually improving (this year, especially). It all rides on this year, IMO. He needs to have an impact.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:00 PM
Stepan is exactly the kind of player the Rangers should be investing 5-6 million per year. He's 24 years old, and coming into the prime of his career.

If you think his contract holdout (last summer) and attitude are potential red flags, then find a trade partner, because there would be a long line of suitors.

McDonagh, Kreider, Stepan - these are Rangers you could potentially enjoy for 5+ more years. As much as I enjoy MSL, I'm not going to see him for the same length of time.

Good post. Stepan can be a 70 point player if he keeps improving his game

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:02 PM
Yeah, but I'm assuming that Stepan is going to make $6M, not $5.5M, because that's what Brooks' report says and it makes sense given his age/potential and production.

And if he's making $6M while Bozak is making $4.2, I'd rather have Bozak.
Who cares what Brooks says? Didnt he say Nash wouldnt be traded when that was obvious to everyone anyway?

And ok, agree to disagree.

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:03 PM
If you're only going by what they've done in the past, no you wouldn't Bozak has never had 50 points, and there's no way he's going to maintain a shooting percentage of over 21 like he had last year. Points per game, dude.


Bozak's best career +/- was last year...he was a 3, also the only time he has ever been positive. Stepan's worst was a +8 as a 20 year old. Statistically, Stepan is pretty clearly a better 2-way player. http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/audio/video/2013/1/21/1358782971522/Henrik-Lundqvist-a-chaste-010.jpg


The whole/better worse argument, in terms of contract, doesn't even tell the whole story. When it comes to money...it is about value. Stepan is far more valuable than Bozak, especially since he's 4 years younger.Which is why I'd give him maybe $5+, not the $4.2 Bozak gets.

Future
07-15-2014, 04:04 PM
Yeah, but I'm assuming that Stepan is going to make $6M, not $5.5M, because that's what Brooks' report says and it makes sense given his age/potential and production.

And if he's making $6M while Bozak is making $4.2, I'd rather have Bozak.
That's shortsighted.

For a year, yea, maybe. But two years from now you've got a 30 year old Bozak making 4+ as a 2nd/3rd liner getting 50 points if his game doesn't slip while Stepan is 26 and, if he continues to improve, will be scoring 65-70 as the Rangers' #1.

I'd pay $6 mil for the 2nd guy before I'd pay $4 mil to the first.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:07 PM
Who cares what Brooks says? Didnt he say Nash wouldnt be traded when that was obvious to everyone anyway?

And ok, agree to disagree.

I care what Brooks says because he's pretty plugged into the team, whether we like it or not. It's definitely not a scenario of "whatever he says, goes", but in terms of hearing things, I'd trust Brooks to at least be in the ballpark.

Future
07-15-2014, 04:07 PM
Points per game, dude.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/audio/video/2013/1/21/1358782971522/Henrik-Lundqvist-a-chaste-010.jpg

Which is why I'd give him maybe $5+, not the $4.2 Bozak gets.
Stepan has a higher career PPG, despite coming into the league 3 years younger than Bozak. And you can't solely look at PPG because then you can find even smaller segments and say "well Stepan had 22 in 23 games after the break, so he's a 75 point player"

Toronto's goaltending was absolutely fantastic for a big part of last year. They were giving up like 40 shots a game and getting outshot but still winning while Henrik wasn't nearly in top form until the Olympic break or so.

Thing of it is, I actually agree that Stepan is probably worth around $5.5. But I'm more in the 5.5-6 than the 5.0-5.5 crowd.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:08 PM
I care what Brooks says because he's pretty plugged into the team, whether we like it or not. It's definitely not a scenario of "whatever he says, goes", but in terms of hearing things, I'd trust Brooks to at least be in the ballpark.

I'll wait until Stepan tells Sather how much he wants before i go and trade Stepan for wanting too much money because Brooks said so

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:09 PM
That's shortsighted.

For a year, yea, maybe. But two years from now you've got a 30 year old Bozak making 4+ as a 2nd/3rd liner getting 50 points if his game doesn't slip while Stepan is 26 and, if he continues to improve, will be scoring 65-70 as the Rangers' #1.

I'd pay $6 mil for the 2nd guy before I'd pay $4 mil to the first.

This idea of Stepan scoring 65-70 is unfounded... His career average is .67 p/g which works out to 55 points in an 82 game season. Stepan showed one year where he improved and then worked his way back down to career average. That's called regressing to the mean. After four seasons in the NHL, the "mean" is something that is pretty self-evident. At 24 years old and after four full seasons in the NHL, Stepan isn't going to be "growing" all that much anymore.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:11 PM
I'll wait until Stepan tells Sather how much he wants before i go and trade Stepan for wanting too much money because Brooks said so

Okay, you do that.

The rest of us will continue to have a nice off-season discussion.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:11 PM
This idea of Stepan scoring 65-70 is unfounded... His career average is .67 p/g which works out to 55 points in an 82 game season. Stepan showed one year where he improved and then worked his way back down to career average. That's called regressing to the mean. After four seasons in the NHL, the "mean" is something that is pretty self-evident. At 24 years old and after four full seasons in the NHL, Stepan isn't going to be "growing" all that much anymore.
Stepan is still improving, no doubt

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:12 PM
Stepan has a higher career PPG, despite coming into the league 3 years younger than Bozak. OK. How does that apply to the discussion of how much "better" Bozak is than Stpean, today?


Toronto's goaltending was absolutely fantastic for a big part of last year. They were giving up like 40 shots a game and getting outshot but still winning while Henrik wasn't nearly in top form until the Olympic break or so.I'm not even touching this one...Toronto was 26th in GA/G. We were 4th.


Thing of it is, I actually agree that Stepan is probably worth around $5.5. But I'm more in the 5.5-6 than the 5.0-5.5 crowd.OK, so we aren't far off.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:14 PM
Stepan is still improving, no doubt

By how much? I see the 65-70 point number being thrown out there a lot, and I don't think we're magically going to have Stepan improve from 55-60 points to 65-70. That's a huge jump.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:16 PM
By how much? I see the 65-70 point number being thrown out there a lot, and I don't think we're magically going to have Stepan improve from 55-60 points to 65-70. That's a huge jump.

How is it a huge jump? The guy is 24 years old and is impoving every year while playing good defense. The lockout year he really broke out and under AV for the first time had 57 points. Why cant he hit 65-70?

AmericanJesus
07-15-2014, 04:16 PM
That's shortsighted.

For a year, yea, maybe. But two years from now you've got a 30 year old Bozak making 4+ as a 2nd/3rd liner getting 50 points if his game doesn't slip while Stepan is 26 and, if he continues to improve, will be scoring 65-70 as the Rangers' #1.

I'd pay $6 mil for the 2nd guy before I'd pay $4 mil to the first.

The issue I have with Stepan is that he's produced on the low end of what's acceptable for a 1st line center on a championship caliber team, while being paired with either Nash or Gaborik. Stepan doesn't significantly improve his linemates, his linemates significantly improve him. That, coupled with a 45% draw winning percentage as pretty much his career average are big issues for the top line. Ideally when you have a guy centering a guy like Nash, you want him to be in the 70-80 point range. When you look back at Nash's days in Columbus, you find guys like Vinny Prospal (55p in 11/12), RJ Umberger (57p in 10/11) and Antoine Vermette (65p in 09/10). What do those guys have in common? They were borderline 1st line centers only when playing with someone of Nash's ability and their production drastically fell once they didn't have a player of his talent with them. Well, to be fair to Prospal, he was old at the time, but his career arch was pretty similar to the others. Needed top players around him to be a borderline first liner.

Future
07-15-2014, 04:16 PM
OK. How does that apply to the discussion of how much "better" Bozak is than Stpean, today?

I'm not even touching this one...Toronto was 26th in GA/G. We were 4th.

Well...beyond the fact that Stepan's ppg is higher, my argument isn't solely about "today" in a vacuum. While I don't agree with it, I can see the argument that, in one game or something Bozak might be the better player. The point is that Stepan is going to be the better player tomorrow. Even small evidence of him being better today would lead to thinking that he's going to be significantly better in the future.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 04:17 PM
57 to 65 isn't a huge jump. I think as he becomes a more developed pro he will improve. Ie: better fitness, more experience and more awareness. I think he could be a 65 point center. I think that's a fair and realistic expectation.

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:19 PM
How is it a huge jump? The guy is 24 years old and is impoving every year while playing good defense. The lockout year he really broke out and under AV for the first time had 57 points. Why cant he hit 65-70?

The better question is why you think he'll magically tack on 15% to his production. Why can he? Because he's getting better? How? Is he getting faster? No. Bigger? No? Is his vision getting better? No. So how's het getting THAT much better.

AmericanJesus
07-15-2014, 04:20 PM
By how much? I see the 65-70 point number being thrown out there a lot, and I don't think we're magically going to have Stepan improve from 55-60 points to 65-70. That's a huge jump.

I have no doubt that Stepan will put up 65-70 points one and maybe more times in his career if he keeps getting to play with world class wingers. He also might put up 50 points if he goes a season without wingers of that caliber.

Future
07-15-2014, 04:20 PM
The issue I have with Stepan is that he's produced on the low end of what's acceptable for a 1st line center, while being paired with either Nash or Gaborik. Stepan doesn't significantly improve his linemates, his linemates significantly improve him. That, coupled with a 45% draw winning percentage as pretty much his career average are big issues for the top line. Ideally when you have a guy centering a guy like Nash, you want him to be in the 70-80 point range. When you look back at Nash's days in Columbus, you find guys like Vinny Prospal (55p in 11/12), RJ Umberger (57p in 10/11) and Antoine Vermette (65p in 09/10). What do those guys have in common? They were borderline 1st line centers only when playing with someone of Nash's ability and their production drastically fell once they didn't have a player of his talent with them.
That's fair...but I don't think Nash is really a good guy to use for comparison because so many of his goals come off individual plays, rather than taking great feeds. Nash would be the same player regardless of who is on his line, imo. Stepan would put up big numbers with a sniper, which he did with Gaborik, not a guy like Nash.

But you're also not factoring in the fact that Stepan is so young. We think of him as a vet, but realistically, he's just at the age where a lot of guys are first breaking into the league. He doesn't have the same athletic ceiling as some of those guys, but I think its reasonable to think that we can still get more growth out of him.

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:20 PM
57 to 65 isn't a huge jump. I think as he becomes a more developed pro he will improve. Ie: better fitness, more experience and more awareness. I think he could be a 65 point center. I think that's a fair and realistic expectation.

That's a MASSIVE jump.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:21 PM
The better question is why you think he'll magically tack on 15% to his production. Why can he? Because he's getting better? How? Is he getting faster? No. Bigger? No? Is his vision getting better? No. So how's het getting THAT much better.

Exactly. He's 24, not 19. He's played four seasons in the NHL already. We've seen what we're getting out of Stepan - he's not a dynamic, brilliant, playmaking center. He's pretty standard as far as 2nd line centers go. Except he's playing on our 1st line.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 04:23 PM
That's a MASSIVE jump.

8 points? He's only 24, I don't see how that is a massive jump. He went from 45 to 51 and 51 to 57 when we look at full season totals. That is six points. With better conditioning and experience is it really a stretch to think he could improve by 8?

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:23 PM
The better question is why you think he'll magically tack on 15% to his production. Why can he? Because he's getting better? How? Is he getting faster? No. Bigger? No? Is his vision getting better? No. So how's het getting THAT much better.

Because he is improving every year. I'm not explaining it again dude, sorry

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:24 PM
That's a MASSIVE jump.

How is 8 points a massive jump?

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:24 PM
57 to 65 isn't a huge jump. I think as he becomes a more developed pro he will improve. Ie: better fitness, more experience and more awareness. I think he could be a 65 point center. I think that's a fair and realistic expectation.

That's a pretty big jump. That's like 2nd liner to 1st liner jump. Let's not downplay the significance of 8 more points over the course of a season.

Look, I want Stepan to do all of these things too, but nothing I've actually seen out of him after 4 years and 294 regular season games and 61 playoff games indicates to me that there's a helluva lot more in store for Derek Stepan.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:25 PM
Because he is improving every year. I'm not explaining it again dude, sorry

But he's not. Not every year.

.62 p/g -> .92 p/g (IMPROVEMENT!) -> .70 p/g (not improvement)

Future
07-15-2014, 04:25 PM
The better question is why you think he'll magically tack on 15% to his production. Why can he? Because he's getting better? How? Is he getting faster? No. Bigger? No? Is his vision getting better? No. So how's het getting THAT much better.
By that logic, Kreider will never be more than like a 22 G/ 45 Pt guy...he's not going to get much bigger or faster, and he's just a year younger than Stepan.

You talk like Stepan is 35 years old...he just turned 24. He can absolutely get bigger and faster. But even if he doesn't, it's not like every player who makes a leap in points does so because they change physically.

I think, considering the holdout last year, you can simply look to the jump in production from the first half to the second half to see that he can still get better as he continues to get more comfortable as a pro.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:26 PM
That's a pretty big jump. That's like 2nd liner to 1st liner jump. Let's not downplay the significance of 8 more points over the course of a season.

Look, I want Stepan to do all of these things too, but nothing I've actually seen out of him after 4 years and 294 regular season games and 61 playoff games indicates to me that there's a helluva lot more in store for Derek Stepan.
So 65 points while playing two way hockey is impossible for Stepan?

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:27 PM
But he's not. Not every year.

.62 p/g -> .92 p/g (IMPROVEMENT!) -> .70 p/g (not improvement)

He is 24, not 34. He is improving regardless of those stats. What were his PPG stats in 12-13 in the lockout year?

Future
07-15-2014, 04:27 PM
But he's not. Not every year.

.62 p/g -> .92 p/g (IMPROVEMENT!) -> .70 p/g (not improvement)
I don't think it's fair to use the lockout year. While it might pull his ppg up, it's probably not quite sustainable. Having said that...he was at like .96 after the break last year. That's two pretty big chunks of season where he's over .9 ppg.

70 points is only .85 ppg...hardly unrealistic I don't think. The biggest improvement for him will be consistency, and since he's already shown the ability to produce at a high clip, something slightly under that isn't all that impractical.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:28 PM
By that logic, Kreider will never be more than like a 22 G/ 45 Pt guy...he's not going to get much bigger or faster, and he's just a year younger than Stepan.

You talk like Stepan is 35 years old...he just turned 24. He can absolutely get bigger and faster. But even if he doesn't, it's not like every player who makes a leap in points does so because they change physically.

I think, considering the holdout last year, you can simply look to the jump in production from the first half to the second half to see that he can still get better as he continues to get more comfortable as a pro.
A year younger, of course, but Kreider has played 205 less regular season games than Stepan. That counts for something.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 04:28 PM
That's a pretty big jump. That's like 2nd liner to 1st liner jump. Let's not downplay the significance of 8 more points over the course of a season.

Look, I want Stepan to do all of these things too, but nothing I've actually seen out of him after 4 years and 294 regular season games and 61 playoff games indicates to me that there's a helluva lot more in store for Derek Stepan.

What am I missing? Six point increase from Y1 to Y2. Six from Y2 to Y4. What am I missing?

I'm really confused here. What evidence is there that he will only stay the same at age 24? Why is his increased production each year being ignored?

I'm not saying he is the .92 player he was during the lockout year. I also am not talking about playoff production. I just think that the data shows he is trending up.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 04:29 PM
But he's not. Not every year.

.62 p/g -> .92 p/g (IMPROVEMENT!) -> .70 p/g (not improvement)

Lockout year is an anomaly. Doesn't change fact that in full seasons he has gone 0.55-0.62-0.70.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:29 PM
He is 24, not 34. He is improving regardless of those stats. What were his PPG stats in 12-13 in the lockout year?

They're right in front of you. He was .92 p/g in the lockout year. He regressed to the mean this year.

I don't see how you can say he's improving "regardless of the stats" when the stats show that he's not improving every year like you said. This year was not an improvement on the prior season.

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:30 PM
Because he is improving every year. I'm not explaining it again dude, sorry

You haven't explained it once, yet, you just keep saying it it over and over.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:30 PM
They're right in front of you. He was .92 p/g in the lockout year. He regressed to the mean this year.

I don't see how you can say he's improving "regardless of the stats" when the stats show that he's not improving every year like you said. This year was not an improvement on the prior season.
I dont think anyone expected Stepan to do that again this year. Is a 6 point increase impossible for Stepan?

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:30 PM
Lockout year is an anomaly. Doesn't change fact that in full seasons he has gone 0.55-0.62-0.70.

This is why I'm using points per game. Let's not start nitpicking stats here.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:32 PM
I dont think anyone expected Stepan to do that again this year. Is a 6 point increase impossible for Stepan?

Why would no one expect it? I certainly expected it. I expected better than what we saw this year, that's for sure.

And 6 point increase from where? From 50 points? Sure. From 55 points? Maybe. From 59 points? Eh, that's a bit wishful, IMO.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:33 PM
You haven't explained it once, yet, you just keep saying it it over and over.

Read the thread. Look at Stepans stats. He is improving no matter what anyone says. 45 points rookie year, 51 points 2nd year, 44 points in 48 games 3rd year (lockout year) 57 points 4th year under new coach while holding out for a contract. If you expected him to continue his PPG from 12-13, you were expecting too much. He is improving tho. Why cant he put up another 6-8 points next year when he did it before?

Future
07-15-2014, 04:33 PM
A year younger, of course, but Kreider has played 205 less regular season games than Stepan. That counts for something.
True, I certainly think that Kreider has more room for growth than Stepan. But age plays a big role in being comfortable and confident, which can make a big difference.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:34 PM
What am I missing? Six point increase from Y1 to Y2. Six from Y2 to Y4. What am I missing?

I'm really confused here. What evidence is there that he will only stay the same at age 24? Why is his increased production each year being ignored?

I'm not saying he is the .92 player he was during the lockout year. I also am not talking about playoff production. I just think that the data shows he is trending up.

His young age is leveled out by the fact that he's played nearly 360 NHL games. Why are we expecting him to continue to develop and have some big, breakout year (again) after 360 NHL games?

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:34 PM
Why would no one expect it? I certainly expected it. I expected better than what we saw this year, that's for sure.

And 6 point increase from where? From 50 points? Sure. From 55 points? Maybe. From 59 points? Eh, that's a bit wishful, IMO.

Then you expected way too much, especially holding out and a new coach. I expect 60-62 points this year from Stepan and will be disgusted if he doesnt get it

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:34 PM
The issue I have with Stepan is that he's produced on the low end of what's acceptable for a 1st line center on a championship caliber team, while being paired with either Nash or Gaborik. Stepan doesn't significantly improve his linemates, his linemates significantly improve him. That, coupled with a 45% draw winning percentage as pretty much his career average are big issues for the top line. Ideally when you have a guy centering a guy like Nash, you want him to be in the 70-80 point range. When you look back at Nash's days in Columbus, you find guys like Vinny Prospal (55p in 11/12), RJ Umberger (57p in 10/11) and Antoine Vermette (65p in 09/10). What do those guys have in common? They were borderline 1st line centers only when playing with someone of Nash's ability and their production drastically fell once they didn't have a player of his talent with them. Well, to be fair to Prospal, he was old at the time, but his career arch was pretty similar to the others. Needed top players around him to be a borderline first liner.

To add to this, if you can't be that 70-80 point player, you need to make up for it elsewhere, especially at the dot. If you are talking that low-end of points, like Krejci or Bergeron, you need to make up for it in things like face-off percentage by being an ace in the hole there.

Stepan's face-off numbers are actually one of his biggest draw backs. He's just not reliable, so much so to the point that there are various points in the season and playoffs where his line won't see an offensive zone draw, or where he won't be the player asked to take it because it's assumed he'll lose it.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:34 PM
His young age is leveled out by the fact that he's played nearly 360 NHL games. Why are we expecting him to continue to develop and have some big, breakout year (again) after 360 NHL games?

Because he is 24 and has plenty of room to grow

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:35 PM
To add to this, if you can't be that 70-80 point player, you need to make up for it elsewhere, especially at the dot. If you are talking that low-end of points, like Krejci or Bergeron, you need to make up for it in things like face-off percentage by being an ace in the hole there.

Stepan's face-off numbers are actually one of his biggest draw backs. He's just not reliable, so much so to the point that there are various points in the season and playoffs where his line won't see an offensive zone draw, or where he won't be the player asked to take it because it's assumed he'll lose it.
So because his faceoffe are bad, he cant improve? He can get better at faceoffs, all it takes is practice

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:35 PM
By that logic, Kreider will never be more than like a 22 G/ 45 Pt guy...he's not going to get much bigger or faster, and he's just a year younger than Stepan.

You talk like Stepan is 35 years old...he just turned 24. He can absolutely get bigger and faster. But even if he doesn't, it's not like every player who makes a leap in points does so because they change physically.

I think, considering the holdout last year, you can simply look to the jump in production from the first half to the second half to see that he can still get better as he continues to get more comfortable as a pro.

Kreider is technically a rookie. Stepan is going into his 5 year. You'd expect a bigger jump as a player learns his way around the league, with the biggest jump coming in year 3. After that, to expect dramatic increases is unrealistic.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:36 PM
Kreider is technically a rookie. Stepan is going into his 5 year. You'd expect a bigger jump as a player learns his way around the league, with the biggest jump coming in year 3. After that, to expect dramatic increases is unrealistic.

What do you expect from Kreider this year?

And who says that after 3 years and increase is unrealistic?

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:37 PM
Because he is 24 and has plenty of room to grow

Please re-read what I said.

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:37 PM
So because his faceoffe are bad, he cant improve? He can get better at faceoffs, all it takes is practice

There you go with another straw man argument.

Read what I wrote. I was quite clear about what I said. Why you felt the need to interpret it otherwise it is beyond me.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:37 PM
Can someone find me a player who improved his career average point production by 15% after playing 300 games in the NHL? I'm genuinely curious if this feat has ever been accomplished before.

And I'm not just talking one anomaly year. I want consistent p/g increase after a significant amount of time in the league.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:38 PM
Please re-read what I said.

You said his faceoffs are bad, i'm asking you is it impossible for him to improve at faceoffs

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:39 PM
There you go with another straw man argument.

Read what I wrote. I was quite clear about what I said. Why you felt the need to interpret it otherwise it is beyond me.

Bringing in faceoffs is not a straw man argument?

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:41 PM
You said his faceoffs are bad, i'm asking you is it impossible for him to improve at faceoffs

Impossible? No. Improbable? Yes.

If you clock your slap shot every year for five years at 65mph, 67 mph, 67 mph, 66 mph and 68 mph, you shoot at 66.6 mph, on average. Is it impossible you shoot the next year at 70mph? No. But it's unlikely. It's even more unlikely you shoot 80, 90 or 100mph.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:41 PM
Can someone find me a player who improved his career average point production by 15% after playing 300 games in the NHL? I'm genuinely curious if this feat has ever been accomplished before.

And I'm not just talking one anomaly year. I want consistent p/g increase after a significant amount of time in the league.

Ray Whitney?

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:41 PM
Can someone find me a player who improved his career average point production by 15% after playing 300 games in the NHL? I'm genuinely curious if this feat has ever been accomplished before.

And I'm not just talking one anomaly year. I want consistent p/g increase after a significant amount of time in the league.

The only guy I can think may fit is Ray Whitney? I don't have the stats on hand, though.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:42 PM
You said his faceoffs are bad, i'm asking you is it impossible for him to improve at faceoffs

Wrong post. Here:


His young age is leveled out by the fact that he's played nearly 360 NHL games. Why are we expecting him to continue to develop and have some big, breakout year (again) after 360 NHL games?

To which you said:


Because he is 24 and has plenty of room to grow

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:42 PM
Impossible? No. Improbable? Yes.

If you clock your slap shot every year for five years at 65mph, 67 mph, 67 mph, 66 mph and 68 mph, you shoot at 66.6 mph, on average. Is it impossible you shoot the next year at 70mph? No. But it's unlikely. It's even more unlikely you shoot 80, 90 or 100mph.
There are ways to increase it tho

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:43 PM
The only guy I can think may fit is Ray Whitney? I don't have the stats on hand, though.

Yep, it is Ray Whitney

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:43 PM
There are ways to increase it tho

Yeah, it's called practice and strength training. Stepan might get marginally better, but his career average being below 50% is unlikely to change. If he goes from 45% to 46%, that increase still doesn't warrant the $6M price tag and first-line center default he's being awarded, is the overarching point.

Future
07-15-2014, 04:44 PM
His young age is leveled out by the fact that he's played nearly 360 NHL games. Why are we expecting him to continue to develop and have some big, breakout year (again) after 360 NHL games?
So players all stop developing after 3 and a half years in the league?

Is Logan Couture done getting better? Same age and came into the league at the same time. Matt Duchene? Ryan O'Reilly? Kyle Turris?

With that argument, these guys aren't going to get any better either.

Stepan doesn't need to break out...another 8 points or so wouldn't be breaking out. But another 10-12 pts? I don't see why that's so impossible.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:44 PM
Bobby Holik too

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:44 PM
The only guy I can think may fit is Ray Whitney? I don't have the stats on hand, though.

I'll have to check, but it might fit the bill.

The point is that it is incredibly rare and difficult. Not that it can't be done, but there are some acting like it's a foregone conclusion just because he's 24.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 04:45 PM
His young age is leveled out by the fact that he's played nearly 360 NHL games. Why are we expecting him to continue to develop and have some big, breakout year (again) after 360 NHL games?

Because there are variables. Ice time is one.

For example.

45 points in 16:27.
51 points in 18:57
44 in 48 at 20:55
57 at 18:03

He increased production as competition as increased so it shows he isn't feasting on inferior competition.

Style of play is another. He produced in a much different system under Tortorella and this was year one under AV.

Age is another. Yes the games played is important but players get better.

I believe age 24-28 is the peak of most players?

For example.

At the same amount of games played, Richards averaged 0.83. From that point he had 7 seasons where he surpassed that. And he went to a tougher conference.

Now it is obvious that Stepan is not Richards. However I am sure there are other occasions were a player looked to be something after a fair amount of games, but became something else.

ERA was different but Marc Savard is another example.

I don't expect Stepan to become a 70 point center. All I am saying is that he still has time to prove he can be that center and an increase of 8 points wouldn't come out of nowhere.

I can elaborate more once I'm home from work if my points aren't clear.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:45 PM
Yeah, it's called practice and strength training. Stepan might get marginally better, but his career average being below 50% is unlikely to change. If he goes from 45% to 46%, that increase still doesn't warrant the $6M price tag and first-line center default he's being awarded, is the overarching point.

Who awarded him 6 mil? I think we all agree he isnt worth that much

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:47 PM
I think Brian Rolston also fits in the improved after 3 years group lol

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:47 PM
I'll have to check, but it might fit the bill.

The point is that it is incredibly rare and difficult. Not that it can't be done, but there are some acting like it's a foregone conclusion just because he's 24.

Forwards generally produce their best numbers between the age of 23 and 27, so it's not insane to think Stepan could increase his output over the next few years.

The knock working against him (heavily, mind you) is that he's yet to dramatically increase his production year-to-year despite being paired with the teams' best offensive players — that list including a 40-goal Marián Gáborík, and a 21-in-44 and 26-in-65 Rick Nash. What this tells me is that it's those players making him better, not the other way around.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:49 PM
Forwards generally produce their best numbers between the age of 23 and 27, so it's not insane to think Stepan could increase his output over the next few years.

The knock working against him (heavily, mind you) is that he's yet to dramatically increase his production year-to-year despite being paired with the teams' best offensive players — that list including a 40-goal Marián Gáborík, and a 21-in-44 and 26-in-65 Rick Nash. What this tells me is that it's those players making him better, not the other way around.

What about Stepan and Nash in 12-13? They were on fire together

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 04:49 PM
Forwards generally produce their best numbers between the age of 23 and 27, so it's not insane to think Stepan could increase his output over the next few years.

The knock working against him (heavily, mind you) is that he's yet to dramatically increase his production year-to-year despite being paired with the teams' best offensive players — that list including a 40-goal Marián Gáborík, and a 21-in-44 and 26-in-65 Rick Nash. What this tells me is that it's those players making him better, not the other way around.

Well it takes two to tango. The goal scoters don't score without getting the pass by work set up by a center. Yes there are secondary assists that may cloud things but I don't know if that is a tracked stat.

Point being, guys are scoring but Stepan isn't totaling points for being a complete passenger.

Morphinity
07-15-2014, 04:51 PM
So players all stop developing after 3 and a half years in the league?

Is Logan Couture done getting better? Same age and came into the league at the same time. Matt Duchene? Ryan O'Reilly? Kyle Turris?

With that argument, these guys aren't going to get any better either.

Stepan doesn't need to break out...another 8 points or so wouldn't be breaking out. But another 10-12 pts? I don't see why that's so impossible.

I didn't say "stop developing". But you're expecting a huge point swing simply because he's 24.

8 points on his 55 career average is a 14.5% increase. 10 points is an 18% increase. 12 points is a 21.8% increase. That's significant.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:51 PM
Well it takes two to tango. The goal scoters don't score without getting the pass by work set up by a center. Yes there are secondary assists that may cloud things but I don't know if that is a tracked stat.

Point being, guys are scoring but Stepan isn't totaling points for being a complete passenger.

If you take away secondary assists from Stepan, then you have to do it to every player who ever played in the NHL, including hall of famers and record holders

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:53 PM
I didn't say "stop developing". But you're expecting a huge point swing simply because he's 24.

8 points on his 55 career average is a 14.5% increase. 10 points is an 18% increase. 12 points is a 21.8% increase. That's significant.

Put Stepan on the 1st PP unit with Nash and Hagelin with Boyle and McD on the point, i dont see why 60+ points isnt possible

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:53 PM
I didn't say "stop developing". But you're expecting a huge point swing simply because he's 24.

8 points on his 55 career average is a 14.5% increase. 10 points is an 18% increase. 12 points is a 21.8% increase. That's significant.

Agreed.

And I think I speak for you, Phil and I when I say — That doesn't mean we don't think it's possible for him to do, just that it should not be expected, nor should we give out a contract based on it.

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:54 PM
What about Stepan and Nash in 12-13? They were on fire together

I've spoken to this already in the OP. His P/G averages indicate that year to be an anomaly.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:54 PM
Agreed.

And I think I speak for you, Phil and I when I say — That doesn't mean we don't think it's possible for him to do, just that it should not be expected, nor should we give out a contract based on it.

Who said anything about giving a contract out on that?

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:56 PM
Who said anything about giving a contract out on that?

That is what we are discussing here.

Well, some of us are discussing it, you seem to be arguing just to argue.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 04:56 PM
Just for the record if I haven't said it; I wouldn't give him $6. I'd give him a show me deal so if he doesn't improve he doesn't get a raise. If he improves greatly which I don't think happens, he gets paid... By someone else. I'd give him $5.25 x 3. Don't know if he takes it though.

Pete
07-15-2014, 04:58 PM
Just for the record if I haven't said it; I wouldn't give him $6. I'd give him a show me deal so if he doesn't improve he doesn't get a raise. If he improves greatly which I don't think happens, he gets paid... By someone else. I'd give him $5.25 x 3. Don't know if he takes it though.

The issue I have is that if he throws up a 82 point year this year, he becomes "that guy", who puts up big years when there's a year left on his deal. Then you don't really know how to approach that.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 04:58 PM
That is what we are discussing here.

Well, some of us are discussing it, you seem to be arguing just to argue.
How am i arguing?

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 04:59 PM
Just for the record if I haven't said it; I wouldn't give him $6. I'd give him a show me deal so if he doesn't improve he doesn't get a raise. If he improves greatly which I don't think happens, he gets paid... By someone else. I'd give him $5.25 x 3. Don't know if he takes it though.

Problem is, he's already on his show-me deal. That's what the bridge contract represents in the NHL today. It's the reason Subban is talking about $8M x 8 when he could have been had at $5M x 5. The Habs said "show me", and he did. Now they pay.

The Rangers said the same to Stepan. I just don't know if he's actually shown it to support this ticket.

Pete
07-15-2014, 05:00 PM
How am i arguing?

Aggressively and without really having a point, or conveying your point effectively.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 05:00 PM
Problem is, he's already on his show-me deal. That's what the bridge contract represents in the NHL today. It's the reason Subban is talking about $8M x 8 when he could have been had at $5M x 5. The Habs said "show me", and he did. Now they pay.

The Rangers said the same to Stepan. I just don't know if he's actually shown it to support this ticket.

Fair enough. I'm headed out so if anyone quotes any other posts I'll respond once I'm home.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 05:01 PM
Aggressively and without really having a point, or conveying your point effectively.

How am i not making a point? Seriously? The entire thread i made my point, i used stats to back it up and i didnt offene anybody. How do i not have a point?

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 05:02 PM
Problem is, he's already on his show-me deal. That's what the bridge contract represents in the NHL today. It's the reason Subban is talking about $8M x 8 when he could have been had at $5M x 5. The Habs said "show me", and he did. Now they pay.

The Rangers said the same to Stepan. I just don't know if he's actually shown it to support this ticket.

I say give Stepan 5.5 for 5-6 years. I think thats a fair deal

Pete
07-15-2014, 05:05 PM
How am i not making a point? Seriously? The entire thread i made my point, i used stats to back it up and i didnt offene anybody. How do i not have a point?

I don't know, the whole thread you just keep asking questions.

How this, why that, who said this, etc. You either seem really confused, or you're confusing other people.

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 05:07 PM
I don't know, the whole thread you just keep asking questions.

How this, why that, who said this, etc. You either seem really confused, or you're confusing other people.

I can't ask a question? Why not?

I was confused which is why i asked you who said give out that contract?

Pete
07-15-2014, 05:08 PM
I can't ask a question? Why not?

Did someone say you can't ask a question?

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 05:10 PM
Did someone say you can't ask a question?

You said i keep asking questions and it appears that i am in trouble for that

Pete
07-15-2014, 05:10 PM
You said i keep asking questions and it appears that i am in trouble for that

Who said you were in trouble? In trouble for what? Why?

RangersFan
07-15-2014, 05:11 PM
Who said you were in trouble? In trouble for what? Why?

You said all i am doing is arguing in this thread and asking questions and thats not true

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 05:27 PM
I say give Stepan 5.5 for 5-6 years. I think thats a fair deal

Probably, but that's not really what's being discussed, or debated against. The original report from Brooks notes that he may double his current salary ($3.075M), which could see his AAV rise to $6.15M annually. Even if you come down from that a bit, we're probably still talking in the $5.75M, $5.875M, etc. range. And likely on a max term contract of eight years. Now, granted, there's been no indication he'll demand that, but the last contract he wanted to sign with the Rangers was an identical deal to McDonagh's ($4.7M for five years), so I think we can probably base line that the absolute minimum he'd want is four years (to mirror the term of McDonagh), and the max would be the max years of eight, to remain a Ranger for the majority of his career.

Generally speaking, my concern with players is almost always rooted in the AAV, not the term. An extra year or so are usually easier work-arounds than an extra million or two. For example, if you have essentially the same player making $4M in City A with four years left on his contract and $6M in City B with three years left on his, you'd actually have an easier time moving the player in City A than the one in City B based on the fact that it's easier to accommodate $4M under most salary caps (especially top-end cap-ceiling clubs) than it is $6M, regardless of the shortened term.

To tie this back to Stepan, what I am saying is that I'm in whatever camp gets his cap hit down, not the camp that gets his term down. Term doesn't matter to me, so if you are talking five, six or seven years, I really don't care. What I care about is the cap hit across it. I'd rather have Stepan at $4.7M for eight years than at $5.5M for five.

Puck Head
07-15-2014, 08:58 PM
We have to be careful when comparing players.
I've heard Bozak's contact mentioned.
4.2 million x 5 years.

But remember, that contract was signed after the 2013 season.
Up that that point he had season totals of..

27 pts
32 pts
47 pts
28 pts

Granted less games in that first year, but he simply didn't have the resume that Stepan will more then likely have after next season.

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 09:15 PM
We have to be careful when comparing players.
I've heard Bozak's contact mentioned.
4.2 million x 5 years.

But remember, that contract was signed after the 2013 season.
Up that that point he had season totals of..

27 pts
32 pts
47 pts
28 pts

Granted less games in that first year, but he simply didn't have the resume that Stepan will more then likely have after next season.

More importantly, we have to be careful about using seasonal totals as a measure.

He signed that contract after the 2013 season.

To to that point he had seasonal point per game totals of:

0.73
0.39
0.64
0.61

Stepan's P/G totals are in the OP.

I agree Stepan is the better of the two players, but they are comparable players and contracts, and Bozak's deal is a deal you can use to argue the low end of Stepan's value.

Puck Head
07-15-2014, 09:22 PM
More importantly, we have to be careful about using seasonal totals as a measure.

He signed that contract after the 2013 season.

To to that point he had seasonal point per game totals of:

0.73
0.39
0.64
0.61

Stepan's P/G totals are in the OP.

I agree Stepan is the better of the two players, but they are comparable players and contracts, and Bozak's deal is a deal you can use to argue the low end of Stepan's value.

But you have to take the time and production of the deal handed out into account.
Bozak was a .51 PPG player up until that time?
And there have/will have been two substantial increases to the cap since then.

What I'm saying is Bozak's 4.2 equals 4.6 or so last season.
Closer to 4.9 after this season, (inflation of two cap increases).

Factor in difference of production, (Stepan does have edge even with no more increase this upcoming season).

And contracts are basically the same, (If Stepan gets around 5.5).

Puck Head
07-15-2014, 09:25 PM
Can someone find me a player who improved his career average point production by 15% after playing 300 games in the NHL? I'm genuinely curious if this feat has ever been accomplished before.

And I'm not just talking one anomaly year. I want consistent p/g increase after a significant amount of time in the league.

Depends on age of player.
Stepan played last season as a 23 year old.

Statistically "all" players improve until the age of 26 I believe. 27 is suppose to be the greatest age of any hockey player statistically.
This is not a particular player I'm talking about, I'm speaking of the data comprised from various leagues, over the course of many years.

That being said, it wouldn't be too surprising to see Stepan to increase his point totals by 10 or so over the next few years.

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 09:28 PM
But you have to take the time and production of the deal handed out into account.
Bozak was a .51 PPG player up until that time?
And there have/will have been two substantial increases to the cap since then.

What I'm saying is Bozak's 4.2 equals 4.6 or so last season.
Closer to 4.9 after this season, (inflation of two cap increases).

Factor in difference of production, (Stepan does have edge even with no more increase this upcoming season).

And contracts are basically the same, (If Stepan gets around 5.5).

Yes, because of an anomaly 0.39 year. Without it, he's a 0.66 P/G player.

Stepan, minus his own anomaly 0.94 year, prior to the contract he just signed, is a 0.62 P/G player.

"Basically the same" isn't the same. Stepan is still going to get more per year, and if Brooks is correct, we're talking about as high as $6.15M per season.

Puck Head
07-15-2014, 09:33 PM
Yes, because of an anomaly 0.39 year. Without it, he's a 0.66 P/G player. Stepan, minus his own anomaly 0.94 year, prior to the contract he just signed, is a 0.62 P/G player. "Basically the same" isn't the same. Stepan is still going to get more per year, and if Brooks is correct, we're talking about as high as $6.15M per season.

Well keep it simple
What was Bozaks PPG per season before contract compared to Stepan?

And what has increase of cap been since then and after this season.

Don't even try to argue me on this...
YOU taught me these points this season!!

Puck Head
07-15-2014, 09:33 PM
And wouldn't O'Reilley be the better comparison?

Phil in Absentia
07-15-2014, 09:46 PM
Well keep it simple
What was Bozaks PPG per season before contract compared to Stepan?

And what has increase of cap been since then and after this season.

Don't even try to argue me on this...
YOU taught me these points this season!!


And wouldn't O'Reilley be the better comparison?

As a player, yeah. He's definitely in the group, especially based on age, but that's a problematic scenario with him refusing a bridge deal and holding out for a portion of the season only to sign an offer sheet with Calgary that the Avs matched.

He works great for a player comparable, but less so on a contract one.

Among the group I'd have pegged as comparable players/deals are O'Reilly, Bozak and Nazem Kadri based on age and production.

CreaseCrusader91
07-15-2014, 09:46 PM
Can someone find me a player who improved his career average point production by 15% after playing 300 games in the NHL? I'm genuinely curious if this feat has ever been accomplished before.

And I'm not just talking one anomaly year. I want consistent p/g increase after a significant amount of time in the league.

http://i.imgur.com/jnPBmVd.png

Here's a rough look at some of the top centers that have played a good amount of games since going through the first 300 or so games. This chart uses the first four seasons, in some cases five only if a player was hurt or was briefly up. I can run the numbers if there is another center that I blatantly missed.

Future
07-15-2014, 11:56 PM
Good breakdown.

Honestly, though Bergeron is the better player, I think he's a fair comparison to Stepan since they are both asked to play more of a 2 way than scoring game.

lefty9
07-16-2014, 08:03 AM
Can someone find me a player who improved his career average point production by 15% after playing 300 games in the NHL? I'm genuinely curious if this feat has ever been accomplished before.

And I'm not just talking one anomaly year. I want consistent p/g increase after a significant amount of time in the league. Marc Savard, his first 360 games he avareged . 67 points per game, next next 500 games he averaged 1.02 points per game, plus he was about the same size as steps and was about as slow as steps.

Pete
07-16-2014, 08:54 AM
Marc Savard, his first 360 games he avareged . 67 points per game, next next 500 games he averaged 1.02 points per game, plus he was about the same size as steps and was about as slow as steps.

Great. All we need to do is find a Heatley and Kovalchuk for him to play with.

lefty9
07-16-2014, 09:09 AM
Great. All we need to do is find a Heatley and Kovalchuk for him to play with.they weren't the reason he averaged a point per game ,his best seasons were with the bruins , he had one year with Atlanta were he averaged a point per game, and it was his last season with the trashes , don't matter my point was that there was a player who got better after 300 games .

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 09:13 AM
Great. All we need to do is find a Heatley and Kovalchuk for him to play with.

He was a P/GP player with Boston too, and he wasn't playing with any high profile wingers there. Yes his ATL numbers are off the charts, but like I said previously, wingers score with a center's help. For every cross ice tap in, there is a situation where a center threads the needle.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't understand that whenever a player does well it has to be because of who they played with. I think Savard is another one that fits the mould because even if you weight his success with ATL, it is still an increase over his first 300+ games. It isn't as big when weighted, but it is a significant increase nonetheless.

Pete
07-16-2014, 09:27 AM
they weren't the reason he averaged a point per game ,his best seasons were with the bruins , he had one year with Atlanta were he averaged a point per game, and it was his last season with the trashes , don't matter my point was that there was a player who got better after 300 games .


He was a P/GP player with Boston too, and he wasn't playing with any high profile wingers there. Yes his ATL numbers are off the charts, but like I said previously, wingers score with a center's help. For every cross ice tap in, there is a situation where a center threads the needle.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't understand that whenever a player does well it has to be because of who they played with. I think Savard is another one that fits the mould because even if you weight his success with ATL, it is still an increase over his first 300+ games. It isn't as big when weighted, but it is a significant increase nonetheless.

Sorry folks, but Savard was a lazy and out shape player until he got to Atlanta and he credits playing with those players for giving him the drive to reapply himself, get in shape, and have him new work ethic.

You two can say whatever you want, but I'll go by what Savard said. And to take it even further, do you think he would become to a point for game player on Calgary? No I don't think so.

There are reasons players get that much better, something has to change. Nothing is changing for Stepan. We aren't adding all star line mates. His circumstances stagnant. There is no reason to expect all of a sudden he'll improve dramatically.

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 09:30 AM
I think it is too early to say that with Stepan but we shall see. Each person is entitled to their opinion and we will see what happens this season.

Phil in Absentia
07-16-2014, 09:32 AM
To play off Pete's last point, the other thing about the Savard comparable that's off is that he is clearly an exception to the rule. Few players ever get better as they age, and even fewer turn into "stars" the way he did.

If that's what you are banking on, I've got a bridge to sell you.

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 09:40 AM
To play off Pete's last point, the other thing about the Savard comparable that's off is that he is clearly an exception to the rule. Few players ever get better as they age, and even fewer turn into "stars" the way he did.

If that's what you are banking on, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Right. Thornton and Richards are two players that recently improved their output. I agree it isn't likely, but wanted to show it was possible.

Phil in Absentia
07-16-2014, 09:42 AM
Right. Thornton and Richards are two players that recently improved their output. I agree it isn't likely, but wanted to show it was possible.

Sure, but Thornton and Richards are also guys who just had longer career arcs. That's not really the same as what happened to Savard, who basically needed to end up in Atlanta, the shit show of the NHL, to serve as a final reminder to him that there are no more chances after this. He learned and learned quick, and he capitalized on it, but a lot of fans wear blinders to the earlier years of his career when he was a fat, lazy fuck who didn't want to work or work out or train or do anything except barely play hockey and eat.

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 09:43 AM
Sure, but Thornton and Richards are also guys who just had longer career arcs. That's not really the same as what happened to Savard, who basically needed to end up in Atlanta, the shit show of the NHL, to serve as a final reminder to him that there are no more chances after this. He learned and learned quick, and he capitalized on it, but a lot of fans wear blinders to the earlier years of his career when he was a fat, lazy fuck who didn't want to work or work out or train or do anything except barely play hockey and eat.

Right. My point with Stepan is that he can still improve his fitness. His broken jaw led to weight loss and he was quicker. Maybe that serves as a wake up that he needs to become quicker. Just a thought.

Morphinity
07-16-2014, 09:45 AM
Right. My point with Stepan is that he can still improve his fitness. His broken jaw led to weight loss and he was quicker. Maybe that serves as a wake up that he needs to become quicker. Just a thought.

Is there proof of this?

Future
07-16-2014, 09:52 AM
To play off Pete's last point, the other thing about the Savard comparable that's off is that he is clearly an exception to the rule. Few players ever get better as they age, and even fewer turn into "stars" the way he did.

If that's what you are banking on, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Depends on what you mean by "as they age." Savards biggest years came before he was 30. Its not unreasonable to think guys will continue to get better until they are 29 or so.

Pete
07-16-2014, 09:53 AM
http://i.imgur.com/jnPBmVd.png

Here's a rough look at some of the top centers that have played a good amount of games since going through the first 300 or so games. This chart uses the first four seasons, in some cases five only if a player was hurt or was briefly up. I can run the numbers if there is another center that I blatantly missed.2 or 3 of players here started as 4th line players, then 3rd line players, then moved to top six. Staal, Datsyuk and Getzlaf. Stepan has played with the team's best wingers since his sophomore year.


I think it is too early to say that with Stepan but we shall see. Each person is entitled to their opinion and we will see what happens this season.That's fine, I'm just saying, something changed for most of the players you're listing. They didn't just wake up one day and decide to be better. Something impacted their play, linemates, teammates, situations, etc. Right now, for Stepan, nothing is changing. Unless maybe St. Louis gets him on his quad program.

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 09:55 AM
Is there proof of this?

He looked faster from my perspective. As for weight loss, he was on a liquid diet. No way he maintained the normal diet players are usually on, so it is a fair assumption.

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 09:56 AM
2 or 3 of players here started as 4th line players, then 3rd line players, then moved to top six. Staal, Datsyuk and Getzlaf. Stepan has played with the team's best wingers since his sophomore year.

That's fine, I'm just saying, something changed for most of the players you're listing. They didn't just wake up one day and decide to be better. Something impacted their play, linemates, teammates, situations, etc. Right now, for Stepan, nothing is changing. Unless maybe St. Louis gets him on his quad program.

I realize. The above was a response to a question about players getting better after 300 games. That was really the only parameter but I can see your point.

Morphinity
07-16-2014, 09:58 AM
He looked faster from my perspective. As for weight loss, he was on a liquid diet. No way he maintained the normal diet players are usually on, so it is a fair assumption.

I see.

Again, this idea that Stepan is going to lose weight, put on muscle, and become faster is all wishful thinking. It's what we would love out of Stepan, but his skating has been a knock on him from the time he was drafted.

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 10:10 AM
I see.

Again, this idea that Stepan is going to lose weight, put on muscle, and become faster is all wishful thinking. It's what we would love out of Stepan, but his skating has been a knock on him from the time he was drafted.

I'm not even saying lose weight and add muscle. Just lose weight. I think one of the most valuable intangibles MSL brings to the team is his fitness. I think he will bust balls and push guys.

I can see it now.

"Step, I'm 40 f'n years old. Look at my thighs. They are bigger than your gf's tits. You better get in shape boy, I'm not wheeling your sorry ass home."

Future
07-16-2014, 10:11 AM
I'm not even saying lose weight and add muscle. Just lose weight. I think one of the most valuable intangibles MSL brings to the team is his fitness. I think he will bust balls and push guys.

I can see it now.

"Step, I'm 40 f'n years old. Look at my thighs. They are bigger than your gf's tits. You better get in shape boy, I'm not wheeling your sorry ass home."
To be fair, his thighs are bigger than most tits lol

Pete
07-16-2014, 10:12 AM
To be fair, his thighs are bigger than most tits lol

This, and :repped:.

lefty9
07-16-2014, 10:22 AM
2 or 3 of players here started as 4th line players, then 3rd line players, then moved to top six. Staal, Datsyuk and Getzlaf. Stepan has played with the team's best wingers since his sophomore year.

That's fine, I'm just saying, something changed for most of the players you're listing. They didn't just wake up one day and decide to be better. Something impacted their play, linemates, teammates, situations, etc. Right now, for Stepan, nothing is changing. Unless maybe St. Louis gets him on his quad program.but why can't those changes happen with steps, we really don't know what players might come in here in the near future .
And with Savard he always had the talent, it just took him a little longer to adjust to the nhl level,

Pete
07-16-2014, 10:26 AM
but why can't those changes happen with steps, we really don't know what players might come in here in the near future .
And with Savard he always had the talent, it just took him a little longer to adjust to the nhl level,

So what's your point, here? That we should give him $6+ million because maybe another guy will come and make Steps a P/G player? Forgive me, but I'm just not sure what your point is...I don't understand how what I bolded is an actual argument, or what you're arguing at all. "We might add players, one day, that will make Stepan better"? That's not really a stance...

AmericanJesus
07-16-2014, 10:41 AM
End of the day, Stepan's production this season will go a long way in determining what his next contract as. If he can produce at around a .8/game clip, he'll earn a $6M contract that purchases some UFA years. If he stays the same or regresses this season, he'll be looking in the $5M range for the same contract. I hope that he does push that .8/game clip. That would mean a 65 point season at of him and a nice improvement over last season. I'd also hope that he comes close to matching that in the post season. I don't think he gets much better on faceoffs. He seems to be what he is there.

lefty9
07-16-2014, 11:34 AM
So what's your point, here? That we should give him $6+ million because maybe another guy will come and make Steps a P/G player? Forgive me, but I'm just not sure what your point is...I don't understand how what I bolded is an actual argument, or what you're arguing at all. "We might add players, one day, that will make Stepan better"? That's not really a stance...no argument, just pointing out that with age steps could improve, never mentioned money

Pete
07-16-2014, 11:38 AM
no argument, just pointing out that with age steps could improve, never mentioned money

We've been discussing how much he may improve, and someone pointed out some players with a dramatic increase in points...Then it was suggested that those players had an outside influence impacting their point totals, and you're saying that maybe Stepan will have one? Um, OK, sure...But we'd discuss that if and when it happens.

Slobberknocker
07-16-2014, 11:49 AM
Earlier in the thread it was pointed out to me that after the Olympic break steps production was far better than the pre Olympic break. Was that improvement over the first part of the year? coming in late, new coach, new system.. etc.

unfortunately going into the playoffs he takes a vicious hit, breaks jaw, loses 15 lbs. and his production was hardly what we would consider to be worthy of a money player. There have also been quotes made in prior threads about his lack of post season production.

the point here is he is going into a contract year. he turned it on prior to the playoffs. Can he have the potential to increase his point total by 8 or 15Pct in a contract year, in a system that he will have the full benefit of a training camp at age 24.

i'd say it's very possible.

but regardless of that, this thread really tries to determine what his worth is on the next contract. unfortunately that's not as easy as his production output. My take on this is that you need to go early with him and see if you can extend him at what is a good level for the clubs economy. If he pulls a Cally than you have no choice but to let him go FA. If he does he's probably gone because someone will surely overpay him.

Patrick Bateman
07-16-2014, 01:09 PM
He's been a second have player his entire career. He was over a PPG in the 2nd half of the lockout season

Slobberknocker
07-16-2014, 01:16 PM
another question to pose is if he seriously wants to be a Ranger. The last negotiation was a bit acrimonious on Sather's part (who held all the cards) and his camp as well. His dad was a Ranger prospect so I'm not sure to what extent, if any he works with the Rangers on staying longer term if he gives up some dollars in the process. Its a hard thing to ask a player to do, given their window to earn this type of coin is so short lived.

me personally, i'd take as much as i could get through my peak years and if i didnt have a shot at a cup look to goto that kind of team at the end of my career.

Puck Head
07-16-2014, 01:39 PM
Stepan played last season as a 23 year old.
I mentioned before, the assumption IS that he will continue to improve.
25-26 is the peak statistically for forwards I believe, 27 is the peak athletically, (no idea why the years are one off).

At 57 pts this last season, it's not too far off to say he should/could hit 60 as a 24 year old.
And then a few years of small improvement from there.

Still doesn't make him or anyone else a 6 million dollar player IMO.
That opinion has nothing to do with Stepan, but more so with the state of the NHL.

CreaseCrusader91
07-16-2014, 03:26 PM
Lyle Richardson of THN, Spector's Hockey etc:



Current or most recent contract:Stepan is currently on a two-year deal worth $6.15 million. The average annual salary is $3.075 million. Stepan's contract expires at the end of 2014-15.

Why he deserves a major pay raise:

Over the last two seasons Stepan rose to become the Rangers' first-line center. Stepan was their leading scorer during the lockout-shortened 2012-13 season with 44 points. Last season he finished second with 57 points. He also tied for the team lead in assists (40) and was second in power-play points (18).

During the 2014 playoffs Stepan tied for second (15 points) among Rangers scorers. He also displayed his toughness by playing through half the postseason with a broken jaw. Only 24, Stepan has yet to reach his playing prime.

Projected raise:

The New York Post's Larry Brooks believes Stepan “will be in line to nearly double his cap hit from its current $3.075 million” when he become eligible for restricted free-agent status (with arbitration rights) next July. A raise to $5.8 million annually isn't out of the question.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2130868-10-nhl-players-due-for-major-pay-raises/page/9

Slobberknocker
07-16-2014, 04:04 PM
i think 5.8 is fair and probably within the rangers wheel house. my thinking is however if he goes FA, he probably gets offered a deal above 6mln per... which I'm not so sure the Rangers match.

debate whether he is a true 1C or not but fact is who else do we have to replace him with?

Phil in Absentia
07-23-2014, 10:37 AM
:tweet: @NYP_Brooksie: O'Reilly 73-118=191 in 345 games, $6M per. Stepan 73-124=197 in 294 games. When he comes up for arb next year, $6M is his comparable.

NYRangers92
07-23-2014, 10:45 AM
O'Reilly's game is about more than points though. How many takeaways did Stepan have last year and how many penalties?

CreaseCrusader91
07-23-2014, 10:57 AM
O'Reilly's game is about more than points though. How many takeaways did Stepan have last year and how many penalties?

Takeaways
ROR-83
Stepan-50

Penalty Differential
ROR- +15
Stepan- +6