Matt Stajan: Putting a Price on #14

Matt Stajan is having a career year playing on a line with Phil Kessel.

Stajan's emergence comes at an interesting time. As a pending UFA in a contract year one has to wonder if the Leafs can afford to keep him or, given his chemistry with Kessel, can they afford to let him go?

One unintended consequence of landing Kessel could very well be Stajan getting priced out of the Leafs' plans.

Boxcars

Before Kessel was healthy enough to join the Leafs, Stajan was putting up points at an 0.58 per game (ppg) rate. Good for a 48 point season. Since being given the plumb assignment of centering Kessel, his production has nearly doubled to a very impressive 0.98 ppg.

Stajan is on pace to put up 65 points this season setting career highs in goals and assists.

Determining Value

I have no idea what transpires between players, agents and GMs. With Stajan on pace for 65 points this year, all signs point to Stajan getting a hefty raise. Factor in a thin crop of UFA centres – demand exceeding supply – and it looks like a safe bet that Stajan will be Oprah rich.

In order to get an idea of the compensation Stajan might be in line for, I took a look at the types of contracts signed by Stajan's peers in 2009, that is unrestricted free agent forwards, in their 20s, that scored in the 50 to 65 point band. Here's a quick look at Stajan's comparables:

Nik Antropov, career high 59 points – signed a $4M/year deal in ATL
Johan Franzen, career high 59 points – signed a $3.95M/year deal in DET
Travis Zajac, career high 62 points - signed a $3.88M/year deal in NJ
Tumomo Ruutu, career high 54 points - signed a $3.8M/year deal in CAR
Ryan Clowe, career high 52 points – signed a $3.5M/year deal in SJ.

Stajan has already outpointed Ruutu and Clowe and this season he will likely outpoint the totals put up by Antropov, Zajac and Franzen in their contract years.

Given the comparables, don't be surprised to see Stajan looking for a contract in the $3.5M+/year range this summer.

Who’s Driving the Bus?

If Kessel is generating the bulk of Stajan’s points (and all signs point to this being so: Stajan’s ppg nearly doubled since joining Kessel and he has countless assists from down near his own goal line) two questions immediately come to mind:

1. Can Stajan be replaced at a cheaper rate than the expected $3.5M+/year?
2. Should the Leafs commit salary and term to a player that isn’t generating the stats he's being rewarded for?

In terms of replacement value, Leaf fans have to remember it’s not just about keeping salary dollars for UFAs this summer, a potential Stajan deal is about cap dollars, cap space and flexibility for the life of the contract. $3.5 to $4M may not seem like a heavy cap hit to carry, but how many Leaf fans would love to see Finger ($3.5M) and Blake ($4M) moved?

As Eliotte Friedman noted in his most recent 30 Thoughts:

One GM told me that if you're going to sign a player to a long-term, big-money deal, he'd better be three things: critical to your success, consistently healthy and, most importantly, extremely self-motivated.

As much as I'm eating crow over the Kessel deal (I didn’t, and still don't, like the deal even though Kessel has looked fantastic for the Leafs) Kessel remains a rather soft player. Boston has effectively neutralized him in two games by playing smothering, tough hockey. I fully expect that this style would be SOP if the Leafs ever make the post-season.

There are a few downsides to keeping Stajan as the Leafs #1 centre:

1. Stajan is not the guy you run 20+ minutes a night against tough competition. He’s not going to help shut-down the bigger pivots in the east;
2. On the other side of the puck, he’s not going to fight through smothering, tough, defence to generate points
3. With Grabovski already signed as the #2 centre, can the Leafs succeed over the long-term, and in the post-season, with softer players centering the top two lines?

To Friedman's point, is Stajan the right type of player to build around or do the Leafs need to focus what assets they have – salary, term, the trading of spare parts and pending UFAs – to acquire a more physical or grittier player than can make some room for Kessel?

VORP

In terms of replacement value, there are always going to be bona fide NHL players looking for a short-term deal to stay in the game. Afinogenov signed for $800k, Moore for $1.1M. Peverley got picked off waivers. I think all 3 would put up Stajanesque numbers if given prime minutes with Kessel.

If there are other centres available who can produce alongside Kessel for less than $3.5M/year, trade Stajan for whatever you can get.

If there don't appear to be other viable options, or if you believe Stajan is a key part of the medium term success of the team, get Stajan’s name on a contract.

If I were GM

My tendency would be to let Kessel continue to inflate Stajan's stats for the rest of the season to see what the return for Stajan is at the trade deadline.

If the price is right, I'd move Stajan.

I'd also consider taking a page out of the St. Louis Blues playbook and move Stajan for picks at the deadline and look at re-signing him come July 1.

If Stajan is willing to take a home town discount (less than $3M/year or a very short term deal) I'd get his name on a contract.

The cap makes the NHL an efficiency contest. Elite teams lock-up their superstars and round out the rosters with players who are outperforming their contracts. Personally, I don't think Stajan fits either of these categories.

With 16 pending UFAs and RFAs on the Leafs extended roster and just 59 days between the January 1st opening of contract renegotiations (CBA 50.5 F iv) and the March 3trade deadline it's going to be an interesting few months for Burke and the Leafs.

The Johnny Mitchell Effect

The best thing to happen to the Toronto Maple Leafs this season might just be a knee injury to John Mitchell.

Since Mitchell was placed on Long Term Injury Reserve the Leafs are 8-3.

Let me be clear: I know the winning streak has a lot to do with stable goaltending, a relatively soft schedule, and better compliance with Coach Wilson’s forechecking system.

That said, taking Mitchell out of the picture made three important things happen:

1. It brought an end to all the useless talk about who should centre Kessel;
2. It gave Stajan an extended opportunity to establish himself as the defacto #1Centre and, more importantly, it meant Mitchell (a fine #3 or #4 Centre) didn’t have to struggle or play in situations way-over his head; and
3. By solidifying the situation up the middle, all four Leaf lines have found some chemistry, provided secondary scoring and balanced play.

It will be interesting to see how Coach Wilson fits Mitchell back into the line-up once he gets the clearance to play.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Leafs assign Mitchell to the Marlies on a conditioning stint that’s just long enough to get this team to the trade deadline. Doing so would give Burke the opportunity to make addditional moves that don't expose Leaf players to waivers and a chance to move an extra body or two for a late round pick.

And You May Ask Yourself: How Did I Get Here?

This entry was cross-posted at PPP

This morning (November 21), an anonymous commenter ovasked how exactly the Leafs arrived in their current mess.

There’s not a single cause or easy explantion.

This franchise has gone through three, maybe even four, different phases since 2000, however; with the exception of one small window, all of these phases have focused on the short-term, sacrificing picks and prospects for a supposed fix.

Pre-Lockout

The Pat Quinn teams of the early 2000s were powerful clubs. Each made the playoffs and several flirted with 100 point seasons. They combined a nice mix of talent and flair (Sundin, Mogilny) with grit (Roberts, Tucker) and solid goaltending (Cujo, Belfour).

These teams were often legitimate threats to go deep in the post season and on more than one occasion it was widely thought they could challenge for a cup. As a result, these teams made a number of trades where the future was sacrificed for the present. There was a small window of success and the Leafs went for it, selling off the future in the hopes of a big pay-day.

In 2003, the Leafs trade Brad Boyes (2000 1st round pick), Alyn McCauley and a 1st round pick for Owen Nolan

In 2004, the Leafs trade two prospects, a 1st and 2nd round pick for Brian Leetch.

In addition to dealing away those three first round picks, the Leafs also had some bad luck when their 1999 first round selection (and WJC 1st team all-star) Luca Cereda had to hang up his skates due to health complications with his heart.

From 1999 to 2004, the Leafs emerged with just two first round draft picks: Carlo Colaiacovo and Alexander Steen. Both would later be traded to St. Louis for Lee Stempniak.

Had either of those post-season pushes turned out, the price paid would have been well worth it. Unfortunately, the 2003 club were eliminated in game seven of the first round while the 2004 club was eliminated in game six of the second round.

The Missing Years

John Ferguson Junior’s tenure was like a ship lost at sea…or maybe it was a ship that kept running into ice bergs…or a lost ship, on fire, that kept hitting ice bergs. Choose your own nautical disaster metaphor and, in keeping with JFJ’s reign of error, the more apocalyptic and dire your selection the more accurate it will be.

Ferguson was GM from the 2004 to 2007 drafts.

Out of those five drafts, he managed to hold on to his first round pick in just once – giving the franchise Jiri Tlusty and a whole lotta NSFW jokes.

Unable to shake-off the "win now!" edict from the MLSE board, in just two years Ferguson sacrificed two first, a second and a fourth round pick in an effort to shore-up the team’s goaltending. Some four years later, goaltending remains a position of weakness that hasn’t been adequately addressed.

JFJ's draft day magic:

The 2005 first round pick (Tukka Rask) dealt for Andrew Raycroft.
The 2006 first round pick was Jiri Tlusty.
The 2007 first round and second round picks (along with a 2009 4th) to San Jose for Vesa Toskala.
The 2008 second round pick to Phoenix for Yannic Perreault.

Draft Schmaft Redux?

In 2008, Cliff Fletcher was brought in to try to move out the NTCs/NMCs on the club and start the, ahem, rebuilding process.

Given the need to get more talent into the system, he made some, shall we say, curious moves:

A swap of first round picks, 2008 3rd round pick, 2009 2nd round pick for Luke Schenn
2008 3rd round pick for Jamal Mayers
2008 4th round pick to get rid of Bryan McCabe
2008 5th round pick for Ryan Hollwegg
2010 2nd round pick for Mikhail Grabovski

In fairness to Fletcher, he also acquired a small parcel of picks:

2008 2nd round pick and a 2009 5th round pick for Hal Gill
2008 3rd round pick for Chad Kilger
2008 5th round pick for Wade Belak

An Eye for Talent? Um. Not really...

If you’re going to trade away picks and prospects, the returning players better pan out.

Clearly that has not been the case for the Leafs.

By my math, the Leafs traded five first round and three second round picks for the following:

69 games from Owen Nolan.
28 games of Brian Leetch.
91 games (and 268 goals against) of Andrew Raycroft (plus a multi-year buyout)
17 games of Yanic Perreault
127 games (and counting) from Vesa Toskala

Stop and marvel at that return.

Five first and three third round picks for 332 games played (plus Toskala's starts until the end of the season).

I'll spare the Leaf defenders from doing the math - Brad Boyes, one of the former first rounders traded away, has played 347 NHL games, 15 more than this motley collection managed for the Leafs.

What's worse is that every single one of these players left the Leafs without a single asset coming back in return. Nolan, Leetch and Perreault walked as UFAs and Raycroft was bought out.

I'll wait while you drink it all in.

I don’t know about you,but I don't think there’s an adjective that can adequately summarize this. One could argue that only Bernie Madoff has done a worse job of asset management - and even that might be a stretch.

Making Mistakes Beyond the Draft

Even more painfully, that poor return only reflects the draft side of the equation.

The Leafs have not excelled in the free agency department (Blake, Finger), have made poor decisions in awarding NMCs and NTCs, and often signed guys at the wrong time, inking McCabe, Tucker and others to long-term deals rather than trading them at peak value. But I’ll save that rant/analysis for another day…

For now, in a nutshell, this is how you build a franchise that’s on target for a 50 point season and has limited options at hand.

Leafs Have Limited Options

Brian Burke has been preaching accountability and threatening to waive and trade players for nearly three months now.

To date, his threats have been emptier than the lower bowl at a Coyotes game and bring to mind a parent counting out-loud to a misbehaving toddler (although in fairnes, most kids usually respond by the time a parent gets to three).

Let's face it, Burke really doesn't have much in the way of options.

There's no cap space to take on new contracts or provide wiggle room in a trade.

There's no more prospects or picks left to be dealt.

As I understand it, the window for buy-outs doesn't open until the off-season.

The only option that remains is waiving a few players to the minors, but even that has a potential long-term cost.

Balancing Short-Term Issues with Long-Term Needs

In the short-term, there's no argument that this team needs a shake-up. But every player waived represents a potential lost draft pick at the trade deadline - something this club desperately needs to replenish. For the long-term good of the club, are the Leafs better off just riding out a 50 point season and cashing in all their spare parts in February?

This franchise is so bereft of talent, both in the bigs and throughout their system, that one has to wonder if it's almost worth it to keep Mayers and Primeau in the press box for the potential 5th or 6th round picks they might bring next February.(Rickard Wallin is the other prime candidate for demotion, but I have a feeling his presence on the roster is tied up with Jonas Gustavsson and right now that kid needs all the support he can get).

The other candidate for demotion to the Marlies, and the only waiver exempt player on the roster, is Luke Schenn. Unfortunately, his demotion means more ice time for Garnet Exelby. As a pending UFA, and to date large-ish bust on the Leafs blue line, I think limiting Exelby's ice-time is in the best short-term and long-term interest of this club.

Who Comes Up?

The next question is, if Burke finally makes a move, who comes up?

Neither Stalberg nor Tlusty have impressed during their short time with the Leafs. Bozak has struggled with illness and has yet to find his game with the Marlies. That leaves Christian Hanson as the likely candidate. He has impressive stats to date: 15GP 5-8-13.

My guess is it will be more dallying around the edges from Burke. He can't waive more significant roster players that might net much needed picks at the trade deadline, nor can he create an atmosphere that appears to be or is perceived by UFAs as antagonistic.

In the end, I fear it's all small beer anyways.

Does anyone really thinks demoting Mayers (8 GP) or Primeau (13GP) is suddenly going to make Blake aim before he shoots, fix a moribund PK, or help one of the goalies find their game?

Une saison perdu (with aplogies to Hemingway)

When Thales was asked what is most universal, he answered, Hope, for hope stays with those who have nothing else - Epictetus, Fragments.

I'm beginning to think Thales didn't know what it is to be a Leafs fan.

Earlier this year, before a single game had been played, a good friend of mine told me that this would be the worst Leaf season since the lockout. The team was largely without talent up front and lacked a certified puck stopper. Giving up five of eight first round picks meant there were little to no reinforcements on the farm, little depth in the system, and very few tradable assets to spackle over the many holes in the Leafs roster.

I hate to say it, but it looks like he was right.

The worst part is, with so few assets on the farm, the cap situation limiting most trades, no draft picks with which to stock up on young talent and so few appealing UFAs hitting the market, I don’t see how this team gets significantly better (never mind how limited their options are if Kessel gets hurt).

Where Will the Players Come From?

The big question for this organization is how to re-build without draft picks? How does this team acquire the cost-effective talent and depth required to compete?

Yes, the Leafs will have plenty of cap space in the off-season and likely a barren roster to re-populate as Exelby, Mayers, Ponikarovsky, Primeau, Stajan, Stempniak, Toskala, Wallin and Van Ryn are all pending UFAs. Unfortunately, it’s not exactly a bumper crop of UFAs hitting the market and several of the big name UFAs will likely sign long-term deals with their current clubs.

More importantly, UFA contracts are rarely full-value (Hey look - it's Jason Blake, Jeff Finger and 15% of the Leafs' cap hit) and a very inefficient and unproven way to build a successful hockey team in a capped system.

Down on the farm, the Leafs have four, maybe five, kids that might make a contribution at the NHL level.

Next season Hanson, Bozak and Stalberg will have a shot at cracking the 3rd, possibly 2nd line, and Gunnarson will get his shot as the fifth or sixth D. That’s it. The following season, Kadri gets his chance (let’s not rush the boy). After that the cupboard is pretty much bare.

The just leaves the, ahem, small task of landing 2/3 of a first line – including a true first-line pivot that can play the tough minutes and get Kessel the puck - 1/3 of a second line, a starting goalie, and someone that can run the PK.

All of these needs have to be acquired via free agency or by trading players that are uniformly having terrible seasons.

Sounds like a good plan.

There will be no Restocking of High Round Draft Picks

Last year at the trade deadline a single first round pick changed hands. Just one. First round picks have never been worth more. The one thing that's never had higher value comes at a time when the Leafs don't have any (quelle suprise).

This year, short of trading Tomas Kaberle (who has a NTC, a clause that Brian Burke stated he will not ask Kaberle to waive) or the few prospects that the Leafs have, there is no asset on the Leafs roster worthy of a first round pick.

There is no first round pick coming as part of a salary dump.

Let me say this again: There is no first round pick coming as part of a salary dump.

Every year since the lockout countless ink has been spent, millions of pixels distributed and the airwaves polluted with chatter that teams in cap trouble would trade high draft picks to shed problem salaries.

With the exception of a single deal between San Jose and New Jersey four years ago, it hasn't happened and I doubt it ever will.

Waivers, buy-outs, and loans to European teams are all far more viable and acceptable options than trading away an ever more valuable asset just to deal with a bad contract.

If anything, GMs have figured out that dead contracts can be dumped as part of bigger deals: JFJ wants Toskala? He's got to take Mark Bell. Got a deal for Dany Heatley? Here's Cheechoo, a little washed up and weighted down with cash. Want one of the Hawks big prospects, better stitch Campbell's name on the back of a jersey.

Another Lost Season

With just 3 wins at the first quarter mark of the season, the Leafs are pretty much just playing out the string.

The only thing to look forward to this year is the trade deadline where the team might be able to procure a second or third round pick and a whole pile of 5th and 6th rounders for their spare parts. (Who would have guessed that the true passion that unites us all is a day in mid-February where we get to see a bunch of guys wiped from the Leafs roster?)

On pace for 12 wins, fewest goals for, most goals against and maxed out at the cap. Two top 10 draft picks in the last two years already in the system. Just think, this is where Chicago was in 2005, and where Pittsburgh and Washington were in 2004. Sadly, I can’t see a similar upside for a Leaf team with so few options left.

Yeah, the sun also ariseth - unfortunately, the Leafs' fortunes never seem to.

Ask me about the secret to comedy

Phil Kessel has looked impressive so far, but with the season nearing the quarter mark and the Leafs on pace for their worst point total since the mid-1980s one has to ask - was this the right time for Burke to pull the trigger?

Phil Kessel is undoubtedly an offensive threat with a wrist shot reminiscent of Wendel Clark's. Unlike Wendel, he's also impressed at the other end of the ice, demonstrating his speed with some aggressive and timely back-checking. He's head and shoulders better than any other Leaf forward and it's been a long time since the Leafs had a young talent like this.

That said, I still have a real problem with the timing of the Kessel deal.

This is the type of deal that’s traditionally pulled off by teams with deep farm systems who are close to winning it all.

The Leafs aren’t close to winning most games, never mind competing for the Cup. Their farm team is about as deep as a oil slicked puddle in an empty car park.

The price paid for Kessel was fair but, given the paucity of talent on this club and the complete lack of depth in their system, I'd argue that the Leafs were not in the position to pay that price.

Trading for Kessel when Matt Stajan is your first line centre is the equivalent of a starving homeless guy getting a sub-prime loan and buying a Ferrari.

There are many who claim the Leafs could afford to sacrifice two first round, a second and a third round pick to land Kessel because the team signed NCAA free agents Hanson and Bozak and plucked young goalie Jonas Gustavsson out of the Swedish Elite League.

I totally disagree.

Don’t get me wrong, the NCAA free agents and Gustavsson are great signings, but the Leafs need to do that each and every year for the next two or three seasons, PLUS draft well, just to replenish their prospect pool.

The Leafs have managed to keep their first round pick just three times this decade. Tlusty, Schenn and Kadri are all the Leafs have to show for first rounders since 2000. (Boyes went for Nolan; Cola and Steen for Stempniak; 2003 and '04 dealt for 15 regular and 13 playoff games of Brian Leetch; Rask for Raycroft; the '07 first rounder went for Toskala).

The Leafs won't get another first round pick into their system until 2012.

Given that it usually takes two to three years for a first round pick to make the NHL (never mind make a contribution at the NHL level), once Nazem Kadri makes the jump, it will likely be 2015 by the time the Leafs have their next first round pick in the line-up. Kessel's contract expires in 2014.

For those who argue that players of Kessel's calibre don't hit the open market and teams have to grab them when they do, there's a lot of truth to that; however, every trade deadline produces vets that can push a team over the hump. The Leafs grabbed Leetch, Pittsburgh grabbed Hossa, the Sharks grabbed Campbell, the Stars got Richards, and so on...

Admittedly, most of these players were rentals not multi-year contract holders like Kessel, but the larger point remains: I'd rather build a competitive team first and then look for the much-needed extra part on the trade market. If the Leafs drafted and developed properly, they'd also have a much richer asset base to trade from.

I think the prudent, and most probabalistic path to success in the NHL is to draft and develop well. Get as many kids into the system as possible.

Here’s why:

1. Risk pool – the more prospects the less need for them to all pan out. These are, after all, 18, 19 and 20 year old kids. It’s not an exact science so load up and spread the risk (after Gunnarsson, the Leafs cupboard on D is pretty much empty and that ain’t good).
2. The CBA constrains salaries on players in their first three years, which leads to…
3. Greater cap flexibility as young players outperform their contracts; and
4. Players with less than 3 seasons experience are waiver exempt, creating even more roster flexibility; which means...
5. Teams have the much needed, and rarely found, depth in their system. You develop these kids right and they’ll be able to step right in, play the system and make a meaningful contribution.

In hockey, like comedy, the secret is timing. And I'm not laughing.

MLSE and H1N1: Give a Shot, Take a Shot

Much has been made by the media of MLSE arranging H1N1 vaccinations for players from the Leafs, Raptors, and Marlies (the Toronto Star went so far as to claim it sparked a "fury" but all signs point to "not so much" on that call).

The City of Toronto Public Health Unit has been clear in stating that H1N1 vaccines are currently restricted to special populations (children under 5, those under 65 with health conditions, health care workers, etc.). None of the Raptors, Marlies or Leafs fit that description.

But what's missing from the media reports is any sense of context:

• Are these athletes the only non-priority populations accessing the vaccine?
• How many non-priority candidates are the clinics turning away?
• Will clinics refuse to administer the vaccine to people who are not in the at-risk/ targeted populations? (When my son, who is a priority candidate, went in for his H1N1 vaccine, the clinic staff also innoculated my daughter and my wife - neither of whom qualify for the vaccine. One of my aunts, who is over 65 has also been innoculated. I can only presume that because my family members are not pro athletes the news of their innoculation didn't make the papers.)
• Has the Minister of Health Deb Matthews, or any of her Legislative colleagues who are not priority candidates, had the H1N1 vaccine? What about any of the reporters filing these stories or the editors pushing them?
• Why are infection rates much higher in the NHL than in the general population?
• What is the Province of Ontario and Toronto Public Health's policy for closed populations, like the NHL, where there is a prevelance of H1N1? (There are about 690 players in the NHL and by my rough count, at least eight have been diagnosed with H1N1. If that rate of infection were applied to the province of Ontario, there would be over 125,000 cases of H1N1 reported. As of October 24, 2009, the province of Ontario was reporting fewer than 5,000 cases.)

Given the nature of our publicly funded, universally accessible health care system, I can't condone anyone jumping the queue. But it would be a nice change if the media could serve the public a side of context along with the heaping pile of inidignation they're dishing out on this one.

A good start would be asking a few basic questions.