Spencer Stastney
2025-26· Data as of July 27, 2026
Status derived from CBA rules; edge cases (Group 6 UFA, 10.2(c), 35+ contracts) may be misclassified. Years remaining are not yet tracked.
Surplus value ~$2.2M/yr
Pending unrestricted free agent (UFA) This is a rating, priced in dollars — what the model rates his on-ice value at. It is not a forecast of what he'll sign for. See the projected signing price on the Free-Agent board.
Realizable today Restricted (RFA) rights let the team realize about +$1.9M of this as signable/tradeable surplus; the rest is locked-in cost control — real value the team enjoys but can't directly cash out while he's signed this cheap.
+0.03 cap-years of surplus ≈ +$2.6M
Judged as-of — each season priced with only the model and data available then — Spencer Stastney has delivered 0.03 cap-years more value than he's been paid across our data window. One cap-year = a full season's salary-cap ceiling.
Career still active — this total will keep moving.
Low-confidence total — thin or short seasons drive a large share of the swing, so read it with caution.
- Cameron Crotty +$2.2M
- Vladislav Kolyachonok +$2.0M
- Jacob Moverare +$1.6M
Why this verdict
Why this verdict
Where this contract sits vs. the market
Each dot is a real free-agent signing (2015-2026): 613 comparable defense deals. The line is the going rate at each talent level, the market convention we price against. Real signings scatter around it; comparable players don’t all sign for the identical number.
The page’s headline verdict, +$1.9M/yr, refines this by adjusting the market rate for age, contract term, and restricted-free-agent status. The plot compares to the raw market curve; the verdict adjusts it.
This player is on an RFA (restricted) contract. Part of the gap below the curve is CBA cost control (teams pay restricted players below open-market value by rule), not evidence of a market inefficiency.
Structurally similar active deals
This contract sits in the Veteran depth region of the contract map. These are the active contracts whose shape is nearest to it, closest in spend, term, age, and role (not how they aged):
- Cameron Crotty $813K +$2.2M
- Vladislav Kolyachonok $775K +$2.0M
- Jacob Moverare $775K +$1.6M
- Conor Timmins $2.2M +$402K
- Jonathan Aspirot $775K +$2.2M
- Lassi Thomson $775K +$2.2M
Comparable by the shape of the deal, not by team or playing style. Archetypes are broad regions on a continuum; a deal near a boundary is genuinely in-between.
The range reflects pricing-model error, not measurement — fair value is a modeled estimate. The sample badge reflects games played, not dollar accuracy.
Defenseman impact uses a deployment-adjusted model (RAPM) that isolates each player from his linemates, competition, and zone starts at even strength. It covers 5-on-5 play and venue only — special-teams value and shot-blocking beyond its effect on 5-on-5 expected goals are not captured, and two defensemen who play almost all their minutes together cannot be fully separated.
Outlook
Outlook
In his peak window
Production index for defensemen. The dot marks Spencer at age 26.
Empirical production-by-age index (delta-method WAR fit, 2010-11+). Illustrative of typical aging; the dollar model prices age with a separate, softer decline.
No as-of track record for this deal yet — a leakage-free record needs at least two seasons graded as-of (coverage runs through 2024-25). The current-season verdict is above.
Full stats
Full stats
On-ice expected-goals impact per 60 — RAPM-adjusted (teammate- and competition-adjusted) where career 5v5 ice time clears the reliability floor, a raw on-off xG differential otherwise. Not wins. The RAPM figure is career-pooled (one value across seasons); the on-off fallback shows the most recent season.
Counted outcomes — totals and rates that carry shooting and goaltending luck.
| Season | GP | G | A | P | TOI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 66 | 2 | 8 | 10 | 15.5 |
| 2024-25 | 23 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 16.2 |
| 2023-24 | 20 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 16.0 |
| 2022-23 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 17.6 |
On-ice shot shares and modeled expected goals — these stabilize faster than goal totals, but xG is an estimate, not a count.
| Season | CF% | xG | xGF |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 51.5 | 1.8 | 38.0 |
| 2024-25 | 50.8 | 0.9 | 15.5 |
| 2023-24 | 51.8 | 0.8 | 18.2 |
| 2022-23 | 40.4 | 0.2 | 4.2 |
- CF%
- Corsi-for percentage — share of shot attempts while on the ice
- xG
- Individual expected goals from the player's own shot attempts
- xGF
- On-ice expected goals — team's xG while this player is on the ice
Usage vs. Value
Usage vs. Value
Limited minutes, strong number.
Among defensemen this season, Spencer's even-strength ice time ranks in the 6th percentile, while our value score puts him at 62. That's a gap of −56 — the coach is leaning out relative to our number.
- 5v5 TOI/GP
- 13:44
- Usage percentile
- 6
- Value score
- 62
- Primary PP usage
- 0%
- Primary PK usage
- 9%
Where even-strength ice time and our value score disagree — descriptive, not a verdict. Our number doesn't yet adjust for role or power-play usage.
Ranked #8 on the defensemen Usage vs. Value board. Usage is even-strength (5v5) ice time per game.
The value score is percentiled across the full position group, while the deployment percentile is taken over the eligible subset — the two aren't measured over the identical population.
Playoff track record
Playoff track record
Not enough playoff games to assess.
Descriptive only — not part of Value Score or Fair Value. Playoff samples are small and team-dependent; shown for the record.