HockeyBuzz Hotstove: Hotstove: Thoughts On Alex Steen's Contract Extension With The Blues?

its rough. the extra year on the contract is where it hits you. pens in the same situation with duper and kunitz few years back. Good contracts, about 1 year too long. but it was needed to keep them. you just have to hope he can be at least a useful player in the top 9 towards the end... much like kunitz.

So Backes signs in boston with a contract ending the same year, Steen came a little cheaper and definitely the better player... good deal

This is not a bad deal. 7, 7, 5.5, 3.5 protects the Blues if he starts going down in production.

The Blues could not afford to lose another leader, and we just signed him to a lower cap hit than his current one. Injuries are the main concern. But he is a great 2 way player. Worth the contract.

Keeping Steen was the better option than keeping Backes for a few reasons.

Besides, his cap hit stays almost the exact same and is smartly front loaded. Nobody seems to be considering he could take the money and retire after the first 2 or 3 years. His last year he will be on the wrong side of 30 and making twice as less.

This is a terrible awful deal and I'm not sure how anyone can say otherwise. I'm not an anti-blues person. In fact, I like watching them, so none of this comes with any bias.

I think the bigger problem here is the Blues management team. They're sending this team into a quick spiral.

I understand Tessier's logic in the blog, but just because you may not be able to properly replace a player doesn't mean you should lock yourself into a long contract with a considerable cap-hit for an aging player.

This either should have been a three year deal, or two million less per year.

Keeping Steen was the better option than keeping Backes for a few reasons.

Besides, his cap hit stays almost the exact same and is smartly front loaded. Nobody seems to be considering he could take the money and retire after the first 2 or 3 years. His last year he will be on the wrong side of 30 and making twice as less.
- Crisp

1) Regardless of what their respective teams are paying them, the cap hits are almost identical: $6M for Backes vs. $5.75M for Steen

2) Backes has shown less issues of slowing down than Steen and they're the same age.

3) Backes can play C and W

There is no way keeping Steen instead of Backes was smart.

Not to mention you just paid $3.5M for a player(Perron) who will get you 12ish goals, 30ish points and be a ghost most of the time.

If I'm a Blues fan, I'm not happy with how they're managing this team.

Steen has played center for the Blues, and Sweden, plenty of times. Backes or Steen is an opinion but Id take Steen. He would have still been on contract this year anyway so there would be no way to afford Backes at $6m even for 1 year. It also makes it easier to give Petro the captaincy with Backes moving on lol

Perron was consistently good for 20+ goals in St Louis. I get he didn't work in Pittsburg and I'm not saying we stole him in free agency but I like the move. He is 28 which is widely considered NHL prime. The deal was low risk high reward.

Steen has played center for the Blues, and Sweden, plenty of times. Backes or Steen is an opinion but Id take Steen. He would have still been on contract this year anyway so there would be no way to afford Backes at $6m even for 1 year. It also makes it easier to give Petro the captaincy with Backes moving on lol

Perron was consistently good for 20+ goals in St Louis. I get he didn't work in Pittsburg and I'm not saying we stole him in free agency but I like the move. He is 28 which is widely considered NHL prime. The deal was low risk high reward.
- Crisp

Perron was a 20+ goal-scorer TWICE in his six-year tenure with the Blues. He has been anything but consistent for most of his career. I wish him the best and hopefully he scores a ton for you, but he likely won't.

You guys COULD have afforded Backes for one year at his $6M cap-hit. Backes was a $4.5M hit, so you're looking at a $1.5M raise and you have over $2M in cap space.

I understand you're a fan and you're trying to find a silver lining here, but there really is none. You have probably one or two more OK years out of Steen and then this deal is going to look VERY bad.

It might not look great after a couple years but that's the compromise you have to make to keep him. Maybe he keeps going strong or maybe he doesn't feel like playing for only 3.5 in the final year.
Our worst contract comes off the books in a couple years which will free up $7m. That should give us options. For now our roster should remain competitive.
We are better off with Steen moving forward and I'm not sure you get him at a better price. Easily would have fetched more somewhere else for just as long. Not sure you can call it awful even if you don't like the term.

It might not look great after a couple years but that's the compromise you have to make to keep him. Maybe he keeps going strong or maybe he doesn't feel like playing for only 3.5 in the final year.
Our worst contract comes off the books in a couple years which will free up $7m. That should give us options. For now our roster should remain competitive.
We are better off with Steen moving forward and I'm not sure you get him at a better price. Easily would have fetched more somewhere else for just as long. Not sure you can call it awful even if you don't like the term.
- Crisp

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree... I completely disagree lol.

1) Regardless of what their respective teams are paying them, the cap hits are almost identical: $6M for Backes vs. $5.75M for Steen

2) Backes has shown less issues of slowing down than Steen and they're the same age.

3) Backes can play C and W

There is no way keeping Steen instead of Backes was smart.

Not to mention you just paid $3.5M for a player(Perron) who will get you 12ish goals, 30ish points and be a ghost most of the time.

If I'm a Blues fan, I'm not happy with how they're managing this team.
- Rinosaur

- Nucker101

My thoughts exactly.

They're both on the decline, but Backes has held up better physically than Steen and that's a fact. Backes has had far less injury issues in general and is simply more durable.

Points-wise you can expect about the same output if they play over 70 games, so if you're spending $5.75, why not spend the extra $275K on the player you'll get more games out of?

They're both on the decline, but Backes has held up better physically than Steen and that's a fact. Backes has had far less injury issues in general and is simply more durable.

Points-wise you can expect about the same output if they play over 70 games, so if you're spending $5.75, why not spend $6M on the player you'll get more games out of?
- Rinosaur

Have you watched them actually play? Steen hasn't showed any signs of being on the decline yet, Backes has.

Have you watched them actually play? Steen hasn't showed any signs of being on the decline yet, Backes has.
- Nucker101

Yes, they've both slowed down IMO. Backes will get you almost the same points, still be useful away from the puck and will likely play more games. His durability alone is worth the extra $275K.

They're capable of putting up very similar points, so why not pay the guy who's more likely to get there?

Yes, they've both slowed down IMO. Backes will get you almost the same points, still be useful away from the puck and will likely play more games. His durability alone is worth the extra $275K.

They're capable of putting up very similar points, so why not pay the guy who's more likely to get there?
- Rinosaur

Steen isn't slowing down, he's playing just as well as he ever has. Chances are that he'll be overpaid during the last year of this deal, but otherwise this contract is solid. Meanwhile, Boston will be regretting that Backes contract after another year or 2 max.

Steen put up 52 points in 67 games last year compared to 45 points in 79 games by Backes. Point production isn't everything but if people hate the Steen contract, giving it to Backes is beyond hypocritical. I like both players btw I'm just more in favor of Steen

Being injury prone is the main concern for Steen but he is always there for the playoffs. He is our best two way forward and should be good for 60+ points per year for most of that contract. That's in line with what he is being paid. Still an extremely formidable veteran.

Four years is not a long term nor a short term contract. Lng term is five or more years.

Steen when healthy has become nearly a point per game player. He does a lot of great things on the ice. If the Blues had a healthy Steen in the past three play offs I suspect they would have done a lot better.

This team always starts playing great hockey and winning once Steen gets going. It has been that way for about four or five years now. He has driven this team well.

Steen has always been more important to the team than Backes. Hell Steen has driven Backes's play the past four or five seasons. I bet there is some fancy chart that would bear out my statement.

This hate of Perron is ridiculous. He.'s a good kid with some tremendous talents and some limitations in his game. He skates better than Brouwer, is cheaper, with less term and produces at the same level and has a better chance at having a higher level of production depending where those players slot on their respective teams.

My prediction the deal turns out to be a good one and even if the last year is iffy or bad the previous years will more than make up for it.

Steen isn't slowing down, he's playing just as well as he ever has. Chances are that he'll be overpaid during the last year of this deal, but otherwise this contract is solid. Meanwhile, Boston will be regretting that Backes contract after another year or 2 max.
- Nucker101

This is well said.

Yes, they've both slowed down IMO. Backes will get you almost the same points, still be useful away from the puck and will likely play more games. His durability alone is worth the extra $275K.

They're capable of putting up very similar points, so why not pay the guy who's more likely to get there?
- Rinosaur

With Backes you will get almost the same points?????

Dude ypu and Gary Johnson are a simple google search away from knowing some pertient details to your arguments.

Perron was a 20+ goal-scorer TWICE in his six-year tenure with the Blues. He has been anything but consistent for most of his career. I wish him the best and hopefully he scores a ton for you, but he likely won't.

You guys COULD have afforded Backes for one year at his $6M cap-hit. Backes was a $4.5M hit, so you're looking at a $1.5M raise and you have over $2M in cap space.

I understand you're a fan and you're trying to find a silver lining here, but there really is none. You have probably one or two more OK years out of Steen and then this deal is going to look VERY bad.
- Rinosaur

Yeah but he also was screwed early by Andy Murray, then he lost almost two seasons to a concussion because of Thorton's cheap play. Oh and there was a lockout season where every Blues player struggled to produce except from Chris Stewart who after that season could no lnger produce anything.

The Blues simply could not afford to lose Backes, Brouwer, Steen, and (potentially) Shattenkirk for nothing in free agency. In saying that, Steen's contract isnt great but it isnt bad either. He does have some injury concerns, but he he is a very good two-way player. Hes good on the pp and pk, and he too can play both center and wing. Considering that what general managers spend, is what sets a market, his cap hit really isnt that bad. He's not throwing his body around the way Backes does each night, so, if he can stay relatively healthy he should be able to produce for most of the term. Is Stl gonna get top notch production the last couple of years? Likely not, but if he can help bring them a championship, or even be apart of some deep runs, they will be okay with it all knowing that he should be a very good player for the next few years.

"Steen isn't slowing down, he's playing just as well as he ever has. Chances are that he'll be overpaid during the last year of this deal, but otherwise this contract is solid. Meanwhile, Boston will be regretting that Backes contract after another year or 2 max."

--Nucker101

ding ding ding

already addressed here - http://www.hockeybuzz.com...ensive-maneuver/229/79411