Provided we don't sign any defensemen, wouldn't it be worth it to give him another year?
We won't know if we're signing another defenseman until after July 1, so we won't know if we should re-sign Stoner until after he hits free agency (he's UFA this year).
If we plan on Brodin making the NHL team, that would leave us with the choice of Stoner vs. Falk
I'd go with Stoner.
We seem to see the same amount of "Good Falk" as we see "Healthy Stoner" so I don't know if I'd agree considering Falk's contract situation. If we're going to trade Falk for a C-prospect or very late pick then maybe.
Stoner played like a solid second pairing guy last night and the last few games. Russo's high on Falk and Prosser but I haven't liked much out of them the last several weeks. Scandy is back on the rise IMO. Gilbert looks solid.
Unless Fletcher can get himself a good NHL'er on that second pairing, moving Stoner down to the third pairing.
I like Stoner because he's been physical while also playing respectably in the offensive zone since coming back from injury. Scandella very much the same thing. We'll need that element next year as (assuming the above lineup) Gilbert and Brodin aren't physical guys.
In a really ideal situation, you'd have something like:
We won't know if we're signing another defenseman until after July 1, so we won't know if we should re-sign Stoner until after he hits free agency (he's UFA this year).
But he also won't be a hot commodity. I think he'll be on the board for a couple days for us to be make the decisions before possibly going back on him.
Personally, I'd go for Falk, but thats just personal opinion. On the other hand, I hope we're able to upgrade in free agency on at least one defenseman.
We seem to see the same amount of "Good Falk" as we see "Healthy Stoner" so I don't know if I'd agree considering Falk's contract situation. If we're going to trade Falk for a C-prospect or very late pick then maybe.
Falk isn't as physical and defensively is out of position and makes more mistakes. Falk did have some nice offense early on but his numbers aren't that much different than Stoner, except for Falk's -10 and Stoner's +4.
Falk isn't as physical and defensively is out of position and makes more mistakes. Falk did have some nice offense early on but his numbers aren't that much different than Stoner, except for Falk's -10 and Stoner's +4.
If I had the time, I'd review their +/- only in games both played (or approximate time periods both played) because Stoner was injured for a long stretch of the losing streaks, which inflated his +/- relative to the rest of the team. As far as I'm concerned, Heatley is the only + player on the team right now.
If our defense looks something like that next year I think I'm going to puke. We'd better sign or trade for at least one top 4 d-man if not two.
We've been over this a dozen times. In free agency, there's Suter then around 4 somewhat decent top 4 guys. If we were to make a trade, we'd be paying Burns-like prices for someone. We're stuck with what we have until we can develop our own.
Spurgeon won't be on the top pairing now that Gilbert is here.
I don't think any of us were counting on Heatley and Setoguchi here over Burns and Havlat so HOPEFULLY Fletcher will do something similar (top 10 pick + prospect for a great player?)
I'm honestly reserving any ideas or thoughts until after we see what happens on July 1st. Sorry, but I'm hesitant to even begin to try to speculate what our future season's D is going to resemble.
Cop out? sure...
Fletcher is still trying to manipulate the situation to get Suter. Has he had secret conversations with Suter's agent? Dunno, I'm not a fly on the wall.
What can you read into the smirk on J. P. Parise's face during the Northstars weekend?
/sigh
My point is this; There are far too many things up in the air right now to even start guess at a prognostication for the offseason.
Falk isn't as physical and defensively is out of position and makes more mistakes. Falk did have some nice offense early on but his numbers aren't that much different than Stoner, except for Falk's -10 and Stoner's +4.
i don't see that at all. Stoner is every bit as inconsistent as Falk defensively. Stoner is more physical (consistently) but positioning is worse, and skating is definitely worse. Stoner is older and breaks more often. This is no contest land for me. Falk if I had to pick. He can play physical and hit just as hard as Stoner when he shows up.
i don't see that at all. Stoner is every bit as inconsistent as Falk defensively. Stoner is more physical (consistently) but positioning is worse, and skating is definitely worse. Stoner is older and breaks more often. This is no contest land for me. Falk if I had to pick. He can play physical and hit just as hard as Stoner when he shows up.
It's not just the hitting part, but look at what Stoner did last night. Some 4th line nobody was jawing at Heatley and Stoner stepped in and shut him up. I know Falk also fought last night, but I'm not sure he would do the same.
Yeah he seems more engaged whereas Falk seems like he's kind of coasting or in no man's land mentally. Stoner's 27, not exactly old. Has injuries, yes, but for a 6/7 D-man you want a solid guy who will come in and play well, not a kid who's going to come in and flip a coin between playing like a solid D-man or a like an ECHL'er.
While Falk might more visibly make defensive mistakes, Stoner mistakes (in my completely subjective and not statistically based viewing) usually end up as goals against.
