Top Six, Bottom Six

When it was suggested here late last season that Matt Stajan appeared to have the character to one day, just maybe, become the captain of the Maple Leafs, there was a little support but mostly guffawing.

By October, with Stajan off to a horrible start under new head coach Ron Wilson, there was no support, more guffawing and lots of sentiment that Stajan needed to be shipped out of town.

Now its December, and maybe, just maybe, Stajan has won back some fans. He leads the team in scoring, came up with an important goal Monday night in Los Angeles and has clearly won the confidence of Wilson, no easy trick. Remember, he was a healthy scratch earlier this season.

What's interesting, however, is how Stajan and other Leafs will fit in the Brian Burke model. Burke made it clear on Saturday at his inaugural press conference that forwards on his teams either have to have enough skill to play in the top six, or be willing to do the grunt work - fighting, shot blocking, penalty killing - necessary to play in the bottom six.

Those are Burke's terms of employment, relatively black and white terms.

But not all players fit easily, and the Leafs are full of such players. Like Stajan.

Does he have enough skill to be a legitimate top six NHL forward on a good team? Cliff Fletcher, who thought only Nik Antropov fit into that category, certainly didn't think so.

If not, does Stajan have the sandpaper to be a bottom six player under Burke? Well, he doesn't fight, he's more willing to get his nose dirty than once was the case and he's a pretty smart defensive player.

Ideally, he might fit the role Sammy Pahlsson fit in Anaheim under Burke. But he's not that physical or chippy, is he?

So based on what we know now, which Leafs fit where under Burke's model?

TOP SIX FORWARDS:

Antropov, Mikhail Grabovski.

TOP SIX MAYBES:

Stajan, Nikolai Kulemin, Niklas Hagman.

BOTTOM SIX FORWARDS:

Dominic Moore, Jamal Mayers.

BOTTOM SIX MAYBES:

Alexei Ponikarovsky, Ryan Hollweg, Andre Deveaux, John Mitchell

NEITHER TOP SIX NOR BOTTOM SIX:

Jason Blake, Lee Stempniak

Comments

[BF22]

Stajan is a "Tweener"....he can't check, hit, fight, win face offs (although, he is geting better), or lead a team offensively (I don't care that he has the most points on THIS team). If they can get something for him while he's "hot", they should move him out ASAP.

[Clark]

A fairly accurate representation of where the current forwards fit in under Burke's definition. A couple of things, though:

When you say Blake & Stempniak are neither top six nor bottom six, what do you mean by that? I think you could have included Stempniak in the top six maybe group and not have gotten too many complaints. It also would have further proved the point that Jason Blake simply has no possible ongoing role in this lineup.

I think we saw down the stretch last year what kind of player Stajan is going to be. He fits the mold of a third-line center, somebody who's capable of doing the little things defensively, like face-offs, penalty kill, and playing against other teams top lines (remember, Maurice used him a lot in that role), and at the same time being capable of providing offensive support. I don't have any problems with Stajan staying here in that role.

What about the Marlies? Kris Newbury seems like an ideal "bottom six" forward, the guy needs another chance to show what he can do. He's shown an offensive streak in the minors, and he plays with enough sandpaper that Burke will love him.

[House2525]

I mostly agree with the top/bottom 6 you have listed... but I would drop Pony into the neither... and raise Stempy into the Maybe section.

[general borschevsky]

Didn't Cliff say that Stempniak was brought in to be specifically a top-six forward? He has 3 points in his first four games as a Leaf. Granted, he hasn't played on the top two lines yet, but... isn't that where we should expect him to be eventually, or is that trade already a bust?

Stajan is on pace for an 80 point season after the first quarter. Hard to believe, perhaps, but that's not a top six-maybe, that's a top-six for sure. Same thing goes for Hagman - 17 points, plus 3 - he's been great. Easily a top-six forward on the Leafs.

[Matt]

I made a mental list like this when I heard Burke talk about his philosophy. I would say John Mitchell is not a maybe but a certain bottom 6: he seems willing to do the hard work and can chip in effectively. Hagman is a top 6 forward, and Stempniak is a maybe, I would also argue.

I think Ponikarovsky wil be the first casualty, and deservedly so. He doesn't do anything particularly well, and certainly doesn't have the skill to be a top 6. I'd like yo see him and Blake moved ASAP for draft picks no matter which round we get in return. Good scouting will turn up gems in 4th rounds and beyond.

[Godd Till]

This is the type of sophisticated, thoughtful analysis that keeps me coming back.

While lesser analysts take 20 or 30 games, or even a full season, to gauge whether a new acquisition fits a team's needs now and going forward, you have determined that Lee Stempniak should be consigned to the Island of Misfit Wingers along with Jason Blake after just four games (1 G, 2 A).

Kudos!

[Roberto]

Where would Steen and Colaicovvo (sp? ) fit? In my view, Steen not a top 6 skill guy and soft as butter so not a bottom 6 either.
Cola maybe top 4 but since he gets injured by passing wind gusts you can't count on the guy.
Don't understand why Stempniak would not make the top 6, he does have 3 points in 4 games as a Leaf and was at that pace with St. Louis.

[shudagonetobed]

Assessment is bang on. I'd include 20 yr old Jiri Tlusty as a Top Six Maybe and Ian White as a Bottom Six Maybe. White's versatility seems to have him gaining favour with Wilson. One of the first to go will likely be Ponikarovsky; whose size and occasional displays of skill will make him attractive to somebody. Seems unlikey there will be any takers for Blake. The most interesting decision will involve Antropov. He will be a 29yr old UFA at year's end. Do you look to re-sign him or do you move him if there is value out there? Nothing against him, but I move him if I can get younger value in return.

[AdHoc]

Damien! What criteria are you basing these rankings on? I agree with the main point that Stajan exists in limbo between Burke's "Top 6" and "Bottom 6" model, but how can you leave Stempniak out of "Top 6 Maybes"? He's scored more points and goals in a season than Stajan ever has (so has Blake of course, but that was a different Blake. I have no idea who this Blake is).

My bottom line: Since Stajan doesn't fit into Burke's formula and he's leading the team in scoring, NOW is the most opportune time to trade Stajan. When will his value be any higher?

[kenny]

This team has not had a collective toughness for some time (think back to the days with Tucker, Corson, Roberts, and others). If there's one thing this team, under both Maurice and (so far) Wilson, cannot do well is work against other teams' "top six."

Under Maurice, they were a scoring team that gave away leads. Under Wilson, they are a scoring team that instead spots the other team a lead, then tries to take it back. There's no formidable PK, lead protection, or in-your-face abrasiveness--there hasn't been for a few seasons now. Therefore, it's questionable whether this team has had ANY truly effective "bottom six" forwards for the last few years (by Burke's definition, which is to say NOT the 7th-through-12th crappiest forwards on the roster).

Does this mean we cast off Moore, Mayers, or Mitchell? Of course not. This isn't just about slotting players onto lines based on their current performance; it's also about taking their potential or track record into account. By extension, this is why Hagman and Kulemin belong in the "top six" group on THIS team.

[kenny]

Regarding top-six/bottom-six forwards, Burke also said this about defence:

"Same with our defencemen: the top-four group with a high skill level, the bottom two do the plumbers work, which are really important jobs with my team. We build our teams from the net out."

Perhaps this is a more interesting issue to consider with the Leafs, given they are having a harder time with stats such as goals against and penalty killing percentage.

[A-Mar]

I think that he left Stempniak out of the rankings BECAUSE he hasn't played enough games to know what potential role on this Leafs team he is best suited for... my personal opinion is that he can play top six on THIS team, but probably wouldn't cut it on a contender...

[Kevin]

I can't see Stempniak as a neither - if he was, then Burke would not have approved of the trade, and you have to know that he was at least consulted on it, if not asked for his informal blessing.

[Robert]

Look, certain of us knew the Stempniak trade was foolish as soon as it happened. (Damien, who came out clearly against it, was one.) The rest of you will soon find out that averaging 55 points per season (with an occasional contract-year season in the 70-80 point range) while playing D so bad that Kovalchuk would blush does not make you a top-six forward.

[Lewis McClain]

HI Damian: Stajan, and Moore stay, and in the top six. They both are team players that do more than is expected with their talents. Same goes for White, and Kubina. You do not give up guys with that kind of heart. Pony is just waiting to go elsewhere. I still say we need Sundin,or someone like him...

[Guido]

While I agree that Stajan's "style" isn't top 6 .. the guy is leading the team in scoring - so how is he not considered Top 6 ?

BOTTOM SIX MAYBE: Alexei Ponikarovsky

If Pony isn't in your *top 6* then he's gone. He takes too many dumb penalties and isn't tough enough - or smart enough to be a bottom 6 guy.

BOTTOM SIX MAYBE: Ryan Hollweg

Hollweg gets dominated physically out there and guys like him are a dime a dozen (which makes Cliff look real bad for giving away a pick for him). He's gone and there are better players than him that can fill the role.

NEITHER TOP SIX NOR BOTTOM SIX: Jason Blake

Blake is a top 6 forward - that's not playing like a top 6, so he's out.

NEITHER TOP SIX NOR BOTTOM SIX: Lee Stempniak

A quick call isn't it? Lee has proven he can score at the top 6 level and the more I see of him, the more he shows top 6 ability. Time will tell.

[Moe Green]

Stajan is a bottom six defensive forward if anything on this team. Most of his goals, like Antropov's are of the "garbage" variety. That is not to say that he isn't valuable, just that he doesn't fit on Burke's self-described team. The problem with the rebuild as I see it is that there are no guarantees in the draft. The Leafs might bottom feed for five years and still never sign a Crosby or Thorton. What the Leafs need to do, as soon as possible, is to identify and go after a franchise player, prefereably a forward, to become the face of this team - a player to build around. Next, they need to acquire a all-star sniper and a premier defenseman. Until we start getting some skilled players on this team, there is no point discussing the bottom six. Bottom six players are like side dishes and garnishes. These Leafs right now are a plate full of carrots, green beans, baked potatoes and parsley. All important parts of a balanced meal, but insubstantial. These Leafs and their cup-hungry fans need a mouth-watering, big, juicy steak and they need it now. Nuff said, I gotta go grab some lunch.

[McLovin]

Damian,

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment. Especially in terms of Stajan. Stajan is scoring at around a point-per-game (as you mentioned). Since when is that not good enough for a top-six role? Maybe you could ask for more from a first-liner, but a second-liner? A point per game - not good enough - really? We all know that a certain Swede clipped along at the same rate for what is regarded as a masterful career. Obviously I'm not comparing all the qualitative and leadership factors of the two, but, them's the numbers so far for Stajan. Now, I'm assuming that Stajan can continue this rate, which he may not. But if he does, I don't understand how he doesn't fit into the second line position. Do you really think that no team would want a PPG player on their second unit, especially at the price tag that he comes with?

Give your head a shake.

[Robert]

Point per game doesn't mean as much now as it did when Sundin was doing it. Sundin was point-per-game in the height of the trap era, when 82 points in a season landed you 4th in league scoring. This season, we have guys on pace for what, 150 points? The Sharks have six, maybe seven guys who are near a point-per-game pace. Detroit has maybe seven (though two have missed time to injury).

To be a solid contending team in this era of hockey, you need at least six players capable of staying near the point-per-game mark, scoring at least 70 points or more in a season.

[Pat - Vaughan]

so basically the stempiak deal is a dud. we unloaded dead wood and got dead wood in return. only top six for sure is Antropov (second line power winger). Grabs is an unproven and maybe a 2nd line centre. Kulemin shows some potential as a two way winger; needs more edge though. Hagman is a first line two way type winger who can fit in on a first line with a scoring winger and elite centre. Dominic Moore is the only proven bottom six as a 4th line centre; but he has to be complemented with a couple of tough wingers who can skate really well and fast. as for all the other names Cox lists they still have to prove and show who they are going to be. Right now they are basically stiffs.