Canucks News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | The Final Countdown

[Canucks LB]

Last one was over 1,000. Continue here.

Vector's NHL Transaction Tracker.

Some Important Off-Season Dates

Buyout Period: 48 hours after the SCF; players without NMCs must be placed on unconditional waivers 24 hours prior (another buyout period opens if a team has a player file for arbitration)
Team-Elected Arbitration: 48 hours after the SCF
Draft Day 01: June 28th
Draft Day 02: June 29th
Qualifying Offer Date: July 1st
Free Agency Opens: July 1st, 9am PST
Summer Development Camp: July 1st-4th
Player-Elected Arbitration: July 5th
Young Stars Classic Tournament: Sep. 13th-16th

Click to read more...

 

[alternate]

I like Dakota, but I'm not running to the bank to give him 6 years @ $3.95m or something similar. I haven't seen anything on term for him, and not all contracts that "start with a 3" are created equal. He's really not someone I'd be comfortable giving big term to.

Late breakout year in a contract year: didn't show up in shape and with that shooting percentage, this very well could be the high water mark for his career.

Speed isn't a driver of his effectiveness, but he's also not a guy who has any extra footspeed. He's approaching 30, what happens when he loses a step? Some concern for me that his game could slide in a hurry.

Maybe he learned a lesson about the importance of being in the best shape possible. Now he'll go full dawg in his offseasons and have many more years comparable to this one.

But we've also seen many examples of guys who get the big contract, and feel they can take their foot off the pedal. Considering DJ needed Tocchet's boot to get that pedal pushed in the first place, and in a contract year no less, I need more than "starts with a 3" before I call it a no brainer.

 

[Cancuks]

Things are way too quiet.

Every team is the same. Waiting for the buyout period to start, followed by a handful of trades leading up to the draft, and then madness on July 1.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

At the end of the day, it came out that Stone had still specifically requested to play with Stephenson because of what he adds to Stone's game with his speed, two-way play, puck distributing ability, etc.

I honestly don't give a shit about anecdotes like this. Johny Gaudreau wanted Columbus to sign Erik Gudbranson, it doesn't f***ing matter, it was a terrible move.

Lindholm had a much better year than Stephenson and I wouldn't give him his rumored deal either.

 

[StickShift]

You just know they are going all in for Jake Guentzel again. I'm just worried that the infatuation will cause them to miss out on other players "just like the trade deadline" again. I'll be mighty pissed if we lose out on Zadorov and Joshua who are rumored to be willing to take a bit of a home team discount to play on the Canucks, for a player that we aren't even guaranteed to get. Guentzel would be a huge addition if he signs with the Canucks on July 1st, but it seems as if Allvin is putting all of his eggs in one basket again with the infatuation of Guentzel. Zadorov and Joshua are very important players to this team, losing them both and the team chemistry and toughness go down the drain.

Dillon and Duhaime are fine replacements but both are a notch below these players imo.

I believe UFAs can begin negotiating with all clubs 24 hours after the Draft finishes and then they can sign contracts as of noon ET July 1st.

Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA)
UFA's are free to sign with any team, and their previous team receives no compensation. UFA's can begin meeting and interviewing with all teams on the day after the Entry Draft (or June 25 at the latest). They cannot sign contracts with new teams until July 1 at 12pm Eastern
Puckpedia
​

The Canucks will probably have a pretty good idea of where things stand with Guentzel or any other UFA before July 1st begins.

Let’s be honest—there is a wide array of indirect tampering going on all the time. Dhaliwal is maybe the most explicit version in the NHL.

 

[Jovofan]

How much would Conor Brown cost on the open market? Could he be a potential replacement for Garland if he happens to get moved?

 

[biturbo19]

The roster construction with Garland making $5m on the third line wing will always be compromised.

That contract was not signed at the time nor would it be signed today with the expectation that the player is on the third line.

It’s why I still think there is a real chance that Garland could be moved. It’s so much cap tied up in your third line for a player that doesn’t get PK or PP1 time.

It’s a weird dynamic to compromise your two scoring lines just to have an elite third line.

And yes, I recognize those among us who will say “But Garland and his line carried play and produced like a scoring line!”

That to me actually reflects more so just how constrained our scoring lines were with the lackluster winger options we had last season. What could they have accomplished with more than one legitimate top-six winger?

It's definitely a peculiar way of building a roster. I don't think it necessarily has to be a liability to have Garland at a "Top-6 price" carrying a 3rd line that can score like a Top-6 line at even strength. But i do think you have to be very deliberate about how much more $$$ you sink into that and what you expect to get out of it. Especially when push comes to shove with the Top-6 badly needing upgrades.

We effectively have...One single solitary quality Top-6 Winger. We should have at least 3, ideally 4. Even better if one or two of 'em had some utility as a Center in a pinch, or just for line mixing flexibility.

I also really think that in watching the games and looking at the numbers, Garland is clearly the play-driver on that unit. In some ways, he acts as the de facto "center" of a 3rd line. Where $4.9M isn't awful for that if the guy can drive a line to produce at a #2B Line rate. If it allows you to cut some costs on that "3rd line" at other spots in exchange.


It feels like they're basically trying to follow the blueprint of the Penguins back when they'd roll Sid Line / Geno Line / Hagelin-Bonino-Kessel line to feast on those matchups. That can work. Especially since Garland isn't "Kessel expensive" even if he's not quite as good either. But they do still need to find at least one other anchor piece for the Pettersson line...and a decent 3rd wheel for the line, even if they're content to rest on Suter/PDG types as third wheel to the JT-Boeser line.

I think the difference for me is Zadorov proved that he was an effective, at times dominant, player for us. He has proven that he works in our system, which mitigate a lot of the risk. Graves might fit on paper, but until he plays on the team, we just never know. Also, I'm not 100% commit to bring Z back "at all cost". I would definitely not give Z too much bonuses and make him buyout-proof, which is a problem with Graves' contract.

I assume Dillon comes in at a shorter term (2 years or less) at a low cap hit ($2.5m or less), so while he is older than Grave, Dillon would be much less risky at the preferred contract. If Dillon wants more, we can look elsewhere.

The only upside in the Graves deal is dumping Mik without attaching a sweetener. But to exchange a 2 years cap dump for a 5 years cap dump is just not enticing at all.

Fair concerns all around.

There's obviously a degree of comfort that comes from having actually seen a result materialize in that specific situation with Zadorov. But it's still plenty of risk of regression given his career as a whole.

Graves contract structure is definitely a factor. But honestly...if it blows up to the point of considering a buyout, you've already cratered things anyway. I don't realistically see how he'd be anything less than a solid higher end 3rd pairing anchor though. Which...we're already paying Soucy $3.25M to do, but is only $1.25M off the basically absolute "worst case" with Graves to me. But again...comes down to how you view the guy i guess. To me, he's pretty clearly a better...if less "calm" defenceman than Soucy. I also don't view Soucy as as completely "locked in" if you had to move him for 2025-26 to move Graves to that luxury 3rd pairing role as a "worst case scenario". Soucy's NTC softens massively, his salary is lesser, and i think you could move him with one year remaining easily enough.


The potential dumping of Mikheyev's money is big to me though. Even if it's trading for a longer commitment. The cost of moving him elsewise, is really painful. Not because it's not "worth it" just to clear the salary, but because that 2nd round pick or potentially more, is one of our few remaining trade chips to go after improvements elsewhere. Or at the next deadline.



With Dillon...1-2 years at $2.5M or less sounds nice. I'm not sure if he'll settle for that though. The market dictates...a guy making $3.9 AAV and $4M cash and coming off a decent enough season...is probably still going to be looking at multiple years at least $3.5M range, even at 34. But if he wants to take a discount to "come home" that's a lot more attractive proposition. If you can get him to sign an Ian Cole contract, that's fine...though maybe kind of lateral.

To be clear, my preference is to re-sign Hronek. Something in the mid-7s AAV long-term is in line with the market, and I hope they get there.

If they are forced to move Hronek, they will need to find two defensemen that can play in the top-four on the right-side, one of which who also needs to have some mobility and offensive upside. That's the situation I would look at Walker.

Zadorov is gone (or should be). Contract demands are just too crazy.

There isn't really anyone else on the UFA market that is RHD with some offense + mobility. There's Montour, but that contract will be an absolute disaster from Day 1.

Yeah. Moving Hronek almost has to be a multi-part trade to work for me. The UFA market has some guys who might be able to backfill those minutes with Hughes, but you're not getting a RD who both fills those minutes and brings the requisite puck-moving and offensive abilities to replace that.

It's where if they don't keep Hronek...they pretty much have to dive into the trade market to reconfigure the blueline again. Not sure what the prices look like or even availability, but Shea Theodore, Ryan Pulock, Rasmus Andersson come to mind as potential targets.

It'd be a lot of juggling.

I get what you're saying with the similarities between Graves and some other guys that Foote/Tocchet have managed to rehabilitate, but taking on the Graves contract willingly is just a massive risk. I don't think the risk/reward calculation is really worth it here. My evaluation of Graves is also likely lower than anyone on this board. I've never rated him in COL, NJ, or PIT obviously.

I don't want Zadorov back either, at any of the projected prices. It's being telegraphed that Dillon is coming to Vancouver and if he wants to take a team-friendly deal, I'd much rather go that route.

Ultimately, what you think of Graves is going to be the major fulcrum on that "risk/reward" calculation. If you hate him, and always have...then yeah, it's going to be next to impossible to balance that.

Personally, i think he's rounded into a reasonably solid #4/5 tweener at worst, with the potential to play an actual shutdown/matchup role with the right partner and system.

But then, i get the impression here that you don't particularly value that "type" of defenceman at all. As you also seem eager to move on from Zadorov. Which is fair, if the price gets as stupid as it sounds. But i'd bet the farm that you absolutely hate Trouba as well...for instance. So trying to make that scale balance is probably just never happening for you on the risk/reward aspect.

Before this season, Stephenson is someone I would have been interested in. But his play-driving numbers took a massive nosedive. And yes, so much of his game is built on his speed meshing with Stone, but per the NHL Edge data, his skating speed, speed bursts, and distance travelled took a step back this season...A guy like him that starts to lose a step becomes a far less valuable player.

I think it is telling VGK went out and got his replacement at the TDL and have no intentions of re-signing him.

Red flags to me.

I find the NHL Edge data more of an amusing novelty than any actual sort of evaluation tool tbh. It's convenient if it lines up to confirm something you're seeing visually while watching, but a lot of the data is just pure noise or peripheral nonsense.

I didn't necessarily feel like Stephenson "lost a step" in his skating last year. He's still got very fluid, easy speed. He's also not the type of skater that tends to "fall off a cliff" the same way, because of that.

I don't even really get what Vegas are doing overall. I'd take Stephenson @ $6M x 6 in a heartbeat over Hertl @ $6.75M x 6 as he's retained down to. But maybe Hertl is my Graves. I've never really cared for the guy. And at this point, the production is basically the same, same age...but he's a lot slower, less versatile, less reliable two-way player, and he's exactly the sort of clunky skater who will wake up one day as Loui Eriksson flying off a cliff with no landing in sight. Especially considering Hertl is coming off another major knee injury, with a long, multi-incident history of his knees falling apart already throughout his career.

 

[biturbo19]

How much would Conor Brown cost on the open market? Could he be a potential replacement for Garland if he happens to get moved?

Just because they're both named Connor/Conor doesn't make them remotely comparable. Any more than it makes either of them comparable to Connor McDavey or Kyle Connor.

Connor Brown is a very nearly disastrous signing by the Oilers trying to outsmart the cap system with an LTIR bonus loophole, and very nearly getting completely burned. Finally starting to come around a little bit at the exact moment everyone is focused in on the Oilers doesn't make him a good or effective player.

Maybe he's finally recovered...but even at his best, he's never been remotely similar to what Garland can do in terms of driving play on his own.

 

[arttk]

I'm feeling a little ignorant but when does that end?

Starts after the cup is awarded and it’s like a week?

 

[arttk]

I wonder if this board will erupt if we end July 1st with like 10m in cap and we go into the offseason with PA just waiting for deals

 

[Wisp]

I wonder if this board will erupt if we end July 1st with like 10m in cap and we go into the offseason with PA just waiting for deals

Wouldn't bother me. Not like this management group hasn't done great work in season.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

How much would Conor Brown cost on the open market? Could he be a potential replacement for Garland if he happens to get moved?

Not for Garland - Brown would be in the vein of Teddy Blueger. As good as Brown as been on the PK and fourth line for Edmonton in this playoff, he had a disastrous regular season on a terrible contract.

Around $1M as a 4C? He’d be a good get. But any more money and in any larger a role, I think it would be setting up for failure.

 

[Vector]

Not for Garland - Brown would be in the vein of Teddy Blueger. As good as Brown as been on the PK and fourth line for Edmonton in this playoff, he had a disastrous regular season on a terrible contract.

Around $1M as a 4C? He’d be a good get. But any more money and in any larger a role, I think it would be setting up for failure.

He’s not a centre.

 

[TruGr1t]

I wonder if this board will erupt if we end July 1st with like 10m in cap and we go into the offseason with PA just waiting for deals

Based on everything we’re hearing I’m not sure this isn’t a pretty likely outcome. The rumoured numbers aren’t working for most of these players in the cap structure, and they may prefer to let the dust settle and then go shopping. Only guy I still think they keep is Hronek, but I’m a lot less certain on that than I was a month ago.

 

[MS]

Before this season, Stephenson is someone I would have been interested in. But his play-driving numbers took a massive nosedive. And yes, so much of his game is built on his speed meshing with Stone, but per the NHL Edge data, his skating speed, speed bursts, and distance travelled took a step back this season...A guy like him that starts to lose a step becomes a far less valuable player.

I think it is telling VGK went out and got his replacement at the TDL and have no intentions of re-signing him.

Red flags to me.

This is spot on.

There are all kinds of red flags here that this is a declining player that would be a bad investment for a good team. But he's young enough, plays C, and has a good enough recent track record that *someone* will give him money and term, and he hasn't sunk far enough to be a cheap/smart short-term reclamation project for a good team, either.

Some bad team will give him 5 years/$25 million or something and quickly regret it. He's one of those textbook Eriksson/Backes/Neal/Ladd-type 30-31 y/o 50-60 point 2nd liners who always end up being bad UFA signings.

 

[God]

Not for Garland - Brown would be in the vein of Teddy Blueger. As good as Brown as been on the PK and fourth line for Edmonton in this playoff, he had a disastrous regular season on a terrible contract.

Around $1M as a 4C? He’d be a good get. But any more money and in any larger a role, I think it would be setting up for failure.

Like Mikheyev, he's spent the season recovering from an ACL injury and is picking it up again - he's been pretty noticeable getting shorthanded chances and open looks. A good buy-low candidate for sure, and doubly funny if we sign him because his cap hit is on the books for Edmonton next season.

 

[Nuckles]

Some bad team will give him 5 years/$25 million or something and quickly regret it. He's one of those textbook Eriksson/Backes/Neal/Ladd-type 30-31 y/o 50-60 point 2nd liners who always end up being bad UFA signings.

I think he's easily getting 6M+ considering the lack of center options in free agency.

But with that said, if he gets 5M/year it's still not as bad as the Eriksson/Backes/Ladd deals as those contracts would be the equivalent of 7.25M with an 88M salary cap.

 

[MS]

I think he's easily getting 6M+ considering the lack of center options in free agency.

But with that said, if he gets 5M/year it's still not as bad as the Eriksson/Backes/Ladd deals as those contracts would be the equivalent of 7.25M with an 88M salary cap.

True, although you're probably right that he'll get 6+.

Some team like Philly/Columbus/Washington who is dying for production at C will hand the bank to him.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

I honestly don't give a shit about anecdotes like this. Johny Gaudreau wanted Columbus to sign Erik Gudbranson, it doesn't f***ing matter, it was a terrible move.

Lindholm had a much better year than Stephenson and I wouldn't give him his rumored deal either.

A player wanting a buddy to come to a shitty team is different than a cerebral player on a cup winner wanting to play with a particular player.

I don't actually want us to pursue Chandler Stephenson, but I don't think your comparison is apt.

 

[BluesyShoes]

I believe UFAs can begin negotiating with all clubs 24 hours after the Draft finishes and then they can sign contracts as of noon ET July 1st.

​

Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA)​

UFA's are free to sign with any team, and their previous team receives no compensation. UFA's can begin meeting and interviewing with all teams on the day after the Entry Draft (or June 25 at the latest). They cannot sign contracts with new teams until July 1 at 12pm Eastern​

Puckpedia​

​

The Canucks will probably have a pretty good idea of where things stand with Guentzel or any other UFA before July 1st begins.

Let’s be honest—there is a wide array of indirect tampering going on all the time. Dhaliwal is maybe the most explicit version in the NHL.

I was under the impression they got rid of the UFA interview period back in 2020 when they extended the CBA (through to 2025-26.) I've actually been looking for a clear answer on this the past few days, because there is so much evidence that negotiations happen prior to July 1st. But per NHLPA.com:

In the MOU effective July 10, 2020:
"60. UFA Interview Period - The UFA Interview Period (CBA Exhibit 15) shall be eliminated."

 

[biturbo19]

This is spot on.

There are all kinds of red flags here that this is a declining player that would be a bad investment for a good team. But he's young enough, plays C, and has a good enough recent track record that *someone* will give him money and term, and he hasn't sunk far enough to be a cheap/smart short-term reclamation project for a good team, either.

Some bad team will give him 5 years/$25 million or something and quickly regret it. He's one of those textbook Eriksson/Backes/Neal/Ladd-type 30-31 y/o 50-60 point 2nd liners who always end up being bad UFA signings.

This is an absolutely nuts take on Chandler Stephenson to me.

Like, we're talking about the same guy right? I feel like we don't always agree on interpretations and valuation of players necessarily, but typically feel like we're at least talking about the same player in terms of current assessment at least.

But on this one...just...what?

Stephenson is still faster and a better skater than literally anyone on the Canucks roster outside of Quin Hughes. He's worlds apart from guys like Eriksson/Backes/Neal/Ladd-types who were all heavier, mediocre at best skating guys who fell off a cliff as their skating did (Dakota Joshua types). Those guys at their "peak" were all mediocre skaters at best. Those are the sort of guys whose technique can't carry them anymore and they fall off a cliff. When Stephenson's entire game is based around his absolutely upper tier skating ability and speed and he makes it easy. As that does start to fade, it could get ugly (like when Burrows legs fell off). But at the moment...he's still right up there.

He's got quickness, easy change of direction and acceleration...and he's got effortless long speed as well. He's got standout mobility in every way that matters, and hasn't lost it yet.


If i could sign Chandler Stephenson to $5M x 5 years...I'd sign 3 of them instantly. No backsies.


Realistically, he's not going to come near that cheap and probably with more term. But i'd still do it. I do agree that if he ends up with one of these teams that wants to sign him as a "savior" it's going to be a flop. He's a lot like Lindholm in that he's not a natural offensive catalyst. He's very similar, as a very responsible two-way "facilitator" type Center. Great complement to offensive play driving Wingers or Centers. Don't ask either to carry a line offensively.

 

[Vector]

I believe UFAs can begin negotiating with all clubs 24 hours after the Draft finishes and then they can sign contracts as of noon ET July 1st.

​

Unrestricted Free Agents (UFA)​

UFA's are free to sign with any team, and their previous team receives no compensation. UFA's can begin meeting and interviewing with all teams on the day after the Entry Draft (or June 25 at the latest). They cannot sign contracts with new teams until July 1 at 12pm Eastern​

Puckpedia​

​

The Canucks will probably have a pretty good idea of where things stand with Guentzel or any other UFA before July 1st begins.

Let’s be honest—there is a wide array of indirect tampering going on all the time. Dhaliwal is maybe the most explicit version in the NHL.

They removed this period. See @BluesyShoes post.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Stephenson is still faster and a better skater than literally anyone on the Canucks roster outside of Quin Hughes. He's worlds apart from guys like Eriksson/Backes/Neal/Ladd-types who were all heavier, mediocre at best skating guys who fell off a cliff as their skating did (Dakota Joshua types). Those guys at their "peak" were all mediocre skaters at best. Those are the sort of guys whose technique can't carry them anymore and they fall off a cliff. When Stephenson's entire game is based around his absolutely upper tier skating ability and speed and he makes it easy. As that does start to fade, it could get ugly (like when Burrows legs fell off). But at the moment...he's still right up there.

He's got quickness, easy change of direction and acceleration...and he's got effortless long speed as well. He's got standout mobility in every way that matters, and hasn't lost it yet.


If i could sign Chandler Stephenson to $5M x 5 years...I'd sign 3 of them instantly. No backsies.


Realistically, he's not going to come near that cheap and probably with more term. But i'd still do it. I do agree that if he ends up with one of these teams that wants to sign him as a "savior" it's going to be a flop. He's a lot like Lindholm in that he's not a natural offensive catalyst. He's very similar, as a very responsible two-way "facilitator" type Center. Great complement to offensive play driving Wingers or Centers. Don't ask either to carry a line offensively.

Strong skaters are some of the worst candidates to age well because if their mobility degrades even a little they lose their competetive advantage. Jason Zucker is a great example of this. Meanwhile, a guy like Joe Pavelski was a slug his whole career and a top line player until age 39.

Stephenson may still be an objectively good skater but his two-way game completely cratered. That Vegas is kicking him to the curb is an obvious red flag. Hell, we already went through this with Nate Schmidt.

 

[MS]

This is an absolutely nuts take on Chandler Stephenson to me.

Like, we're talking about the same guy right? I feel like we don't always agree on interpretations and valuation of players necessarily, but typically feel like we're at least talking about the same player in terms of current assessment at least.

But on this one...just...what?

Stephenson is still faster and a better skater than literally anyone on the Canucks roster outside of Quin Hughes. He's worlds apart from guys like Eriksson/Backes/Neal/Ladd-types who were all heavier, mediocre at best skating guys who fell off a cliff as their skating did (Dakota Joshua types). Those guys at their "peak" were all mediocre skaters at best. Those are the sort of guys whose technique can't carry them anymore and they fall off a cliff. When Stephenson's entire game is based around his absolutely upper tier skating ability and speed and he makes it easy. As that does start to fade, it could get ugly (like when Burrows legs fell off). But at the moment...he's still right up there.

He's got quickness, easy change of direction and acceleration...and he's got effortless long speed as well. He's got standout mobility in every way that matters, and hasn't lost it yet.


If i could sign Chandler Stephenson to $5M x 5 years...I'd sign 3 of them instantly. No backsies.


Realistically, he's not going to come near that cheap and probably with more term. But i'd still do it. I do agree that if he ends up with one of these teams that wants to sign him as a "savior" it's going to be a flop. He's a lot like Lindholm in that he's not a natural offensive catalyst. He's very similar, as a very responsible two-way "facilitator" type Center. Great complement to offensive play driving Wingers or Centers. Don't ask either to carry a line offensively.

I don't buy that good skaters age better than bad skaters. Sometimes they do ... and sometimes their game is so built around skating that when the skating falls off the whole game falls off a cliff. Chris Higgins is a guy for us who had some Stephenson-esque qualities and then his skating lost a step around age 30 and his career ended in a major hurry. Same with Jannik Hansen.

I was a big Stephenson fan but he really hit a wall this year and didn't look like the same player as before, and I'm always terrified of these 60-point types hitting UFA at age 30 or 31. Maybe it was just a Cup hangover? But he isn't a guy I'd feel very comfortable signing.

 

[biturbo19]

Strong skaters are some of the worst candidates to age well because if their mobility degrades even a little they lose their competetive advantage. Jason Zucker is a great example of this. Meanwhile, a guy like Joe Pavelski was a slug his whole career and a top line player until age 39.

Stephenson may still be an objectively good skater but his two-way game completely cratered. That Vegas is kicking him to the curb is an obvious red flag. Hell, we already went through this with Nate Schmidt.

It's really more about the type of skater they are. There's a lot more nuance to it than that.

Did Lidstrom or Niedermayer really "fall off" as they aged? Is Crosby aging poorly? Guys who skate and generate easy power fare pretty well.

Even Zucker...he's falling off, but he's still playing and scoring well into his 30s. He was never as fluid though. Much more of a brute force speedster. Guys like Pavelski occasionally succeed, Holmstrom, Brunette, etc. as guys whose entire game is basically stationary goal-scoring in the first place. But there are far more of those who fail out with age than success stories.


Injuries play a huge role as well. But in general...


It's the guys who have to work extra hard for it, like Eriksson/Backes/Neal/Ladd who age particularly badly. The guys who aren't great skaters and then work their way into being decent, then fall back again. And it's the guys who need every single step they've got to get in on the forecheck and play physical who age like milk. The Lucic, Dakota Joshua types. When they lose half a step...they can't play their game anymore. They just chase the play around in futility, acting fake tough.

If nothing else, Stephenson plays with far more natural momentum in his game. Same way "Good Petey" masks his shitty skating when he's playing with confidence and anticipation.



I'm open to the idea that Stephenson's "two way game" somehow "cratered" if it can be explained. But i don't really buy what i've seen, and i attribute it more to situation factors. I don't see a player who just forgot how to play defensively or got substantially slower suddenly. I see different deployments and massively disrupted team chemistry issues as a bigger factor.

 

[biturbo19]

I don't buy that good skaters age better than bad skaters. Sometimes they do ... and sometimes their game is so built around skating that when the skating falls off the whole game falls off a cliff. Chris Higgins is a guy for us who had some Stephenson-esque qualities and then his skating lost a step around age 30 and his career ended in a major hurry. Same with Jannik Hansen.

I was a big Stephenson fan but he really hit a wall this year and didn't look like the same player as before, and I'm always terrified of these 60-point types hitting UFA at age 30 or 31. Maybe it was just a Cup hangover? But he isn't a guy I'd feel very comfortable signing.

Absolutely. It's not a black and white thing. When you've got guys whose entire game is "skate fast in a straight line and score" they can age very poorly as well. Sometimes those skaters run into more injury problems as they age too. And if that's the only thing they have to their game...it becomes like a lightswitch.

But by and large, it's guys like Dakota Joshua who have clawed and fought and struggled to drag themselves up to "decent skater" and suddenly became more effective, who age the absolute worst. That's also like a lightswitch when they lose that half step and are suddenly just late for every single hit, late getting to the net for goals, late getting to a lane on the PK, late for literally everything because they just cannot afford to lose a step.


Guys like Stephenson, the way he plays is definitely more conducive to a longer more effective career at Center, where he can continue to play in bigger arcs and puts less stop/start pressure on things. But his skating is just so much easier and his game is so much less built around those 0-60mph drag race from a standstill moments. It's built around a lot more 30-60mph moments using anticipation. Which is where his skating is still miles above any Canucks Forward and he's a very smart player.