Rewind back to the summer of 2024. If we had offered Necas for Stank straight up Dallas fans probably say no. Stank was coming off of a terrific end of season and playoff performance. Necas actually had a really solid playoff but still frustrated with inconsistent play and turnovers in the playoffs, and had a super underwhelming 23-24 regular season. Drury was a dime a dozen bottom 6er - a 4C on a good team who is good defensively but offers not much physicality or offense. We essentially move on from Necas to Stankoven but have all of Stank's team control (including one more ELC year). As a bonus perhaps for taking on a much less proven player, we also swap a 2nd+3rd+4th for 1st+1st+3rd+3rd. Asset-wise, that's about as good as you can expect.
In the Tulsky GM school, we sold high on Necas - I don't think he would ever have as much value as he did after the first 30 games this year. We sold probably on the highest month he had had so far since he was drafted. We also bought low on Stankoven - Stank just turned 22 and was considered untradeable 6 months ago. Asset wise this is pretty good management. It also avoids the possibility of locking in $13.5M for a 29-37 year old Rantanen who scores 60 points and is bad defensively.
Whether he is a future Jarvis on a snakebit streak, or will never put together, time will tell. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt because he is so young. For what it's worth, Stank is a little older than Jackson Blake and has 7 more points this year. I'd consider Blake to be virtually untradeable given how well he has looked on the ice.
Fit-wise, this is also good asset management. I thought Rants' style would fit the team perfectly, but clearly his actual on-ice play this year proved me wrong. He could surely have turned it around, but maybe he wouldn't. Hall hasn't scored a bunch for us, but he has been a more visibly motivated, dangerous, and committed player. I'd rather lean on that kind of playstyle in the playoffs. Stankoven should be more of the same.
I think it was
@bleedgreen who said in the summer that he'd rather outright have a team of Rod-first players than get the skill guys who don't fit in. Seems like this string of moves puts us more in that direction.
This summer we'll have 37 million bucks to play with. We can easily fit in Marner. Hell, we could buy two Mitch Marners and not look back. (Honestly, Mitch doesn't fit our needs but I think he'd fit our playstyle perfectly if he makes it to UFA.) But we also have to be really careful. We now have a shitton of guys who *could* be gamechangers for us after their ELCs: Jackson Blake, Alex Nikishin, Logan Stankoven, Bradly Nadeau, Scott Morrow, Nikita Artamov. That collection of quality young players I'd put up against any contender in the league. But you have to be careful. If we lock into big boy contracts for 30-37 years for too many guys, you won't be able to afford all your young talent down the line. Bottom line, the biggest mistakes are often ones you make where you feel like you can't lose. I trust management to spend like gangbusters, and I also trust them to still be good decision-makers.
