Matt Stajan is hated in Leafsnation because he is not Mats Sundin. But so what? He has been my favourite player since his days on St. John's. He got 55 points last season, that's pretty good for an defense-first player. Just because the management has not brought in a "legit #1" centre, doesn't make it Stajan's responsibility to do so.
Keep him. He's a Leaf.
I don't know where people got it in their heads that he's so competent defensively. He's often out of position, gives the puck away a ton and hardly ever makes those great backchecking plays that you need from a top defensive centre. He's better than Grabovski in that respect, but that doesn't make him good.
He's a slightly above average player in the defensive side of things. I'd say he's much better offensively than he is in his own zone.
Edited: He's currently worst amongst Leaf forwards in plus minus with -6.
I don't know where people got it in their heads that he's so competent defensively. He's often out of position, gives the puck away a ton and hardly ever makes those great backchecking plays that you need from a top defensive centre. He's better than Grabovski in that respect, but that doesn't make him good.
He's a slightly above average player in the defensive side of things. I'd say he's much better offensively than he is in his own zone.
Edited: He's currently worst amongst Leaf forwards in plus minus with -6.
Stajan can be absolutely dominant defensively. If he's on a good day. But he's so goddamned inconsistent. That's my biggest problem with him, his inconsistency in all aspects of his game. Some guys will go through really bad spells from time to time, but will always work hard(ie, Grabo), but Stajan will have stretches where he really doesn't seem like he gives two *****... and that's why he's been benched this season and last.
On point #1, I think Stajan got to that level of production by getting scads more icetime than he would on a team with a legitimate top line. Given his icetime and opportunities, a true offensive talent should have hit the 75+ point mark - even with poor linemates. Play Stajan a more reasonable 15-16 minutes a night, and you'll see his production around the 40 point mark.
As you point out, that's still a useful player, which is why he'd be of value to other teams, hence the calls to trade him while his value is possibly inflated by getting more icetime than warranted.
For my money, I don't think he needs to be moved, but I do think one of Stajan or Grabovski needs to go, and there are arguments to be made on both sides. I'd just as soon keep Stajan and move Grabovski, if the return was comparable, but I'm not the one talking to other GMs, so I don't know what Burkie's hearing. I suspect Stajan will be the one to go since there's no long-term commitment there, and teams close to the cap for this year would have an easier time fitting him in.
Stajan plays 18 minutes a night, with 2 of them being on the PK. You make it sound like he's playing 25 minutes every night.
You continue to ignore the fact that in most games he's a non-factor and for a player who is supposed to be solid defensively he often makes big mistakes. It doesn't matter how many points he gets. On a team like this, players get the opportunity to score more than they normally would. The reason people continue to refute his statistics as significant is because he plays sub-par to average hockey most of the time. He has a good game maybe 40% of the time.
We need more than that from our 2nd line centre. He doesn't have to be a point per game player, but he does have to be a good player on most nights.
You've got to be kidding me.
Why do you think Stajan made the NHL at age 19 out of nowhere under a hall of fame coach?
because he was soft, stupid, and lazy?
His work ethic and smarts is exactly why he made the league under Pat Quinn at age 19, and it's why he's stuck so long, and continued to improve every year in the league, and continued to earn the trust of every new coach he's played under, despite some hesitation.
Stajan isn't the most naturally talented kid, but he works his butt off and is one of the smartest players out there.
And that's what this team lacks the most - HOCKEY SENSE. We have a bunch of pretty skaters and guys who can snipe, but precious little hockey sense - and Stajan's one of the few that has it.
It's a relief - after watching Grabo, Blake, and Hagman skate in circles really, really fast - to actually see a player like Stajan who can crack open the ice with one smart pass, and do it most every shift.
To convince yourself that his production is some sort of fluke is ridiculous. To think that a player with his limited natural skillset can produce like that without showing up every shift is even more ridiculous.
People just can't get past the fact that he falls down a lot. That's what it comes down to.
On point #1, I think Stajan got to that level of production by getting scads more icetime than he would on a team with a legitimate top line. Given his icetime and opportunities, a true offensive talent should have hit the 75+ point mark - even with poor linemates. Play Stajan a more reasonable 15-16 minutes a night, and you'll see his production around the 40 point mark.
.
NO.
Stajan received LESS ice time than most every player who scored at a similar rate as him last year.
LESS time.
Stajan has been HURT by receiving LESS ice time than other players who produce similarly.
Stajan is a decent player, but can be quite inconsistent. He'd be a good 3rd liner on a team that ran 3 offensive lines, IMO.
Biggest problem by far IMO... his inability to stay on his skates. I don't think there is an NHLer with less balance than Stajan
Stajan would fit well on a western conference team that are a little softer and ran 3 offensive lines...the canucks come to mind...the blues come to mind...the bluejackets...
Yeah - so let's discuss and debate a little. If Stajan has no offensive talent, how do you account for his 60 point season? How do you account for his run of points this season?
Fluke? Luck?
Yes a career year, lead by his second assists. He doesn't have any offensive talent because 1) he can't create 2) he doesn't make anyone better 3) he's too soft to be a grinder/checker.
If Stajan played like Kulemin, but had only 30 pts instead of 55, then I would not complain about him.
Quote:
The last bit is a major contradiction; your saying that Stajan is so crap that other GMs have taken notice, but you still want us to get rid of him to these other GMs? Gee.. that's going to be some pretty strange negotiations eh? What makes you think the same GMs you claim to think Stajan is crap, are going to be the ones that trade for him?
Yes he's crap. It would take a dumb GM like JFJ to throw money at Stajan.
GMs will trade because 1) his contract is expiring 2) they may want to take a chance. Moore got us a 2nd rounder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK
Easy, his agent just points to Grabovski's.
And we'll see if anyone is stupid enough to give Stajan 2.9m. GMs don't just look at point totals, like some other people are doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke
It's a relief - after watching Grabo, Blake, and Hagman skate in circles really, really fast - to actually see a player like Stajan who can crack open the ice with one smart pass, and do it most every shift.
Yes a career year, lead by his second assists. He doesn't have any offensive talent because 1) he can't create 2) he doesn't make anyone better 3) he's too soft to be a grinder/checker.
If Stajan played like Kulemin, but had only 30 pts instead of 55, then I would not complain about him.
Yes he's crap. It would take a dumb GM like JFJ to throw money at Stajan.
GMs will trade because 1) his contract is expiring 2) they may want to take a chance. Moore got us a 2nd rounder.
And we'll see if anyone is stupid enough to give Stajan 2.9m. GMs don't just look at point totals, like some other people are doing.
LOLOL. every shift hahaha.
But Stajan is not Kulemin nor is Kulemin Stajan, two different players all togther. Why compare. Stajan has played very well, excelled in every role he has been put in, and has a low cap hit vs his output. Seems some posters don't like him, but his production and value can't be argued, it's fact -like him or not.
Only in Toronto is a guy who scores 60 points criticized..... unbelievable. Should be scoring more points? He's 25 for crying out loud. There are a handful of other teams who will want this guy, and that's why I fear that he will be moved.
I agree with the one of Grabo/Stajan needs to move, but I would be extremely hesitant to move either one of them UNTIL we found a top-end center. For me, Matt Stajan as a secondary scorer/non-primary center = his role, and he should be apart of this team's future
First off, let me say that I like the kid: he's smart, he works hard, and he tries to do everything asked of him. Those are all good things, and reasons to keep him on the team (as is the fact that he's a local boy, a home-grown product -- it's nice to have some of those in the system, it helps the team's identity).
But those are also reasons why he's more marketable than many of our assets, and that's what we're facing here: knowing we have multiple assets for a particular role, how do we maximize those assets for the best long-term interests of the club?
At the end of the day, he's a tweener -- not consistent enough on offence for a top-line role, not consistent enough on defence for a shutdown role, not physical enough to be a grinder. That makes him by default a decent but not great second-line center. But we have a couple of other options for decent-but-not-great second-line centers, which means something will have to give at some point.
As you say, maybe that time is when we have a bona-fide top-line center in hand... but you also have to take the opportunities when they're available. Do you sign Stajan to a Grabovski-style contract, tying up $7 million in those two players? I don't think so. One way or another, one of them should be playing somewhere else next spring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caesium
Stajan plays 18 minutes a night, with 2 of them being on the PK. You make it sound like he's playing 25 minutes every night.
That's 2-3 more minutes a night than they'd ideally be giving him. But I was speaking more of last season. Cue Zeke...
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeke
NO.
Stajan received LESS ice time than most every player who scored at a similar rate as him last year.
LESS time.
Stajan has been HURT by receiving LESS ice time than other players who produce similarly.
Sorry, zeke, are you suggesting that Stajan is actually a top-line calibre player, and we've just been limiting his ice-time too much? I know you're a stats guy, and I respect that, but without seeing the numbers I don't buy this argument. Near as I can tell he received more ice-time, and more PP time, than any other third-liner you could name. As a result, his production went up from the 40-point area to 55. That doesn't make him a better player, it just means he had more opportunities than players of comparable ability because there was nobody else on the team really competing with him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TML4LIFE
But Stajan is not Kulemin nor is Kulemin Stajan, two different players all togther. Why compare. Stajan has played very well, excelled in every role he has been put in, and has a low cap hit vs his output. Seems some posters don't like him, but his production and value can't be argued, it's fact -like him or not.
Stajan has excelled in every role he has been put in? If only it were true. Stajan has been adequate in every role that's been asked of him. Decent. Occasionally good. But I've yet to see him excel at anything. As I said above, he's a tweener, or has been so far. I *do* like him, and I recognize he has value -- that (and his contract status) is why his name is being discussed as a trading chip in the first place.
First off, let me say that I like the kid: he's smart, he works hard, and he tries to do everything asked of him. Those are all good things, and reasons to keep him on the team (as is the fact that he's a local boy, a home-grown product -- it's nice to have some of those in the system, it helps the team's identity).
But those are also reasons why he's more marketable than many of our assets, and that's what we're facing here: knowing we have multiple assets for a particular role, how do we maximize those assets for the best long-term interests of the club?
At the end of the day, he's a tweener -- not consistent enough on offence for a top-line role, not consistent enough on defence for a shutdown role, not physical enough to be a grinder. That makes him by default a decent but not great second-line center. But we have a couple of other options for decent-but-not-great second-line centers, which means something will have to give at some point.
As you say, maybe that time is when we have a bona-fide top-line center in hand... but you also have to take the opportunities when they're available. Do you sign Stajan to a Grabovski-style contract, tying up $7 million in those two players? I don't think so. One way or another, one of them should be playing somewhere else next spring.
That's 2-3 more minutes a night than they'd ideally be giving him. But I was speaking more of last season. Cue Zeke...
Sorry, zeke, are you suggesting that Stajan is actually a top-line calibre player, and we've just been limiting his ice-time too much? I know you're a stats guy, and I respect that, but without seeing the numbers I don't buy this argument. Near as I can tell he received more ice-time, and more PP time, than any other third-liner you could name. As a result, his production went up from the 40-point area to 55. That doesn't make him a better player, it just means he had more opportunities than players of comparable ability because there was nobody else on the team really competing with him.
Stajan has excelled in every role he has been put in? If only it were true. Stajan has been adequate in every role that's been asked of him. Decent. Occasionally good. But I've yet to see him excel at anything. As I said above, he's a tweener, or has been so far. I *do* like him, and I recognize he has value -- that (and his contract status) is why his name is being discussed as a trading chip in the first place.
Let me clarify; for a player not expected (by some) to be a top 6 forward, he has played both 1st line centre and 2nd line centre and didn't look out of place doing so. Over acheiver maybe? My point was he has done well in every situation he has been put it; that's pretty good IMO, when you're bottom 6 guy and can jump to the top 6 and produce.
Everyone accepts Stajan isn't an archetypal 1st line talent. Yet most complain as though we have something better to replace him.
I'm glad that our management doesn't operate with as much bias as some people here. Trading Stajan for the sake of it only opens a hole that we can't fill right now. A 2nd round pick can't get Kessel 10 shots or score last nights winning goal.
If he gets traded there will be a lot of regret around here, mark my words. I don't mind a deadline deal, or somehow pulling another teams pants down and getting a better centre. But just getting rid of him because he "doesn't contribute" is simply hate clouding judgement.
