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

[Michel Beauchamp]

I think the ducks missed out on moving stoner along with Anderson.

That would have been my condition to move Anderson. Could have opted to pass on Pittsburgh's first rounder to one of the second rounders the leafs acquired.

It also makes the ducks acquisition of Bernier at his full cap hit puzzling? Bernier was a luxury add. They needed to resolve Lindholm and Rackell. And move stoner before getting Bernier.

Someone else probably has already answered that, but...

The Ducks don't really care about cap hits.

They do care, however, about money spent.

The Bernier trade was delayed till after July 1st so that the Leafs had to pay the signing bonus due that day.

His cap hit might be $4.15M, but the Ducks only have to spend $2.15M.

 

[ThatSaid]

Did you seriously just compare Stoner to Rozsival? **** me, the way people use these hero charts is ****ing ridiculous.

Yeah buddy, all you need to compare players is a ****ing chart. Forget the fact that Rozsival is 6 years older, plays a completely style of game and is well passed the age you'd expect any NHL player to be.

I just picked my team's #7 d-man and threw up the chart. Charts are made with stats. Stats are the result of the actions of the player on the ice.

I've seen Stoner play. He shouldn't be in the league. He's a career AHLer on an NHL roster. The Rozsival comparison was thrown up to dispute the claims that Stoner is "only about 1 million overpaid." That's ********, and everyone knows it. If Anaheim fans can't understand that using only the eye-test, well, there are some stats for you.

As for Rozsival being 6 years older, so what? Are you implying that Stoner is not a negative asset? You think a team wants him for his playing ability? What team in the league takes Stoner for two years at 3.25 million instead of Rozsival at 600k? That was my point.

Let's put the trade proposals aside for a second. What do you think Clayton Stoner would make this year if he was a UFA? Whatever number you think he'd get, take his current contract, subtract what you think he's actually worth, and that's how much he's overpaid.

I say he's worth about 700k-900k AAV in the UFA market, if he found a team. I'd argue there are better d-men currently without a contract though.

 

[mytduxfan*]

I just picked my team's #7 d-man and threw up the chart. Charts are made with stats. Stats are the result of the actions of the player on the ice.

I've seen Stoner play. He shouldn't be in the league. He's a career AHLer on an NHL roster. The Rozsival comparison was thrown up to dispute the claims that Stoner is "only about 1 million overpaid." That's ********, and everyone knows it. If Anaheim fans can't understand that using only the eye-test, well, there are some stats for you.

As for Rozsival being 6 years older, so what? Are you implying that Stoner is not a negative asset? You think a team wants him for his playing ability? What team in the league takes Stoner for two years at 3.25 million instead of Rozsival at 600k? That was my point.

Let's put the trade proposals aside for a second. What do you think Clayton Stoner would make this year if he was a UFA? Whatever number you think he'd get, take his current contract, subtract what you think he's actually worth, and that's how much he's overpaid.

I say he's worth about 700k-900k AAV in the UFA market, if he found a team. I'd argue there are better d-men currently without a contract though.

You're talking pure ass gas. Stoner is no worse then Nick Holden. Nick Holden is another oversized, physical, SAH D-man. He's getting paid 1.65M, is only 2 years younger then Stoner and was just moved to NYR for a 4th round pick <------- LOOK! No top prospect attached. At worst, Stoner is overpaid by half his contract. That's 1.625M. Ok, it's not 1M, but it's not 2.35-2.55M either.

Anyway, my point is that you can't just throw up a stupid stat chart (that you're totally misusing and over-reliant on btw - those numbers are only an indicator) and say that those two players are equal in value and should have the same contract. Value and contracts are determined based on multiple factors that you're just straight up ignoring. I get the point you're trying to make, but you're failing miserable using the logic you've applied.

 

[Jumptheshark]

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

Would anyone be willing to take this?

I do not think it would be a small retention for a guy who would be number 6 on bad teams and 7th d on good teams. If the ducks want to move Stoner they may need totoss in a good prospect

Panthers tossed in a very good prospect to get phoenix to take Ballard of their hands for a second and third--

 

[ThatSaid]

You're talking pure ass gas. Stoner is no worse then Nick Holden. Nick Holden is another oversized, physical, SAH D-man. He's getting paid 1.65M, is only 2 years younger then Stoner and was just moved to NYR for a 4th round pick <------- LOOK! No top prospect attached. At worst, Stoner is overpaid by half his contract. That's 1.625M. Ok, it's not 1M, but it's not 2.35-2.55M either.

Anyway, my point is that you can't just throw up a stupid stat chart (that you're totally misusing and over-reliant on btw - those numbers are only an indicator) and say that those two players are equal in value and should have the same contract. Value and contracts are determined based on multiple factors that you're just straight up ignoring. I get the point you're trying to make, but you're failing miserable using the logic you've applied.

My initial "eye-test" reaction to you comparing Stoner and Holden was "Holy **** no!." Interestingly enough, we have stats that compare players. Forget the fact that Stoner was probably the most cursed player by every Anaheim fan for at least the past year. Fine. Lets look at empirical evidence.

Nick Holden: ATOI:21:53, 22 points, 6G, 16A +/-: -1
Clayton Stoner: ATOI: 15:22, 6 points, 1G, 5A, +/-: 4
Michal Rozsival: ATOI: 16:10, 13 points, 1G, 12A, +/-: 3

Hmmm, who is the better comparison? Is it Holden? Or is it Rozsival.

Here is the HERO for Stoner vs. Holden:

http://public.tableau.com/shared/9HDNTZ6MX?:display_count=yes

Holden is the far superior player. I think the playing ability of Stoner is much more comparable to Rozsival regardless of playstyle or age. Stoner is certainly not a player who can play top-4 minutes competently, as Holden has.

So, again, I assert that he is probably overpaid by about 2.5 million, and will be impossible to move without significant assets going the other way, much like the Bickell deal.

 

[mytduxfan*]

My initial "eye-test" reaction to you comparing Stoner and Holden was "Holy **** no!." Interestingly enough, we have stats that compare players. Forget the fact that Stoner was probably the most cursed player by every Anaheim fan for at least the past year. Fine. Lets look at empirical evidence.

Nick Holden: ATOI:21:53, 22 points, 6G, 16A +/-: -1
Clayton Stoner: ATOI: 15:22, 6 points, 1G, 5A, +/-: 4
Michal Rozsival: ATOI: 16:10, 13 points, 1G, 12A, +/-: 3

Hmmm, who is the better comparison? Is it Holden? Or is it Rozsival.

Here is the HERO for Stoner vs. Holden:

http://public.tableau.com/shared/9HDNTZ6MX?:display_count=yes

Holden is the far superior player. I think the playing ability of Stoner is much more comparable to Rozsival regardless of playstyle or age. Stoner is certainly not a player who can play top-4 minutes competently, as Holden has.

So, again, I assert that he is probably overpaid by about 2.5 million, and will be impossible to move without significant assets going the other way, much like the Bickell deal.

This is pure ass-gas. I'm bored of dealing with people who judge players based on a selection of numbers given on a chart.

Have a good day.

 

[SupremeTeam16]

My initial "eye-test" reaction to you comparing Stoner and Holden was "Holy **** no!." Interestingly enough, we have stats that compare players. Forget the fact that Stoner was probably the most cursed player by every Anaheim fan for at least the past year. Fine. Lets look at empirical evidence.

Nick Holden: ATOI:21:53, 22 points, 6G, 16A +/-: -1
Clayton Stoner: ATOI: 15:22, 6 points, 1G, 5A, +/-: 4
Michal Rozsival: ATOI: 16:10, 13 points, 1G, 12A, +/-: 3

Hmmm, who is the better comparison? Is it Holden? Or is it Rozsival.

Here is the HERO for Stoner vs. Holden:

http://public.tableau.com/shared/9HDNTZ6MX?:display_count=yes

Holden is the far superior player. I think the playing ability of Stoner is much more comparable to Rozsival regardless of playstyle or age. Stoner is certainly not a player who can play top-4 minutes competently, as Holden has.

So, again, I assert that he is probably overpaid by about 2.5 million, and will be impossible to move without significant assets going the other way, much like the Bickell deal.

I believe most unbiased people would agree with your assessment of these players but at the end of the day we're splitting hairs between 6-7 defensemen.

The fact is that similar or better players are sitting at home without a contract right now, who could be had near league minimum on a 1 year deal. There are better, younger options available and that fact right there doesn't make Stoner overpaid it makes him a pure cap dump.

Add in the fact that GM's know BM is in a bind, recent similar transactions of cap dumps and no GM in their right mind is going to take Stoner without extracting something worthwhile.

 

[XXIV97]

You're not going to get any teams to take on that contract by just giving them a third round pick. Did you see how much it costed Chicago and Florida to get rid of Bolland's and Bickel's contract? It costed the Florida Lawson Crouse, and it costed Chicago Teuvo Teräväinen, so you're looking to give up a decent prospect to get rid of his contract.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Ference who cost nothing to the Ducks plus a 3rd for Larsson and Stoner

Terrible for the Ducks just terrible then we are giving Oilers a good defenseman prospect no way in hell.

You're not going to get any teams to take on that contract by just giving them a third round pick. Did you see how much it costed Chicago and Florida to get rid of Bolland's and Bickel's contract? It costed the Florida Lawson Crouse, and it costed Chicago Teuvo Teräväinen, so you're looking to give up a decent prospect to get rid of his contract.

Stoner makes less then Bolland and has 1 less year. Bickell was in the AHL because of how bad he was. Stoner shouldn't cost the same kinda thing to get rid of especially if we retain some.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Once Horton and Robidas go on LTIR we are going to have some money to spend so why not something like

To Toronto Stoner 2017 2nd

To Ducks Hunwick

You save 2 million we gain a 2nd

 

[Ducks in a row]

Once Horton and Robidas go on LTIR we are going to have some money to spend so why not something like

To Toronto Stoner 2017 2nd

To Ducks Hunwick

You save 2 million we gain a 2nd

I think I would do it but need to think more about it.

 

[Paul4587]

The most I'd give up is one of Nattinen/the 2nd we get from Toronto next season plus another mid round pick for a 7th. If no other team would take that I would keep him and look at moving someone else.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

The most I'd give up is one of Nattinen/the 2nd we get from Toronto next season plus another mid round pick for a 7th. If no other team would take that I would keep him and look at moving someone else.

Based on what you said

You'd give up Stoner a 2nd and another pick like a 4th or 5th for a 7th?

Would you do Hunwick and a 6th

For Stoner a 2nd and a 4th?

 

[Opak]

Once Horton and Robidas go on LTIR we are going to have some money to spend so why not something like

To Toronto Stoner 2017 2nd

To Ducks Hunwick

You save 2 million we gain a 2nd

As a Ducks fan, I'd do this. Leafs get the 2nd rounder back from the Andersen deal, Ducks get to unload Stoner's contract. The Ducks-Leafs trades put together would look like this:

Andersen
Stoner
Conditional 2017 pick

for

2016 1st (Sam Steel)
Bernier (no cap retention)
Hunwick

 

[DavidBL]

As a Ducks fan, I'd do this. Leafs get the 2nd rounder back from the Andersen deal, Ducks get to unload Stoner's contract. The Ducks-Leafs trades put together would look like this:

Andersen
Stoner
Conditional 2017 pick

for

2016 1st (Sam Steel)
Bernier (no cap retention)
Hunwick

I'd second this.

 

[Mark Kandy]

Montreal should go after him, apparently he's not bad to hunt bears and we're having a great rivalry with the Bruins!

 

[Hammertyme]

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.

Maybe fans should be fans not GM s

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

If Ducks need cap:

The Ducks need cap and they seem to have lots Dmen. Therefore, trade Stoner to any team that will take him. NO return, maybe a 7th rounder.

Teams with cap that might fit Stoner.....Arizona, NJD and maybe Jets.

The key for Ducks is not to take any money back in salary. So a "giveaway" might be their only option.

 

[Connor]

Did you think nobody would notice you threw Rakell in there? I wouldn't do that for either Montour or Rakell alone.

LMAO rakell just in there. You sure you don't want Theodore or larsson too?

If taking on Bolland who is LTIR gets you Crouse, taking on Stoner DEFINITELY gets you Montour AT LEAST.

... Probably would cost more

 

[WhatTheDuck]

If taking on Bolland who is LTIR gets you Crouse, taking on Stoner DEFINITELY gets you Montour AT LEAST.

... Probably would cost more

Forgetting that picks went back the other way in the Crouse deal, and that Bolland's owed much more money per year and total.

 

[lindholmie]

If taking on Bolland who is LTIR gets you Crouse, taking on Stoner DEFINITELY gets you Montour AT LEAST.

... Probably would cost more

putting montour is ehh itself. that guy added montour and a young 40 point C

 

[broman]

As a Ducks fan, I'd do this. Leafs get the 2nd rounder back from the Andersen deal, Ducks get to unload Stoner's contract. The Ducks-Leafs trades put together would look like this:

Andersen
Stoner
Conditional 2017 pick

for

2016 1st (Sam Steel)
Bernier (no cap retention)
Hunwick

Which is what should've been done right away. Still time to set it right though.

 

[Halla]

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

Would anyone be willing to take this?

ducks retaining half? a team might give up a 7th.
ducks retaining just 15-25%? expect to lose a top prospect

 

[ManofSteel55]

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

Would anyone be willing to take this?

The Ducks would likely have to pay someone to take Stoner at this point. Teams can see that they are desperate for cap space.

 

[mytduxfan*]

ducks retaining half? a team might give up a 7th.
ducks retaining just 15-25%? expect to lose a top prospect

This is the way I see it.