Proposal: Stoner (maybe small retention) 3rd round (maybe 2nd) for 7th or future considerations

[Ducks in a row]

Stoner contract is $3,250,000 each season through 2017-18

Would anyone be willing to take this?

Click to read more...

 

[Leafs87]

Sure for lupul

 

[Avs44]

Chicago had to give up TT to get rid of one year of Bickell at an average just 750k more than Stoner's. Nobody is touching multiple years of that contract for a #6/7 defensman for just a third round pick.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Sure for lupul

Since when is Lupul a 7th round pick or future considerations? Ducks are looking to unload Stoner without taking a player back.

 

[Pennaduck]

Chicago had to give up TT to get rid of one year of Bickell at an average just 750k more than Stoner's. Nobody is touching multiple years of that contract for a #6/7 defensman for just a third round pick.

It's two seasons - this one and next. The Ducks may be able to retain half a million too. We did for Maroon, so it could be an option.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Chicago had to give up TT to get rid of one year of Bickell at an average just 750k more than Stoner's. Nobody is touching multiple years of that contract for a #6/7 defensman for just a third round pick.

Stoner > Bickell. At least Stoner is a NHL quality defenseman still unlike Bickell who was so bad with Chicago this past season that they sent him to the AHL. Stoner is only slightly overpayed Bickell is totally overpayed.

 

[Ducks in a row]

It's two seasons - this one and next. The Ducks may be able to retain half a million too. We did for Maroon, so it could be an option.

Yea we could retain a small amount. A veteran 3rd pair physical defenseman isn't so bad for a team to add.

 

[AvsGuy]

Since when is Lupul a 7th round pick or future considerations? Ducks are looking to unload Stoner without taking a player back.

yeah bro. I'm sure they are.

 

[Ducks in a row]

yeah bro. I'm sure they are.

What is so funny? Your acting like Stoner totally sucks he is a decent 3rd pair defenseman just a little overpayed and we could retain a small amount we shouldn't need to take another player back.

 

[Pennaduck]

Yea we could retain a small amount. A veteran 3rd pair physical defenseman isn't so bad for a team to add.

No, its not a bad thing to add at all if you have the cap space. Stoner at 2.5 million or 2.75 million is still overpaid, but not by much. If a team was going to sign a veteran 3rd pair defenseman of his abilities they'd probably play 1.5 to 2 million for him anyway, so essentially this is an opportunity to buy a pick and add a serviceable depth player.

I don't see it happening though until the season is underway and teams start dealing with injuries. That is when his value will be highest (not that it is all that high). Rosters seem pretty set in terms of depth players and there are still a few UFAs out there that could be had for potentially less money, like Kris Russell for example.

 

[Avs44]

Stoner > Bickell. At least Stoner is a NHL quality defenseman still unlike Bickell who was so bad with Chicago this past season that they sent him to the AHL. Stoner is only slightly overpayed Bickell is totally overpayed.

He's a #6 defensman. He's not slightly overpaid, he's overpaid by several millions. He should be making 33% of his current salary, that's not "slightly." If a team wants that, they can pick up a superior Kyle Quincey for cheap, or get Russel who's significantly better, etc. If you want other comparables, Schenn is making two million less, and Schultz is basically making two million less. Any team who wanted a bottom pairing defender could have had one of them, and there are still others, as I mentioned above, who will be cheaper and better. Demers, who got the biggest defense contract in FA and who is vastly better, is making 1.25 more only. Think about that. Stoner's deal is terrible, it can't be reconciled. If a team was willing to take him, I think it would have already happened. Everyone has their rosters basically set, there are other defenders available in FA for less money to plug gaps / PTO's, and I doubt anyone is in a rush to help Anaheim be better.

 

[TLEH]

as a fan of a team that deals with salary cap like a 2nd job, teams just don't take on salary, without giving at least some back. Even getting rid of semi-productive players takes getting players back.

 

[Clamshells]

What is so funny? Your acting like Stoner totally sucks he is a decent 3rd pair defenseman just a little overpayed and we could retain a small amount we shouldn't need to take another player back.

The problem is that every team has a full defensive roster currently. Anyone who takes on Stoner is going to have to find a way to move someone else, and then you're just pushing a new problem onto them. All those types of players that would get moved are making 1+ mill on their own, so if you can't take that one back, teams are sacrificing more cap than the value they are getting back.

 

[Ducks in a row]

He's a #6 defensman. He's not slightly overpaid, he's overpaid by several millions. He should be making 33% of his current salary, that's not "slightly." If a team wants that, they can pick up a superior Kyle Quincey for cheap, or get Russel who's significantly better, etc. If you want other comparables, Schenn is making two million less, and Schultz is basically making two million less. Any team who wanted a bottom pairing defender could have had one of them, and there are still others, as I mentioned above, who will be cheaper and better. Demers, who got the biggest defense contract in FA and who is vastly better, is making 1.25 more only. Think about that. Stoner's deal is terrible, it can't be reconciled. If a team was willing to take him, I think it would have already happened. Everyone has their rosters basically set, there are other defenders available in FA for less money to plug gaps / PTO's, and I doubt anyone is in a rush to help Anaheim be better.

So then if you think he is so much overpayed what would you think it would take for Ducks to get rid of him? Don't say we would have to take back someone who has a terrible contract that makes more.

 

[TLEH]

So then if you think he is so much overpayed what would you think it would take for Ducks to get rid of him? Don't say we would have to take back someone who has a terrible contract that makes more.

the team has to pay him this year and next year. Its going to take a valuable asset.

 

[Ducks in a row]

the team has to pay him this year and next year. Its going to take a valuable asset.

Like what?

 

[Pennaduck]

He's a #6 defensman. He's not slightly overpaid, he's overpaid by several millions. He should be making 33% of his current salary, that's not "slightly." If a team wants that, they can pick up a superior Kyle Quincey for cheap, or get Russel who's significantly better, etc. If you want other comparables, Schenn is making two million less, and Schultz is basically making two million less. Any team who wanted a bottom pairing defender could have had one of them, and there are still others, as I mentioned above, who will be cheaper and better. Demers, who got the biggest defense contract in FA and who is vastly better, is making 1.25 more only. Think about that. Stoner's deal is terrible, it can't be reconciled. If a team was willing to take him, I think it would have already happened. Everyone has their rosters basically set, there are other defenders available in FA for less money to plug gaps / PTO's, and I doubt anyone is in a rush to help Anaheim be better.

I agree with all of this, but I don't think you are considering the value of the pick involved. What is a 3rd round pick worth on the trade market? or a second? is that worth it for a team to take two years of his contract. If the Ducks offered Stoner with 750,000 retained, plus a 2nd round pick, for a nothing prospect or a 7th rounder, would a team play be ok with paying 2.5 million for him, knowing that a comparable depth defenseman is probably going to be 1.5 to 2 million anyway? That is buying a pick essentially. So depending on what you see that value of a 2nd or 3rd round pick it could be worth it.

 

[Weezeric]

The Bickell deal is the standard. It might take something like a stoner and a larsson for a 3rd type deal. Ducks are in a tough spot

 

[Ducks in a row]

The Bickell deal is the standard. It might take something like a stoner and a larsson for a 3rd type deal. Ducks are in a tough spot

Stoner makes less and we can retain some and he is better then Bickell who was so bad to be sent to the AHL.

 

[John Pedro]

Stoner + Theodore/Larsson/Montour for Reid Boucher + 2rd

 

[dracom]

The Bickell deal is the standard. It might take something like a stoner and a larsson for a 3rd type deal. Ducks are in a tough spot

I'd do that in a heartbeat, granted I'm not as high on Larsson as others are.

 

[AvsGuy]

Stoner's contract is somewhere in the ballpark of the inexplicable contracts that were handed out to Deryk Engelland and Brad Stuart - he's making upwards of $3 million a year for absolutely no reason, and in this salary cap atmosphere, that is nearly unmovable.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

There will be a bunch of I'll advised posts in this thread claiming Stoner is garbage - he isn't. He's a very steady, physical bottom pairing guy who happens to be paid about 750k - 1M more than he should.

He was a great fit as a partner for Vatanen while the latter was getting his feet under him at the NHL level and the two often took on upwards of 20 mins per game.

If a team has the cap space, and has a young puck mover in need of some insulation on their third pair, this is the perfect fit. As a bonus they likely get paid some sort of solid asset to take him on due to the contract.

Once again, if you're coming into this thread to make a generic comment about Stoner being bad, you're just telling me you haven't watched him play. He's been exactly as advertised when the Ducks signed him.

 

[AvsGuy]

There will be a bunch of I'll advised posts in this thread claiming Stoner is garbage - he isn't. He's a very steady, physical bottom pairing guy who happens to be paid about 750k - 1M more than he should.

He was a great fit as a partner for Vatanen while the latter was getting his feet under him at the NHL level and the two often took on upwards of 20 mins per game.

If a team has the cap space, and has a young puck mover in need of some insulation on their third pair, this is the perfect fit. As a bonus they likely get paid some sort of solid asset to take him on due to the contract.

Once again, if you're coming into this thread to make a generic comment about Stoner being bad, you're just telling me you haven't watched him play. He's been exactly as advertised when the Ducks signed him.

a) If he's a great fit as a partner for Vatanen and can play upwards of 20 mins a game, why are Ducks fans trying to get rid of him? Ohhhhhh right, because

b) It doesn't matter if you're good or bad when you're 50-75% overpaid.

 

[Morgs]

I'd do that in a heartbeat, granted I'm not as high on Larsson as others are.

If Larsson is available, the Leafs are all over this.