Management Eugene Melnyk - Lawsuits, rants and more... Part 5.7 (YOUS)

[Bileur]

When you hear things repeated often enough you accept it as the truth.


Does anyone here have a quote from Dorion about Stepan being a legitimate 2c at the stage in his career where we acquired him? Tsn, Sportsnet, NHL.com and the Ottawa Sun all have the same Dorion quote

"Derek's acquisition provides us with important stability at centre heading into the season," Senators GM Pierre Dorion said. "He plays a 200-foot game and has proven to be a reliable special teams' player throughout his career. His addition to our lineup will also represent a valuable leadership presence within our group."


DJ said this about Stepan
“Stepan can protect young centres, whether it’s Logan Brown or Josh Norris,” Smith said. “He can play the hard minutes. He can play against the league’s best.”
Smith noted that in Toronto, Auston Matthews benefitted from playing behind Tyler Bozak and Nazim Kadri. It was similar for Bo Horvat behind Henrik Sedin.
“Stepan is going to help Norris or Brown,” Smith said. “He can show them the way.”

I can't find anything that says the Senators thought they were getting a guy still able to be a productive 2c. It was a development year, he was brought in as an insulator so that guys that weren't ready for roles didn't have to play those roles.

It didn't work out in large part because he was injured.

He wasn't a 6.5 m player when we got him. There is value in both situations of a player having a higher AAV than what he brings and a player providing more than his AAV. We needed to hit the floor because of our young roster. Stepan's 6.5 AAV helped that. The reality is that that gap between AAV and salary has value.

It gets repeated over and over but I just can't find any quote anywhere where our brass thought Stepan was still a legit 2c. If someone turns that up, I'll eat crow. Til then, I'll stick with what I am able to find which points to Stepan being brought here to eat minutes that the young guys weren't ready for. Which btw is the MO of virtually every team in the league

Can you clarify what you’re looking for in a quote?

The quote you posted states Stepan was brought in to play in a top role ahead of the young guys. It strongly suggests he would get special teams deployment. That’s how he was then deployed.

Are you asking people to find a quote saying « we think Stepan will offensively produce at the pace of a top 6 Center »?

 

[JD1]

Can you clarify what you’re looking for in a quote?

The quote you posted states Stepan was brought in to play in a top role ahead of the young guys. It strongly suggests he would get special teams deployment. That’s how he was then deployed.

Are you asking people to find a quote saying « we think Stepan will offensively produce at the pace of a top 6 Center »?

I think guys here by and large have a flawed understanding of stepan's role when he was here.

I can't find anything that suggests our brass thought he'd be offensively effective. He was brought here so that our young kids wouldn't get exposed to responsibility they weren't ready for.

And I don't think it mattered, or ever was going to matter had he not been injured, whether Stepan was actually any good playing against a guy like Matthews. His job was to simply play against guys so the young centers didn't have to.

 

[Bileur]

I think guys here by and large have a flawed understanding of stepan's role when he was here.

I can't find anything that suggests our brass thought he'd be offensively effective. He was brought here so that our young kids wouldn't get exposed to responsibility they weren't ready for.

And I don't think it mattered, or ever was going to matter had he not been injured, whether Stepan was actually any good playing against a guy like Matthews. His job was to simply play against guys so the young centers didn't have to.

If the Sens objective was just to throw a guy to the proverbial wolves of matching up against Matthews and McDavid, irrespective of ability to play the role effectively, couldn’t they have just played Anisimov or Paquette in that role? Couldn’t they have just signed a Nate Thompson or Mikko Koivu to play that role?

Instead they traded a second round pick for Stepan. They clearly thought he could contribute more than just being a place holder.

 

[JD1]

They clearly thought he could contribute more than just being a place holder.

Did they clearly think that?

I can't really locate any expressed thought that supports that.

To your point about Paquette or Anisimov...they also needed the cap hit.

 

[Big Muddy]

Stepan couldn't shelter the younger players/centers. They must have thought he was capable of playing higher in the lineup because that's where they played him early in the season. Actions speak louder than words. He was not capable of doing this as evidenced by history/actual events. They rather quickly demoted him and had to play him lower in the lineup. Waiver wire or existing players would have been equal or better options. They misjudged and it was a "fail" in every sense of the word. And it cost a high 2nd round pick. FAIL.

 

[Bileur]

Did they clearly think that?

I can't really locate any expressed thought that supports that.

To your point about Paquette or Anisimov...they also needed the cap hit.

I don’t think it’s necessary to always have the team’s objectives explicitly expressed in interviews to be able to surmise what their objectives may have been.

Didn’t they trade away 4.8 in Gaborik and 2.6 in Nilsson which would have counted against the cap and been mostly covered by insurance?

 

[Ice-Tray]

Stepan was brought in specifically because he was known to be a great leader, and was known to play ‘the right way’.

His post trade interview makes it pretty clear what his role was supposed to be, and he talks about how excited he was to do it.

He was brought in to insulate our top young centres, and him in particular because he could show the kids how to work hard and play smart, while also being a tremendous off ice leader in the locker room.

His comfort and motivation took a massive hit when the borders were closed and he was kept from his young family, and then injuries sidelined him. He never got to settle in and get going, but Norris still mentioned him as an important role model for him.

This idea that we brought Stepan in to be an offensive top six forward on a team looking for wins is pure HFSens myth making. It’s just another thing the same folks use to bash management. The idea of vets being roster placeholders and high character and nothing more is a very difficult pill to swallow in here for some, though I’m not sure why.

PD already hit the media and lamented how that Stepan move didn’t work out, but that’s not enough for the clean sheets in here. It’s perfection or it’s a horrible disaster for our folk!

 

[Big Muddy]

Some leaders are capable/better NHL players, some are not.

Some people prefer that their leaders are capable NHL players.

All leaders are not lousy players. These are not mutually exclusive characteristics.

 

[JD1]

I don’t think it’s necessary to always have the team’s objectives explicitly expressed in interviews to be able to surmise what their objectives may have been.

Didn’t they trade away 4.8 in Gaborik and 2.6 in Nilsson which would have counted against the cap and been mostly covered by insurance?

Goal posts. Shifted.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Not all good leaders are available for trade, are on short deals, and are happy to move to a bottom of the league team to help shepherd a rebuild.

Sometimes things don’t work out the way they are planned. Stepan was fine on paper for the role he was expected to fill. The fact that he wasn’t able to round out is a shame, and in the end mostly due to injury and COVID restrictions.

For whatever reason, some folks are simply unable to move past what in the grand scheme of things is a pretty minor roster event, one that has zero bearing on the current team.

 

[Big Muddy]

Book of excuses.

 

[Bileur]

Stepan was brought in specifically because he was known to be a great leader, and was known to play ‘the right way’.

His post trade interview makes it pretty clear what his role was supposed to be, and he talks about how excited he was to do it.

He was brought in to insulate our top young centres, and him in particular because he could show the kids how to work hard and play smart, while also being a tremendous off ice leader in the locker room.

His comfort and motivation took a massive hit when the borders were closed and he was kept from his young family, and then injuries sidelined him. He never got to settle in and get going, but Norris still mentioned him as an important role model for him.

This idea that we brought Stepan in to be an offensive top six forward on a team looking for wins is pure HFSens myth making. It’s just another thing the same folks use to bash management. The idea of vets being roster placeholders and high character and nothing more is a very difficult pill to swallow in here for some, though I’m not sure why.

PD already hit the media and lamented how that Stepan move didn’t work out, but that’s not enough for the clean sheets in here. It’s perfection or it’s a horrible disaster for our folk!

I agree his quotes were very telling.

Stepan has already had conversations with several of his new teammates, including Brady Tkachuk. He sees potential for an offensive attack.

“I like playing with a younger group,” said Stepan, whose affable personality comes across in interviews. “I like to teach them. I really feel at this point in my career I’m ready to get back to that production I was at early in my career.”

Senators' Stepan provides steadying influence for inexperienced core - Sportsnet.ca

 

[Bileur]

Goal posts. Shifted.

How so? You said they needed cap expenditure, I raised two cap heavy players they traded away, suggesting there were other ways to meet the cap objective.

IMO they thought Stepan was a valuable addition aside from his cap hit.

He wasn't a 6.5 m player when we got him. There is value in both situations of a player having a higher AAV than what he brings and a player providing more than his AAV. We needed to hit the floor because of our young roster. Stepan's 6.5 AAV helped that. The reality is that that gap between AAV and salary has value.

Also, is there a quote from the team to support this (reasonable) inference from you?

 

[GCK]

I don’t think it’s necessary to always have the team’s objectives explicitly expressed in interviews to be able to surmise what their objectives may have been.

Didn’t they trade away 4.8 in Gaborik and 2.6 in Nilsson which would have counted against the cap and been mostly covered by insurance?

Was Nilsson’s contract insured ? Does insurance not kick in at 80% after something like 20-25 games, if so that’s less than 50% covered in a 56 game season.

 

[Bileur]

Was Nilsson’s contract insured ? Does insurance not kick in at 80% after something like 20-25 games, if so that’s less than 50% covered in a 56 game season.

Good point

 

[JD1]

How so? You said they needed cap expenditure, I raised two cap heavy players they traded away, suggesting there were other ways to meet the cap objective.

IMO they thought Stepan was a valuable addition aside from his cap hit.




Also, is there a quote from the team to support this (reasonable) inference from you?

I think the quotes from the team are pretty clear in terms of needing him to chew up ice time until younger players were ready. I've quoted Dorion and Smith saying so.

I understand your view. Also recognize many that post here have that view. I see it differently. I think he was viewed as a one year stop gap to chew up time. Ultimately he got injured early and never got to play his role. It's all good.

 

[GCK]

I think the quotes from the team are pretty clear in terms of needing him to chew up ice time until younger players were ready. I've quoted Dorion and Smith saying so.

I understand your view. Also recognize many that post here have that view. I see it differently. I think he was viewed as a one year stop gap to chew up time. Ultimately he got injured early and never got to play his role. It's all good.

I agree with your assessment as to why Stepan was brought in, but that just makes the fact we paid a 2nd to get him even worse.

 

[JD1]

I agree with your assessment as to why Stepan was brought in, but that just makes the fact we paid a 2nd to get him even worse.

If we don't need the cap hit, Arizona has far less bargaining power. But we did. It was a season with constrained revenue and imo we paid for that 4.5 hit above salary.

If we didn't need the cap hit, the bargaining positions are different

 

[DrEasy]

If we don't need the cap hit, Arizona has far less bargaining power. But we did. It was a season with constrained revenue and imo we paid for that 4.5 hit above salary.

If we didn't need the cap hit, the bargaining positions are different

That feels backward to me. There must be a lot more teams desperate to get below the cap (or saving money period) than teams trying to reach the ceiling, and so normally when you're helping a team off by offloading their salary, *they* should be giving you something in compensation, not you. Now if Arizona was not desperate to offload salary, you move on to some other team that is.

Unless I misunderstood your point? (very possible I did)

 

[GCK]

If we don't need the cap hit, Arizona has far less bargaining power. But we did. It was a season with constrained revenue and imo we paid for that 4.5 hit above salary.

If we didn't need the cap hit, the bargaining positions are different

We didn’t need the cap hit. With the other additions we were above the floor.

 

[JD1]

That feels backward to me. There must be a lot more teams desperate to get below the cap (or saving money period) than teams trying to reach the ceiling, and so normally when you're helping a team off by offloading their salary, *they* should be giving you something in compensation, not you. Now if Arizona was not desperate to offload salary, you move on to some other team that is.

Unless I misunderstood your point? (very possible I did)

There are situations on both sides of the cap. If you're above, you're trying to offload AAV, typically you're offloading someone not living up to the AAV. In our situation, we were below. Root cause:cheap. So a contract with 6.5aav with only 2m in salary is valuable to a cheap team looking to add AAV.

Arizona didn't need to offload the salary or the AAV as I recall but the contract itself was valuable. To us.

 

[Ice-Tray]

I agree his quotes were very telling.



Senators' Stepan provides steadying influence for inexperienced core - Sportsnet.ca

Hahaha, alright Bileur, I get that you’re staunch with your view of the situation, and it’s all good. I watched an interview where he went on at length about his role of leader and mentor on the team. I’m glad that he was hoping to produce points, but I don’t think that’s why he was brought in agree to disagree!

I think that they were looking for a bunch of placeholder vets to fill roster rolls so that they could focus on sheltering and developing the multitude of kids on the roster, and from where I’m sitting that’s exactly what they did.

Stepan had a slow start and was eventually injured at a time where it looked like he was finally getting on a roll. It’s a shame, but it did come up that he was really struggling with being away from his new child and wife, so perhaps that ended up playing a part in his slow start.

Across the board it’s been admitted that it didn’t work out as expected, regardless of whether you thought he was brought in to be a producing 2c, or whether you thought he was brought in to mentor and be a solid placeholder vet.

 

[Bileur]

Hahaha, alright Bileur, I get that you’re staunch with your view of the situation, and it’s all good. I watched an interview where he went on at length about his role of leader and mentor on the team. I’m glad that he was hoping to produce points, but I don’t think that’s why he was brought in agree to disagree!

I think that they were looking for a bunch of placeholder vets to fill roster rolls so that they could focus on sheltering and developing the multitude of kids on the roster, and from where I’m sitting that’s exactly what they did.

Stepan had a slow start and was eventually injured at a time where it looked like he was finally getting on a roll. It’s a shame, but it did come up that he was really struggling with being away from his new child and wife, so perhaps that ended up playing a part in his slow start.

Across the board it’s been admitted that it didn’t work out as expected, regardless of whether you thought he was brought in to be a producing 2c, or whether you thought he was brought in to mentor and be a solid placeholder vet.

I don’t disagree that his best attributes were likely leadership and experience in playing hard minutes as a placeholder for the young guys. I think that’s pretty clear and he does seem like a good leader from what we can glean off ice.

I’m just inferring from the price they paid that they thought he’d be better on the ice than he was. IMHO, if the Sens had sent a late pick, or received a pick as often happens with these high cap hit guys, nobody would care.

All good if we don’t all agree.

 

[Big Muddy]

There were a lot of teams over cap that summer (the first COVID season & the year we acquired Stepan) because many/most teams expected the cap to keep increasing.

That's why there was so many players signed to last minute, inexpensive, one-year contracts. It was a good time to be a buyer and a bad time to be a seller.

 

[Ice-Tray]

I don’t disagree that his best attributes were likely leadership and experience in playing hard minutes as a placeholder for the young guys. I think that’s pretty clear and he does seem like a good leader from what we can glean off ice.

I’m just inferring from the price they paid that they thought he’d be better on the ice than he was. IMHO, if the Sens had sent a late pick, or received a pick as often happens with these high cap hit guys, nobody would care.

All good if we don’t all agree.

I can agree that it was a lot to pay for a guy that didn’t pan out. I do think that they were putting more import on his ‘play the right way’ to go along with his leadership and mentorship.

I dont think they expected big points, but they did expect mistake free hockey in all three zones, which is what he was known for. That would be excellent teaching for a young group of forwards, and perhaps worth the cost if the lessons stuck.

Unfortunately Stepan wasn’t able to live up to his previous reputation on the ice, nor was he able to last long on the ice at all in the end. They thought he could have been an important mentor for the team, and it didn’t pan out.

Sucks to lose the 2nd, but I can see why they thought he could be worth it if it panned out as expected.