So...after this season
Thoughts on moving Stepan even if he wakes up at some point.
I'm moving Stepan before Hayes,Miller or Kreider.
So...after this season
Thoughts on moving Stepan even if he wakes up at some point.
I'm moving Stepan before Hayes,Miller or Kreider.
For the right return, sure. But not before moving a contract like Girardi, Staal and/or Nash.
Why?Originally Posted by Drew a Penalty
Listen I dislike this guy and his play more than most people on this board, I promise you. But moving him is a bad idea. He produces points on a consistent basis that is fairly consistent with if not above the value of his contract. He provides our team with an experienced centerman which we do not have otherwise. Do not undervalue this. I can't stand slow, soft players (see: my complaints about hayes as well, well documented), but Stepan has been a proven performer for many years on this team where it counts: on the scoresheet. Pair this with the fact that he fills a roster position that we are notoriously shallow in and it makes him a tough sell for me, even though I don't like his play.
A Stepan trade only makes sense if you either get a C back, move Miller to C full time, or think Lindberg can be a 3C and someone like Nieves be your 4C. I have doubts about all three of those moves, though, to be fair, none of them are all that impractical.
I don't want to trade Stepan, but if you can pull something similar to the Brass/Zib trade where you get essentially the same production but cut salary and get a pick, it'd be hard to pass up.
It's pretty slim pickins for young, productive centers in the West, especially with any hope of winning a trade like we did with Brass. Maybe someone like Devin Shore or Radek Faksa from DAL, Monahan or Bennett from CGY - should they want a different type of center - could be targets.
Last edited by Future; 03-07-2017 at 11:33 AM.
Well obviously perfect world,Girardi is somehow moved ,bought out,etc.
I like Stepan but despite his nearly normal numbers something in his play seems off
Send him home to Minnesota
Because it's largely unnecessary. If you're moving Stepan chances are it's for an upgrade on defense. That's not possible unless you open a spot somewhere else. Maybe you're dealing him for a better forward if someone is willing to downgrade for some reason, but Stepan isn't the type of player a team will trade a dynamic forward for. Not at his age.
Minnesota doesn't need him. Not with Staal and Granlund now performing. Too many big contracts there anyway. Maybe Florida would want him. They need centers and he's a good veteran.
Bjugstad, Huberdeau and Trochek are their centers.
They actually might be a good target for a Brass-type trade, if one of those three can be pried away.
And Barkov but I think some of them can adjust to the wing. Stepan is a different type of center for them. He's a good two-way even though they have Bjugstad.
They're not similar to Zib though because all of them have been extended already. The savings are minimal if at all.
What if you move Stepan to Anaheim for Vatanen, then sign a 3rd line center like Sam Gagner?
Now you're going with Zibanejad, Hayes, Gagner, Lindberg down the middle, but have improved your defense in the process. Then buyout Girardi.
To be fair, I don't know who Anaheim has coming through the pipes at center, but their three top faceoff guys were Kessler, Vermette and Getzlaf.
Barkov plays wing for them already, that's why I didn't include him there. Forgot that they all extended already, though, really, the only savings for Zib was this season anyways.
I just don't really like the idea of trading Stepan without getting a comparable player back. That's really risky in hoping that you find someone to fill that role. A D upgrade is nice, but what good does it do if you go from 4 to 2 lines that can score?
Gagner is interesting, though I think he's probably going to be a little too expensive after this year. Could actually be a better fit for this system than CBJ's too
Half their guys can play either or but it doesn't really matter.
Nashville is another option. Phoenix too even though they have a bunch of C prospects.
He's a very good PP specialist. Adding him along with Shattenkirk could be a considerable change. He hasn't gotten minutes though. He's very sheltered. Better Pirri.
If they were to go with...
Kreider - Zib - Buch
Nash - Hayes - Zucc
Vesey - Miller - Grabner
Someone - Lindberg - Fast
Is that really going from 4 lines that can score to 2?
I just think our D is going to continue to kill us. We're seeing that lately. Once the over the top shooting percentage dried up, the team becomes a borderline playoff team. At the same time, next year, we're losing one of our top forwards regardless. If we don't trade a top 9 forward, we're going to lose one to Vegas, most likely. So are we better next year losing Grabner to Vegas and not really improving our D or having to do it by paying UFA prices for Shattenkirk, or are we better off moving a forward likely more valuable than Grabner (Stepan) while significantly improving our D (Vatenan) while paying $2M less for him than Shattenkirk?
Heck, if we remove Stepan ($6.5M) for Vatanen ($4.875M) and save $2.8M next season and then almost $2M the following two on a Girardi buyout, maybe we can bring in both Vatanen and Shattenkirk. Really need to crunch the numbers.
No, but that's if you plan on moving Miller to C full time and is assuming that we don't lose Grab/Lind/Fast.
Ok, I used CapFriendly GM tool. Here's what I assumed:
Salary Cap at $74M ($1M up over this year, under the average of $2M per season since the last CBA)
Trade Stepan for Vatanen
Sign Shattenkirk for $7M
Vegas claims Raanta
Trade Klein to Vegas for future consideration
Re-sign Fast at $2M
Re-sign Lindberg at $1.5M
Re-sign Puempel at $900K
Re-sign Hellberg at $750K
Buyout Girardi
Kreider - Zib - Buch
Nash - Miller - Grabner
Vesey - Hayes - MZA
Puempel - Lindberg - Fast
McDonagh - Shattenkirk
Skjei - Vatanen
Staal - Holden
Hank
Hellberg
$2.1M in available cap space for spares.
Dave wins the GM of the Year Award.
You forgot Glass
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote