Nothing 2 See Here

Using the Cap and Budget to Advantage

2010-07-06T15:58:00.004-06:00

(IF he had ended up on the westcoast... marketing doesn't get any easier than that)

The NYI are, supposedly, in the hunt for Kovalchuk. They also, factually, have to meet the Cap floor of (59.4 - 16.0 =) $43.4 million.

Current team salary stands at ~ $36 million and when role players are factored in that number should settle in at ~ $39 million. That leaves some $4.4 million to make up.

Why are they after Kovalchuk again?

Edmonton desperately wants to dump Souray ($5.4m Cap / $4.5m Sal), Chicago wants to dump Huet ($5.6m Cap / $5.6m Sal), Anaheim would love to dump Blake ($4.0m Cap / $3.0m Sal), etc.

The Isles are desperately in need of young, cheap, high-end talent. Kovalchuk ain't that. 1st round draft picks tend to be.

If I were Garth Snow I am spending a great deal of time talking to Anaheim and letting them know that Blake is a guy they can send my way at the cost of a draft pick(s) upgrade. Something like this:

Blake, ANA 1st round pick 2011 and ANA 4th round pick 2012
.. OR (Anaheim's choice prior to 2011 draft)..
Blake, ANA 2nd round pick 2011 and ANA 1st round pick 2012
FOR
NYI 3rd round pick 2011, NYI 5th round pick 2011

Anaheim dumps the Blake contract - allowing them to use the money for Ryan - has protection in case they fall apart in 2010/11 and the option to dump their pick in 2011 regardless (being a weaker draft class).

Islanders get a guy who won't help them much regardless - thereby not affecting their own draft pick standings - get much closer to the Cap floor (relatively painlessly) and stock up on higher quality draft picks.

The Isles don't have any, real, short-cut options on their rebuild. Using the Kovalchuk money to snag good picks and prospects from teams that need to dump salary is the best option. Full stop.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

NHL Entry Draft (2010) - Burnin' Nash Bridges

2010-06-29T02:32:00.012-06:00

Before I finish up my full 1st round draft review I wanted to remark on the Nash trade.

------

2003

Oilers trade the #17 (Parise) to New Jersey for the #22 (Pouliot) and the #68 (JF Jaques)

In one of the deepest drafts in recent memory the Oilers drop 5 spots in exchange for a pick at the very end (another 46 spots later) of the 2nd round.

2007

Oilers trade the #30 and #36 to Phoenix for the #21 (where they take Riley Nash)

In an average draft year (2007 had good front-end and petered out after that) the Oilers move up 9 spots in the draft in exchange for an early 2nd rounder.

2010

St. Louis trades the 2009 #17 overall pick (David Rundblad) to Ottawa for the 2010 #16 overall pick (Vladimir Tarasenko); in the next round Edmonton trades the 2007 #21 overall pick (Riley Nash) to Carolina for the 2010 #46 overall pick (Martin Marincin)

As much as I know some bloggers don't like Nash (lookin' at Ben) I find it hard to believe that he was worth THAT MUCH less than Rundblad.

------

While it looks like the Oilers team management has finally learned how to draft properly (more or less consistently) it does not appear true that the Oilers team management has learned a thing about how to:

a. value, as assets, their players and prospects;
b. maximize said player/prospect values; and
c. trade said players/prospects when value is high

Yay! for us.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

NHL Entry Draft (2010) - Rockin' the BMc

2010-06-21T12:29:00.014-06:00

A new item I am adding to the draft preview/review - how the aggregated list matches up against the best there is this time of year: Bob McKenzie.

His list is found at TSN and it comprises information gleaned from, primarily I believe, team scouts. Since the aggregated list is comprised of information gleaned from, primarily, non-team scouts I figured this would be an interesting exercise.

Note that the aggregated list is only takes into account the top-15 listings, so the number of players aggregated from those lists - 'in total' - in any given draft year can vary. For 2010 the number is 22.

So I will only look at McKenzie's top-22.

Rank

Number of slots it would take to get a player to have a matching rank on both lists; i.e. Gudbranson is ranked 2 slots earlier on McKenzie's list as opposed to where he ranks on the aggregated list.

Group

Per my original post I grouped the players by their aggregated point scores, acknowledging that in that bracket they were almost interchangable. I then replicated copied the process I used above (per Rank).

The Comparison

Aggregated .... Bob McKenzie .. Rank .. Group

Hall .......... Hall ............ 0 ..... 0
Seguin ........ Seguin .......... 0 ..... 0
-
Fowler ........ Gudbranson ...... 2 ..... 0
Gormley ....... Gormley ......... 0 ..... 0
Gudbranson .... Fowler .......... 2 ..... 0
-
Granlund ...... Johansen ........ 4 ..... 0
Connolly ...... Niederreiter .... 2 ..... 0
Tarasenko ..... Connolly ........ 1 ..... 0
Niederreiter .. Campbell ........ 2 ..... 1
Johansen ...... Skinner ......... 2 ..... 0
-
Campbell ...... Forbort ......... 3 ..... 0
Skinner ....... Burmistrov ...... 1 ..... 0
Burmistrov .... Granlund ........ 7 ..... 1
Forbort ....... Watson .......... 4 ..... 1
-
Kuznetsov ..... McIlrath ........ 7 ..... 0
Bjugstad ...... Tarasenko ....... 8 ..... 2
Pysyk ......... Etem ............ 2 ..... 0
Watson ........ Bennett ......... z ..... z
Etem .......... Bjugstad ........ 3 ..... 0
Merrill ....... Pysyk ........... 3 ..... 0
Faulk ......... Sheahan ......... z ..... z
McIlrath ...... Merrill ......... 2 ..... 1

Notable drops by Rank:

-- Tarasenko (8 spots)
-- Granlund (7 spots)
-- McIlrath (7 spots)

I think we see where the 'Russian' factor impacts Tarasenko, the 'Size' factor impacts Granlund and the 'Toughness/Size' factor impacts McIlrath. Except at the very high end I consider 4 spots or less to be irrelevant.

Notable drops by Group:

-- Tarasenko (2 spots)

Tough being a Russkie nowadays. He drops two full brackets on McKenzie's list. Should be noted that Bennett and Sheahan don't show on the aggregated lists while Faulk and Kuznetsov don't show on McKenzie's.

Some Thoughts

Pretty damn close imo. Props to the independent scouts... and the aggregation process I guess :-)... group think maybe?

Quick note - the 'Rule of Thumb' I use explains away more than a few of these discrepancies (almost everything top-15 oddly enough).

All things being equal... remember that McKenzie is talking to 'team' scouts. His list should always be better (I know I think it is) but, as with anything, don't be surprised if sometimes the aggregated list gets it right.

After all, teams are, generally, run by strong independent minded thinkers aren't they? Right?

------

Have a great evening everyone.

NHL Entry Draft (2010)

2010-06-19T00:48:00.009-06:00

For archive purposes I am compiling my NHL Entry Draft (2010) stuff here. As with last year's NHL Entry Draft (2009) archive, this first post acts as a primer that contains the set-up info of interest going into the draft.

Links to the other two articles in this series:

NHL Entry Draft 2010 - Rockin' the BMc

NHL Entry Draft 2010 - First Round Review (to come)

NHL Entry Draft 2010 - Oiler Picks (to come)

------

Personal Thoughts

Kind of fond of this draft group. Deep in numbers but shallow in terms of true top-end talent (both Hall and Seguin will probably require long, long careers for either to get any HOF buzz). That said, LOTS of team building talent here, some of them will surprise (Niederreiter and Tarasenko) and one of them (Campbell) might even be swimming upstream of the conventional wisdom of the sphere.

-- Hall or Seguin - can't go wrong either way
-- Fowler, Gormley, Gudbranson - shades of 2008, 2002 and 1998; who is who?
-- Granlund - how important are smrts?
-- Niederreiter - if CSB gives him top-10 status he ranks just behind Granlund; top-5 talent imo
-- Connolly - on points the injuries aren't an issue, except he only made 3 top-10 lists so I guess they do matter
-- Campbell - goalies get no love here but I think, contrary to my own beliefs, he will be the steal of the draft
-- CSB - amalgamate your NA and Euro listings; just no good excuse for not doing it

After the top-2 a lot of these guys are one thing away from being viewed as sure-thing all-stars (Connolly/injury and Granlund/size and Tarasenko/Russian) so, normally, I wouldn't anticipate ANY team trading out of the top-12 (i.e. an honest shot at Skinner or Burmistrov? Sign me up!) and would expect all the action to start with St. Louis at pick #14 (just got their goalie and they KNOW how to play a draft)...

except that...

well...

This is a VERY motivated draft year. Aside from the usual suspects (Islanders, Blue Jackets, Coyotes, Ducks, Blues and Sharks) there are a bunch of teams that will have something going on:

1. Several teams have new management and one of them will want to make a splash
2. It's a deep draft with loads of desirable talent that will be available late
3. Chicago - their assets are good enough to entice competitive bids
4. Toronto - Kaberle should be moved this time around
5. Phoenix - Maloney is a player AND he has TWO mid-round picks
6. Florida - has declared they are open for business

etc.

Don't see all of that come up every year.

Why don't I have Edmonton listed above? They don't have a lot of chips that would bring back a 1st rounder in this draft. Simple as that. Heck, they don't have the assets to bring back 2nd round picks. Unless they are willing to trade Gagner, Penner or Hemsky this team is stuck to staying where it is.

Best, realistic, bet?

Cogliano and Nash are used to bring back something in the 16-20 range.

Best, fantasy, bet?

Penner, Brule and a pick (or Nash I guess) for Boston's #2 overall.

Here's a wierd thing I guess: don't like any of Fowler, Gormley or Gudbranson well enough to expend major assets to get them - regardless of how badly the Oilers need defensemen - rather try to get later round picks and select from McIrath, Tinordi, Pysyk, et al. If I'm Florida I'm trying to stepladder my way down this draft.

Somehow, knowing the Islanders have the #5, I'm a little scared.

Miracles would include coming out of this draft with two of Hall, Seguin, Niederreiter or Tarasenko. Happiness means adding one of McIlrath, Burmistrov to the haul. I like Seguin but expect Hall and I figure that one of the bad contracts will be unloaded, but only one. Nilsson.

Without further ado...

------

Oiler Draft Picks (for use or trade)

01 -- __1
02 -- _31
02 -- _48 ... Trade with Nashville
03 -- _61
04 -- _91
05 -- 121
06 -- 151
06 -- 162 ... Trade with Anaheim
06 -- 166 ... Trade with Ottawa
07 -- 181

Remember to adjust for compensation picks.

Team Order - 1st Round

01.. Edmonton
02.. Boston ........ via ... Toronto
03.. Florida
04.. Columbus
05.. NY Islanders
06.. Tampa Bay
07.. Carolina
08.. Atlanta
09.. Minnesota
10.. NY Rangers
11.. Dallas
12.. Anaheim
13.. Phoenix ....... via ... Calgary
14.. St. Louis
15.. Boston
16.. Ottawa
17.. Colorado
18.. Nashville
19.. Los Angeles
20.. Pittsburgh
21.. Detroit
22.. Phoenix
23.. Buffalo
24.. Atlanta ....... via ... New Jersey
25.. Vancouver
26.. Washington
27.. Montreal
28.. San Jose
29.. Anaheim ....... via ... Philadelphia
30.. Chicago

Top-15 Player Rankings (aggregated)

Below are the listings of the top-15 picks of each of the different, and independent, scouting bureau's. They are: McKeen's, ISS (International Scouting Service), Redline (Woodlief), The Hockey News and the CSB (Central Scouting Bureau).

Below that is an aggregated listing of those datasets after they have been fed through a scoring system. The scoring system simply reverses the order on the list (i.e. a player ranked #1 on the list scores 15 points while a player ranked #15 scores 1 point) and then adds ALL the points that player generates from the different lists.

Note that I counted the number of times a draftee made the top-10 of a list. This is to help add perspective. Prospect 'A' may have fewer points than prospect 'B' but if prospect 'A' shows as top-10 on all 5 lists then prospect 'A' may be seen as a safer pick to make.

The Scouts Recommend (Final Lists)

... McKeens* .... ISS ......... Redline* .... Hockey News . CSB**

1.. Hall ........ Hall ........ Hall ........ Hall ........ Seguin
2.. Seguin ...... Seguin ...... Seguin ...... Seguin ...... Hall
3.. Campbell .... Gormley ..... Granlund .... Fowler ...... Granlund
4.. Gudbranson .. Tarasenko ... Tarasenko ... Connolly .... Connolly
5.. Gormley ..... Fowler ...... Gormley ..... Gudbranson .. Gudbranson
6.. Fowler ...... Niederreiter. Fowler ...... Burmistrov .. Tarasenko
7.. Connolly .... Gudbranson .. Skinner ..... Gormley ..... Fowler
8.. Johansen .... Johansen .... Niederreiter. Niederreiter. Gormley
9.. Granlund .... Skinner ..... Johansen .... Bjugstad .... Kuznetsov
10. Niederreiter. Forbort ..... Campbell .... Granlund .... Pysyk
11. Kuznetsov ... Merrill ..... Forbort ..... Forbort ..... Etem
12. Skinner ..... Watson ...... Gudbranson .. Johansen .... Forbort
13. Burmistrov .. Connolly .... Burmistrov... Campbell .... Johansen
14. Bjugstad .... Burmistrov .. Connolly .... Tarasenko ... Burmistrov
15. McIlrath .... Granlund .... Faulk ....... Watson ...... Niederreiter

Graded Rankings

.................... Top-10 . Scoring

Hall .................. 5 ___ 15 + 15 + 15 + 15 + 14 = 74
Seguin ................ 5 ___ 14 + 14 + 14 + 14 + 15 = 71
Fowler ................ 5 ___ 10 + 11 + 10 + 13 + 09 = 53
Gormley ............... 5 ___ 11 + 13 + 11 + 09 + 08 = 52
Gudbranson ............ 4 ___ 12 + 09 + 04 + 11 + 11 = 47
Granlund .............. 4 ___ 07 + 01 + 13 + 06 + 13 = 40
Connolly .............. 3 ___ 09 + 03 + 02 + 12 + 12 = 38
Tarasenko ............. 3 ___ 00 + 12 + 12 + 02 + 10 = 36
Niederreiter .......... 4 ___ 06 + 10 + 08 + 08 + 01 = 33
Johansen .............. 3 ___ 08 + 08 + 07 + 04 + 03 = 30
Campbell .............. 2 ___ 13 + 00 + 06 + 03 + 00 = 22
Skinner ............... 2 ___ 04 + 07 + 09 + 00 + 00 = 20
Burmistrov ............ 1 ___ 03 + 02 + 03 + 10 + 02 = 20
Forbort ............... 1 ___ 00 + 06 + 05 + 05 + 04 = 20
Kuznetsov ............. 1 ___ 05 + 00 + 00 + 00 + 07 = 12
Bjugstad .............. 1 ___ 02 + 00 + 00 + 07 + 00 = 09
Pysyk ................. 0 ___ 00 + 00 + 00 + 00 + 06 = 06
Watson ................ 0 ___ 00 + 04 + 00 + 01 + 00 = 05
Etem .................. 0 ___ 00 + 00 + 00 + 00 + 05 = 05
Merrill ............... 0 ___ 00 + 05 + 00 + 00 + 00 = 05
Faulk, McIlrath (2 pts or less).

The big two: Hall, Seguin
Next best thing: Fowler, Gormley, Gudbranson
Should be Good: Granlund, Connolly, Tarasenko, Niederreiter, Johansen
Consolation Prizes: Campbell, Skinner, Burmistrov, Forbort
Afterthoughts: Kuznetsov and everyone else

A Rule Of Thumb

When looking at the list I tend to apply an arbitrary rule of thumb: any draftee within 10 points of another draftee is at threat to be picked ahead or behind that draftee. This is to recognize, in part, the modestly random (to me) aspect of what teams prefer in their players. It is also a measure of reasonableness.

Connolly has 38 pts - it would not be a big surprise to see him preferred over Gudbranson by any number of teams. It would also, however, be a surprise to see him picked ahead of Fowler or Gormley.

Using that rule of thumb I can expect that:

-- Hall and Seguin will take the top 2 spots
-- Tarasenko could overtake Connolly and Granlund but not Gudbranson
-- If anyone ranked below Johansen is chosen in the top-8 it SHOULD be a surprise
-- If anyone ranked below Forbort is taken in the top-9, the team making that call probably just made a big mistake

------

* McKeen's and Redline only release, for free, their top-10. I found the other 5 names, using various other websites, but cannot completely verify for accuracy. If you have the goods please feel free to self-correct while you read.

I will update as the information becomes public.

** CSB does not aggregate their European and North American lists. So I did it. Given the weakness of the Old World's offerings this year I started the highest CSS ranked Euro two spots behind and followed on from there.

------

Have a great evening everyone, and enjoy the draft. I will as I will be there :-)

The Never Evers

2010-06-07T20:58:00.003-06:00

Some things I thought would never, ever...

... and have (or not as the case may be):

Bruce

One of the great, great people I know goes by the name of Bruce. To my knowledge it is also his real name (then again... there was that time a bunch of us were headed to a wedding in Regina and stopped in Edmonton for a night and a game - where they raised #31 to the rafters - and he wouldn't let us drive all the way to his "aunt's" place and had us drop him off a block or two away so as to reduce the chance we would 'wake her up'... heh).

Anyways.

Bruce is a Canucks fan. As far back as he can remember.

He is also one of the best sports fans I know and, I suspect, will ever know.

Hence I have resolved that IF:

-- the Canucks make the make the play-offs AND
-- there are, literally, no other teams I like better than the Canucks still in the play-offs THEN

I will cheer for the Canucks.

In the meantime I will pray that such an event never, ever happens.

Entry Draft(s)

Last time I went to an NHL Entry Draft it was 1995. I still remember the chants of the crowd for Doan! Doan! DOAN! Doan! Doan! KELLY?!? WTF?

I still have the booklet from that draft.

Anyways, I am now - officially - headed to the 2010 NHL Entry Draft being held in Los Angeles this June 25.

Never, ever thought I would get two of those in.

The Arena

Just to clarify, my true preferences in regards to the arena are these (in order):

1. That Northlands is renovated and all that money being thrown at a development downtown actually goes into the community surrounding Northlands. History, tradition and heritage mean a lot to me and, for what it's worth, I think that area could become something truly spectacular were equivalent energies expended.

2. That IF a new arena must be built then it be built where in the same area as where the Stadium is. Move the Linen plant et al (gotta be cheaper than downtown land), one eyesore is better than two and parking can be shared. Move the entire Northlands complex and pass the old one to the developers (part and parcel).

Never, ever happen.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Some Simple Thoughts

2010-05-10T14:06:00.006-06:00

(picture via Steve Russell, Toronto Star)

THE PICK

If the Oilers can get Boston to throw in their two 2nd round picks (the 2010 Toronto 2nd and their own) - or something equivalent/better - they should, happily, accept the compensation and take Seguin at 2nd overall.

If not, then they should probably take Hall.

Barring a trade for the actual 2nd pick, in a best worlds scenario Boston flips their own 1st and 2nd (not Toronto's 2nd) for a 3rd and 5th and the privilege of taking Hall 1st overall. Don't see it.

I say that only because I am fairly ambivalent as to the difference in value of Hall and Seguin. However, if the Oilers are similarly ambivalent they shouldn't be as obvious about it as I am.

THE ARENA

If the cost to renovate/expand the Colisseum is around $250 million then, and if their bargaining position matches mine, then that is what the City of Edmonton should expect to pony up for a new Arena.

My bargaining position is simple:

1. Maximum contribution, to arena, is $250 million; this money would be borrowed

2. The arena remains the property of the City of Edmonton

3. Other area infrastructure upgrades are estimated and tallied and paid and exactly one-half of those costs would be borrowed and tied to the same instrument used to fund the arena (the other half being considered a cost of doing business to revitalize an area)

4. Debt servicing and repayment for all amounts borrowed is paid for:

..... a. first, by any super-increases* in the targeted area's tax collection over and beyond the last established tax collection for that area, and

..... b. secondly, by ancillary revenues** generated by the new arena

5. Once the debt is paid off the ancillary revenues, as established and referenced, are then paid to the team

* increases over and above standard increases city-wide - this is for the sake of tax payer transparency (i.e. pre-arena the area was worth 'x' and paid 'x' in taxes and now it is worth 'y' and pays 'y' in taxes; y - x is what is gained by taking part in the exercise)
** parking and the like; pretty much anything that will result in an increase in revenues for the Oilers via the new arena is up for negotiation imo - though I expect that only those revenue streams currently gifted the Oilers would end up being hassled over

The upshot being that the City will allow the developers to leverage city dollars into making the development a go AND, once the debts are paid off, gift the Oilers with much larger revenue streams (with the issue being the payment of the debts incurred).

STEVE NASH

Very proud of him.

Update to add a nice G&M story (per Michael Grange):

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Hypothermetically Speaking

2010-04-25T23:49:00.005-06:00

So... question...

Given that you, as the GM of an NHL team are SERIOUS about rebuilding your club - from the ground up no less - do you make this trade:

Souray, O'Sullivan, Nilsson and Moreau
FOR
Redden, 2010 1st, 2011 2nd and 2012 1st

------

The Salary Grid* looks like so:

2010-11: EDM = -4.6 = 4.5 + 2.4 + 2.5 + 1.7 - 6.5
2010-11: NYR = +4.6

2011-12: EDM = +2.0 = 4.5 - 6.5
2011-12: NYR = -2.0

2012-13: EDM = +5.0
2012-13: NYR = -5.0

2013-14: EDM = +5.0
2013-14: NYR = -5.0

* With buy-outs the absolute cost to the Rangers goes down substantially while the relative value of benefits received by the Oilers go down

------

The Cap Grid looks like so:

2010-11: EDM = -5.8 = 5.4 + 2.9 + 2.0 + 2.0 - 6.5
2010-11: NYR = +5.8

2011-12: EDM = +1.1 = 5.4 - 6.5
2011-12: NYR = -1.1

2012-13: EDM = +6.5
2012-13: NYR = -6.5

2013-14: EDM = +6.5
2013-14: NYR = -6.5

Surprisingly, the big hit to the Oilers - in regards to the Cap - don't really occur until the 2012-13 season as the two year stretch per the Nilsson and O'Sullivan buy-outs is avoided.

------

This is, basically a cash for picks deal with the variables being value received by the Rangers from Souray's play (fight! fight! fight!) and the value received from by the Oilers from Redden's play (doh!).

So:

- is it worth it to you to dump all of your problem contracts/players at once AND get some nice draft picks in exchange for a player on the downslope with a nut-crushing contract?

- is it worth it to the Rangers to get a player(s) they might want AND save their future Cap and cash positions in exchange for being able to dump a Cap and cash killing contract?

------

So what do you imagine/mean/believe when you say the words 'rebuild'?

------

Have a great evening everyone.

It's A Bird, It's a Plane... It's a Draft Pick?

2010-03-23T12:23:00.007-06:00

Photo is picked up from Faceoff.com, an Edmonton Journal blog

So. Let's say that this team really IS in for the long rebuild. Cool.

Hey! Look! Ottawa is thinking of buying out Cheechoo's contract! I guess that looks kinda like so (feel free to check my math):

JONATHAN CHEECHOO

Salary: $3.5 million
Cap hit: $3.0 million
Buyout: $1,155,000 or $577,500 per year in budget costs
2010-2011: $ 77,500
2011-2012: $577,500

Hrmmm... ain't that a coincidence... the Oilers are looking/rumored to be buying out Nilsson and/or O'Sullivan...

ROBERT NILSSON BUYOUT FROM CAPGEEK.COM

2010-2011: $-83,333 ($416,667 in budget costs)
2011-2012: $416,667 ($416,667 in budget costs)

PATRICK O'SULLIVAN BUYOUT FROM CAPGEEK.COM

2010-2011: $935,417 ($397,917 in budget costs)
2011-2012: $397,917 ($397,917 in budget costs)

Gee, what kind of draft pick would Ottawa give up to save approximately $323,000 in budget costs and somewhere from to $238,000 to $321,000 in Cap hits (think Nilsson)?

Guess we'll never know.

------

Edit to add: If Tambellini really did have a Penner & Gilbert for the TO 1st on the table (per Dupont at the Boston Globe)... and Chiarelli couldn't get that to go... then they are both idiots. Tambs for offering and Chiarelli for not closing. Just a stupid, stupid deal to even offer!

------

Have a great evening everyone.

2010 Reload or Rebuild - Rebuild It Is Then

2010-03-03T16:54:00.006-07:00

Well, THAT was underwhelming.

The Trades

Did like the Staois trade straight up. Johnson is gone end of the year so this is purely about trimming next years Cap hit and getting a 3rd round pick.

Did not like the Grebeshkov trade before and it makes even less sense now. If Visnovsky was a trade target then keeping Grebs makes a lot of sense - pump his value with powerplay and butter minutes and trade him NEXT year.

Did not like the Visnovsky trade. I haven't liked Whitney since his full-on regression in Pittsburgh and I liked him less once he signed an inflated deal based on best before dated play (which makes him an Oiler by default I guess). No draft pick? Dear god.

The Waiver

Ryan Jones will be a better NHL player than JF Jacques. whoop-de-freaking-do

The Trades Not Made

How many smallish, duplicate skill-set forwards do we have on this team? How many were traded today. Reason enough to fire Tambellini right there. Moreau still with the team? And Pisani and Comrie are still with the team?

Epic failure. Epic. No excuse good enough for that.

One (Possible) Saving Grace

Of 3 trades made, only 1 makes any sense IF Tambellini is actually planning on the buy-outs (Nilsson, POS) and the reloading of the roster (Jagr) for next year - which I believe to be true btw. If, however, this is the start of a full on rebuild (which I will believe when seen) then the trades make some sort of sense.

Look, the total possible Cap dump here is around $7.5 million less a few replacements (I would probably keep Johnson just so that I can retain a veneer of respectability - he is a 'veteran' defenseman after all). Drop Pisani and Comrie and the savings are now in excess of $10 million - even factoring in some replacements.

Tambellini now has a chance to dump/trade any/all of the remaining forwards that have to go. I figure that one, maybe two, can be legitimately traded.

Using a ratio of 1/2 (half of what goes out comes back in; i.e. Moreau for a 4th and some scrub with a guaranteed one-way contract) the resulting Cap savings could be as much as another $2 million.

With any luck Khabby doesn't come back (another $3+ million) and Souray becomes another off-season casualty/trade (using the 1/2 ratio that is another $2.7 million).

So here's the trick - use what you have. And what you have is a team as bad as it will ever get (I hope), a few decent veteran pieces, some good prospects and a whack of Cap space and budget play.

THAT first part (the bad team bit) is the one, possible, saving grace that comes out of a day like today.

Given that Visnovsky, Grebeshkov and, even, Staois aren't easy pieces to replace on this team (mostly because they comprised some of the few quality pieces on it), don't try to replace them.

At least not yet. Make signing, or trading for, ONE decent player the goal of the off-season (Seidenburg maybe?) - it worked for Phoenix (Sauer) and go from there.

Keep Eberle and co. off the roster for now and let Nilsson/POS/Brule et al play out their contracts or become trade deadline tradebait. The in-season goal is to collect ONE more decent player and collect another top-3 pick in 2011.

Hemsky is the only real question mark in this whole process and I have to hope that even Tambellini can't screw that trade up.

A decent management team could make lemonade out of this fiasco.

Hence my hopes aren't all that high.

F&*k me.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

2010 Reload or Rebuild

2010-03-01T19:27:00.009-07:00

Hrmmmm....

This team isn't that good. Hasn't been for a long, long time. Makes it hard to write about. Even harder when I can't see where it will get any better any time sooner, or later.

So I will keep this short.

SHOULD MAKE PLAYOFFS

IF this is my goal - to build a team that should make the playoffs and then hope for some quality time with my Fairy Godmother at a Shnapp's Shooter party come said playoffs - then:

Step 1: Moreau goes, Souray goes, Pisani goes, etc.
Step 2: Dump any four of the munchkins
Step 3: Do everything I can, short of giving up the 1st, for Weiss

If Step 2 and Step 3 aren't mutually exclusive then all the better.

i.e.

Brule, Cogliano & Plante
FOR
Weiss

Works just fine for me.

Given that goaltending may be plentiful yet again, I wait for the off-season to fix that problem.

Given that my team isn't deep enough to overcome mediocrity I wouldn't hold my breath as to 'fixing' the problem.

Given the state of the team's goaltending right now... maybe mediocrity isn't so bad after all.

heh

WILL MAKE PLAYOFFS

IF this is my goal - to build a team that will make the playoffs and should be a year-to-year contender for the Stanley Cup then:

Step 1: Moreau goes, Souray goes, Pisani goes, etc.
Step 2: Dump any three of the munchkins
Step 3: Do everything I can, short of giving up the 1st, for Toronto's 1st

If Step 2 and Step 3 aren't mutually exclusive then all the better.

i.e.

Penner/Visnovsky/Gilbert (one of), Brule/Cogliano & 2nd
FOR
Ryder (or equivalent salary) & TO 1st

Works just fine for me. Hell, Penner and Gilbert could work if the salaries match up.

If I can follow that up with a trade of Souray and assets to Dallas for Turco, their 1st and assets then all the better.

Given that 'bad' goaltending is a key, positive, factor in any successful rebuilding I am already set with current assets. No chance I keep Turco.

Given that I am committing to a full rebuild then all I have to worry about is getting assets with a good work ethic - so that is my major worry.

That and Hemsky. Would hate to lose him.... and with this I probably would.

UPDATE (from when written):

GREBESHKOV TRADE

Grebs for a Nashville 2nd. Tambs is in for the long haul.

Unless Nashville collapses, not a great trade.

Edit to add:

I am reading in numerous comments (made elsewhere of course :-) ) that this trade makes sense:

1. as a salary dump and

2. as a value trade because he was set to earn too much if qualified

Utter f&*king hogwash.

1. Katz has the cash to stash so if this was about the salary dump then it puts to lie every claim made that he was/is willing to spend to build a winner*

2. As an RFA every team that wanted him to stay could qualify to stay and every team that wanted him to go could just not qualify - just like a UFA**

* and sometimes that means spending on a loser so as not to get less than fair value
** which means the team that trades for him has the advantage of being to keep him - regardless of all other factors not involving not playing in the NHL - which is BETTER than UFA

I repeat: not a great trade.

More to come.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

2010 Reload or Rebuild - NBA Edition

2010-01-24T19:37:00.010-07:00

As mentioned before I have started to follow the NBA. The ability to reshape a team, almost overnight, is pretty interesting stuff.

However, I also follow it, in part, because I believe that the NBA's management know-how, when it comes to Cap managing a team at least, is far ahead of that of most NHL general managers. There are lessons there to be learned.

What Matters in the NBA

What matters are these four things (in order):

1. Acquiring superior talent;
2. Having money and spending it wisely;
3. Well rounded roster; and
4. Coaching well-matched to the talent

Not much different from any sport really (shoulda known!).

The Salary Cap and Luxury Tax issues only matter on the way to, and at the close of, the accomplishment of those four things.

One area where the two sports differ, markedly, is the extent to which the possession of superior talent affects the record of a team. Because the NBA game is only 48 minutes long and most starters play 30+ mins a night a top-tier player will affect as much as (and sometimes more) two-thirds of a teams 'game'.

In the NHL, other than the goalie (who plays the entire game), only a handful of players will log more than 25 minutes a game over the course of a season. Given an NHL game is 60 minutes long the math says that no matter how good a player like Ovechkin is he will put less time in on the ice than a Kobe or Lebron.

Which means that in the NBA there are few things more important than acquiring superior talent. #1 with a bullet.

Now We Talk Money

Much like in the NHL superior talent will only show up in one of three ways:

1. Top-end draft picks
2. Lucky draft picks
3. Smart, aggressive management with money

As the first two options are pretty standard I will spare a few more moments to discuss the last - smart, aggressive management WITH money.

The NBA Salary Cap sits around $57.3 million while the Luxury Tax kicks in (dollar for dollar) at roughly $69.9 million. The Luxury Tax threshold comes with an extra kick however - teams under the Tax get as much as $4.5 million as part of a share of the taxes paid by those over the Tax.

i.e. Salaries totalling $69.9 million have an effective cost of $65.4 million while Salaries totalling $70 million have an effective cost of $70.1 million.

That last $100k is a killer.

However. The correlation between paying the Tax and being a play-off bound team is pretty strong (I use hoopshype). Check the link.

Excepting the Knicks and the Wizards almost all the teams listed (15 in all) as paying the Tax are either IN the play-offs or probable for it.

Excepting the Raptors, Bobcats, Hawks, Blazers and Grizzlies most teams listed (15 in all) as not paying the Tax are out of the play-offs.

To be fair, that Western Conference is nuts.

Why?

Go back to what I said about smart, aggressive management with money.

Sooner or later one of the teams that doesn't like to, or cannot, pay the Tax will HAVE to dump a good player. And that is where a team WITH money can come in and get said player.

That isn't always easy however. The NBA has a trade kicker (actually, there are several) wherein salaries have to, more or less, match up. So the trick is being able to match up.

Much easier to do that if you are already spending more than you need to. The key is having expiring contracts available.

Expiring contracts - contracts that end in the current year - can have a lot of value in the NBA. Houston, a team that is paying Tracy McGrady $23 million NOT to play may be able to improve their team by trading him to Philadelphia or Chicago - teams that want to dump NEXT year's salary.

Want to build a winner in the NBA - spend the cash.

Reload or Rebuild?

Okay, granted, while the margin for error is much higher in the NHL (larger rosters, well paid middle class and no skater plays 60%+ of the available ice-time), the NHL isn't all that different from the NBA.

Next post will be the final one of this series.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

2010 Reload or Rebuild - The Revisits - #1

2010-01-23T11:05:00.008-07:00

As mentioned just previous, and as alluded to in the title, I am now re-visiting the topic of what I would (if it mattered and if you cared and even if you cared that it mattered I guess) do: reload or rebuild?

First, however, a quick post on luck and why it matters, to me, in this case.

If any of you recall there was a time when I was doing a series of Franchise 101 posts. For the purpose of this post the relevant post to reference is this one:

Franchise 101 - Part 05 - Objectivity

------

For those of you who don't want to take the link elsewhere (Too late for some. I know. Sorry) I will quote the relevant portion below:

A quick lesson on Objectivity and Subjectivity:

Objectivity

Yes. Halle Berry is better looking than my wife.

Subjectivity

My wife is every good thing for me. She rocks my world in every way. Absolutely gorgeous. Get lost Halle.

The Goal

There is the rub. As long as the topic, or goal, is simply that of 'who is most attractive' then my example stands, if however, the issue is that of lifemate and compatibility then my example is stood on its head (pointed as it may be).

Does luck play a role? Of course. Is some subjectivity a good thing? Of course. Too much of either however is, typically, a bad thing.

The lesson - as important as it is to objectively classify the competitive standing of a team it is even more important to understand the goal at hand. Ostensibly this is to win the Stanley Cup.

------

In the NHL there are, really, only four categories needed to classify the competitive standing of each team: Play-off Longshot, Play-off Bubble Team, Play-off Probable and Cup Contender.

Play-off Longshot

The team, as currently constituted, won't be in the play-off chase. Too young, too injured, too dysfunctional, too short on talent in key spots and/or too much of any combination of the items already mentioned - it just isn't a play-off team.

Everything would have to break right for this team to make a run.

Play-off Bubble Team

The team, as currently constituted, has some issues but is strong enough in other areas to compensate. If the team can avoid the injury bug and/or long-term slumps from key players then they should be competitive most nights and right in the thick of it.

Throw in a career year from a key player and/or a rookie that blows the doors off and this team is in and may be making a run.

Play-off Probable

The team, as currently constituted, has few issues and a lot of strengths. Barring impairment caused by long-term injuries to, or unexplicable drops in performance from, key players or a total break-down in team chemistry this team will be 'in' the play-offs, not 'trying' to get in.

If a few things break right this team will be competing for a top-4 conference finish and can be considered a Cup contender.

Cup Contender

The team, as currently constituted, is a powerhouse that only total catastrophe can derail from a play-off berth. A solid team without any real weaknesses the roster will have players whose talent is undeniable, players whose performance is dependable, and players who know how to compete night after night. The team probably has a few players who have all three of those qualities.

These are strong teams that can survive the odd set-back quite easily and if players play like they should they will be in it to the end.

------

A GM who has an accurate gauge of the competitive standing of their team should have an advantage over the GM's who do not. I said 'should' because other factors may be in play; the most common being, of course, interference from higher management.

------

You will find this kind of talk in other posts of mine, in the recent past the most notable would be this one:

A Plan

So. That gives you a sense of my starting frame of reference as far as these sorts of things go.

What About 'Luck' Then?

Well:

1. Luck exists;

2. Luck exists on a micro level;

3. Luck exists on a macro level; and

4. Regardless of any mitigations undertaken, see also #1

So I think there is such a thing as luck. 'kay.

In terms of 'micro-level' I am talking about certain individual things that can be done, on a person by person basis, to mitigate the chance that bad things happen or increase the chance that good things happen.

i.e. an NHL-level shooter should be able to, fairly reliably, hit the net with a certain level of accuracy at a certain level of speed. Practicing a type of shot (wrist shot, slap shot, one timer, point shot, etc) should improve a players ability to maintain, and maybe even improve, their level of proficiency with that shot to an extent the 'un'lucky effects are minimized or eliminated in some cases.

In terms of 'macro-level' I am talking about all, or at least a large combination of all, the individual things that can be done, on a person by person basis, to mitigate the chance that bad things happen or good things happen.

i.e. not just practicing a shot but practicing many types of shots, practicing stick-handling and pass reception, studying goalie tendencies and increasing ice awareness, maintaining physical fitness levels and optimizing the mental and emotional approach to the game, etc.

And lest I haven't made the point clear enough before - sometimes 'luck' just 'happens'.

What Direction The Wind?

I also look at things in a reference or direction mode. Which is to say, when I add everything up do I (or 'you', or 'whomever' for that matter) need:

-- luck to work with me for me to succeed or
-- luck to work against for me NOT to succeed

Think about that for a second. If I am a NHL level shooter and I have:

-- maximized, to the best of my ability, every talent and skill I have; and
-- allowed for the talent of the opposing team to alter or block my shot

Then I know that I should be scoring some goals. If I am scoring less than I should then odds are good I am not getting lucky or I should review my mitigation efforts and if I am scoring more than I should then luck is with me.

HOWEVER

If I am a NHL level shooter and I'm not practicing and doing all sorts of other good things then there comes a point in time where - just to maintain status quo - luck HAS to be working in my favor. Over time my ability to successfully do things, at a certain level of predictability, will decrease.

The Oilers

I would propose to you that the problem with the Oilers the last few years is that team management has, serially, constructed rosters that required luck to be working in their favor in order for the team to succeed:

- certain players HAD to stay healthy
- certain players could NOT have off years
- certain players HAD to improve their productivity a great deal (not just a bit)
etc.

And all that, obviously, hasn't happened.

Start To Put It Together

So, put it all together and you should, now, have an idea of what I think about the question of reload vs. rebuild.

It's all about competitive level and requirements for luck. Until the next post in this series, take care.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

2010 Reload or Rebuild - To Be Revisited

2010-01-17T23:18:00.004-07:00

I will post more on this on a later date but for the record my decision on whether or not to try for a 1 year reload versus a 3 to 5 year rebuild rests on three unknowns:

1. If Boston wants Penner;

2. If they would give up the Toronto 1st rounder for him and be willing to wait to the last hour of trade deadline day to do it; and

3. Where Toronto is in the standings

My reasoning revolves around the concept of 'luck' and whether or not your success or lack of success depends on it working for you or against you, respectively.

The dots aren't hard to connect.

Not that it matters.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Trades (and a little NBA stuff)

2010-01-09T00:06:00.006-07:00

(just to prove I have it)

Souray

Has indicated he's okay if he sees a plane ticket he likes. West coast kind of guy.

- be shocked if Phoenix makes the move (too smart there)
- be surprised if Anaheim makes a move (team fit is poor - may be a replacement for Nieds?)
- be surprised if San Jose makes a move (team fit is poor and Blake is playing well)
- be expecting to see a low-ball bid from Los Angeles (Lombardi is pretty smart)
- be expecting to see a deal made with Dallas (best combo of need, talent to offer, Cap space and budget flex)

As I mentioned elsewhere I like the idea of:

Benn, Skrastins and 1st
FOR
Souray and ??

------

That NBA Stuff

Word is that Houston wants to make a big push for Bosh.

Okay. Fine.

Bosh (PF), Turkoglu (SF) and Calderon (PG)
FOR
McGrady (SG), Ariza (SF) and Scola (PF)

Salaries work per the trade machine but a trade like this never happens - trading Bosh means a rethink of the entire team and such a rethink means a restart. Hence the expiring contracts of McGrady and the now, not needed, contracts of Turkoglu and Calderon.

Next year the rotation is: Jack, DeRozan, Ariza, Scola (if re-signed) and Bargnani

Lottery - but not a bad place to start from. Drop in salary would be amazing.

Next.

Don't mind the talk on trading Calderon. Two best trades I see there:

Calderon and DeRozan (or Wright, if god blows sunshine up BC's ass)
FOR
Iguodala

Calderon and Wright
FOR
Morrison, Vujacic, Farmar, $3 million cash and a pick

This trade has been out there for a while and many serious pundits say LA wouldn't do it Vujacic was involved. Fair enough. Morrison is an expiring contract in 2010 while Vujacic's expires in 2011.

Vujacic's contract is costly, no way around it, but in 2011 the Raptors would have 3 expiring contracts (Vujacic, Evans and Banks) cumulatively worth just over $15 million - nice set of trade chips to have.

NBA... a pretty wild place to GM, even when stuck in the armchair.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Yay! 2010!

2010-01-07T12:38:00.005-07:00

(can't get the pic of my MAP jersey to load so I went this direction)

Next verse! Same as the first! A little bit louder and a little bit worse!

A few things with which to start the New Year:

Don't Second Guess

Look. IF Moreau, Staios, Nilsson or POS get traded (heck, include Brule and Cogliano in there if you want) DO NOT be surprised or, worse, second guess yourself IF they happen to do well in their new home.

Performance if a function of three things (I had four in my head when I started typing this section but I'll be damned as to where the fourth one went, so three is what you get):

1. Skills and ability (inherent or learned)
2. Use
3. Luck
4. ... heh ...

Where-ever those players go you can rest assured that #2 will most probably change and #3 may as well. Right here, right now, these guys (Brule excepted) aren't having any luck and their usage is debateable.

That is just the way it is.

Ad Nauseum

For the first time in a long time I was lost as to what to do with this team - either to improve it from what we have now or to rebuild it. Usually I have a pretty good idea of what can be done (sans actual inside knowledge) but now, right now, not so much.

In a macro sense the issue is that too many of the team contracts are too big and too long (hah!) to be easily tradeable in a Cap system where most of the other teams are maxed out or almost maxed out. Dealing in the smaller contracts won't yield much and the few value contracts that are there are tied to players you don't want to deal.

A reasonable man looks at the roster and sees that:

-- there are players that you keep (almost regardless): Gagner and .... Gagner

-- those you trade only if there is a clear upgrade possibility or you want to change the direction the team is headed: Hemsky, Horcoff, Penner and Gilbert;

-- a couple that you keep if they stay cheap enough: Potulny, Stone, Stortini and Smid;

-- and a few pick 'ems (keep one): Pouliot or Brule, Souray or Visnovsky and Deslauriers or Dubnyk.

That leaves:

-- Grebeshkov (RFA / 3.15 / 0 yr)
-- O'Sullivan (RFA / 2.95 / 1 yr)
-- Nilsson (RFA / 2.00 / 1 yr)
-- Cogliano (RFA / 1.13 / 0 yr)
-- Khabibulin (UFA / 3.75 / 3 yr)
-- Staios (UFA / 2.70 / 1 yr)
-- Moreau (UFA / 2.00 / 1 yr)
-- Comrie (UFA / 1.25 / 0 yr)
-- Strudwick (UFA / 0.70 / 0 yr)
-- one of Pouliot (RFA / 0.83 / 0 yr) or Brule (RFA / 0.80 / 0 yr)
-- one of Visnovsky (UFA / 5.60 / 3 yr) or Souray (UFA / 5.40 / 2 yr)
-- one of Deslauriers (RFA) or Dubnyk (RFA)

Myself, being less than reasonable, would trade four of the six pick 'ems but that's just me.

FTR: I keep Pouliot because a) Brule is a prime pump and dump candidate so I get more out of him and b) if I can't squeeze Pouliot into a supercheap contract after YET ONE MORE shyte year (his fault or not) then I just let him go (i.e. trade in the off-season).

Having been on the Pouliot bandwagon from the start you have to believe me when I say - that last bit hurt to say it.

Looking at a lot of roster turn-over there, but that's okay. As being good right now isn't an option, and neither is being good right away, we are left with being good one day much sooner than never but much later than now.

As I have mentioned elsewhere, I am absolutely certain that many of those names are moveable THIS year.

Goaltender Interference

I wrote this pre-injury but the idea remains the same - there is always a way.

Khabibulin's contract will be almost impossible to move this... err... next year... err... ever. The term and the amount are just too long and too large (I flatter) to be easily absorbed. This leaves just two possibilities:

1. Send him to Russia for a year or so and hope he likes it

2. Find a GM that is either a) desperate b) stupid or c) both

Option 1 will probably be the easier solution to implement. Outlets for that contract are very few (in no particular order):

a. Chicago makes some sense, depending on whether or not they actually want Khabibulin back, as $2 million in Cap relief is significant;

b. Philadelphia isn't a bad bet if Emery/Boucher continue to struggle but the lack of salary fill, from Philly, makes this a hard trade to complete;

c. Ottawa isn't getting much from Leclaire or Elliot but, as managment isn't under the gun to 'win-now', only an 'outta-here' trade makes sense;

d. Los Angeles, as with Ottawa, isn't getting much out its goalies but the team does have a winning record and has played a lot of raod games early; and

e. Washington has the pressure to win so they might throw a look at him (using Theodore and Nylander) but Varlamov is just playing too well right now

For the record I think the Washington deal may have been the easiest (though it would have required Katz eat some salary).

For The Record: Boston

I have seen some suggestions about trading Visnovsky to the Bruins for the Leafs #1 pick. Trading to get that pick IS freaking brilliant if it can be pulled off.

Visnovsky won't make that happen. The Bruins have few REALLY bad contracts and the one they have they like (Lucic). Morris and Ference are both done after this year so that leaves Wideman, Krejci, Ryder and Sturm as the only decent sized contracts the Bruins would have to trade in order to take on a contract the size of Visnovsky's.

(Yes. They could trade Morris. But odds are good that space is already spoken for. Ference, I will admit, is a maybe/probable.)

Taking a look at boxcars and details I am thinking that if Visnovsky (if healthy) is going to Boston for that pick the trade looks a lot like:

Visnovsky & Brule/Cogliano
FOR
Wideman, Krejci & TO 1st?

Think about that for a second. A lot of noise in Boston. Krejci isn't having a great year but his boxcars are okay while Wideman is a fair bit younger than Visnovsky and was signed as one of that teams d-men of the future.

Which means that Visnovsky to Boston just isn't an easy trade to visualize happening. Visnovsky only works if Boston really wants to make a Cup run, wants to dump salary and can't find a cheaper offer elsewhere.

Hence my point - you want to talk the Toronto pick out of Boston... talk Penner. That'll make 'em cream their pants.

Penner
FOR
Krejci and the TO 1st

Would probably work. And I don't even like Krejci that much.

For The Record: Pittsburgh

Want to trade Visnovsky? Send a glance Pittsburgh's way. Gonchar is making noise about his payday and he will be 36 next year. Me? I say pay the man (and I do think he will stay). But if Pittsburgh is thinking different then they may take a look at Vis. Regardless of the play of Letang

The guy you want is, of course, Staal. If not Staal then target the best selection of Goligoski, Tangradi, Depres and picks you can get. I wanted Letang last year but... well... good luck with that now.

Full disclosure: Tangradi and Depres are listed only by virtue of the listing at HF, and I haven't spent any time scouting or watching Goligoski. I don't know any of their games at all. Sorry.

Of course... that means that none of the guys you actually WANT to trade are traded yet.

Yay.

Be an interesting trade deadline to be sure.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

(New) Last Post of 2009

2009-12-30T13:08:00.006-07:00

My apologies to those who thought I was done for the year.

Blame Scott. His response to my 'Last' (now '(Second) Last') post of the year got me to thinking; first, his post verbatim:

"We can only hope that the result of the low finish is a change (hopefully for the better) in upper management of the hockey club. Unfortunately, I figure Tambellini will get one more year no matter the finish this season and will feel that he needs to make the playoffs to keep his job (and he'd probably be right) and do further damage to the long-term future of the team."

Mostly right Scott.

There are three possible ways for Tambellini to keep his job longer than the end of this year (in no particular order):

1. Katz mulligans Tambellini for Lowe's team build and his own (Katz's) sanctioning of Tambellini's management strategy; major changes could take place but this would be the put-up or shut-up year for Tambellini and Jagr (you heard me)

i.e. everyone agrees it was a f^&ck-up by all and Tambellini gets one more year to turn it around; note that this

2. The team goes on enough of a tear in the new year that the team sacrifices some young talent (not named Eberle or MPS) in order to secure enough veteran talent to make a run that takes them into, or just barely out of, the play-offs

i.e. this cluster-f^&k that we call a roster gets another year older but not another year better and Tambellini will dodge the bullet for one more year

3. Tambellini starts the rebuild; in this case the blame falls on Lowe's team build and all agree the team needs a rebuild. Moreau, Staios, Souray and others head out the door while Horcoff goes in for surgery and gets the 'C' for 2010-11

i.e. what should have started in 2006-07 (Pronger) and must have started in 2007-08 (Smyth) will finally start now and Tambellini will get to do it

Dammit

The problem with these scenarios are three fold:

1. in each case Tambellini, and Lowe, get to keep their jobs

2. the obvious scenario is the third

3. in the case of third scenario Tambellini, and Lowe will get far more than one more year in which to produce results

I may not think much of Lowe and Tambellini's managerial skills but they aren't stupid people.

-- Lowe was smart enough to get out of the way just before it became obvious to joe-everyfan (not just the Oilogosphere) that he was the problem and

-- Tambellini was smart enough to pull the trigger on MacTavish while the paint used to draw the face was still fresh

Think about that for a second. The rebuild is becoming obvious. So much so that it may be impossible, even for those with the hubris that is the calling card of Oilers team management, to avoid.

Do you know any GM's who only get one year to rebuild a team? When it is universally acknowledged as being one?

I don't believe there are any such names out there.

And that is the problem.

Lowebellini will start the rebuild, be lauded for seeing the light and for being courageous enough to do so - despite the rabid fan base the Oilers have - and it will be years before their failings will be found out.

Again.

You don't always get what you want.

And sometimes when you do, it isn't what you need.

I think this team needs a seachange in its management group. If they take the path of the rebuild, something I have wanted them to do for a while now, I won't get to see it.

For years.

My great fear is that they try to short-circuit the whole thing. Draft top-3 this year and then spend all their money on Jagr, Redden and whoever else they can max Cap on. My call? It won't work... it may get me the management turnover I want but it will set this team far, far back of where a proper rebuild would take them.

We are about to see our very own, homegrown, version of Mike Milbury in action. Draft well and then shit the bed, rinse, repeat.

wheeee

------

Have a great evening everyone. And a wonderful new year :-)

(Second) Last Post of 2009

2009-12-22T12:08:00.006-07:00

Before the year began most Oilogosphere posters had the Oilers as placing out of the play-offs with some, myself included, positing that they had a chance IF everything (in my case: EVERYTHING) went right for them. There were a few who pegged this for a team that could, on its own merits, finish 6th to 8th but even those posters didn't sound too enthusiastic about it.

Kind of a sad thing when internet bloggers have a better grasp of the capabilities of a team than masters of the trade like Kevin Lowe and Steve Tambellini. Let me come right out and say this clearly:

I don't actually think most NHL general managers are all that good at their jobs.

A Qualification

The one qualification I will allow for being this: I don't always know what those jobs are. Some GM's live to serve their master and if their master values ticket sales over all else then expect big names, regardless of team fit or need, to feature prominently on the menu.

The same sort of mechanic will follow depending on the goal - whether the goal be a new arena or the maximization of profits or just being able to meet the budget.

So maybe a GM is, actually, good at their job - we just don't know what that job is all the time.

And How it Applies to the Oilers

One can laud the competitive instincts of Tambellini, Lowe and Katz all they want, it doesn't really matter, competitive instinct doesn't mean dick when two lack capability and the third has other agendas in play.

For the record - while I believe the Oilers may have lost money last year I also believe they would only have done so in an accounting sense (wherein Katz is using the dollars generated by the team to pay himself back the purchase price of the team thus generating a 'loss' by the team) and in my world, only a weasel pulls that trick with a straight face.

There is, absolutely, nothing wrong with such an approach. Just don't try to tell me that fielding a winning team is your priority. Apparently the priorities list like so:

1. new arena
2. recoup investment through team generated cash flow
3. field a winning team

Back To Point

Spend enough years watching the NHL management teams at work and two things come quickly to the fore:

a. to become a GM in the NHL you generally have to be part of the family to start
b. as noted, most of these guys should not be GMs

Look. When I see a guy like Dawes, who had some very good underlying numbers the last few years, sign with a team, WITHOUT obvious holes that he would fill, for minimal money, at the end of the offseason, then it is clear that many of these guys don't know jack shit about putting teams together.

And you see that every year.

There are some good GMs out there. We know who they are. We also know who are not.

Kevin Lowe and Steve Tambellini are not good NHL general managers.

The Runs

Had a quick case of the runs recently. Luckily, as we know these things go, the runs usually - no pun intended - run their course fairly quickly and the body recovers. Painful and inconvenient? Yes. But only for a short while.

The Oiler will have another good run or two in them. In the long run this will not be a good thing. The team needs a rebuild in the worst way but I fear that won't happen with these jokers in charge.

For 2010 I predict the only runs you are guaranteed to continue to see are these:

1. The Oilers won't make the play-offs
2. Lowebellini will not turn this team around
3. Those inherent in my sentence structure

------

Have a great evening and a wonderful holiday season everyone.

Seriously

2009-11-23T18:35:00.006-07:00

I used to live and die by the Edmonton Journal sportspage so, in that spirit, and knowing the photo is actually from there (I do try to credit where credit is known btw - though I should be more diligent in doing so):

Photograph by: Chris Schwarz, Edmonton Journal

------

So.

Being Serious

If you were serious about rebuilding this team would you not - and I am looking at this in a RIGHT NOW kind of way:

a. Waive Robert Nilsson and, also use re-entry waivers? Basically use every avenue available until he is gone?

b. Use Cogliano and Grebeshkov in an upgrade trade? Together or alone.

Of course, one would dump any of Moreau, Khabibulin, Staois, Strudwick and Comrie first chance they got (think trade deadline).

How long would it take you to slam the door on Brule?

And Pisani?

Being Absolutely Serious

If you were absolutely serious about making the play-offs and you were GM of the Edmonton Oilers would you not:

a. waive Robert Nilsson

and

b. (seriously) make a pitch to Burke along the lines of:

Cogliano, Brule and picks
FOR
Ponikarovsky & Stajan

If you had to pick up the salary of a Wayne Primeau or a Garnet Exelby - would you blink?

And if 'picks' meant a 2nd and 3rd instead of a 4th and 5th would you do it?

And if 'picks' meant a 1st... would you still do it?

------

IMO, Robert still being here has more to do with Kent than anything else; also, I would actually offer Pisani another contract - 3 yrs at $600,000 /year - if he genuinely wanted to retire an Oiler and I thought guaranteeing his pension was something one did for loyal, hardworking employees who didn't make a career out of taking aggressive penalties.

Which I do think is something one would do.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Who Needs 'Em?

2009-11-07T13:36:00.008-07:00

Conventional wisdom generally holds that there is little value in a team tanking a season. It doesn't guarantee a Cup win, it aggravates a fanbase and leaves the players disillusioned and unmotivated.

Fair enough.

Last 10 Stanley's

2009 - Pittsburgh
2008 - Detroit
2007 - Anaheim
2006 - Carolina
2004 - Tampa Bay
2003 - New Jersey
2002 - Detroit
2001 - Colorado
2000 - New Jersey
1999 - Dallas

Nice list of teams.

A Road Less Travelled?

Interesting thing though, of those teams that have won the Cup in the last 10 years, no less than 6 teams owe significant debt to having been horrible teams at one time (or several times as the case may be):

2009 - Pittsburgh ... Crosby, Malkin, Fleury
2006 - Carolina ..... Staal ....... 2003, 2nd overall
2004 - Tampa Bay .... Lecavalier .. 1998, 1st overall
2002 - Detroit ...... Yzerman ..... 1983, 4th overall
2001 - Colorado ..... Forsberg .... 1991, 1st overall (Lindros)
1999 - Dallas ....... Modano ...... 1988, 1st overall

So that is 6 of 10.

Sidedoors

Of the other 4 teams:

2007 - Anaheim ...... Pronger (1993, 2nd overall) & Niedermayer
2003 - New Jersey ... Niedermayer
2000 - New Jersey ... Niedermayer .. 1991, 3rd overall

So, even if by way of Hartford and Toronto, 3 more teams needed players picked high in draft by teams that had, once upon a time, horrible, horrible seasons.

Righteousness

That leaves the 2008 Detroit Red Wings. They would be the anomaly.

They are the only team that has won the Cup in the last 10 years without a player who was chosen in the top-4 of a draft year.

Good for them!

Well, except for Brad Stuart maybe (1998, 3rd overall, San Jose)?

As he wasn't a key component of that team making the play-offs, winning a round or winning the Cup I guess we can ignore his contributions in the context of this post.

So. Still. Good for them.

Mostly.

Morality Play?

Don't kid yourself. Sometimes it takes a crawl through a river of shit.

While poor timing, poor drafting and poor management can ruin a good wallow in the muck of awfulness NOTHING can goose a team's chance to win it all like having one, or (even better) multiple, top-4 draft pick selections on the roster.

It's almost a pre-req.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Swimming in Cash

2009-11-05T23:09:00.003-07:00

You are a billionaire who has decided your team needs to be gutted and started from scratch.

So, from one billionaire to another...

Khabibulin
FOR
Theodore and Nylander

While you may have to swallow Nylander's salary for this year and the next you do get out from under Khabibulin's next three. In the mean time Washington shores up their long-term goaltending and cuts cash outlay in prep for the Semin/Backstrom contracts.

What do you know - there ARE trade options for this team that might make some sense.

Just gotta be swimming in cash and be ready to dive. Wasn't that one of the perks that came with having a rich owner?

Oh right. I forgot. This is a real estate play. Sorry.

Maybe it'll come with a pool?

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Not a Joke

2009-11-03T20:37:00.007-07:00

A few posts ago, before it became a rather heated topic over at LT's even (in a calendar sense), I mentioned a trade:

Hemsky & Grebeshkov
FOR
Weiss & Ballard

For the record. Not joking.

The fact is that this is an 'okay' team IF everything is firing. That means key players have to remain healthy AND they have to performing to, or above, spec.

The Oilers lack quality depth. From what I have seen over the years only a few things overcome a lack of quality depth on the skating roster; some of those include:

1. Phenomenal talent at key positions (see also: Buffalo, Hasek)
2. Phenomenal luck from key players (see also: LA Kings, Potvin)
3. Absolute crap for opposition (see also: SE Division)

Goaltending can mean a lot.

If Horcoff really is injured then this team is in a great deal of trouble. In years past there was always a Stoll or a Reasoner around to carry the heavy freight for a while; not so much in 2009-10. A few more weeks of this and 'rebuild' becomes the operative word (you know... except maybe for that whole Khabibulin contract thingie).

So back to the trade idea. The key words being: 'trade idea'.

I named the names I named for two reasons:

1. They weren't completely out of the realm of reason insofar as the value is there on both sides, and
2. There comes a time when teams have the change direction, sometimes drastically, and this trade would do that

Think about the 2nd line of the roster for second. Probable/possible candidates include Gagner, Cogliano, Nilsson, O'Sullivan, Comrie and Brule. Of those Gagner OR Cogliano (at this stage in their careers) OR Comrie OR Nilsson make a lot of sense if the pieces are there for a soft-minutes scoring line or if a babysitter is secured to watch over them when playing tougher minutes.

But the pieces aren't there. Hence Jacques is on the 1st line.

heh

Think about the O'Sullivan trade for a second. Makes a lot more sense if the team is willing to trade some combination of Cogliano and/or Nilsson in a package for a 2nd line cornerstone doesn't it? Not in Edmonton.

Is this about a sports team or a fucking real estate development?

Oilers team management left MacT to hangdry. Looks like Quinn is holding on to leftover line.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Another Mish-Mash of Stuff

2009-10-17T18:36:00.023-06:00

DEFENSE! . . DEFENSE!!

I have always categorized defensemen into four broad categories:

1. Those who play best staying in defensive position
2. Those who contribute most leaving defensive position
3. Those who try to do both
4. Those who can do both

Simple enough. There may be a hundred descriptors I can graft onto to those categories but it all starts there. The trick, imo, is to always have a 2 or 3 playing with a 1 or 4. When teams screw these combo's up they generally get into trouble.

The 2nd group is the most varied of the four categories as it includes offensive defensemen (say, Ozolinsh) and 'hitters' (say, Ulanov). This is the chaos group because players in this category tend to leave position in order to make their play.

Chaos doesn't necessarily mean 'bad' btw. Gains made can be worth losses incurred. I would suppose the 3rd group is generally the 'most bad' group. Not sound enough defensively to hold the fort and not good enough in other areas to make up the losses. Lots of rookies in that group.

That said, Seidenberg has rounded into a decent defenseman by my eye.

As you can imagine, the 4th group is (by far) the most rare. And please note, except in the case of the 4th group, I have not made any indication of ability.

Thinking of all of that the other day I spared a thought for Phaneuf. Group 2 player who is a threat to leave position at any time as he is both a hitter and an offensive defenseman. That isn't going to help Kipper any.

LAFFS AND LAFFS

Following up on a David Staples post (Cult of Hockey) that echoed my own empty headed thoughts - that post is here - I am one of those who think Burke started his rebuild way too soon.

He didn't quite have the wonderful off-season I predicted for him (or, at least, that he should have had)**.

This isn't rocket science folks.

Valuable pieces available to unload? Check.

Bad goaltending? Check.

Patient fan base? Check.

Full budget and full Cap capability? Check.

A few good young prospects/players already in place? Check.

Damn. I cannot think of a higher profile team that had a better opportunity, in my lifetime, to enter a rebuild and come out of it pre-forgiven and shining like roses. Even Blake's contract was finally getting to the point where it was a value asset (next year the Cap hit is a cool mill higher than actual salary).

It's like Lowe and Burke got together in the little boys room, kissed and made up and somewhere in the spit they exchanged mojo's. The risk factors for the Leafs are all so high it beggars my imagination.

Kessel was the wrong the move to make THIS year. That 2010 1st rounder should be a top-8 marker and it will, of course, be paired with a 2nd rounder in the top-38. Barring a great off-season in the summer of 2010, the second (2011) 1st round pick should be in the top-10.

And that is WITH Kessel, Beauchemin, Komisarek, et al added to the team.

Think about that for a second. It isn't a matter of Kessel outperforming what Boston receives in the trade - it's about Kessel outperforming what Toronto would have gotten if they hadn't done the trade.

Burke's real mistake was that of putting too much value on the incoming defensmen. Niether Beauchemin nor Komisarek was a driver back there on defense - on those teams it was Neidermayer/Pronger and Markov - but Burke treated them as being such.

Then made all his bets accordingly.

Oops.

If he had just stuck with a rebuild plan:

- stay with Toskala for 2009/10 (at least) and bring the new guy in slow;
- do NOT pick up Komisarek
- pimp Stempniak and Blake near the deadline
- if the price is right find a taker for Poni and Kaberle
etc

Then two top-3 picks over the next two years aren't out of the question; good draft year or bad, top-3 is generally where you get your winners.

Given Toronto's ability to pay for trade deadline mercs, and pick up UFA's when ready, there is no reason why Toronto should not have been a major force as early as 2014/15. Maybe even earlier given the right UFA signings.

You think Kovalchuk's agent wouldn't have pointed a finger at Toronto's marketability, Cap space, ability to spend, Burke's track record and the fcat that the team would have more talent faster than Atlanta could ever hope to produce?

And now? With the rebuild ending with Kadri?

The Laffs never end. Hyuck Hyuck.

PROMISE AND PROMISES

One part of me says: 'homegames' and 'shooting percentages' and nothing changes.

Another part of me says: 'Penner is ready to play this year', 'Smid has graduated' and 'We just might have a scoring line featuring Gagner as center'.

Oh yeah: 'small sample sizes'

heh

------

** Also feel free to read this post on rebuilding a team and this post on the Kings (Lombardi to be specific).

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Early Returns

2009-10-07T22:55:00.004-06:00

It's how you finish that matters. Fair enough.

A season start is what it is and, given the laugh-a-thon that was the netminding in games 1 and 2, it can be said that the points were, at the least, earned. Well-earned being a label to save for another day.

Some thoughts.

Do You?

An interesting thing, for me, is the play of Horcoff and Hemsky. Dudes are having some issues. Can't all be JFJ. Question becomes, if (and this is a 'just saying' moment) a package like, say, Weiss and Ballard came available for, say, Hemsky and Grebeshkov with draft picks to balance - do you?

I don't believe the Oilers are going to get any 'luck' - in terms of trades of spare pieces (teams really shouldn't waste gift-of-god trades like Hejda and Glencross, they just shouldn't) for usable pieces - to come their way anytime soon so a sideways swing may be needed.

So, do you? Swing that way? Do you at least start thinking about it?

Consider, at this pace Gagner will be a legit #2 center, able to score points and handle defensive duty, by the end of NEXT year.

Powerplays

Seems to me that when you take a legitimate shooter (Stoll, Souray, Streit, Phaneuf) and combine them with a legitimate puck-mover/passer/all-around smart-guy (Pronger, Markov, Bouwmeester) you have 2/3rds of a dominate powerplay ready to roll. All that is left to be decided, imo, is what approach the forward ranks will take.

Surprised we don't see more of it. Surprised at any who didn't think Calgary would be a top-4 team this year. They won't sustain their current pace but that powerplay will cause all the damage that team will need. The forward depth that Sutter built up is just the icing on the cake.

I have said to more than a few - Calgary 2009-10 reminds me a lot of Edmonton 2005-06.

Penalty Kills

Edmonton's is a freakin' monstrosity of hope-shattering soon-to-be-in-a-net-near-you disappointment. Only hope we have internal is a rising-from-the-grave performance by Pisani.

For the record - be nice to see him get his 400 games in.

Be nicer if those games are good ones.

Montreal

For the second year in a row we know: no Markov equals death for this team.

You know, if a team could sneak Latendresse out of there, even if at the cost of picking up a Laraque and/or a Gill, the team that did so could do fairly well. His Desjardins EV numbers say I should like him and so maybe I do.

That would be a steal eh? JFJ, Nilsson, Strudwick and Staios for Latendresse, Gill and Laraque. You know. Because they need another defensemen.

I keed. I keed!

Crazy

Who do we actually match up well with for a trade?

Hrmmm... therein some distress.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Plans Gone Awry

2009-09-28T00:49:00.007-06:00

Thinking about the whole Phoenix Coyotes / Gretzky thing a bit.

There is no nobility in the eating of maggots spawned off a body that rots yet has not yet died, and even less if some of its wounds you have, yourself, inflicted.

Phoenix was dead, financially, years ago. As an owner there is no way Gretzky could not have known this. For him to insist on earning $8 million /year, an amount which is:

1. at least $6 million more than the average going rate and
2. probably $7 million more than a coach with his record deserves

it only means that the team, really, meant less than nothing to him. imo.

Gretzky has always had the halo. I know. I am ones of those who has polished it on occassion. But the Gretzky brand has always been one of how he trancends the game, not just a great player but also a great person; he knows this full well.

It is why he wanted his money.

Big halos get lots of polish.

What gets me is that he was/is a founder of this team. Were he just a contractor, or an employee, or even the sole owner (respectively: get mine / get mine / stupid greedy bastard) I could understand it but when the majority owner is, legitimately (not the accounting trickery that Katz is getting LaForge to peddle), losing his shirt, then sticking another sword in the back of the child you helped birth...

... when you are, expressly, NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THE GUY WHO WOULD DO THAT SORT OF THING...

... and then trying to feast on the flies as it dies. Well.

Even Coyotes don't do that.

Somewhere. A couple of years ago. He really should have got out. Or taken a severely reduced pay package perhaps.

I don't like thinking about him in this fashion. I think tonite, I'll spend some time thinking about the way back when. 1979. The Lord Nelson Apartments. And heroes I actually thought I knew.

Heroes are human. They don't have halos. I tell myself.

------

All drama aside.

There have been some GREAT posts/threads over at Lowetide's lately.

I am well represented on the record as saying, and saying so in many ways, that this teams lacks both managerial acumen and a plan. To those who think differently I can only ask this:

Are you, rightfully, telling me that, with pre-season coming to an end, the fulfillment of the Oilers master plan this off-season, was to sign Comrie and then (maybe) trade Nilsson for a draft pick? Really?

Not only was Plan A a little less than brilliant but f^%k me, methinks they have to work on their Plans B through Z as well.

But thats just me.

(Doesn't Tampa Bay need a RW? Find $1 million or so in salary to take off their roster for this year and maybe that can happen. And no. That doesn't mean they would trade us Ranger. Probably starts with Hale. And yes. A trade with Nashville for picks is better financially... but competitively? Debateable.)

------

Have a great evening everyone.

New Year New Attitude

2009-09-17T19:46:00.008-06:00

heh

Oilers are losing money again? Old new I know, but still... WOW! They really don't think much of us do they? Maybe the EIG will take them back. Katz would have to sell at a loss of course. Team being a money loser and all.

Anyways. So.

Comrie may be a value signing, Penner may be in shape, Motin may be a player*, Cor-NAY may be Pisani v1.2 in a coiple of years and Grebs may be about to hit another plane of being but, imo, what matters is this:

1. Can Khabibulin stay healthy and keep his save% over .910; and

2. Can Quinn and Renney make a difference with this roster

Either one of those go south and this team is no better than 4th in its division and out of the play-offs. New Year meet Old Year I guess.

To be honest I have written this team off for a long time now** but then I read/heard it.

Something promising. Something that makes sense. Something that agrees with what I already thought***.

(Oddly enough,) the most promising thing I have seen or heard out of this team all off-season actually came from outside the organization (pulling this from Copper & Blue who pulled it from TSN):

We had high expectations going into the year. For the most part of the year we were in a playoff position and we were in pretty good shape. At the end we really didn't fulfill those expectations and when that happens changes are made. I think the players lost their trust and faith in me and my ability to get the job done, and for a large part I think that was the same for me, that I lost faith in the players."
Craig MacTavish (TSN interview)

That quote pretty much echoes everything that I, and a few others, were saying last year. And it hurt because I (and 'we' in some cases) am a MacT fan. Guy is a great freakin' coach but he got thrown under the bus by this team's player procurement department too many times and finally lost it.

I can't dismiss the fact that MacT may have said all that so as to take a fall for the team. I can't. My third favorite Oiler ever, everything I have ever seen from the guy indicates that his first instinct is to take the hit to make a play.

So maybe he did.

But for now. Perhaps for me. I'll take him at his words.

If true it means that Quinn and Renney may be able to get a lot of mileage out of this roster and if so maybe they take 3rd in the division and if they can do that then maybe 7th or 8th is a possibility. 6th if another team completely falls off the map (it happens).

Look. I'm trying to be positive here okay?!?

------

In terms of long-term planning? Well, the ability to build tomorrow's team is hobbled by the weight of its yesterdays. Barring a whole bunch of surprises this team just doesn't/won't have a critical mass of talent all hitting its stride. Together.

So best case scenarios, for the future, from the right now, are these:

1. The team sucks total ass and it forces the rebuild.

2. Tambellini starts thinking future-now and slowly unwinds these legacy contracts.

If #2 is an option then maybe its time to get Lowe to call Sather and find out just how bad the Rangers need a steady ol'd-man to balance the boat. The Rangers being one of the few teams with both budget and Cap space (they can manipulate it if need be) to take on steady.

The third option is to hope that this year will be all full of sunshine and lollipops and rainbows and Stanley Cup play-off runs and the kids will learn so much that it was worth putting it all off until next year!

Or something like that.

After all. They really are, all of them, new years.

------

* Would make me very happy if true. Have always liked that pick. Go Kytnar!
** That whole 'could' post I wrote a few posts back.
*** That's how it works, right?

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Sunshine

2009-09-10T18:55:00.005-06:00

So he's back.

I remember the buzz about Comrie back in the day. I remember the Van Ryn ruling and how it affected the signing. Didn't mind it so much. The super-huge ego, apparent even then, was a little worrisome but thems the rules so no harm no foul.

Pretty obvious the team didn't have the cash for it though.

When it did start to bug me was during his rookie year. It was pretty obvious that Comrie was getting some pretty easy minutes but there was everyone - even MacT - blowing sunshine up his ass. Talking about 'how defensively responsible he was'.

Which was all poppycock to anyone with an open eye.

But what do you do? The team had just spent a mint on the kid and he WAS the hometown hero... so... well... hero the man already! And so they did. Looking back on it now I no longer wonder about managements motives. It has always been all about the sell.

Winning cost extra back then.

Even so. What got me wasn't the reflections of the down deep and the passing through - it was how much he (Comrie) seemed to believe it. Must have paid up early because everything he got he was owed.

I lost it there. There. Just before the end.

'There' was when he was injured for a bunch of games and then got himself back on the roster. Wasn't even fully healed. Team was in the play-offs without him. Got his point though. Useless little assist and he got his bonus money.

But hey. There he was. Owed.

So fair enough. Team was dumb enough to play him and dumb enough to pay him. It wasn't a lot of fun. Watching Kevin Lowe die a little on the inside when it came time to negotiate a new deal. I treat you with respect and. Heh.

He forgot, Comrie had already paid.

I remember being really unimpressed. He wasn't helping the team win. It was all bonus. Money. Keep the star happy. Team chemistry is what its all about with the Oilers you know. Sacrifice for the team. Sacrifice for the win.

And win what you can.

Then the drama. Then the trade. Aborted. As much as I didn't like what Lowe was doing I have to admit I liked Comrie even less after all of that. Still don't. I didn't need him to go all Ruettiger for me.

Some fucking appreciation for his circumstance would have been nice.

So he's back. And, you know, humbler. Wiser. Must have learned a lot playing shinny hockey in New York and Ottawa. Contract is mostly okay. Finally force some roster moves I guess. Why waste money?

Thank God though. We could have ended up with a self-serving asshole like Dany Heatley.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Fascinations

2009-09-07T20:12:00.012-06:00

Growing up I gained a great deal of appreciation for certain bands. Mostly Rock bands. My ex-wife liked country. I started with a (great) respect for Johnny Cash and a wierd enthusiam for Kenny Rodgers 'story songs' and then found reasons to like the genre. Some of the songs are very watchable.

It was a fascinating time.

In Other News

Tanguay just signed a very (imo) reasonable contract with the Lightning.

I would have gone into rebuild mode with that team going into the draft, and hoped to scoop as many prime draft picks and prospects as I could to go with Hedman and Stamkos but, that said, the Eastern Conference isn't a stacked deck and if Lady Injurybug doesn't find this team it could surprise by both making the play-offs and making some noise in them.

The only sure team to miss in the East is the Islanders, and the most probables are the Thrashers and the Leafs, so the Lightning are in the thick of it with the whack of other teams that rely far too much on a goalie, or star forward, to make their team go.

Despite their ownership troubles the Lightning are making a solid push to put a solid team together, and management has done pretty well there (imo), individual contracts notwithstanding, so it will be fascinating to see if it amounts to much.

Still liked the full-rebuild model, for this team, better.

In the East:

Teams that will make the play-offs: Pittsburgh, Boston, New Jersey.

Teams that should make the play-offs: Washington, Philadelphia, Carolina

Teams that could make the play-offs: anyone not yet pegged plus the Lightning

Also, Sather may be stuck with Redden's contract but he did a nice job of picking up McDonagh (and Higgins) for Gomez. If we see Dubinsky sign a decent contract and Drury moved next year we will know that Sather has been given the green-light to rebuild the team.

Speaking of which...

The NBA

I have, I must admit, been fascinated by the NBA for the last couple of years. Not by the game itself but by the management moves that happen in the game.

i.e. twice, in the span of four years, Bryan Colangelo (BC) has completely re-worked the roster of the Toronto Raptors. I know that it is far easier to rework a roster in the NBA than it is in the NHL but still - that's pretty farkin' impressive.

Of course, it isn't like BC has ever had to unload players like Dustin Penner or Robert Nilsson.

Now THAT would be hard to do.

All kidding marginally kicked aside there are two teams that, to my eye, have a very bright future ahead of them: the New Jersey Nets and the Oklahoma City Thunder. The Nets are particularly interesting because they have the look of a team that will be successful, in the NBA, without any recognizable superstar

I won't do many (honest) NBA articles but there will be the odd mention here and there (given how my interest has been piqued). I am a Raptors fan (kindof) but this is about the:

New Jersey Nets

Playing Assets w/ Real Value

Devin Harris (PG) and Brook Lopez (C) anchor this team. As Point Guard is the most crucial position to get right and Center is the hardest position to adequately fill I have to say that, right off the top, they are doing well. Courtney Lee (SG) is a crucial fill here, he had a great play-offs with Orlando and if he can continue that level of play then the Nets are 3/5ths of the way there.

Terence Williams (combo-G and SF) projects to be a decent stopper across a few positions, and Chris Douglas-Roberts (SG) and Josh Boone (C) both look to be guys who can play their position effectively - which all means that the Nets should actually be stacked at the 1, 2 and 5. A lot of teams out there are lucky to have decent starters in two of those three spots (let alone have 'depth').

That leaves the Small Forward and Power Forward positions.

Of the two positions, the 3 should actually be easier to fill as the Nets don't really have any 'keepers' incumbent at that spot. Williams could play the spot (pretty athletic guy by all accounts) but he would need to dramatically imrove his offensive skills in order to be a solution there.

The 4 is a little tougher to deal with as Yi Jianlian (PF) is slotted in there right now. He has a long way to go to get to the level of 'effective' but his draft pick means he will get a lot of chances.

How the Nets fill the 4 will be key to the team's success going forward - the longer it takes them to get an effective player in there the shorter the window for success for this team will be.

Other Assets w/ Real Value

Budget Space - for 2010/11 the Nets have ~ $32 million committed to 10 players and most of them are on longer-term contracts. Barring the acquisition of a max-contract player this team doesn't really have any budget issues.

Draft Picks - the Nets have two 1st round picks in the 2010 draft. Their own and that of the Dallas Mavericks. The Mavs pick is no big deal (in the 20-24 range?) but their own pick could easily be top-6.

Expiring Contracts - the Nets have ~ $26 million in expiring contracts (5 players) this year. Given the value of expiring contracts in the NBA (its huge) the Nets have fantastic trade flexibility.

Even Better - most of those expiring contracts are attached to players who other teams, come trade deadline, may actually want. This means that the return on those trades should actually be a little better than dollars alone would dictate.

Meh

Sean Williams (22 yr old PF) and Eduardo Najera (33 yr old PF) would have to have big bounce back seasons to be worth their contracts, that said, neither guy is making big dollars so their contracts could be unloaded in the right trade. As well, Williams is young enough to still learn and Najera is a veteran competitor so it isn't like they are stuck with a guy like Marcus Banks on the roster.

Keyon Dooling (combo-G) - admittedly I don't have a great handle on his value as a player but he seems to fit the role of 'mentor/decent depth player'. If so, an extension in the $2.5 to $3.5 mill range (after next year) would make him a useful, on-going, asset. Had hip surgery lately so recovery is an issue.

Disclaimer

I have to qualify this section by stating that I just don't know basketball well enough. What players work/would work best in what system? Don't know. I know the basics of full court and half court play but the nuances of each system isn't something I know, or even care to know, on anything but the most general level.

It does seem interesting that one of the big determinates is who the shooter is. Teams can be broken down by options: who is first option for a shot, etc. It is why the latest news out of Sacramento (truth to be determined) is that there may be an developing issue between Kevin Martin and Tyreke Evans. It isn't be a personal issue (not even between them per se), it is an option issue. Tyreke, the ostensible 'new' point guard, isn't a distributor of the ball while Kevin is a guy who needs the ball distributed to. It isn't hard to see where that could be considered an 'oops' at the draft table.

Right Now and 2010

A lot is made of the 2010 free agent grouping but, myself, I don't see a lot there that fits for this team. All the big money guys (LeBron, Wade, Amare and Bosh) will be going to where the heart/wallet is and the Nets, while not a backwater, won't be that interesting to them (imo). Don't see Boozer as an option.

So that makes the 'right now' a little more interesting. I have to admit I was a little surprised that they didn't go after David Lee. A rebounding powerforward looking for a big payday, but being completely undercut by his current team in terms of term, may have been a great opportunity for the Nets.

It isn't impossible to see where the dangling of a long-term deal would have gotten Lee on board and an offer to pick up Jeffries contract may have enticed the Knicks into a sign and trade. The trick would have been that of getting Lee at the right price point but if the deal started at $7 million** and looked like (in millions):

D. Lee (5 yrs, start at $7.x), J. Jeffries ($6.5 / 6.9P) and cash
FOR
B. Simmons (exp. $10.5) and S. Williams ($1.6 / 2.5T / 3.5Q)

it could make a lot of sense. The Knicks dump Jeffries salary without taking on any that compromises their 2010 UFA spending spree. The Nets get, at a very reasonable price, a PF entering his prime and it only costs them Jeffries contract (which they dump next year anyways). Lee gets a contract that may look pretty good given the Cap contraction anticipated next year.

So, IF Lee fits the Nets profile: do they target him and get the 4 they need... at the cost of a (probable) top-6 pick in the 2010 draft and money to spend on the 2010 UFA class?

(It is important to note that NBA rookies drafted in the low first round have guaranteed contracts and earn substantial dollars so unless you are getting a guy who can outright play (like Blake Griffin) it is often better to be drafting LATER in the round.)

Maybe I do. Even with the Lee and Jeffries contracts the team would have ~ $44 million allocated to 11 players; in the NBA that is a pretty efficient contract ratio. If they wanted to upgrade at SF in 2010 they could afford to do so. Also, as much as Lee could make them a play-off team they still have some valuable contracts they can dump at the trade deadline - pieces can be acquired as needed.

But here is where it gets really fun (and again, remember, I fully admit I don't fully know what I am talking about) - what about Eddy Curry? If the Knicks drop his contract then it doesn't matter how far the Cap drops in 2010 - the Knicks could afford two superstars if they wanted them.

So how about:

D. Lee (5 yrs, start at $7.x), E. Curry ($10.5 / 11.3P), W. Chandler ($1.3 / 2.1 / 3.1) and cash
FOR
B. Simmons (exp. $10.5), T. Battie (exp. $6.3) and S. Williams ($1.6 / 2.5T / 3.5Q)

Wilson Chandler can play good defense, if he can also play the 3 (I have seen some conflict there as some sites have him as a 2 and some as a 3) then in one trade the Nets could have a line-up kinda like so:

PG ... D. Harris / R. Alston / K. Dooling
SG ... C. Lee / C. Douglas-Roberts
SF ... W. Chandler / T. Williams
PF ... D. Lee / Y. Jianlian / E. Najera
.C ... B. Lopez / E. Curry / J. Boone

That's pretty sweet. Salaries aren't too high, still lots of expiring contracts available, play-off probable, still getting two draft picks in 2010, Alston is a desirable asset regardless of contract status and if Curry learns how to play again he becomes worthy trade bait in his own right (trading Curry is a must).

Like I said - fascinating. Fantasy gaming on steroids. Almost every rumour has to be seen as credible because almost every trade can happen or can be made to happen - and most of them can be made to make sense. The Hedo Turkoglu trade was off-the-charts.

heh. Anyways, that's it for my NBA posting for now. Maybe something next off-season.

------

**Cribbing from the Stephen Jackson contract a viable David Lee contract could look like so (in millions):

$7.14 / 7.65 / 8.45 / 9.26 / 10.06

With his numbers that is a VERY reasonable contract.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

A Plan

2009-08-29T19:21:00.006-06:00

In the comment section of the post titled "Can't Have It Both Ways" (directly below this one) Gord's summation is, essentially, that I am saying the Oilers have no plan.

I mostly agree.

I think they do have a plan, I just don't think they know what it means nor how to implement it.

See, the Red Wings are the kind of team where any non-contrarian observer can honestly say that:

"The Red Wings should make the play-offs."

The Oilers however are the kind of team where a large number, maybe even a majority, of non-contrarian observers can only, honestly, say that:

"The Oilers could make the play-offs."

In the same way, the Kings are the kind of team where any non-contrarian observer can honestly say that:

"The Kings have enough top-end young talent that they should be one of the next top-teams in the NHL."

The Oilers however are the kind of team where a large number, maybe even a majority, of non-contrarian observers can only, honestly, say that:

"The Oilers have some nice young talent and they could one day form the core of a top-team in the NHL."

Again, one could say that:

"The Blackhawks are the kind of team that the loss of any two of their top three forwards (lets say Kane, Hossa and Toews) could prevent them from making the play-offs."

And, in turn:

"The Oilers are the kind of team that the loss of any two of their top three forwards (lets say Horcoff, Hemsky and... ummm... Visnovsky? yeeesh) should prevent them from making the play-offs."

The differences in reality and perception are staggering when you work your way through it. Only the requirement to play games, wherein luck CAN giveth without taking away, saves the future year for this team.

Yet the team is near full-Cap for a reason. And the team has sloughed off two years of RFA status for Gagner and Cogliano for a reason. And the team and almost emptied the Hemsky magazine for a reason.

Obviously, the Oilers have executed a plan. So to speak.

------

My problem for me, beyond that of following a team constructed in a fashion wherein the results are consistent with that which one would get from a blind and thumbless monkey working with a pail of lego**, is that I don't really know what my plan would be to fix it.

This season can be saved. Swallow a salary or two, sign Hilbert, one from the Malhotra/Betts tree, get another veteran defender and keep Strudwick off the defense... and VOILA! The Oilers should make the play-offs.

But that isn't going to happen, and so the combination of coach approach and luck will have to suffice. Other teams have done so with less so all isn't lost however it does obviate the obvious.

It is only a fix for this year.

Three big problems exist:

1. fewer stupid teams (Snow is better than Milbury and Toronto may finally have a plan);
2. fewer teams with the Cap and budget OR plain old budget space to work deals with; and
3. there has been no evidence of Katz being willing to blow substantial dollars on salary swallows

Options get limited quick when ego, stupidity and money aren't wandering around hand-in-hand.

A couple of extra points:

a. All that talk of a d-man going to Columbus for a forward is just silly, so please, stop it. What we would really want they probably won't give and a one-for-only complicates our surplus forward issue (please re-read points made, #1 through #3, above).
b. Any talk of unloading a front-loaded salary for a Cap/budget exchange is also silly. Stop it. Main issues being - most of front-loads the Oilers have don't supply the Cap pay-off needed to make it worthwhile AND getting to the Cap floor isn't THAT hard

It all makes me think a long term fix is a long ways off.

------

Now, despite my protestations, the Heatley deal (if he had deigned to come to Edmonton) may have helped IF it had been:

Penner, Smid, Nilsson, 2010 1st and conditional 2011 1st
FOR
Heatley

At least he would have given us the third piece of a French Connection-lite line and with that in place, with Cogliano, Gagner, Gilbert and Grebeshkov there is some hope that, short-term, this team should be a winner.

As well, one could hope that Souray, et al could have been turned (in time) into other pieces that would have matched the younger core better and maybe a champion could have been developed from that.

However, five assets IS a lot to give up. No question about it.

------

Lacking the means to pick up an asset like Heatley there is still some hope that the Oilers could make the lateral moves that still remake a team. Movement in that fashion is harder than it looks (I say without actually knowing), because the first demand of that kind of a remake is this:

Honesty.

Even were a team willing to trade a worthwhile asset - are the Oilers honest enough with themselves to take a slight step back (i.e. trade Souray or Visnovsky) in order to make a big step forward a year or so later?

I am not talking rebuild here. Just straight up maneuvers.

To answer my own question: No.

The Kahbibulin signing really does tell you all you need to know.

------

So if one takes fortuitous circumstance and good planning off the table then all one is left with is stupidity and luck.

I don't see this management team having the wherewithal to benefit from stupidity so that leaves luck.

But they don't know that. And what they made is something wherein they can't really see the real faults in it.

So.

If the Oilers manage to avoid serious injury to any key parts (Horcoff, Hemsky, et al), have their young players continue to develop (Gagner, Smid and Cogliano) apace, get the season they need out of their older players and have someone step up and take on the defensive responsibility commensurate with leading a line (like the 3rd line for instance) and anchoring the 2nd penalty-kill unit then I can honestly say:

The Oilers could make the play-offs.

Way to execute a plan boys, way to execute a plan.

------

** Does that even make sense? Wit be not my friend this harrowing eve.***

*** There. That's it for Shakespeare now too.****

**** F you too English, I don't need you.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Can't Have It Both Ways

2009-08-22T00:54:00.006-06:00

Finding out you can't have it both ways is usually something you figure out right after you find out you can't have it both ways.

We's a funny bunch of humanity.

Twice The Pronging

Think about the Chris Pronger trade for a second.

If that trade is about the 'now' then there is no way Ryan Getzlaf isn't part of that equation. Even if it is done Iginla style: i.e. Pronger for Getzlaf straight up.

If that trade is about the 'future' then Bobby Ryan and Ladislav Smid are your two must have targets and if you can get a 1st round pick to round out that package you take it.

And you make Brian Burke make that choice.

But when you try to have it both ways then you get less. Plain old less.

Doubles Your Fun

Of course, as free-thinking people, it is our right to double our fun. Think about the Smyth situation for a second.

If you aren't going to trade him then you sign him. Early. Even if at a slight premium.

If you are going to trade him then you hold an auction and get the best package out there.

But to go into a negotiation, without time or leverage, having acted in a manner that says you kinda-wanta-but-maybe-not-so-much, then maybe, just maybe, acting as if you are the one holding the gun is a bit much.

Which is how one winds up with a package of Nilsson, O'Marra and a 1st instead of a guy like Okposo or some other worthwhile asset from another team that BID HIGHER THAN THE ISLANDERS.

Trying to have it both ways. Maybe not so good.

If Your Protected

And it isn't just about the trades. Think about the product for a second.

If it's about being competitive 'now' then veteran players get signed to fill holes on defense, or on the forward lines, or wherever you need them to play.

If it's about developing a team for the future then none of Smid, Gagner and Cogliano play when they did. And Penner and Souray don't get signed.

But If Not

Think all that through real careful like. Go deep.

Say Pronger gets traded for Bobby Ryan and Ladislav Smid and a 1st (which is still #30) and say the team dedicates, right then and there, to a rebuild situation. Not a liquidation per se but no half-measures either.

Tjarnqvist is still a probable signing but does Roloson get a 3-year deal? Maybe Roloson does. Hard to deny the heroes so lets say that everything else remains the same

EXCEPT

that Smid is played as a call-up (or stays in the minors another year) and if Smyth isn't signed then he is traded for 'best' package available. We'll call that package 'Okposo' equivalent.

With the season more or less playing out as it did the team is down a Plante but up a Ryan and an 'Okposo'.

Getting a little more speculative now but lets say that in 2007-08 Smid plays his first year and Gagner and Cogliano do not. Pouliot gets full play (for better or worse) and a couple of Sanderson's are playing in place Nilsson and Penner.

Does Souray get signed (better question - does Horcoff? I believe he would actually but you may think differently)?

So where does this team end-up in the draft? Worse than the Blues and Islanders but not as bad as Atlanta? Is Luke Schenn now an Oilers draft pick?

Finally we get to the end of the 2008-09 season. Gagner and Cogliano have played their 1st year and maybe even Ryan and 'Okposo' have as well. Regardless of how well they do that is an awful lot of rookie minutes to shelter. If Souray isn't signed a couple of years back then odds are good we finish below LA and maybe even Atlanta - is Braydon Schenn now an Oiler prospect?

Gagner, Cogliano, Smid, Ryan, Nash, 'Okposo', Eberle and Schenn(s) make for an amazing future line up. Time to start signing guys like Glencross.

And it didn't take incredible leaps of logic (timewarps aside) to get there.

Reverse it all and think of what coulda woulda shoulda if this team had gone the competitive route (Getzlaf, Smyth signed at $4.75 million when he should have been, Glencross on the team, etc).

EITHER WAY - it is better than what we have now.

You Could Be Screwed

Which is where we are now I think. This team, as constructed, could make the play-offs. 'Could' is not spelled 's-h-o-u-l-d' in this case however and that is the essential problem with trying to have it both ways.

The future is bright, but not so bright I gotta wear shades, and the 'now' is overpriced and 'iffy' competitively. Hell. Our future will be overpriced too.

You want to know what the most interesting thing about the Heatley saga was (did he send Patrick Kane a 'thank-you' note btw?)? For me it was Bryan Murray pushing the Oilers to the point where the package for Heatley included Cogliano.

Somehow I think that were the roles reversed the Oilers would have accepted Nilsson instead of Cogliano in the package.

Which would have been a package I could live with.

Because I wanted it both ways. Or perhaps I knew I could not.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Some Recent Past

2009-07-31T18:12:00.005-06:00

This is a picture of my wife's belly, from a few weeks ago, when she was pregnant. I started writing this post about then, but things got a little busy and so, press conference aside, I am just getting to posting it now.

Her, and my boy, are well and healthy and beautiful beyond all reason. For me, at least, it has been a great off-season.

:-)

UNLIKE

Mr. Tambellini I guess.

So... let me be clear: Dany Heatley is a top-5 LW in the NHL.

He has a willingness to shoot and the ability to shoot well, he has skating speed and the ability to use that speed well, he has just enough size, plays a smart enough game, can handle the puck passingly well and can make a pass when needed. His focus is on the attack and it is in the offensive zone that he puts his effort; his powerplay game is quite good.

While he isn't a complete dodger or quitter, no one will ever confuse him for a hitter, mucker, crasher or glue guy and there is nothing in his game that suggests he is capable of imposing his will on a game when needed. Even if he has the brains for the defensive game there is no indication that he wants to play it at a level above that of 'meh'.

To be fair, his point production is high enough, and his skills good enough, that most of his deficiencies are covered. Quite well at that. As a gun for hire he is an excellent choice.

Teamed with Horcoff and Hemsky, at regular strength, he should do very well as all three players have interlocking skill sets.

A power-play unit of Heatley, Horcoff, Hemsky, Souray and any one of Visnovsky, Gilbert or Grebeshkov should be both effective and efficient as the mix of shooters and passers is excellent. Only weakness I see here is that there aren't any true puck wizards in the group (a la Kovalev). There are quite a few puck movers however and the other skill sets are off the charts when considered in their combination(s).

Edmonton is a better team with Heatley on the roster.

But how you get there, and what it means once you are there, matters.

Money

In terms of paycheque, Heatley is an overpay.

As I have mentioned in an earlier post, for the money he makes, Heatley HAS to perform to expectation to earn that paycheque. I would, conservatively, put 'expectation' at:

- point-per-game
- positive corsi
- can tilt the ice (i.e. as above but allow for zone starts)
- positive +/- EV vs good competition
- can carry the line (i.e. as above but allow for linemates)
- team leader or glue guy
- difference maker on pp or pk (compared to league and not to team)

Any deficiency in one area requires more from others.

So while Heatley did cover most of those bets in 2008-09 he failed on at least two of them (ppg and carry the line - Alfredsson is the difference maker there) and we don't know about the team leader/glue guy thing*.

How often do you think he will cover those bets in future years?

Yeah. I am thinking that the 'team leader' option is a non-starter at this point.

Talent

Cogliano is a superb young talent, Penner should be and Smid will be okay.

Penner is, like Heatley, an overpay. I expect to see a good season out of him next season (the redemption effort) and the second season after that (the contract effort) but, given that he will be an UFA after his current contract there is little value in keeping a guy who only plays for the contract.**

On the flipside it is hard to see where Cogliano and Smid's work won't be a bargain next year. They will have had their education paid for by Edmonton and Ottawa would then get to cash in on the resulting performance-to-contract differential.

Ideally a trade should return a break-even or a win result. Peckham may help us forget about Smid but I don't see where anyone will be stepping up and replacing Cogliano.

Heatley's performance should exceed that of the parts going the other way but from where I sit the trade equation, just in terms of talent, isn't guaranteed. Cogliano will get better and the extent to which that happens can change everything.

I have no urge to make Bryan Murray look smart.

Integrity

Heatley's integrity has been, quite rightly, been questioned in many a forum. Fair enough.

What is troubling for me is the fact that this isn't a matter of a man misunderstood or needing a helping hand - I am quite willing to make a call based on granting second chances (see also: 1985 - MacTavish, Craig) - this is a matter of owning it.

I simply don't believe that Heatley takes full ownership of the decisions he makes. A listing of his 'questionable decisions made' is long, and undistinguished, but for my purposes it is as simple as not being able to live up to a contract signed, yet still acting as if you are owed.

Human frailty is a condition all owned, but I find it more forgivable in some. How empty the vessel?

Which brings me to the Oilers. The team and the management. This team has been leaking integrity for a long time.

As detestable as I found Mike Comrie's actions, Lowe's response did not do the team any favors. What has followed since has been a gradual transformation of team image from that of scrappy-underdog-in-a-hockey-mad-town to that of doomed-to-fail-roster-in-an-undesirable-destination.

The Nylander incident is/was, in and of itself, the kind of thing that should never reflect poorly on a team. Yet, as a sequence of events unfold themselves (Comrie, Pronger, Smyth, Nylander, etc), a narrative is formed.

"No? Just wait. Word gets around. The Sisters have taken a real shine to you, yes they have. Especially Bogs."

The Heatley situation, especially the begging in Kelowna, is one that pretty much confirmed this team as everyone's bitch.

Stop It

I don't know what else to say about this situation. Team building isn't THAT hard. If the team already has good fundamentals just reduce risk wherever possible and you'll pretty much have the situation handled.

Need a player to fill a spot that is important but not critical? Sign what you need or trade for it.

Screwed up your roster/salary cap equation? Swallow it or trade it away.

Too many rookie's? Play them fewer minutes or replace with veterans.

If you already have serviceable parts in place a competitive roster isn't rocket science. It only gets hard when:

a) you make it hard

i.e. by trying to shoe-horn a superstar onto the roster

b) circumstance is out of your control.

i.e. when there aren't any 'good' 3rd line centers available

c) or your mistakes all coalesce at the same time

i.e. probably the Oilers Cap situation 2010-11

d) it is time to make the push or time to blow it up

i.e. situations that require rock-solid planning and/or some 'luck'*** in order to ensure success in dealing with them

And even then, in the case of 'c' - there are always solutions out there (see also: New Jersey Devils 2005-06).

So. Please. Guys. Stop it.

Stop trying to be brilliant (adding a superstar won't solve all your problems) and just start doing that which just makes sense (adding a veteran 3rd line center will help win games).

Stop trying to win the Cup yesterday (there is no Messier on this team) and just try to win those games that come with the morrow (there is a great guy named Horcoff who needs more support).

Stop trying to find Waldo (Smid is not a winger and Pisani is not a center) and instead just try to work with what is obvious (Pouliot should be playing at center and Cogliano should be playing on the wing while he tries to find the handle on the dot).

We'll all be happier for it.

------

Quick note on Khabibulin. Don't like it.

Okay. One more comment on Khabibulin (kinda).

As much as I (almost) always agree with LT I do recall he said at one point that Khabibulin would be tradeable later on in his contract.

Not at 3.75 / 3.75 / 3.75 / 3.75 he won't be.

Were the contract shaped 8.00 / 4.00 / 2.00 / 1.00 then maybe.

Sorry LT.

The $1.40 million contract for Biron is freakin' amazing.

------

* I believe he was an Assistant Captain but I don't know if that letter came via the lockerroom or the contract.

** There is nothing wrong with a condottiere who is actually willing to fight the war for which he was hired. Given his cost of contract and acquisition, the selling of Penner will hurt but his contract is one that has to go.

*** As in, the trade for Goring leading, almost directly, to a string of 4 Stanley Cup victories... yeah... sharp trade but they did get a little lucky there.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Sad

2009-07-01T01:26:00.003-06:00

Oiler team management is screwed loose. And not in the good way. The Heatley trade, as proposed, is one of the worst I imagined.

Again and again and again we see this team's management transfer ALL of the risk onto the home team.

On a day where Calgary signs a bedrock defenseman for the next 5 years - for all of the cost of a Cameron Abney (think about that for a second) - the Oilers offer up 5 years of development time, SPENT ON TWO QUALITY PROSPECTS, and one middling-poor-but-the-jury-is-out contract for an overpaid, if legit, sniper who has now whined his way out of two different teams.

Remember when Souray signed? Back then I said all the risk was on Edmonton - why? Because Souray HAD to have a career year, pretty much every year, just to be worth his contract. It was the same story with Penner - but with him it was worse because of the assets given up to sign him.

Not an average year.

Not an okay year.

Not a good year.

No.

A freakin' GREAT year.

We sit at 0 for 2 for Penner and 1 for 2 on Souray so far. On a roll baby! On a roll!

How well would Heatley have to play for the Oilers to earn back the $7.5 million in salary AND the loss Cogliano AND Smid (and even Penner for that matter)?

He scored 72 points last year and wasn't all that great defensively (less Alfredsson anyways). Horcoff may have only scored 53 pts last year but we know he, at least, was carrying the rest of the forward core around on his back.

Why are so many of the Oiler faithful peeved at Horcoff? Because at $5.5 million he needs to be both great defensively AND score 65+ pts (my number) to make the optics work. Horcoff gets 25 goals and 40 assists and I promise few would be complain about his pay. As understandable as it is, 53 pts from Horcoff both looks bad and IS bad.

Does Horcoff need a career year every year? No. But he does need a good-to-excellent one.

As with Souray, and Penner before him, Heatley's price would require him to have phenomenal years every year. And since we know he can't carry a team, he is a complementary player afterall, that also means Horcoff and Hemsky or Gagner (if going pure soft minutes outscoring line) HAVE to remain healthy (who else would he play with?).

The risk is all on the Oilers in this one. Again.

Do that enough times and a team becomes the New York Rangers (Hey! I know! Let's sign Kamensky - we'll be GREAT!).

It's bad enough to watch Pronger and Smyth walk for, basically, nada. To then overpay for Penner and Heatley is just too much. THINK ABOUT THOSE FOUR NAMES. Can you see the difference? This team is sending out quality for dross (even if it is shiny shyte like Heatley) on a regular basis.

Had it just been Penner, Nilsson and Smid in the trade, I could have swallowed my dislike. But two quality prospects? Nuts to that. Didn't Ottawa want a puck moving defenseman? Smid?

That Heatley would then turn around and take time to 'think' about it only accentuates the hilarity.

Here is the thing. Players don't want to come here? Fair enough.

At what point in time do we realize that maybe it isn't the city that is to blame? Maybe, just maybe, players, and their agents, know that a winner won't be built here anytime soon. Forget Detroit. This group can't even compare to Columbus.

At what point in time do we maybe realize that team management is a joke.

And everyone knows it.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Edmonton Oilers - 2009 Off-Season

2009-06-30T22:39:00.005-06:00

I started writing this post a few months ago (end of March or so) and updated to today JUST SHORT of the whole Heatley 'thing'. We know changes are coming so take this post for what it is worth.

Funny thing though - anyone but me notice that NONE of Moreau, Staios or Pisani was involved in that trade?

In some ways this team is quite predictable.

Immediate Notes

The chart shows that Edmonton has, in 2009/10, ~ $45.89 mill of next years Cap space allocated to 11 forwards, 4 defensemen and 1 goalie. This leaves 3 forwards, 3 defensemen and 1 goalie to be signed.

The 2009/10 Cap has been set at $56.80; the difference being ~ $10.91 mill.

The RFA's

Brule, Reddox, Grebeshkov and Smid

Brodziak, ostensibly, was moved to make space on the roster. Brule is one of the guys who should benefit from that. Given that he couldn't even dominate the AHL I think he should, and does, get a paycut - a 2 year deal in the mill-a-year club would be more than enough.

Without MacT to champion his cause, Reddox is on the bubble. Depending on his remaining waiver eligibility we will be looking at a Roy-type deal where the second year is one-way (~ $650k).

Grebeshkov got the contract he wanted last year (the one I feared) and will get a big raise now. With any luck he is okay with getting less than what Gilbert did but I still don't see a smart agent letting him sign long-term. All signs point to a 3 year deal for $3.5+ million.

Smid is turning into a decent #5 and looks to have #4 upside. If Burrows is willing to sign for 4 years and $8 million there is no reason why Lowe can't try to get Smid into the same kind of deal - maybe even longer. I expect, however, a shorter deal and $1.65 million a year for two years sounds about right.

As with last year, one of the keys for Tambellini will be to keep inflationary effects out of the contracts he signs the players to. For example, a contract for Smid at 1.65 / 1.65 is much better for the Oilers than one at 1.30 / 2.00.

The UFA's

Kotalik, Strudwick and Roloson

Kotalik is a situation player. I'm not sold on him and neither are the Oilers (as they never made an offer apparently) but I expect he gets proffered a contract somewhere. While I do think that Kotalik is a useful player and would have signed him if he was willing to take a paycut (say $2.0 million) he isn't THAT important a player that he can't be replaced fairly easily*.

As it stands I will put a low-level replacement salary in that spot for now.

* However, if Souray is traded then the team would be well-advised to get a big shooter for the powerplay... oh... wait

I like Strudwick (more as a 4th line winger than a 7th defenseman though) but with Tambellini running the show now it isn't a sure thing as to whether or not he gets picked up again. If so, I have him down for another year at the same rate as before.

Roloson probably earned himself an extra contract. Won't be for what he made before however. Sounds like Edmonton has offered something in the $3.0 million range so I will go with that - this franchise has a history of rewarding its veterans.

Cap Flex and Maneuvers

Add it all up and the Oilers sit at ~ $56.84 million in Cap salary next year. The team is over the Cap by some $40k (way to save that 10%).

In terms of Cap flex, as with prior year, I don't see a lot. The easiest thing to do is drop a player or two into the minors and do the old up-n-down trick until waivers become an issue. That should take care of a $1 million or so and allow the team to make Cap.

More probable is that some combination of Penner, Pouliot and Nilsson is traded and the salaries coming back are low enough to allow the team to slide just under the Cap.

Apparently we are an option for Bouwmeester [Editor's Note: Not anymore apparently]? That'll be interesting.

Finally, don't expect to see any of the veteran core of Staios, Moreau and Pisani get traded. I think at least one should go but I don't see it happening. Loyalty trumps all in Oilerville.

For The Defense

With Grebs new contract incoming the defensive core is getting a bit pricey. This is okay if the names are spelled P-r-o-n-g-e-r and N-e-i-d-e-r-m-a-y-e-r or L-i-d-s-t-r-o-m and A-n-y-o-n-e-h-e-p-l-a-y-s-w-i-t-h but that is not the case here. Visnovsky and Souray are both injury prone and neither is elite level so at some point the law of diminishing returns will kick in.

Best case scenario for a Souray trade has San Jose getting booted early** and them being interested in a Souray-type to give them a better bomb option on the powerplay (they already have the puck-movers and passers). I wouldn't expect a miraculous return but moving the Cap hit is the main objective regardless.

** Really, I did write that before the play-offs, now if only I had mentioned how Souray would be willing to do to be closer to his family. At least then I would have been right.

Moving Visnovsky presents some of the same problems (big salary, aging player, injury filled past) as moving Souray but moving either of them is preferable to moving Gilbert imo (FTR, I would hate to drop Visnovsky from this defense core).

That leaves Staios and Smid. Staios is the obvious option and I remain in favor of trading him. Fat chance of that. Smid is, to me, the next Scuderi***. As long as he remains cheap why, excepting in a clear upgrade for an on-ice player, move him?

*** To whit, a long time ago I said that one should scout Pittsburgh to see who was the guy to target - Scuderi or Melichar. The reasoning being that both were starting to show decent results and it is always a good thing to get players who other teams have spent time and money molding them into useful players.

Going Forward

The forward group needs to be blown up real good. Or given a hug. Just too many players need to be hidden for this to form a cohesive group.

Horcoff, Hemsky, Gagner and Stortini are about it on my list of untouchables while O'Sullivan and Cogliano populate the list of mostly useful and probably keepable.

Note, if Cogliano doesn't have markedly improved face-off numbers next year he either moves to the wing or gets moved.

Moreau and Pisani are probably overpaid for what they deliver but at least, when playing the minutes and position God made them for, they do deliver the goods. Reddox is cut from their mold but it is hard to say whether or not he makes the grade on a non-MacT team.

Penner's asset value has never been lower but with a new coach coming in it is hard to say whether or not he gets moved. I have been one of those who have always thought Penner was a great building block towards a Kovalchuk type deal but after MacT threw him under the bus (multiple times) there is nothing there left to trade.

Right now the better move is to keep him.

Nilsson is inconsistent yet too far down the veterans road to think bright lights await while Pouliot, apparently has decide whether or not he should be a goalie.

Think about all of those players for a second.

Of those listed I see only three that don't require sheltering or special treatment (Horcoff, Hemsky and O'Sullivan), one that is on the cusp (Gagner) and four that are good at what they do (Moreau, Pisani and Stortini). The last group of names belong to players who are 3rd or 4th line guys (at best) and of the rest only one (Hemsky) could qualify as having elite level skill.

Quite a few spots to fill and most of what is filling those spots is questionable (to some degree). And small. Can't ever forget how small this team is.

Except for doughnut boy anyways.

Some of those pieces have to be blowed up. My guess would be that it will start with Pouliot and Nilsson. Penner is an outside shot but again - for what? That said, Tambellini will never be safer than now in trading Penner so you never know.

Going Back

Goaltending remains an issue. Fernandez is out there but once that name gets dropped then real money is on the table. Tyler likes the idea of a Harding offer sheet and I can't say that I'm opposed. I have a feeling we are looking at a higher number than proffered however.

Hard to believe that the Oilers are now wandering the goalie barrenlands on full-time basis. All this time I had hoped we were only visiting.

Summary

Last year I said a lot of good, smart decisions needed to be made to lock in the gains made 2007-08. So much for that.

Yes, MacT misplayed what had been mismanaged and so he, quite rightly, took the fall... I learned a lot from watching Lowe operate the last few years.

I like how Hemsky started to speak up, I like how Gagner grew his game, I like how Peckham emerged I liked how Smid showed some jam more often than not and I like that the team is now, possibly undisputably, Tambellini's.

Yay.

Overpriced contracts remain a huge issue and how Tambellini resolves that issue is the big ?. He has more flex than many give him credit for but wholesale change will remain difficult.

New coach has his work cut out for him.

Here's hoping.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Calgary - Kudos

2009-06-27T20:51:00.004-06:00

Calgary picked up the rights to negotiate with Bouwmeester for a 3rd round pick.

Is it a big price to pay given the odds of signing a guy committed to UFA? Yes.

Is it a big price to pay if they do sign him? No.

And for all who think the salary is an issue (I expect 6.75 and a retirement contract) I give these 3 words:

Vandermeer
Primeau
Jokinen

Vandermeer is already gone so that is $2.3 million in Cap. Primeau is another $1.4 million and Jokinen is $5.25 million. That is, in total, $8.95 million. More than enough for Bouwmeester and a couple of fillers for the other spots. If they pick up Malhotra they score this off-season big time.

Now if only they can solve the Kiprusoff problem.

When you have a chance to get a difference making talent like Bouwmeester - you do it. If Brent Sutter can turn Phaneuf around Calgary will be a scary team for years to come.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

NHL Entry Draft (2009) - Review

2009-06-26T22:12:00.036-06:00

Very deep draft. Could be 2003 all over again. One big trade came early (affecting draft order):

TRADE: Philadelphia trades Lupul, Sbisa, the #21 pick, their 1st round pick from 2010 and a conditional 3rd round pick from 2010 (or 2011) to Anaheim for Pronger and Dingle. Anaheim now has the #15 and the #21 while Philadelphia is out of the 1st round.

01 ... NYI ... Tavares
02 ... TAM ... Hedman
03 ... COL ... Duchene
04 ... ATL ... Kane

The first 4 picks are all as advertised. As much as I can appreciate the talent this draft has all the drama of a day-old Timbit. If it wasn't for the trade of Pronger... nuthin'.

As with every year there is one team, picking early, that I think should trade down and this year, for the 2nd time in the last 3 years, that team is the LA Kings. Not because their pick was a reach (like Hickey was) but because this team HAS to be competitive and getting a play-now asset for the 5th was a better way to go (imo).

Schenn was next on the board and that is where the LA Kings go. [Editor's note: Burke... not happy. YKOil... happy. I'm cheap that way.]

05 ... LAK ... Schenn
06 ... PHO ... Ekman-Larsson

A quick look at the aggregate scoring list shows that Phoenix is the first team to take a guy out of order - leapfrogging Paajarvi-Svensson and Cowen to take Ekman-Larsson. Great pick imo, just outside the 10 point jump rule but really, how could they go wrong at this spot in this draft?

TRADE: Howson continues to show us what he can do as a GM: Columbus trades the #16 and #77 to the NY Islanders for the #26, 37, 62 and 92. For a drop of 10 spots the Jackets get 2 extra picks; of which one is really high quality. That said, if the Isalnders get what they want they do well here as well.

This is what I said in my aggregated ranking post: If anyone ranked below Schroeder is chosen in the top-8 it SHOULD be a major surprise and if anyone ranked below Kadri is taken in the top-9, the team making that call probably just made a big mistake

Well. Okay then.

07 ... TOR ... Kadri
08 ... DAL ... Glennie

Kadri was ranked 11th (23 pts), Glennie was ranked 15th (10 pts) and they both jumped Paarjarvi-Svensson (6th w/ 48 pts), Cowen (7th w/ 40 pts), Kulikov (9th w/ 27 pts) and Schroeder (10th w/ 26 pts). If the Kadri pick is a surprise, the Glennie pick is BIG surprise. I like Glennie but... wow.

Maybe the Oilers get Kulikov? Will they risk the Russian steppes?

09 ... OTT ... Cowen
10 ... EDM ... Paarjarvi-Svensson
11 ... NAS ... Ellis

Ottawa gets back on script so Edmonton had an interesting choice to make. Kulikov is still my choice but Paarjarvi-Svensson is tempting in a Jani Rita sort of way; they take the Swede (who is half-Finn apparently; its a twofer!). Too bad in a way, Cowen would have been a no brainer.

I like the pick. Kulikov is the better player but Paajarvi isn't chopped liver either. Speculation is that Kulikov will drop because of the 'Russian' factor - be interesting to see how far. Nashville takes Ellis and it's a little funny isn't it? No one is mentioning how far Schroeder is dropping.

TRADE: Minnesota trades the #12 to the New York Islanders for the #16, 77 and 182. Nice trade by both teams as Minnesota gets a bounty of picks and the Islanders get aggressive.

12 ... NYI ... DeHaan
13 ... BUF ... Kassian
14 ... FLO ... Kulikov
15 ... ANA ... Holland
16 ... MIN ... Leddy

Well. Okay. A good trade for Minnesota. Islanders take DeHaan too early but I suspect they were spooked by the Ellis pick (and Kulikov drop) and figured they would get their d-man while they could. Big stretch by the Islanders.

Buffalo stretches a bit in taking Kassian (let's face it - they needed the size and grit) and then Florida, soon to be down a J-Bo, takes Kulikov. Great pick by Florida. Great pick.

Anaheim takes Holland and Minnesota takes Leddy (teams are all over the map now)... who the H%LL is Leddy? They couldn't trade down any further? Leddy might turn out but this is a horrible use of the pick by Minnesota. Schroeder continues to drop.

17 ... STL ... Rundblad
18 ... MON ... LeBlanc
19 ... NYR ... Kreider

St. Louis and Montreal help get the top-15 lists back on track but then the NY Rangers take Kreider. Fastest skater in the draft apparently... Barry... is that you?

TRADE: Calgary trades the #20 to New Jersey for the #23 and 84. Calgary pulls one out of the Kevin Lowe hat. Good trade for New Jersey.

20 ... NJD ... Josefson

TRADE: Anaheim trades the #21 to Columbus for the #26 and 37. Howson stays frisky. Should have been talking to Calgary apparently. It's a room full of gnats and Lou has a newspaper.

21 ... CLB ... Moore
22 ... VAN ... Schroeder
23 ... CAL ... Erixon

Moore is a solid pick even if the price is high and Vancouver gets Christmas a little early as Schroeder falls all the way to the 22nd. Luck is blind. Calgary picks up decent talent in Erixon.

24 ... CLB ... Johansson
25 ... VAN ... Caron
26 ... ANA ... Palmieri
27 ... CAR ... Paradis
28 ... CHI ... Olsen

A whole whack of picks that jump ahead of three guys who actually made a top-15 list: Despres, Roussel and Morin. Despres is the surprise here.

TRADE: Detroit trades the #29 to Tampa Bay for the #32 and 75. For a team on the verge of falling apart it is nice to see Tampa make a move.

29 ... TAM ... Ashton
30 ... PIT ... Despres

I like Tampa's draft day but I can't help but wonder how Pittsburgh got Despres this late in the draft. Great value for Pittsburgh at the #30.

------

The winners are (in order):

-- Philadelphia (CFP),
-- Anaheim (How to Get Value for an Asset 101),
-- Tampa Bay (a franchise d-man and a decent wing),
-- Columbus (built depth and got a highly rated player),
-- Florida, Vancouver and Pittsburgh (great value picks),
-- Despres
-- New York Islanders (great maneuvers but De Haan?),
-- Minnesota (great maneuvers but Leddy?),

The losers are (in order):

-- Anaheim (Lupul?),
-- Toronto (all that air wasted),
-- Los Angeles (team needs real players)

Philadelphia, in getting Pronger, does really well here. Good thing for the rest of the East that Philly can't secure solid goaltending to save their life.

As for the Oilers:

I like Paarjarvi-Svensson. Nothing wrong with that pick at all. I do get tired of the tire-kicking though. If you are going to move up then do so; quit dicking around.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Not a Hockey Post

2009-06-25T12:52:00.004-06:00

Had to be another out there somewhere.

Been following the NBA a little more lately. Fascinating league where BPA is a fantasy for all but the best GM's (Spurs). Now, and I say this honestly - NOT EVERY TEAM NEEDS A REBUILD - but boy oh boy do the Raptors ever need some help.

From Garbajosa's injury to the ill-fated trades for TJ Ford and O'Neal* the team is in dire shape and there is no way they are going to win with Bosh given that the Raps won't be a luxury tax team**.

Trade Bosh to one of Miami (Beasley) or Golden State (Randolph) and pick up some draft picks while you are at it. Get the 29th from LA (who are willing to sell) and trade down in this draft because no one will be worth it at the 9th spot (though I do like Holiday if there) and a decent - for this draft - guy will be available later.

Anyways - first day of two big draft days for me upcoming... sweet!

------

* which goes to show what star-shopping-because-stars-will-fix-everything can get you (Heatley)
** if the team was willing to pay significant luxury tax they could eventually build a contender around Bosh imo

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Tampa Bay - Too Fast For Me

2009-06-24T23:05:00.005-06:00

Honest. I had hoped to do a full write up on a Tampa Bay rebuild in conjunction with a post on "Rebuilds - On Steroids" (finally) and "Edmonton Oilers - After the Prong".

Given that things are moving so fast there right now I have believe that anything I write wouldn't be anywhere near prescient, or even intelligent (don't wait for it), if I waited any longer so consider this the (very) short-form.

Keepers

Otherwise known as players I like for the long haul.

G - Smith
D - Ranger, Meszaros, Smaby
W - nada, zippo and out of here
C - Stamkos

From the 2009 Draft, picks of note include: #2, #32 and #52.

Prospects of interest include (in order): Szczechura, Wishart, Lashoff and (maybe) Tyrell.

Trade Assets

(in order of value)

LeCavalier
St. Louis
Malone
Halpern
Prospal (too many years left)

Short-Forming

Try to send Lecavalier to the Kings for their 1st overall (the #5), one of Teubert/Hickey (probably not Hickey), one of Purcell/Moller (you want Moller) and some lesser draft pick(s) and prospect(s). In an amazing world maybe the 1st, Frolov (on a salary equalization basis) and one of Teubert/Purcell/1st rounder 2010 is obtained.

Frolov would, of course, have to be extended. Pay the man.

If Montreal is willing to play then some combination of: 18th pick overall (2009 draft), 1st round pick in 2010, Gorges, Higgins, Plekanec, Pacioretty and McDonagh. Maxwell, Subban and Fischer are also options. Gorges, Higgins and one of Pacioretty/McDonagh form the minimum requirements. Of course, as we know, any 5 assets will do.

Try to send St. Louis to Colorado.

Colorado may be willing to forego a rebuild if St. Louis comes their way. If so, don't be afraid to entice them by taking Tucker and one other short-term salary dump off their hands. The main target(s) is the #3 overall pick in this years draft and Shattenkirk. St. Louis and the #32 for Tucker, the #3 and Shattenkirk may be doable. If not Shattenkirk then Nigel Williams. Pay the price.

Prospal and Malone have a lot of years left on their deals but, at least in the case of Malone, there may be a fanboi GM out there so check it out.

Halpern should be an easy trade - someone will give up a 2nd (trade deadline) or 3rd (draft) for him.

Pay The Price

As mentioned - pay the price. The goal is to get at least one, and if aggressive, both of those high quality draft picks. Final price to pay - find out what Snow would want to NOT pick Hedman and bail if it gets ridiculous..

Do all that and the 'Keepers' roster looks like so (assuming decent but not amazing trades in those two scenarios):

G - Smith
D - Ranger, Meszaros, Gorges, Smaby, Hedman, Williams
W - Plekanec, Ashton**
C - Stamkos, Higgins, Duchene, Schenn/Kane

** If going by Mackenzie's listing and drafting for need

THAT is a sweet up-n-coming roster. Tonnes of upside and it still sucks for next year when more draft assets can be added and maybe Malone and Prospal can be traded. And all of that would come before other asset building strategies are employed.

This is the kind of year when a struggling team can remake their future by being sure and aggressive. Be interesting to see who wins that power struggle (though, to be honest, I don't credit Koules or Lawton with the skills to get it done right).

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Rebuilds - Old School

2009-06-21T01:17:00.004-06:00

The Process

Prior to the new CBA the General Manager's blueprint for the full rebuild of an NHL team was fairly straight forward:

Step 1 - Suck.

Be really, really bad for a very long time and wait for transformational players to make their way to the team via the draft and/or trade markets.

Step 2 - Stick with Step 1.

Players had to wait until they were 31 to become an unrestricted free agent so the time was available.

The Pitfalls

Given the wait (directly above), the only real pitfalls were these:

a. coming out of the rebuild too soon;
b. having really bad timing;
c. having really bad drafting*;
d. having really bad management; and
e. never being bad enough to make a difference

Of the pitfalls listed, the only debilitating ones were/are 'c' and 'd'; get those two in combination and the next Islanders dynasty (Milbury Edition) is locked and loaded.

The other three pitfalls can maim but the wounds should not be fatal; good management can overcome a lot of obstacles.

* A team can make good no-brainer picks in the 1st round and still have a bad drafting record (see also: Atlanta Thrashers).

Stages

A properly done rebuild has three distinct stages:

The Slide

So it begins. The team, as assembled, just doesn't have the horses. In all probability the horses are also: a) getting old and b) getting expensive.

The trick here was to maximize asset sales on the way down. Draft picks and prospects preferred (see also: Calgary Flames/Jarome Iginla) .

Balancing fan expectations vs. rebuild requirements plays a key role in the 'Slide'. Poor teams with big aspirations could spend a single year on the 'Slide' (they were just that bad anyways) while semi-good teams could spend a three or four years dismantling the old order of things.

The Wallow

Once the team is bad the next step is to wallow in it. There should be 2 to 4 years worth of top-5 draft picks in a good 'Wallow' and it is those picks that will make it all worth it.

Rule of Thumb: the more time is spent on the 'Slide', the less time should be spent on the 'Wallow'.

Given the need to field a roster, the idea here was to churn assets. One way to do this would be to bring in scoring wingers who can't defend air and let them gorge on 1st unit power-play time - then trade said point producer for more draft picks.

If the goal was/is to keep the team down in the rankings the very best method is just to get really bad goaltending.

The 'Wallow' doesn't last nearly as long as one might think. By year 2 the team will be 3 to 6 years into the ugliness and the fan base, even a patient one, will start to get restless.

The Build

This is where it all comes together.

Think about player development for a second. Your typical NHL player starts to hit their stride in their 3rd or 4th year in the NHL (see graphic). If your 'Slide' started 6 or 7 years ago your first batch of prospects and draft picks should now be 2+ yrs into their NHL career.

More importantly, those draft picks made during the 'Wallow' should be good enough that they skipped the minors and they should be hitting their sophomore years (NHL) right about the same time as the first batch.

So the 'Build' is about adding the right veterans in the skating ranks and making sure the goaltending is covered. A properly done 'Build' takes 2 to 3 years.

End Game

Thus, under the old NHL framework, a properly executed rebuild should take anywhere from 5 to 11 years (yikes!); after that it was just a matter of staying the course (exercising good management to remain competitive; see also: Detroit Red Wings).

Think of a three year 'Slide', a three year 'Wallow' and a 2 year 'Build'. Just from the draft picks (those originating with the team and those brought in via trade during the 'Slide' and 'Wallow'... hrmmm... great bar name) such a team SHOULD have:

- a certified all-star on the roster;
- another one just waiting to be certified;
- a 1st or 2nd line guy who is good-but-not-great;
- at least 1 stalwart for the 3rd/4th lines;
- two top-4 defensemen locked in;
- another who can play the 3rd pairing
- a few nice prospects on the farm team

Please note: that list doesn't figure for 'luck' (i.e. having the team's worst years coincide with great draft years; see also: Quebec Nordiques and Pittsburgh Penguins).

The list also doesn't figure in gains made from trades or unrestricted free agent signings - purely draft pick returns.

(And that 18 year old kid drafted in year 1... would then be 29 years old and still a restricted free agent... it really was to laugh wasn't it?)

------

And there you go - a basic primer for what an NHL rebuild would/should have looked like under the old CBA. It is important to remember, however, that history proves that rebuilds are harder than they look.

But, I'll write more on that another day. As with many other posts I write the purpose of this one has been to set up future ones.

For the record - this post was also about having fun AND establishing a theoretical process. Luckily, in both those respects it was successful: I had fun and the rebuild process (oft named but never quantified) is now baselined (hrmmm... I think baseline be the wrong word but nevertheless, ah well).

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Meh

2009-06-19T21:21:00.002-06:00

Daum as headcoach in Springfield = good.

$4 million for Roloson = bad.

Sedins for a Cap hit of $5.25/yr each = awesome. Do that deal in a heartbeat.

Mathesons' rumours on the deals for Heatley (starting with Gilbert and O'Sullivan) = could be very bad.

I remain... unimpressed with the Oilers team management. They still have time.

Meh.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

NHL Entry Draft (2009)

2009-06-17T00:02:00.004-06:00

For archive purposes I am compiling my NHL Entry Draft (2009) stuff here. As with last year's NHL Entry Draft (2008) archive, this first post acts as a primer that contains the set-up info of interest going into the draft.

Links to the other two articles in this series:

NHL Entry Draft 2009 - First Round Review

NHL Entry Draft 2009 - Oiler Picks (to come)

------

Personal Thoughts

What an incredible draft group. There are, from what I can discern, 8 picks that 'should' turn into all-stars and of those there are a few who could be Hall of Fame candidates.

Crazy year. Pass the kool-aid.

-- Tavares - given the hype this is a risky pick; to take or to pass, that is the question
-- Hedman - stud pick with no question marks
-- Duchene - see Hedman
-- Cowen - despite injury concerns he still makes the top-7; wow
-- Schenn - best 'safe' bet after the top-3; will he justify the pick?
-- Kadri, Josefson, Leblanc, Ellis, Glennie - all notable for only making 3 of 5 lists (top-15)
-- Ekman-Larsson and Kulikov - one of two I would hope for at #10

As opposed to last year this is NOT the kind of draft where trading into the top-14 will net best value on the dollar. The depth of the draft justifies the hype but that means the prices will be high, really high. Think about it - who will want to be the guy who trades the next Jordan Stall (Schenn in this draft)?

Where there will be action is in the top-5. As I have noted elsewhere, Colorado and Los Angeles are two teams that are in a position to trade their picks in exchange for a better play-off push next year - that means their picks may be in play; either by themself or as part of a push by another team (say Toronto) to secure a top-2 pick.

The Islanders and the Lighting may just swap picks but, from where I sit, both teams have the assets to make major plays this year. I expect, however, whimpers from both teams.

Tambellini does have the assets to snag a second 1st rounder this draft but that pick won't be until late in the round and at that point, well, whoopee-de-do-da.

i.e. the price point would be high and the 40th + Nilsson won't net you much

What do I expect? I expect we shall see Tambellini stand pat or trade spare parts for extra picks in later rounds. I half-expect to see a lot of Cap-unloading action, by all teams, taking place.

Miracles would include coming out of this draft with two of Ekman-Larsson, Kulikov and Glennie. Happiness means getting one of Ekman-Larsson or Kulikov at 10 or trading down to get one of Ellis or Glennie in the 12 to 15 range.

Without further ado...

------

Oiler Draft Picks (for use or trade)

01 -- _10
02 -- _40
03 -- _71
03 -- _82 ... Trade with Philadelphia
04 -- 101
05 -- 130
06 -- 160
07 -- 190

Remember to adjust for compensation picks.

Team Order - 1st Round

01.. NY Islanders
02.. Tampa Bay
03.. Colorado
04.. Atlanta
05.. Los Angeles
06.. Phoenix
07.. Toronto
08.. Dallas
09.. Ottawa
10.. Edmonton
11.. Nashville
12.. Minnesota
13.. Buffalo
14.. Florida
15.. Anaheim
16.. Columbus
17.. St. Louis
18.. Montreal
19.. NY Rangers
20.. Calgary
21.. Philadelphia
22.. Vancouver
23.. New Jersey
24.. Washington
25.. Boston
26.. NY Islanders ... via ... San Jose
27.. Carolina
28.. Chicago
29.. Detroit
30.. Pittsburgh

Top-15 Player Rankings (aggregated)

Below are the listings of the top-15 picks of each of the different, and independent, scouting bureau's. They are: McKeen's, ISS (International Scouting Service), Redline (Woodlief), The Hockey News and the CSB (Central Scouting Bureau).

Below that is an aggregated listing of those datasets after they have been fed through a scoring system. The scoring system simply reverses the order on the list (i.e. a player ranked #1 on the list scores 15 points while a player ranked #15 scores 1 point) and then adds ALL the points that player generates from the different lists.

Note that I counted the number of times a draftee made the top-10 of a list. This is to help add perspective. Prospect 'A' may have fewer points than prospect 'B' but if prospect 'A' shows up top-10 on all 5 lists then prospect 'A' may be seen as a safer pick to make.

The Scouts Recommend (Final Lists)

... McKeens* .... ISS ......... Redline* .... Hockey News . CSB**

1.. Hedman ...... Tavares ..... Hedman ...... Tavares ..... Tavares
2.. Tavares ..... Duchene ..... Duchene ..... Hedman ...... Hedman
3.. Duchene ..... Hedman ...... Tavares ..... Duchene ..... Duchene
4.. Ek-Larsson .. Pa-Svensson . Schenn ...... Cowen ....... Kane
5.. Kane ........ Kane ........ Kane ........ Kane ........ Pa-Svensson
6.. Schenn ...... Schenn ...... Pa-Svensson . Schenn ...... Schenn
7.. Kulikov ..... Cowen ....... Ek-Larsson .. Pa-Svensson . Schroeder
8.. Cowen ....... Kadri ....... Cowen ....... Kadri ....... Josefson
9.. Kadri ....... Ek-Larsson .. Kulikov ..... Schroeder ... Moore
10. Pa-Svensson . Kulikov ..... Leblanc ..... Rundblad .... Glennie
11. Ellis ....... Josefson .... Schroeder ... Kulikov ..... Ek-Larsson
12. Moore ....... Leblanc ..... Rundblad .... Depres ...... Depres
13. Schroeder ... Ellis ....... Ellis ....... Ek-Larsson .. Cowen
14. Glennie ..... Schroeder ... Roussel ..... Glennie ..... Erixon
15. Leblanc ..... Holland ..... Morin ....... Josefson .... Kassian

Graded Rankings

.................... Top-10 . Scoring

Tavares ............... 5 ___ 14 + 15 + 13 + 15 + 15 = 72
Hedman ................ 5 ___ 15 + 13 + 15 + 14 + 14 = 71
Duchene ............... 5 ___ 13 + 14 + 14 + 13 + 13 = 67
Kane .................. 5 ___ 11 + 11 + 11 + 11 + 12 = 56
Schenn ................ 5 ___ 10 + 10 + 12 + 10 + 10 = 52
Paajarvi-Svensson ..... 5 ___ 06 + 12 + 10 + 09 + 11 = 48
Cowen ................. 4 ___ 08 + 09 + 08 + 12 + 03 = 40
Ekman-Larsson ......... 3 ___ 12 + 07 + 09 + 03 + 05 = 36
Kulikov ............... 3 ___ 09 + 06 + 07 + 05 + 00 = 27
Schroeder ............. 2 ___ 03 + 02 + 05 + 07 + 09 = 26
Kadri ................. 3 ___ 07 + 08 + 00 + 08 + 00 = 23
Josefson .............. 1 ___ 00 + 05 + 00 + 01 + 08 = 14
Leblanc ............... 1 ___ 01 + 04 + 06 + 00 + 00 = 11
Ellis ................. 0 ___ 05 + 03 + 03 + 00 + 00 = 11
Glennie ............... 1 ___ 02 + 00 + 00 + 02 + 06 = 10
Rundblad .............. 1 ___ 00 + 00 + 04 + 00 + 06 = 10
Moore ................. 1 ___ 04 + 00 + 00 + 00 + 06 = 10
Despres ......... ..... 0 ___ 00 + 00 + 00 + 04 + 04 = 08
Roussel, Erixon, Holland, Morin, Kassian (all 2 pts or less).

The big 3: Tavares, Hedman, Duchesne
Next best thing: Kane, Schenn
Should be Good: Paajarvi-Svensson, Cowen, Ekman-Larsson
Consolation Prizes: Kulikov, Schroeder, Kadri
Afterthoughts: Josefson, Leblanc, Ellis, Glennie and everyone else

A Rule Of Thumb

When looking at the list I tend to apply an arbitrary rule of thumb: any draftee within 10 points of another draftee is at threat to be picked ahead or behind that draftee. This is to recognize, in part, the modestly random (to me) aspect of what teams prefer in their players. It is also a measure of reasonableness.

Kulikov has 27 pts - it would not be a big surprise to see him preferred over Ekman-Larsson by any number of teams. It would also, however, be a surprise to see him picked ahead of Cowen or Paajarvi-Svensson.

Using that rule of thumb I can expect that:

-- Excepting that the Islanders have signalled Tavares, Hedman or Duchene could go #1
-- Cowen could overtake Paajarvi-Svensson and, maybe, even Schenn but not Kane
-- If anyone ranked below Schroeder is chosen in the top-8 it SHOULD be a major surprise
-- If anyone ranked below Kadri is taken in the top-9, the team making that call probably just made a big mistake

------

* McKeen's and Redline only release, for free, their top-10. I found the other 5 names using various, legal, websites but cannot completely verify for accuracy. If you have the goods please feel free to self-correct while you read.

I will update as the information becomes public.

** CSB does not aggregate their European and North American lists. So I did it. Given the weakness of the Old World's offerings this year I started the highest CSS ranked Euro two spots behind and followed on from there.

------

Have a great evening everyone, and enjoy the draft.

Congratulations to the Penguins

2009-06-12T23:44:00.004-06:00

One of Two

I can't claim to have been here since the beginning - that honor belongs to guys like LT and MJ and the like - but I have been around a long, long time (it was soon after I moved up here, 1997 or so I guess). One of the things I remember, in the course of time, was the development of the mind-set, now prevalent in the Oilogosphere, of 'what-the-f%ck-is-really-going-on?'.

It started with +/- and TOI (still one of my all time favorite stats) and general observation and then grew with the discussions that followed. Some intrepid soul would dig into something that had struck them as worthy of investigation and then it would be 'out there' to be tested and torn and tried and, maybe, if worthy, true.

One of the things I remember, impact(fully), was the discovery - it seemed like a discovery, given that it flew full in the face of conventional wisdom at the time - was that Sergei Gonchar and Zigmund Palffy were great ALL AROUND talents.

Somewhere along the way someone(s) did the work and pointed out that those two weren't just point machines. They were, truly, great players in their own right.

From that moment on the gulf between the Oilogosphere-types and the HF fanboy's became self-evident and, despite a golden run put in by LT and Cerebral and others (as mods at HF) it was only a matter of time before the Tyler Dellows and Vic Ferrari's of the world left HF behind.

Of course, now there is Behind the Net (and the great Gabriel Desjardins) and the Oilogosphere and all this type of stuff is easier to see, understand and tabulate BUT, way back when, there was a time when that kind of knowledge was, almost, mini-revolutionary.

Just a few hours ago Sergei Gonchar won the Stanley Cup. He is, quite probably, the 5th best defenseman playing in the NHL today. You wouldn't know it. He still doesn't get the respect he deserves but at least now he has claim to the Stanley Cup.

About f&*king time.

I called the Wings but sometimes I am perfectly happy being wrong.

You quit too soon Ziggy. Sorry man.

------

On Heatley

Matheson references the cost for Heatley as being a talented puck-moving d-man, a top-6 (young) forward and a top-10 draft pick. That is a stupid trade to make. Tambellini makes that trade and he has done something stupid. I cannot say it plainer. Even IF Ottawa sends a pick back with Heatley.

Too damn much to give up.

A winning trade for Edmonton, one that takes into account the Cap-hit barrel that Heatley's contract tosses Bryan Murray over, is:

Heatley
FOR
Penner, Staios and Eberle

Murray saves a LOT of money, a little bit of Cap space in the short term ($550k), gets a contract MUCH easier to trade than Heatley's and a highly regarded prospect at the same time.

That is enough for me to give up (though I could be persuaded to throw in a prospect like Chorney and/or a middle rounds draft pick). If Murray can get better elsewhere then good on him.

My advice: focus on getting Bouwmeester, and if you really need a better LW (and we do) scoop Malone out of Tampa Bay.

------

On Tampa Bay

Speaking of Tampa Bay. Sending Vinny to LA for Johnson, the #5 and a guy like Handzus just makes too much sense. Anything more is bonus.

Stamkos (whom I was wrong about), Hedman and Schenn make for a pretty sweet rebuild starter-kit.

Of course, at one point in time, Johnson and the #5 were headed to Anaheim for Pronger (not a horrible trade actually).

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Sticktuitiveness

2009-06-10T23:14:00.004-06:00

Sticking with Detroit in the final

and

Very impressed with the judge, guy worked the angles and found an intelligent way to split the difference; sorry Phoenix

and

I do not like the packages that are being pitched if the Oilers are to get Heatley. His Cap hit is too big to ignore and, more importantly, the only guy you are really bidding against is yourself and, possibly, LA. Also, Heatley has some ability to dictate so don't look for him to okay a trade that cripples the team he is heading to.

Penner is probably too toxic for Ottawa management to sell and Cogliano doesn't cover the salary spread. I have to admit - this is a hard trade to match because Edmonton doesn't have spare quality that Ottawa would want (i.e. no d-man past Gilbert and Grebs that could play a role in Ottawa).

hrmmm....

The more I look at it the problem is Ottawa's dire need for a puck-moving/power-play d-man and Edmonton's inability to freely give one up. Even a mediocre one.

Visnovsky, Nilsson & a 2nd rounder works but now Edmonton needs a (GOOD) d-man. Gilbert, Cogliano and ? (Nilsson is my pick here as well) also works but now Edmonton has given too much up.

Look. Mr. Tambellini; go get yourself another d-man in trade and THEN look at getting Heatley. Otherwise, just say no.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

NHL CBA - Revenue Sharing and Salary Cap

2009-06-10T21:22:00.004-06:00

Some items in this post are cribbed from this post at Hockeys Future; which cribs from an August 2005 article in the Sports Business Journal. I'm just filling in holes, organizing a bit, supplying extra context/info and then whacking in some thoughts/observations. Irish Blues at NHLSCAP is much closer to pro when it comes to the cba so please feel free to go to his site for more/differently said information.

This post deals with the Cap calculations and revenue sharing. I am writing so as to archive and provide myself reference material for future posts.

Basic Cap Calculation

Hockey Related Revenues = HRR
Negotiated Player % of HRR = A
Maximum Player Share of Revenues = HRR*A = MPS

Club Average Revenue = HRR/30 = CAR
Team Salary Cap = CAR*A or MPS/30 = Cap

Salary Budget Target = CAP - $ 8 million = SBT

So if HRR = $ 2.586 billion then:

A = 56.5% and MPS = $ 1.461 billion

CAR = $ 86.2 million
Cap = $ 56.7 million
SBT = $ 48.7 million

There is a lot of play in the calculations (inflation escalator, a player benefits number, etc) but, for the most part, that is how it works.

Basic Escrow Math

As many clubs will spend beyond SBT the odds are good the players will get paid more than their overall share, hence there is an escrow holdback system in place.

Actual Salary Expenditures = ASE
Escrow Holding Account = ASE - MPS = EHA

So if every team spent full Cap then:

ASE = $ 1.701 billion and
EHA = $ 240.0 million

Interestingly enough, the EHA will never total more than $ 240 million. Escrow funds are first paid out per the two revenue sharing plans and then split evenly among the clubs.

As there are two identified revenue sharing plans this creates a situation where there are actually three possible revenue sharing payouts that any one team can receive.

i.e. remaining escrow dollars are "split evenly among the clubs".

Basic Revenue Sharing Rules

1. Clubs start with 54% of their own revenues (presumably HRR) for payroll calculation and revenue sharing purposes.

2. Clubs in markets with more than 2.5 million TV households are ineligible for revenue sharing.

3. By the third year of the deal, clubs have to grow revenues faster than the league average and have attendance of 75% of capacity to be eligible for their full revenue-sharing allotment.

4. By the fourth year, the required attendance capacity increases to 80%. That number then holds at 80%.

Revenue Sharing Pool 'A' (RSPA)

Comprised of league media revenue, play-off gate receipts, escrow funds and funds from top-grossing teams this pool of funds totals ~ 4.5% of HRR. The purpose of the RSPA distribution is to bring clubs to within $ 4 million of SBT.

Any club in the bottom half of league revenues, regardless of payroll, is eligible to receive funds from RSPA.

To continue the example, Team TRY:

RSPA = 4.5% * HRR = $ 116.4 million

TRY HRR = $ 70.0 million
TRY MPS = $ 39.5 million

$ 48.7 million - $ 39.5 million = $ 9.2 million

$ 9.2 million - $ 4.0 million = $ 5.2 million

Team TRY would, presumably, be able to draw as much as $ 5.2 million from RSPA.

One interesting thing to note here - if escrow is high enough then, presumably, the entire RSPA pot could be funded from escrow dollars. Which would mean that this revenue sharing pot would then be entirely player funded.

Which isn't exactly what one might call 'in the spirit' of revenue sharing. Dollar sharing: 'yes'; revenue sharing: 'no'.

The critical factor here would be: how much of RSPA is comprised of escrow dollars? To be honest, I haven't dug deep enough into the CBA to get that info.

Revenue Sharing Pool 'B' (RSPB)

Comprised entirely of escrow funds, if available, not used up by RSPA. The purpose of the RSPB distribution is to bring clubs to, but not over, the SBT. Any club spending over the midpoint on player salaries is not eligible for the second batch (obviously).

Team TRY would, presumably, be able to draw as much as $ 4.0 million from RSPB.

Again, it is interesting to note that, if escrow is high enough, player salary holdbacks have paid for all of the revenue sharing efforts of the NHL teams.

Using 2008-09

Cap = $ 56.7 million
SBT = $ 48.7 million

Teams spending over SBT = 24 (25*)
(* Toronto was under SBT but, probably, doesn't qualify for Revenue Sharing)

Total Salaries (including LTIR) = $ 1.613 billion
Average = $ 53.77 million
Teams above average = 19
Teams below average = 11
EHA (estimated) = $ 152.23 million

Total Salaries (without LTIR) = $ 1.580 billion
Average = $ 52.67 million
Teams above average = 20
Teams below average = 10
EHA (estimated) = $ 119.05 million

RSPA = $ 116.4 million

RSPB (inc LTIR) = $ 2.65 million
RSPB (w/o LTIR) = $ 35.83 million

Depending on how much of the escrow is used up in RSPA (as mentioned) it looks like the revenue sharing could have been entirely escrow funded in 2008-09; regardless of scenario.

A Chart

According to the CBA the players are guaranteed a % of leaguewide Hockey Related Revenues (HRR). That % changes as HRR shrinks or grows but can never fall below 54% (at $ 2.2 billion in HRR) and never go above 57% (at $ 2.7 billion in HRR).

Salary Cap # per team based on the estimated leaguewide HRR.

$b ........ Player%

2.200 ....... 54.0
2.300 ....... 55.5
2.400 ....... 56.0
2.500 ....... 56.3
2.550 ....... 56.5
2.600 ....... 56.7
2.700 ....... 57.0
2.800 ....... 57.0
2.900 ....... 57.0
3.000 ....... 57.0

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Rematch

2009-05-28T20:40:00.007-06:00

(Found a better photo)

Finale

If Lidstrom is healthy (and I mean HEALTHY - not hanging on by a thread) then Detroit takes this in 6.

If not, and Gonchar is HEALTHY (same criteria), then Pittsburgh in 7.

If both Lidstrom and Gonchar are just 'healthy' then Detroit in 7.

I take Detroit in 7.

Sitting at 7 for 14 now... unless you figure I was wrong on the game counts in which case I am waaayyyy out of it.

Quinn & Renney

I'll go with cautiously optimistic. I do like that every player should get a new 'look-see' but if Quinn is even more vet-happy than MacT then it will all come down to Renney's work on the special teams.

Which could be the bet all along.

One sour note: dropping Huddy was just plain stupid imo.

Balls

Balsillie will win the team. The right to move it... slim. The odds of the NHL pulling the team within a few days of such a ruling... 50/50.

Balsillie lost $600 million once fighting a fight he shouldn't have.

When I look at this I see a guy who could have bought the team for much less than the $212 (say $176?), rejigged the lease, lost $12 or so for three more seasons (just to bring it back to $212 - I'm like that you know) and THEN declared bankruptcy and moved the team.

Because after three years he would have won over enough BoG guys, in a big enough way, to get it done.

I'm sure they have round-ups in the Phoenix area. Balls get cut off at round-ups.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Just In Case You Missed It

2009-05-16T12:10:00.004-06:00

Thirds

DET over CHI (in 7)

PIT over CAR (in 6)

hrmmm... now 5 for 12... owwwwww

------

Question

Your team is in a bit of a rebuild situation. You have gobs of cash but the cost of what you are considering isn't all 'money-I-am-giving-up-putting-in-my-pocket', some of it will be 'money-I-will-be-taking-out-of-my-pocket'.

Also, what you are considering WILL be scrutinized by the league.

That said, would you, say, trade:

O'Marra, Hrabal, Pitton, 2009 7th rounder and 2010 7th rounder
FOR
Pothier, Theodore, 2009 1st rounder and 2010 or 2011 1st rounder*

* (WASH choice at draft time)

That puts a $3 million value on a late-1st round pick IF you never planned to use the players.

I am waiting for these kinds of deals to start to happen. Burke did a mini-version of this at the deadline but what I am talking about is one-step away from the whole enchilada.

Remember - the Zetterberg deals finally started to happen and all it took were a few warm-ups first.

[Edit to add: btw, there is a deliberate flaw in the math so if you find it GOLD STAR FOR YOU!]

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Expansion Teams Incoming

2009-05-06T19:09:00.004-06:00

Take Your Pick

Fearless Prediction #1

BoG of the NHL finds a way to dodge the Balsillie bullet altogether. Mostly because the rest of the league doesn't want to miss out on the expansion fees a Toronto team would offer (not to mention the Sabres and Leafs getting their 'our-turf' fee).

Fearless Prediction #2

Balsillie gets the Coyotes but has to keep them there for the next 2-3 years or until another buyer is found. He then gets awarded the expansion team for Toronto... and still has to pay through the nose for the privilege.

------

While a second expansion team for Kansas City may or may not be approved in either scenario the real key for Bettman is pointing out to the BoG just what they are missing out on ($) without going the expansion route.

No matter how this shakes out - even if Balsillie wins it all outright - there will finally be a 2nd team in Toronto.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Well That Kinda Sucked

2009-05-01T05:44:00.005-06:00

Second Round

Can also mean: chance to try again. Seems I will trend towards the favorites this time:

DET over ANA (in 6)
VAN over CHI (in 6)

BOS over CAR (in 5)
PIT over WAS (in 7)

First round was not kind to me. 3 for 8. Not good.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Impacts

2009-04-27T21:31:00.006-06:00

The Three Best

The three best players in the NHL, in my opinion, the three guys I would never trade, are simply these (in order):

Lidstrom
Ovechkin
Luongo

I cannot think of anyone else who makes the difference they do. And I would probably take Gonchar and Zetterberg over Crosby or Malkin, but that's just me.

Quick Note (Horcoff)

Tyler Dellow has a great post up on Horcoff and the relative value of his contract. To grossly oversimplify the arguement (mine - not his) I'll throw some extra pennies on the table:

Year ...... Cap (m$) .... Inflation .... Sal (m$)

2005-06 ...... 39.0 ....................... 3.60
2006-07 ...... 44.0 ....... 12.8 % ........ 4.06
2007-08 ...... 50.3 ....... 14.3 % ........ 4.64
2008-09 ...... 56.7 ....... 12.7 % ........ 5.23

2009-10 ...... 56.7 ........ 0.0 % ........ 5.23 SQ
2009-10 ...... 62.0 ........ 9.3 % ........ 5.72 UP
2009-10 ...... 54.7 ....... -3.5 % ........ 5.05 DN

So... don't really see where Horcoff's contract is an overpay.

If one accepts the fact that he was a $ 3.60 mill /yr player in 2005-06 then, just using simple Cap inflation, he is underpaid by 200k+ (the UP) starting next year. While the numbers aren't up there (too lazy), the simple math says that Cap inflation is required to be less than 5% to make him an overpaid player.

Can you imagine if the comp was against UFA salary inflation (an approach that would have been more appropriate) instead of overall Cap inflation? Gets even worse for all of you Horcoff haters if one looks at UFA salary inflation for players in the 27 - 32 years old category (most appropriate).

A long time ago, speaking of his last contract, I said that the only issue I had with it was that it should have been for one more year (4 years instead of 3) - a position that looks pds right about now...

BUT

... that isn't something I could hold against Lowe then (and I didn't) so it certainly isn't anything I can hold against him now. It is what it is - a pretty fair contract.

And do you really think Horcoff would negotiate his next contract after a year like the past one? Give your head a shake.

Channel that anger elsewhere people - Horcoff doesn't deserve it.

About That Cap

It's pretty obvious that declines in NHL team revenues will dramatically impact player payrolls. The trick is to see whether or not this then impacts the Salary Cap. This can go one of three ways:

1. Excessively large drop in Cap (as much as $10 million?)
2. Small drop in the Cap and let escrow handle it
3. Moderate mix of the above

I tend to believe, that for 2009-10, we will get #2. The Cap will dip slightly, no more than $2 million, and the escrow account will be HUGE.

In this way:

- small market teams get a bit of relief as they see a drop in Cap Floor;
- large market teams (still) get to exploit their payroll budget advantage; and
- player contract rewards will remain stable (just sans inflation)

For the purposes of future, and even this, post(s) that takes the Cap to ~ $54.7 million.

For max Cap teams that lack in expiring/deadweight salary, like Edmonton, this will hurt a little bit. Not only will the team be lacking in the space it needs to sign all of it's players, other teams will have less space available to absorb the salary Edmonton wants to trade.

No question, as noted a few days ago, Brian Burke is sitting in the catbird's seat this off-season.

Prendergast Update

The Prendergast post of a few weeks ago has been updated to link new items:

1. Guy's third post in the series and
2. Tyler Dellow's rebuttal **

** Tyler rebuts (quite rightly) the impression, as left in Guy's first two posts at least, that MacT was sabotaging the development of prospects into players.

To his credit Guy responds as well as anyone could.

------

Bonus points to anyone who sees the key weakness in my Horcoff arguement. Hint: it has nothing to do with the new contract.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Timing. And Luck.

2009-04-23T20:14:00.008-06:00

(please, dear Lord, let them be wearing skates)

Luck O'the Irish

Brian Burke is about to have a wonderful off-season. Rarely have I seen circumstance so benefit a NHL General Manager.

Everything should be working to his advantage. EVERYTHING.

A. The team operates in a large market with a rabid fan base and can spend full Cap without blinking an eye.

B. The dollar resources of the team, and the force of Burke's personality/control of the team, are such that the budget should be able to exceed Cap.

C. His is one of (very) few teams entering this contract season with lots of Cap space, lots of budget space and few RFA committments to consider.

D. Individual NHL teams will be facing serious fiscal obstacles and will be eager to deal with someone who has cash and knows how to use it.

E. The NHL, as a whole, has entered a period of time where salary inflation should be almost non-existent due to the economy.

F. The NHL, as an operating league, has already approved deals which work to the dollar strengths of the team (see: Detroit).

i.e. the heavy lifting has been done.

G. The upcoming UFA and Entry Draft classes are stocked with talent (as opposed to the 2008 UFA list or the 1999 Entry Draft lets say).

H. The upcoming Entry Draft has two distinct classes of teams in the top-7 picks and this will provide opportunity. **

I. He will have carte-blanche in all his dealings and can remake the team as he sees fit.

THAT is some pretty sweet timing. Los Angeles should be in this position as well but I don't see those owners as being as willing to spend the dough.

------

About That #1 Pick

Being contrarian I do not see a deal for Tavares as being impossible, or even 'really' hard for Burke to achieve. In fact I also see Los Angeles as being a contender for that (the #1) pick.

** That is because of the two classes of teams that I mentioned above.

1 ... New York Islanders
2 ... Tampa Bay Lightning
3 ... Colorado Avalanche
4 ... Atlanta Thrashers
5 ... Los Angeles Kings
6 ... Phoenix Coyotes
7 ... Toronto Maple Leafs

On that list Toronto, Colorado and LA stick out like sore thumbs. The financial capabilities of those three teams, compared to their brethren, is staggering - and of the three, financially, Toronto is way, way ahead.

Two things further differentiate Toronto from Colorado and LA:

a. roster and payroll flexibility (Toronto only really cares about Schenn) and
b. compete level

Because of where their rosters are (in terms of build and compete) both Colorado and LA are teams that should be/want to be serious play-off spot contenders next year. Colorado's picture is litle muddied in that the team will be subject to two, mutually exclusive but same sourced, motivations:

a. possibly dumping some salary if Sakic re-signs or
b. probably adding a replacement player if Sakic retires

Regardless of the Sakic decision fall-out however, the point to be made is that neither Colorado nor LA is in the same strategic space as the Leafs - namely, being quite willing, able and happy to trade picks, players and money for a big move in the draft.

In fact, because of their compete factor it is quite plausible that either one of LA or Colorado would be willing to trade their pick for quality players coming back the other way.

------

Enter Brian Burke

The trick here is for Burke to trade for one of the 3rd or 5th picks and package THAT with the 7th.

I think people underestimate how many quality trade chips Burke actually has. Kaberle, alone, represents a serious upgrade to either Colorado's or LA's defense corps (Kaberle, Doughty, Johnson and Hickey make for a quality defense corps).

Think about it: Stajan, Ponikarovsky, a bevy of 2nd round picks, Kubina, Hagman, White, a (albeit) small pool of prospects and even Stempniak or Finger... yeah, Toronto has tradeable assets.

My Take? A package in the form of Kaberle, Stajan and a pick gets LA's 3rd or Colorado's 5th.

And don't forget - Toronto can afford any bad contract any team wants to dump.

Snow is a fairly smart GM. He knows that, as valuable as Tavares or Hedman is, a package of high quality assets can make all the difference in the world (see also: Quebec/Lindros).

My belief is that Burke gets the 1st if he gets Snow any two of Duchene, Cowen, Kane and Schenn in a package. I suspect the package would look a lot like this:

Tavares

for

x2 1st rounders (as mentioned);
x2 2nd rounders (only one needs be current year);
a prospect (or still a 1st year player);
one of Ponikarovsky/White (probably White).

The only question for me is this: if Burke gets the #3 and has a legit shot at two of Duchene, Cowan, Kane and Schenn, why would he trade that away?

I gotta give this to Burke: his timing is impeccable. Or maybe he should just pull that leprechaun out o'his ass... though it does explain the temperament.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

(MacT) Thanks and Good-bye(s?)

2009-04-18T00:44:00.011-06:00

Craig MacTavish

Joining the show late (as it is my wont to do) I will add my voice to those that:

a. thank Craig MacTavish him for his efforts as coach of the team;
b. wish him well in the future;
c. believe he was a far better coach than given credit for (by many);
d. appreciate his ability to develop talent;

and, perhaps most importantly imo,

e. do not believe he deserved to walk the plank alone

Yes, MacT took a whack of misteps this year (I have a summary somewhere here and BDHS has a more recent, and better, one) and when those mistakes are combined with:

a. a historic(al) inability to develop a decent powerplay system, and
b. players whose committment he had lost**

it was time for him to go.

BUT, this was Lowe's roster all the way and it was his player procurement that set the team up to fail.

Pronger for beans, Smyth for less than that, Torres for a question mark, Hedja, Reasoner and Glencross discarded, and more - the series of moves made is as mindboggling as it is questionable. Rebuild style moves made when a reload was possible and reload style moves made when a rebuild was the obvious strategy.

It really is batshit crazy kind of stuff.

Yet, when other head office retirements are mentioned it isn't Lowe's name that comes up - it is that of Kevin Prendergast.

That is asinine.

Kevin Prendergast

I look at draft results all the time and I am absolutely certain that in the fullness of time the Oiler drafts from 2001 through 2008 will show positive results.

I have a couple of years of updates to do to my data and on the quick I can honestly say the trend is way up; the only clear miss being Niinimaki in 2002.

But you want to point a finger of blame per the Pouliot/Parise trade?

Good. Point it then at the substandard return Lowe secured and not at Pouliot nor Prendergast (as neither deserves the heat simply for being). While I cannot be mad at Lowe for making the pick I can be mad at how he prices his draft assets - compare what he got for the 17th (2003) versus what he paid for the 21st (2007) and then take a look at all of Lowe's like trades - he is a classic sell low and buy high kind of guy.

Want to be mad - be mad about THAT. Good GM's don't sell their assets cheap.

Guy Flaming has an absolutely must-read post at Coming Down The Pipe that lays out a defense of KP. It doesn't get much better than that.

(The second in the series is here and the third is here)

Now, Flaming might be tight with KP. Guy has been following the Oilers propects for quite a while now and developing contacts/friendships with the scouts would be a natural thing to have happen. But nothing in his post(s) ring false.

[Edit to add: seems I spoke too soon about the 'nothing in his post(s) ring false' as Tyler Dellow speaks to the issue - as far as MacT is concerned anyways]

Kevin Prendergast should not be shown the door. Not this year at least. We'll see how Springfield does next year.

BPAATC

One of the best things about Guy's post is that it basically states, in no uncertain terms, that Best Player Available is a joke. No team out there takes best player available - they all take Best Player Available According To Criteria.

[Edit to add: a belief I have, well... always, had]

So whether it was Barry Fraser loving size (and US colleges - see my work) or Lowe not really wanting another small skilled guy in 2003 (buh-bye Parise) NONE of it had anything to do with taking the best player available.

Fact is, reading Guy's post it sounds an awful lot like the Oilers made the cardinal sin of drafting for need. BPA be damned.

------

** Despite other assertions I am one of those who believes that MacT lost the room.

'Losing the room' does not have to exhibit itself in the form of a general player revolt (dressing room) or unofficial player surrender (on the ice) - if one sees a team that either lacks confidence or shows a condition of malaise, when it should not, then odds are good that the leadership of the team (the leadership is comprised of the coaches and the letters) has lost the room.

The disconnect was noted by MacT himself. For a guy who preaches team grit and sacrifice NOT to be able to get that out of his team, despite the fact that most of his players were/are cut from that mold, well... that is 'lost the room'.

------

To be clear. MacT should have, and did, get shown the door. But the other guy going, if any, should be Kevin Lowe. Not Kevin Prendergast.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

2009 Playoff Predictions

2009-04-15T19:18:00.006-06:00

Round One

Boston (1) in 5 over Montreal (8)
Rangers (7) in 7 over Washington (2)
New Jersey (3) in 6 over Carolina (6)
Philadelphia (5) in 7 over Pittsburgh (4)

San Jose (1) in 6 over Anaheim (8)
Columbus (7) in 7 over Detroit (2)
Vancouver (3) in 5 over St. Louis (6)
Chicago (5) in 6 over Calgary (4)

Round Two

Boston (1) in 5 over the Rangers (7)
New Jersey (3) in 7 over Philadelphia (5)

San Jose (1) in 6 over Columbus (7)
Vancouver (3) in 7 over Chicago (5)

Semi's

New Jersey (3) in 7 over Boston (1)
San Jose (1) in 7 over Vancouver (3)

Final

San Jose over New Jersey in 6.

------

Quick note - be interesting to see where the Oilers go from here but I have to think that one of the MAIN reasons Omark wasn't signed was that which both Tambellini and MacT singled out as one of the reasons why this was a failed season.

Too much small (and skilled) is bad.

If this team was huge and lacking skill there is no doubt in my mind Omark (and even his pal skippy) gets signed.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Heh. So....

2009-03-07T00:17:00.003-07:00

My bad.

When I referenced signing Strudwick to a 4 year deal (a couple or so posts ago) I must admit that I didn't look at his age. Given he is already 32 there is no way he gets a deal longer than 2 years. Maybe go 3 years if you can get him to agree to minimum (NHL) wage and you are willing to bury him in the minors for that 3rd year.

By the same token, depending on how one wants to maneuver with the first UFA year, there is no reason not to sign Brodziak, Reddox and Smid to deals as long as you can make them.

Why not sign Pouliot in the same fashion (next year)?

Because he is already at $900k+ and you don't even know what role he will play for you yet. As there is little chance he would want to sign for more than 3 years at low rate ($950k?) and because you don't know if he will progress beyond bubble status there is no point in making the kind of deal I propose.

i.e. replace with Nash or Eberle and try again.

The difference with Brodziak, et al is that you already know, beyond much doubt, that they will be able to fill their 3rd and 4th line roles just fine - so why risk a 20 goal season? Brodziak, especially, is a guy you want to lock-up at $950k or so as long as possible; he'll have a great year very soon (a la Stoll) and I would hate to pay for it earlier than I have to.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Trade Deadline Musing - 2008-09 - Final Thoughts

2009-03-04T22:04:00.007-07:00

So, Tambellini or Lowe? This was some solid team building and asset management work so, as rare as it may be coming from me, for what it is worth, well done.

Getting right to it.

WINNERS (in order - most winnerest listed first)

Phoenix

Upshall is one of those under-rated leader types while Carcillo is one of those 'almost-more-trouble-than-he-is-worth' types; to get a 2nd rounder thrown in on the deal? Wow. If they can sign Upshall to a decently affordable contract... WOW.

Morris has been over-rated almost forever. Dawes alone would have been an adequate return so if Prucha or Kalinin turn out then this is a clear win. I don't have much faith in Kalinin but Prucha is an interesting roll of the dice.

Lombardi is, argueably, not far off Jokinen in terms of performance so the 1st round pick will help make up the difference. Prust, and the 4th for Tellqvist, are just the icing on the cake for the Coyotes.

Great work by Maloney.

Calgary

Sutter, despite being a dick, completed some nice trades here. He had to. Leopold will fit in wherever they need him and it's put up or shut up time for Jokinen.

Boston

Boston gave up three, borderline at best, NHL'ers (so I'm not a big Lashoff fan - big whoop) and got back two Cup run veterans; fair enough I say. The kicker for me is the 2nd rounder from Tampa - that will be just like a late 1st rounder given how screwed up that franchise is. Well done Boston.

Edmonton

Two new options to try out on LW and, more importantly, they are both legit options (none of that "let's try Cole at LW" bullshiite this time). Kotalik is an enigma, so I can't put too much faith in him just yet, but O'Sullivan is a real 'upside' piece and for the Oilers to get that much for an UFA bound Cole... well... great, great trade imo.

Columbus

Vermette can play center and Leclaire was making too much money so that alone makes this trade a win, however, even I will sometimes put immediate results in front of good player asset management and so the 2nd round pick is a small price to pay for ensuring a play-off run.

Howson and Hitchcock are proving a formidable team and they will get a lot out of Vermette.

San Jose and Chicago

A Cup contender just got better. That is one scary team.

Carolina

Cole plays well on that team. For their sake I hope he sees that and, in remembering his excellent Edmonton adventure, notices that the grass is plenty green in Carolina. With any luck the economy drives his asking price down and they get him on a, relatively, cheap contract.

Pittsburgh

Guerin is a nice pick-up but all the heavy lifting was done for this team on the 26th of February. Wozwho?

Toronto

Also a 'loser' at the deadline (see below), Toronto's last trade of the day shows that Burke 'gets' it. Toronto spent $600k to get a, very low, 4th round pick. There are far worse ways for a 'money' team to spend its money (see also: Redden).

LOSERS (in order - biggest loser listed first)

Tampa Bay

These guys are a joke. One of St. Louis or Lecavalier is gone at the draft, I swear it. Rebuilding teams do not give up draft picks. Barrie and Co. don't deserve a franchise. Not that it means anything but, and I say this with feeling, I am sorry Tampa Bay. I'm so sorry.

NY Rangers

Sather is far too arrogant a man. Morris and Antropov won't do much to fix the various mistakes made and losing Dawes will only aggravate the wounds. Avery will help but this team needed Antropov to fill time at the center spot like it needed a hole in the head.

Philadelphia

Yeah. This team needed a guy like Carcillo on the team. A lack of discipline will kill this team come play-off time. Carcillo is the last thing they needed. AND they threw in a 2nd rounder? Holmgren? Is that you? WTH?

Montreal

On a day when players like Pahlsson, Moore and even Christensen are being traded for some low rent assets (well, O'Dell hurts a bit I guess) it is borderline unexcusable for a team like Montreal to stand pat when their need for a center is so obvious and so great.

Lang isn't coming back in time Mr. Gainey. He just isn't.

Toronto

Also a 'winner' at the deadline (see above), Toronto just didn't get much for a team that is looking to crash hard and fast. Good thing they have money.

Colorado

That is it? All they do is unload Leopold for a 2nd rounder and meh? If you are going to rebuild then do so and to be brutally truthful the Avalanche had a lot of non-core assets they could have traded but didn't. Yeesh.

SIDEWAYS (in order - most horizontal listed first)

Anaheim

A lot of movement and while I would normally give them more credit than not for trying to have a rebuild without a crash I look at the trade of O'Dell and I think that IF you are going to try such a rebuild, you get a piece better than Christensen when you are unloading your younger assets.

Atlanta

O'Dell was a nice little pick-up but the Havelid trade needs to work out, big time, before I give Atlanta credit for doing anything more than tread water.

Los Angeles

Justin Williams has to get healthy just for this trade to remain 'sideways'. Unlike Buffalo and Florida - two teams who could 'win' their trades - this trade has the potential to be a loser.

NY Islanders

Did what they could. Good for them. Who cares? That pick better be ripped.

Buffalo

If the two draft picks are a wash then they traded Moore for Kotalik and picked up a back-up goaltender for a 4th rounder. If Moore finds a role in Buffalo then this can be upgraded to a win. No harm and no foul in that.

Florida

Much like with Buffalo this trade could become a win for the Panthers. Thing is, Eminger had several bad years before this 'rebound' year with Tampa so forgive me for not holding my breath.

FORGETTABLE (in order)

St. Louis

Richmond. wheeeeeee.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Trade Deadline Musing - 2008-09 (More)

2009-03-03T21:38:00.006-07:00

[UPDATE: Burrows signed for 8 million over 4 years. Fantastic signing for Vancouver and it fits the theme of this post perfectly.]

After watching Dawes and Halak go uncontested (as in: no one made them an RFA offer sheet) last year I finally concluded that most NHL GM's really aren't all that smart. They can't be.

As much as I understand that they operate in an imprecise medium that doesn't excuse the number of misses that they accumulate.

Lucky Lou?

Of course, to refute my stance we have GM's like Lou Lamoriello. This guy is good. The Colin White contract has always been one of my favorites and when one works their way through the Devils contract structure they will find very few misses along the way.

Here is one of the things I truly respect about him: he knows how he wants the team to play. And then he works it from there. Rarely will you find on his teams a player who doesn't belong and if a signing doesn't work out he rectifies the mistake before it gets too ugly.

Think about that for a second. Now think about your favorite team the Oilers.

It is to cry.

That is part of what makes the trade for Havelid so smart. The guy he traded for him was, for all intents and purposes, a 'found' asset. Signed, pretty much unheralded, as a free agent out of Europe.

In return the Devils get a Lidstrom-lite type of player and, as with everything I have ever seen from that type of player, solid positional play has a pretty long shelf life.

Havelid's game is pretty low maintenance, he doesn't require big hits or a big shot or blazing speed to be effective, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Devils sign him to a two year deal in the $1.5 mill/yr neighborhood.

Somehow I don't expect that Lou would have let the disconnect (between coach and personnel) that has taken place on the Oilers under Lowe, happen.

------

I remember saying, once upon a time on Hockeysfuture, that long-term signings of role players who can play their position well was a good thing if you can get them to lock in cheaply enough.

I was looking at signing players for 5 to 6 years at a time and doing so in the $850k to 1.5 million range.

Someone disagreed (of course) and they threw out, in their rebuttal, the fact that few, most probably none, of the NHL teams out there currently practice that philosophy.

I now refer you back to my first few sentences.

A Grid

Start with a 23 man roster and a $56 million Cap/budget.

14 Forwards / 7 Defensemen / 2 Goalies

3x 1st line (F) at ~ $5.00 mill ea = $15.00 mill
3x 2nd line (F) at ~ $3.25 mill ea = $ 9.75 mill
2x 1st pair (D) at ~ $5.00 mill ea = $10.00 mill
2x 2nd pair (D) at ~ $3.00 mill ea = $ 6.00 mill
Goaltending (pair) = $5.00 mill
Bench players on minimum wage = 3x ~ $500k = $1.5 mill

That adds up to ~ $47.25 mill for 15 players.

Granted, those are the numbers for a well balanced team but I fail to see where I am out of line in the reasoning.

You now have $8.75 mill for 8 players. Average wage would be just over $1.09 mill a player. Dropping the pro-roster to 22 players, which seems a standard tactic nowadays brings that number up to just over $1.15 mill a player.

After all is said and done the average wage of the players that make up the bottom half of the playing roster (not including bench and back-up) shouldn't be any more than $1.00 to $1.25 million.

Back To Point

Now think about my original stance:

"long-term signings of role players who can play their position well was a good thing if you can get them to lock in cheaply enough"

The key words in there aren't: 'role player', nor are they: 'cheaply enough', they are: 'who can play their position well enough'.

i.e. if you have a roleplayers, on your team, who are good at what they do, then EVERY guy you can get to sign for long term at a rate LESS THAN $1.25 million a year is a probable win (if same player is a definite outscorer the you can probably go a little higher).

Risk vs. Impact

More importantly, at that price point a team can afford to make 3 or 4 mistakes of this kind comparative to that of making a mistake on a signing for the top line.

i.e. for every, theoretical, Nylander signing I can make 4 or more role-player signings of this type; the cost savings of a mistake are significant.

Pisani - Exhibit 'A'

In 2005/06 he was looking for a new deal paying in the range of $1.0 to $1.2 million a year (I always hear $1.1 million but I figured I would give a range).

He doesn't have a lot of NHL history but he is driving results on his line, he is 26/27 years old and he has a whack of AHL time in (where he excelled).

NOT jumping on this opportunity was a clear MISS for Lowe and Co. Coming right out of the AHL, and still in a place where just having an NHL paycheque is a huge plus, how hard would he have fought a 5 year offer in the $1.35 mill /yr range?

Granted, Pisani represents a bit of an outlier for the purposes of this arguement, but - even for when this arguement was first made (by myself) - for those who have followed this blog, player contract inflation is something I often talk about.

As it is, well, the 'miss' was even bigger than I thought it would be (even after the play-off run I figured he would only get 5 years at $10 million - oops) and it would be unfair to lay blame to the full extent of the 'oops'.

Strudwick

This brings me to Strudwick. I like Jason Strudwick as a player. He can play both defense and forward (I like him better at forward), he isn't a problem if he sits a game here or there, he is a positive in the dressing room, he can fight (well) when needed and he has the right attitude on the ice.

He isn't a pure bench player nor is he even a 3rd line guy.

No word of a lie though, signing him on a 4 yr deal (long-term for him) in the $650k range would be money well spent imo.

Stortini, Brodziak and Reddox need the same kind of treatment.

So Who Is Right?

It begs the question. Knowing the intrepid souls that you are I am sure that, by now, you have checked and found that the good GM's (Lamoriello, Holland, Holmgren) have precious few long-term contracts of the nature I propose.

Does that make me wrong?

I don't rightly know. One thing that you, dear reader, have to keep in mind is that those GM's (at least those with a fair number of years of service) have a number of constants on their roster. Pandolfo and Maltby have been with their respective teams forever. Each team has guys who sign multi-year deals again and again and again.

So what is it that those teams have?

Stability probably plays a factor. So does a tradition (post-Mickey Mouse) of excellence. They have, historically, been high payroll teams. Good scouting. Only their star players get the really big bucks. They always have a few outstanding role players. There are a lot of things they do right.

Yet I still don't think that I am wrong. On reflection, what I think I am talking about is simply another way of doing what they do - building excellence into my team one contract at a time. Retaining the best players I can, no matter the line they play on.

Funny thing. I find myself back to where I started actually. There aren't a lot of really good hockey GM's out there.

So how wrong can my approach be? Be nice to see it tried.

------

A quick note on Horcoff. My biggest issue on his $3.6 mill/ yr contract was that it was one year too short imo. Seems I was right.

Also on Horcoff, My biggest issue remains length of deal **, take him to age 38 and lower that Cap hit by a million or so while you are at it.

(7.00 / 6.50 / 6.50 / 6.00 / 4.00 / 3.00 / 1.50 / 1.50) = 4.50

** if you are going to give a guy a retirement contract then the Zetterberg model is the one you follow and if you have the money then use it.

Also, I would trade my first round pick in a package for Hunter without even blinking. But that's just me.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Trade Deadline Musing - 2008-09

2009-03-01T21:51:00.010-07:00

Where Do We Go From Here?

The Oilers are, heading into the trade deadline, in a very interesting 'spot' so to speak. Not bad enough to require a full on rebuild and not good enough to make a run with a couple of add-ons the team is some 23 shades of grey.

The upside of this is that the team is in a position to make a whack of incremental changes and not really get challenged on the making of any of them. The idea being that sometimes a bunch of small changes all add up to having the same impact as a few big ones.

Most of what I will write here is predicated on MacT as coach throughout the rest of this year and that next year either: a) he returns or b) the way management wants the team to play doesn't change.

The Coach Factor

MacT favors players who play hard. Neither skill level (Nilsson) nor results (Penner) matter as much to MacT as effort. Normally I don't think there is too much wrong with that approach as most players get the message and the truly lazy you don't want on the team regardless.

Problems will arise however when the approach stops making sense.

If the goal of the game is to win, then sitting on Penner and kicking him the nads every chance one gets - when it is clear he is the best 1st line LW option on the team - doesn't make a lot of sense.

It makes even less sense when a player like Moreau, who is getting hammered out there on a head to head basis shift after shift AND is taking bad penalties again and again and again, gets prime minutes game after game and never gets called on it.

Despite what some fans think, players aren't stupid. The players see what is happening and, understandably, the credibility gap makes it hard for them to listen to the coach.

From what I have seen over the years a coach can get away with some or a little of one (leaning on a guy not totally deserving of the hate) and some or a little of the other (favoritism for a guy not totally earning the love) but not the extremes of both.

Veteran Cheese

For better or for worse, Moreau and Staios have become crutches for MacT and it is probably better for the team over-all if they get moved. Let Souray, Horcoff and Hemsky provide a new leadership core.

Moreau's injury aside, both Staios and Moreau are seen as 'warrior' types. This makes them desirable trade chips. Moreau and Staios also have contracts outsized to their contributions and those contracts have time yet to run. Not so desirable.

These are take what you can get trades. The Oilers are better off keeping Grebeshkov, Smid, Strudwick, Brodziak and Cole (with luck) than they are Moreau and Staios so clearing that salary is important.

Young Meat

With MacT's crutches taken away the risk becomes sending the wrong signal to the rest of the team. Time to get rid of the clutter on the roster.

If Penner were the only problem MacT had with this roster it would be workable; but he isn't. From where I sit the players MacT has trouble with, on a regular basis, comprise a list of Penner, Nilsson, Pouliot and Cogliano. Schremp is an unneeded distraction and he should go too.

Penner and Schremp have to go regardless. One of Nilsson or Pouliot needs a change of address post haste. Cogliano has to learn to play wing, take face-offs or go play center poorly somewhere else - and he needs to be told that straight up.

Some of these players have real value (Penner, Cogliano) while others are add-ons (Pouliot, Nilsson) and others are throw-ins (Schremp); if combined with Moreau and Staios there is some opportunity there to make some big deals.

The Goalie and Cole

I wrestle with the idea of trading Roloson. If I am thinking I am okay with missing the play-offs then he has to go and if I am thinking that I would rather make the play-offs than not then he should stay.

Cole probably has to go. Regardless of how bad I want to make the play-offs. He just isn't the difference maker Roli is.

That was hard to type btw - I have wanted Cole on this team a long, long time and nothing makes the overpriced contracts of Moreau, Staios and Pisani pop into the consciousness more than knowing because of those contracts there isn't a remote chance we could keep Cole on the roster.

Targets

Since I am both seller (selling the Vets to Cup contender teams) and buyer (the younger players) I have a lot of targets to pick from. Since I have a range of items available I should be involved in all kinds of deals.

And since none of what I am giving up, outside of Cogliano, is a core asset I'm not going to hurt my team going forward. In fact, if I can get in on the right deals maybe I secure some assets I can add to my core build.

Lowebellini has a lot of assets to work with right now and the future is wide open, my hope is that this team is radically different come the evening of March 4th.

I have always been a big fan of Dawes from the Rangers. If I am trading Roloson then Washington is the team I call and Gordon, despite the horrible year, could be a target. Ponikarovsky is still a favorite so hopefully Burke returns calls from Tambellini. If Cole is heading back to Carolina then Ruutu is a decent pick-up. I wanted Letang from Pittsburgh but that ship has sailed. Just how desperate is Montreal?

This is the kind of trade deadline where cash can make a real difference so if Katz wants to get some prime assets back then maybe opening the wallet and swallowing hard while he pays some hack to be in the minors is just what he has to do.

Think outside the box. What about Penner and something for Ryan Malone? The length of the contract is horrible but at least he plays MacT's style of game and Tampa chops a whack of years off of their committment ledger.

If you are going to overpay someone it might as well be someone you actually like.

More than anything I would want to a) fix my locker-room chemistry and b) add a core player to the mix - preferably a left winger.

Here's hoping.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Simple Things and the Cap

2009-02-26T19:42:00.004-07:00

Interesting. The Maple Leafs are increasing their ticket prices.

No question about it. I do get a little snarky every now and then, and I should apologize for it when it happens, but after a re-read I don't actually think my last post was all that bad. Not a great read mind-you but that's par for the course with me so, from where I sit, no harm and no foul.

Now, in a less snarky way, I present to you a simple change to the CBA that, I believe, should have made it into the document from the very start.

Background

Small market (read: small budget) teams are getting hammered because of Cap inflation. As noted before in this blog, once the Cap gets past the $52 million mark the spread between what big budget and small budget teams have to spend reaches, sans significant revenue sharing or an amazing new TV deal, an untenable level.

Right now the Floor ratchets upward in lock-step with the Cap; the maximum spread always being at $16 million:

$b ........ Player %/$b ..... Cap$m .... Flr$m .... %

2.200 ..... 54.0 / 1.19 ..... 39.6 ..... 23.6 ..... 32.2
2.300 ..... 55.5 / 1.28 ..... 42.6 ..... 26.5 ..... 34.6
2.400 ..... 56.0 / 1.34 ..... 44.8 ..... 28.8 ..... 36.0
2.500 ..... 56.3 / 1.41 ..... 46.9 ..... 30.9 ..... 37.1
2.550 ..... 56.5 / 1.44 ..... 48.0 ..... 32.0 ..... 37.6
2.600 ..... 56.7 / 1.47 ..... 49.1 ..... 33.1 ..... 38.2
2.700 ..... 57.0 / 1.54 ..... 51.3 ..... 35.3 ..... 39.2
2.800 ..... 57.0 / 1.60 ..... 53.2 ..... 37.2 ..... 40.0
2.900 ..... 57.0 / 1.65 ..... 55.1 ..... 39.1 ..... 40.4
3.000 ..... 57.0 / 1.71 ..... 57.0 ..... 41.0 ..... 41.0

Notice the inflation effect? (hint: look at the last column) The hard spread of $16 million slightly disconnects Floor from HRR and thus causes Floor Requirement to slowly increase (as a % of the HRR).

By the time we get to $3.0 billion in HRR the % spread between max Players Share and Floor Requirement has shrunk by some 6 percentage points.

i.e. (54.0 - 32.2 = 21.8) - (57.0 - 41.0 = 16.0) = 5.8

That is sizable.

Solution

The easily workable solution is to loosen the strap a tad and tie the Floor Requirement number to Players Share % (not to Cap).

To make it easy on ourselves we will fix the spread at 20 %pts and re-start the CBA at a Floor Requirement of 34% of HRR. If we then increase Floor Requirement in lockstep with Players Share % our chart now changes to look like so:

$b ........ Player %/$b ..... Cap$m .... Flr$m .... %

2.200 ..... 54.0 / 1.19 ..... 39.6 ..... 24.9 ..... 34.0
2.300 ..... 55.5 / 1.28 ..... 42.6 ..... 27.2 ..... 35.5
2.400 ..... 56.0 / 1.34 ..... 44.8 ..... 28.8 ..... 36.0
2.500 ..... 56.3 / 1.41 ..... 46.9 ..... 30.3 ..... 36.3
2.550 ..... 56.5 / 1.44 ..... 48.0 ..... 31.0 ..... 36.5
2.600 ..... 56.7 / 1.47 ..... 49.1 ..... 31.8 ..... 36.7
2.700 ..... 57.0 / 1.54 ..... 51.3 ..... 33.3 ..... 37.0
2.800 ..... 57.0 / 1.60 ..... 53.2 ..... 34.5 ..... 37.0
2.900 ..... 57.0 / 1.65 ..... 55.1 ..... 35.8 ..... 37.0
3.000 ..... 57.0 / 1.71 ..... 57.0 ..... 37.0 ..... 37.0

So now we have a %pt spread that stays constant (at the 20%) and a Salary Budget gap that increases (from $14.7 million at $2.2 billion HRR to $20 million at $3.0 billion HRR).

Who's a Happy Baby?

Small budget teams are happy. As long as most other factors remained unchanged (like revenue sharing) the budget pressure drops by several million dollers.

Large budget teams are happy because no new money is expected of them and they get to increase average player salaries even more (yippee!).

Players are unhappy because they, potentially, leave million of dollars on the table as the small budget teams contract their payrolls.

Except... well... would that actually happen?

No. I don't think it would.

Remember, players get their share regardless so all that would actually happen is that the dollars would be apportioned differently.

Now, given that not all players, and their contracts, are created equally we know some player somewhere would be unhappy - BUT - the veterans have thrown the rooks under the bus before and with early UFA we know there are fewer disadvantaged to complain so it is hard to see where this is a loser.

------

Do I think this suggestion is the solution for the NHL. Of course not. Any hard Cap concept that doesn't have significant revenue sharing involved is one that won't work under anything but the slowest inflation effect.

FTR, back in the day, I supported a soft Cap with a luxury tax component that would increase in effect on a plateau basis. I still think that is the best overall way to do it.

------

By the way, in regards to the Malkin for Sedins comment. I meant it. Yes, Malkin is a phenomenal talent, but if Pittsburgh could get the Sedins to sign long-term deals (5 yrs+) in the $6.00 - 6.25 million range then the math is simple:

2 Sedins at a $12.00 million Cap hit > 1 Malkin at a $8.70 million Cap hit

The odds of finding the right winger for Malkin at $3.30 million are pretty long and, to be blunt, Pittsburgh needs the depth that the two bodies would provide.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Miscellanea - February

2009-02-21T15:17:00.004-07:00

Garth Snow

Lowetide sends some love Snow's way. I know some may point to the Dipietro contract and say 'what?' but those people would be wrong.

The Rick Dipietro contract remains one of the best contracts in hockey. Topped only by the Zetterberg and Hunter contracts imo.

Dipietro Contract - Part 1

Dipietro Contract - Part 2

Dipietro Contract - Part 3

I cannot blame Snow for Dipietro's Mr. Glass act and if you actually read through those links you will find where I say:

"The real danger is a chronic malady (a la Dunham's groin issues when with Nashville) that leaves DiPietro on the active roster drawing full salary and affecting the Cap."

That said, not sure what I think about in regards to the Campoli trade. The 1st is more than I would have paid to get him and so I have to think Snow did well there.

Funny thing though - if he pairs well with a stay-at-home on the Ottawa roster then Snow will end up looking bad for something over which he had less control than Ottawa did.

Right. I did just talk about the Dipietro contract didn't I?

Geniousity

Oh. About that Zetterberg contract. Absolute genius wasn't it?.

Funny thing though - I recall lots of posts about those sorts of contracts on the message boards back in day. Hell. I posted a few. Most people said that people who were making posts like that were idiots. Contracts just wouldn't work that way.

Two signatures later and Holland is a genius.

Cool. So I wasn't an idiot. For the record, that aspect of this topic, the aspect about being right all along, doesn't upset me at all. Here is what does upset me however - if I can figure it out then how hard can it be to figure it out?

I'm not that smart. Just look at my sentence structure.

Vancouver is in negotiations with the Sedins. Given their historic ability to perform at a high level, and the fact that they never seem to get injured, I am surprised they aren't getting the Zetterberg treatment.

I really am. I am also surprised Pittsburgh never traded Malkin for them.

Finally, on this topic, never underestimate the effect that timing can have on intelligence.

Shero has to sign Crosby and Malkin during a day and age when money was everywhere and money was cheap while Gillis gets to sign the Sedins during a day when everyone is afraid they won't be able to make the mortgage payment.

My guess is everyone will be commenting on just how smart Gillis is **.

Rebuilds

Still working on my 'Rebuilds on Steroids' post. Gold Star for the first among you who sees how Snow is working the cba to his advantage. Davidson is St. Louis is doing the same.

It isn't much of an advantage mind. More along the lines of: "this is how you have to do things anyways so what you do with what you have is up to you".

That is your hint right there folks.

You too can be a genius!

F^*k me.

:-)

------

** ftr - I do think Gillis has done very well in lalaland, I have a post titled "Tale of Two Gamblers" in production that shows how smart he has been.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

One Night

2009-01-23T17:56:00.004-07:00

Every now and then I still drop by Hockeysfuture. I don't lurk like I used to but then, one doesn't see my call hanging out at Oilfans very much either. I tend not to sign in anymore. Gets a bit noisy out there. Thoughts get addled I think.

Still, early memories are fond and so it is I keep the links (sidebar).

That said, it was interesting to find out that my identity, and even my geographical location, has been reassigned.

That's okay though dsf, I do this more on a 'for me' rather than an 'about me' basis so being only somewhat known/remembered is totally okay. Besides, Rage has my back. I think...

:-)

I do have to say that I did kind of mind having to sift through the chaff on this thread. It made me sad to have to wait until post #11 before someone pointed out that Staios' contract was the real problem (yes, I know, it did contradict the premise of the thread), it made me sadder yet when someone listed the incomparable Brad Stuart as a 'good defenseman' and when I read this:

"....Kronwall and Stuart are both better options at present than either of Grebeshkov and Gilbert."

I became so inconsolable I just had to start drinking.

On the bright side, I am happily drinking some 18yr Gibson's now so all I can really say is: Thanks Hockeysfuture!

P.s. this is partly why I wasn't blown away by the Garon trade (though I did think it was okay), my wish was that it had been a bigger trade - one that had brought Letang here. The Oilers are woefully short on effective depth on defense. Strudwick isn't a real answer.

------

Of course, if one thinks about how the Moreau contract (an overpay against rule of thumb standard, my thumbs admittedly, of some 250k) and the Staios contract (overpay, same thumb, of some 300k) were about character and making up for service rendered and veteran leadership and how loyalty to the team can mean so much...

...and then happens to remember that the Smyth contract didn't close because of a spread of a 100k then... hrmmmm... ahhhh, f*#k me... I think I need more alcohol.

Oh look! More. Good.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Lombardi to H8

2009-01-18T16:18:00.011-07:00

I don't know how smart Deam Lombardi is. Unlike Paul Holmgren, from whom I have seen few misteps, DL has his fair share of 'wtf' moments. My favorite is probably from the 2007 draft when a drop down on picks would have probably let him snag Hickey regardless. Easy money on the table and he left it there.

That said, the guy knows how to cripple a team to set up a draft. More importantly, he knows how to do it consistently. Trading for, and then extending Cloutier's contract was brilliant. Dumping off Labarbera is just more of the same.

To Tank

Wanna tank your team? Best bets are bad goaltending (first choice of the smart GM) and/or bad coaching (first choice of a lot of well meaning GM's).

There are a few things that can derail a good tank job (another post) and for a while there I think Lombardi was looking at just that. Luckily, for him, the trends he had put in place re-asserted themselves and trading Lababera will:

a. help guard against an upswing and
b. increase the risk factors that would seal the tank job

A Trade Deadline Look-Over

The next moment of interest, with Lombardi and his Kings is this:

What will his trade deadline look like?

He has most of the elements needed for a classic tank job trade deadline in place:

1. One respected veteran on expiring contract (O'Donnell);
2. Two depth veterans on expiring contracts (Armstrong & Gauthier); and
3. One mid-range secondary scorer on expiring contract (Calder);

He also has two players who, while they are not performing to expectations, are halfway through their contracts (Preissing and Handzus).

NONE of the players involved have any cachet in the team's marketplace (so no uproar if traded) and two of the players listed are playing, deceptively, important roles for the team.

Royale With Cheese

If Lombardi thinks his draft position is in jeopardy then look for O'Donnell to be traded. Handzus if he can find a taker.

That is what makes it interesting. How comfortable is he that he will get a pick he can live with?

Trading Gauthier and Armstrong would only make the team stronger (and generate very little return regardless) so they should be in LA full season.

That leaves Preissing and Calder. Of the two Calder will be the easiest one to trade and, I suspect, he is gone regardless.

So I will look for those signals at the deadline.

Calder is a goner, sure, but the rest of the deadline deals - if any - will tell the tale of Lombardi's intentions for the 2009 draft.

King Me

That brings me to the final moment of interest in regards to Dean Lombardi. His 2009-10 NHL roster. Once I see that I will know a great deal more about just how smart Lombardi is.

You see, after the 2009 draft his rebuild will have run its course.

Look at his roster. That team has too much quality for it to sit still for another year past this one.

Frolov, Kopitar, Brown and O'Sullivan represent the kind of high-end forward talent other teams, who have better records, would die for and every Oiler fan knows how good Stoll can be if he is restricted to the roles he excels at.

Doughty, Johnson, Hickey and Quincey represent a solid core of under 22's who all have incredible upside. The core d-pairings for this team are set well into the future. I like Harrold as a player and Greene is... playing really well?

The only thing missing on this team is goaltending and with players like Fernandez coming available Lombardi will have little excuse for sitting still. Both with fans and with the players themselves.

2009-10: Tells the Tale

By 2009-10 we will see just what Lombardi brings to the table as a GM. If he picks up an established #1 goaltender and the equivalent of Kurt Sauer this off-season then we know he knows his stuff.

(Trading O'Donnell at the deadline, letting him know he will be bringing him back in the off-season, would just be... smart.)

If he stands pat and brings in Bernier then we know that Lombardi isn't serious about the next year. Even if Bernier blows the doors down it doesn't change my analysis here, just means Lombardi got lucky.

Some very important players get to, or very close to, their free agency years after 2009-10 and the Kings, as an organization, need to both:

- give them the cash they'll want, and
- give them a reason to stay

i.e. Frolov can get $5.5+ million anywhere - why stay with a team that doesn't seem to care?

Winning

There is a time, in every rebuild, where it is time to get serious about winning. The Kings will be in 2009-10.

Signing Hossa would be a nice touch but it isn't that important. A true #1 goalie, a veteran d-man in the 27-30 year range and a couple of proven bottom sixers and the Kings are for real.

And if Lombardi is any good it really should happen just-like-that.

------

Time for supper. Have a great evening everyone.

Almost forgot - Anderson deserves it. Good for him.

Like a Stone

2009-01-17T17:41:00.007-07:00

Not a bad trade imo.

The Good

- Stone is a quality tweener and Springfield gets better immediately;
- Sabourin is a quality tweener and Springfield gets better immediately;
- a 4th, even three years from now, is still a 4th and that is good;
- roster spot opens up on the big team (finally);
- the return was excellent given the value on par-goalies now-a-days;
- should free up a few 100k in Cap space (always good); and
- Garon and JDD were getting jerked around and that should, now, stop

The Bad

- Garon and JDD should never have been getting jerked around in the first place so it isn't like we can confidently say team management gets 'it'
- more tweeners... yay
- Letang was the guy to go after in Pittsburgh and we didn't get him (this should have been a bigger trade)

Overall I am happy with it.

The next three players that should be gone: Nilsson, Moreau and Staios.

The next three players that will probably go (of four): Nilsson, Pouliot, Smid and Grebeshkov.

This will be the last year (barring a renaissance next year) that Moreau and Staios will probably have any trade premium placed on their 'veteran' and 'battlers on the ice' reputation so we can expect that we will keep them around well past the due date. As I said, it isn't like we can confidently say the team gets 'it'.

Finally though. A trade.

Question: Lowe or Tambellini?

I say Tambellini because of the Sabourin factor.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Gloom - Not Just a Card Game

2009-01-11T16:45:00.005-07:00

[My bad folks, Gloom is a card game that I actually play (and enjoy). For me to reference the game but not include a picture of it, especially one so apropos, was just plain wrong. Hence the correction.]

Lowetide has a nice GDT (Oilers vs. St. Louis) and in it he talks about the unhappy season progressing to date, to be more precise I will simply quote:

"Tonight marks the halfway point in the season for the Edmonton Oilers. This has not been a happy season so far, it has in fact been same old, same old and that my friends is causing some commotion in the fanbase."

BDHS also has a post up today and while the resonance is deliberate BDHS tries to look for the origin, or source, of the joyless Oil we have today. Again, to quote:

"There is a lot of grumbling about the Oilers these days and even the terminally cheerful, like LT, are starting to tire of a franchise that has, with one exception, wallowed in mediocrity for the last fifteen years or so. I think the club is where many of us thought it would be, in the mix for the playoffs, but the journey has been an unsatisfying one this season. Points have been thrown away with poor efforts and odd coaching decisions. [quick - go to link to read more]"

Much like BDHS I will try, in this post, to wonder where the problem lies. I do think I know where it is.

Simply put, this team, THE TEAM, doesn't know sweet-f%*k-all about what is going on.

Playoffs... or Not?

I have written about this many times - the team has not been set up to be a team that is serious about making the play-offs. Even in my, late to be sure, season preview - where I am wrong about a lot of things - the one thing I am absolutely right about is this:

While this should be a team that finishes in the play-offs the risk factors are incredibly high.

A team that is serious about making the play-offs keeps two of Torres, Reasoner, Stoll and Glencross on the roster. It just does.

So while Lowe could hide behind the state of NHL economics up to 2005/06 and he had some cover (slim as it was) working in his favor 2006/07 (Pronger) and 2007/08 (Smyth) he doesn't have anything to hide behind this year.

Worse yet, the ills facing the team appear to be, more and more, symptomatic in nature.

All of the above is on Lowe. On MacT (in terms of dedicating the team to make the play-offs) - why isn't Horpensky playing together from day one, why isn't Smid paired with Staios and why is Gagner playing on the penalty kill units?

Development Season... or Not?

So if it isn't a Playoff team then maybe it is a team getting ready for a run next year? Maybe this year is about teaching the young guys a few things so that next year we can all play street hockey for the Cup next year!

So then why is Cole here, and why is Visnovsky here? And why are we putting in big time on guys who are just entering their 2nd or 3rd year in the NHL?

Gagner, the new team centerpiece, is only 18 years old, a team that is serious about a next year is using a current year to finish player development - not finding out if a guy can even play on the penalty kill units; let alone contribute positively.

So then it isn't really about this year. And it isn't really about next year. It is about years from now.

So if it about years from now then Gagner's development time makes sense. How about Smid's development time then? He has shown incremental improvement every year and on a 'years-from-now' he is one of the few defensemen who will be entering his prime when the window of opportunity opens.

All of the above is on Lowe - how can one say this year and next year when it is obvious that yfn is what you mean. On MacT (in terms of dedicating the team to player development) - why aren't Pouliot and Brodziak taking the 3rd and 4th line duties, why is Pisani playing at center and why isn't Smid paired with Staios (an interesting double appearance there)?

Identity

Now think about team identity for a second. All through the lean years the team had a semblance of one - mostly that of 'work-your-ass-off' and 'we-are-all-pluggers-here'. This wasn't true of all players but it was, at least I believe so, true of the leadership core of the team.

Given how he forced the trade to St. Louis I may never be a fan, again, of Doug Weight BUT as long as he was here you couldn't say he didn't ably lead the team.

Can we say that about this team's leadership core? Team captain Ethan Moreau:

- won't pass to a fellow team-mate on his line;
- kicks same team-mate out of the face-off circle just so that he promptly lose said face-off;
- takes ill-advised penalties, consistently; and
- refuses to play to his skill set (more 4th line and less 3rd line) and then has the gall to start calling out the younger guys

I have always enjoyed, and valued, Moreau's warrior spirit but true leadership takes humility.

Meanwhile two players, whose work ethic is a continual struggle, are signed to lucrative contracts (Penner and Nilsson of course). Neither of which would even be on the team if it hadn't been for misplayed management decisions.

So who exactly is establishing the identity of this team? Almost 20% of the teams payroll is tied up in the unfocused (Penner, Nilsson), undisciplined (Moreau) and less effective (Moreau and Staios).

And Then, Karma

So take all the above and mix. Don't let the top-line gell, don't let the soft-minute line play together, don't play proven tandems, don't play last years clear #1 goaltender, etc. Whatever you do - do not let the team gain any momentum.

Normally that would be a recipe for disaster, yet somehow the team stays healthy and manages to hang out at, or near, the play-off spot that makes it all make sense.

Amazing really.

But then Karma does what she does and just as the team is getting serious about line-ups and rosters and a long series of home games means its time to harvest, the main cog in the wheel gets injured.

When all your risk factors are through the roof, it is only a matter of time. And Karma.

Back to Point

Have you ever worked for a boss that makes stupid decision after stupid decision but never gets called on it by his bosses? Well, imagine you are one of the mid-range vets on this team. This has to be a maddening year for them.

The older vets can't lead as they would like to, the mid-range vets are left to carry a load that holds little reward and the kids barely even know how to play. The goaltending has no long-term future, the new kids are all smurfs, the payroll is screwed for years to come and the holes in the roster are big enough to fly jumbo-jets through.

Who signed on for that? They all did actually. But that doesn't make it any easier. To their credit Horcoff, Souray, et al are still putting in workmanlike efforts.

My belief is this:

The team, as constituted, lacks vision (in the headoffice) and identity (on the ice) and in knowing that the players on the team are having a hard time of it buying in and it shows.

A team that believes in itself and what it is doing would be better than this. Maybe not in terms of points, but definitely in terms of 'try'.

As fans we would recognize that, and rejoice.

------

Have a great evening everyone. Enjoy the game tonight.

Penalties Kill

2009-01-09T23:13:00.003-07:00

An amazing set of posts recently on the subject of the Edmonton Oiler's penalty kill problems. Some of them can be found using these links:

IOF - "That's killed us all year long. It killed us again tonight."

IOF - Corsi on the PK

IOF - Loaded Dice and NHL Penalty Killers

mc79hockey.com - I wish Brownlee hadn’t written about PK faceoffs

And Just Because It Was Interesting

Oilers Nation (Jonathan Willis) - Penalty Differential

Collecting the Thoughts

Some point to a poor faceoff winning percentage and others point to a distinct lack in committment to the shotblocking principle. Others may also point to, what appears to be at least, a passive pk system that allows opposing teams to set their plays up at leisure. One might point to the youth on the team as an issue but to their credit the press guys do a pretty good job of debunking that myth.

The stats guys do a pretty good job of backing-up/crediting the players own observations that the number of players a team has on the ice heavily affects faceoff winning percentage and mudcrutch points out that the Oilers goalies have, seemingly, forgotten how to stop the puck in a penalty kill situation (collective save % has dropped through the floor compared to last year).

What I Think

Myself... I think it is all of the above.

With the new rule in place for this year we are seeing, to my eye anyways, an extra 10-20 seconds or so of powerplay time taking place in the defending teams zone. As a standard powerplay is only two minutes long this is an astounding increase in immediate pressure on the defending team.

Few seem to remember that the big effect here isn't actually the faceoff - it is possession time in the offensive zone for the team on the powerplay.

Given that faceoffs represent a stopped game moment in time to affect puck possession I have to to think that they play a role. But how much? Winning a face-off doesn't mean much if the rest of the unit isn't any good at clearing the puck or if the guy taking the face-off can't cover worth damn.

Few seem to remember that the big effect here isn't actually the faceoff - it is the ability of the entire PK unit to capitalize on a faceoff won.

Blocked shots has always, seems to me, been a matter of high-reward to risk taken. Not only is there the reward of blocking the shot, there is also the (much more likely) reward of breaking up the flow of the play in general and, with luck, deflecting the puck out of the zone.

Few seem to remember that the risk of not blocking the shot is that of a clean(er) shot on net - and even if 'saved' there are always guys like Smyth just hanging out.

What I Do Not Know

Not a quick listing of all I do not know (I would be typing forever) but a listing of the interesting questions that come to mind when I consider the difficulties the Oilers are facing while on the penalty kill:

Is there a specific skill set in play and is it measurable? **

It may be (read: it is probable) that there are players good at taking faceoffs but not at killing penalties. It may also be (also probable) that some faceoffs aces are better utilized on the powerplay and so it is impossible to measure if they are any good at killing penalties.

How important is it the way in which the face-off is won?

Maybe a guy can't kill penalties worth a damn, but what if he wins face-offs clean? Straight back clean. Perhaps, in that situation, it may be profitable to use the player on the penalty kill if the two backing defensemen are (very) good at clearing the puck from the zone.

Which teams are using shot location to change team results?

We know that the location from which a shot is taken is measurable and we know where the danger zone is. It can be broken down game by game, team by team and year by year. Using that data one could:

a. determine if the goalies are just having a bad year or not

Really. If the ratio of the danger-zone shots being faced has changed dramatically then how much of it is the goalie's fault?

b. determine the composition of powerplay units which will be trouble

Which teams generate large numbers of high-percentage chances against the penalty kill units and is there a trend to it?

c. determine who should be on the penalty kill units or not

If certain teams are jumping into the slot and getting a high-percentage shot whenever player A is on the ice then maybe...?

When do we go MLB or NFL?

If we can figure out what type of powerplay a team uses then why aren't we seeing more situational staffing of the penalty kill units? Maybe a player is no good against a powerplay heavy on the point shot but what if that same player is superior against the powerplays that rely on puck control?

Just wondering.

There are a lot of good questions that arise but those are the early ones that jumped to mind when reading through the material.

** As I noted in a response on one of Showerhead's posts at IOF

Core Issue

From where I sit I do find it interesting that in all the talk of 'what is wrong with the Oilers penalty kill' that few seem to mention the core problem.

Taking penalties. If you can't kill 'em then don't take 'em.

Methinks it is time for the Oilers to commit themselves to taking fewer penalties. Perhaps the leadership of the team can set the example.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Great Night For Hockey!

2009-01-05T22:34:00.005-07:00

What a great night for hockey!

Threw on my Team Canada jersey and then, right after that game, threw on my Oilers Pouliot jersey.

Enjoyed watching the games, enjoyed a rye and coke and then a rye and ginger and, bye-the-bye, completed two long outstanding blog posts.

Even used the dvr to show my wife a few plays during the wjc game.

Great, great night for hockey.

------

A few thoughts for the record:

- If we are keeping Omark and Eberle I can't see where there is spot for Schremp (as there isn't really a space for him now);

- If Lowe and Snow are talking trade then who are they talking about (as the pieces we should be sending out are pieces Snow won't want);

- If Stortini and Strudwick continue to play this way then maybe we should extend Strudwick's contract (as I am coming around on Stortini);

- if Lowe wants to make an impact trade with anyone then he should be talking to a team that is desperate, like Pittsburgh (as I am a fan of Letang and Dupuis);

- if Lowe wants to make a trade then who is left for him to trade with (as Burke going to Toronto shuts that valve closed); and

- Oilers drafting has been real good for a long time now (just saying).

------

Great evening for hockey folks. I had one anyways.

Have a great evening everyone!

Oilers 2008-09 Season Preview

2009-01-05T21:16:00.008-07:00

Executive Summary

The team has come a long way. The forward group is a little mish-mashed (deep on RW but woefully short on LW) but it should be able to hold its own. The defense is greatly improved and the goaltending has some depth. If all goes well the team will finish in the play-offs.

Projected Finish: somewhere between 12th and 17th overall.

Scariest Stat from 2007-08: Garon's shoot-out record followed by Cogliano's shooting percentage of 18.4%

Forwards

This group is a mess. At best this team can put together two decent lines and after that it will be overmatched vets babysitting rookies.

Penner, Horcoff & Hemsky

One of the great plusses to come out of last year is the fact that these three make a decent first line. They should be looked to to carry the load and they have to stay healthy as they will be matched against top lines from day one.

Nilsson, Gagner & Cogliano

Wow. What a finish to their year. Yes. I know. All easy minutes. Still, they did very well with what they got and they should do well as a scoring line for the team going forward. Be nice if they saw harder minutes.

Moreau, Brodziak & Pisani

With Stoll and Reasoner gone this becomes the spot that Brodziak seems to have been groomed for. Between the two veterans Brodziak should do okay. The issue here will be for Moreau to stay healthy as the depth on LW is shallow enough as it is.

Strudwick, Pouliot & Cole

I think Strudwick can play both wings. I hope so anyways. Neither Pouliot nor Cole are good fits for 4th line minutes so the hope will be that the team will go with more of a 1, 2a, 2b, 2c set-up. Cole could be moved up but then you are looking at line chemistry issues.

Something will have to be done in regards to Cole's minutes.

Stortini

Did more than anyone ever though possible. Great energy pick-up and 13th guy.

Defensemen

Huge upgrade in skill here. Needs to stay healthy as depth is an issue but that said - a Visnovsky/Souray pairing on the powerplay is to drool for.

Souray and Visnovsky

This should be the #1 pairing. I know I have said Souray should only be playing #4 or #5 EV minutes but anyone who knows me also knows I will always trend towards puck-mover and babysitter d-man pairings. This looks to be one of those. Visnovsky will shore up Souray's maneuverability shortcomings while Souray will supply the toughness and defensive focus the pairing will need. On the PP they should be murder.

Souray has to stay healthy. He has to.

Grebeshkov and Gilbert

By the end of the year last year these guys were the top pairing (imo). Gilbert has a brand new contract and Grebeshkov wants one so I expect good things here. Another year of development for both of them but as they will be playing behind Visnovsky/Souray it should work out well for all concerned.

Smid and Staios

Smid continues to learn the game and, while paired with Staios, he seems to be learning it. Keeping these two together as the bottom pair is a no brainer. The minutes won't be too hard and Staios will continue to provide the steadiness that Smid needs.

Strudwick and Roy

Strudwick is a swingman so I expect to see him put in some time here. Calling someone up from the minors (Roy or Young) is a better call.

Goalie's

Roloson and Garon

A bit of cut and paste from last year: Best goaltending rotation this team has had in years. I don't even need to get specific. Roloson and Garon are both good goalie's capable of above average play. Roloson is getting older but hopefully that doesn't cross the line into too old this year.

JDD

I guess they want him in the big leagues. Good for him in terms of paycheque but I have no clue where he will get his games in.

How Will They Do?

My projected finish (just based on gut feeling) is somewhere between 12th and 17th overall. Believe it or not. Some teams are worse right out of the gate while others are just a player injury away from total collapse. Some made up percentages:

00% - finish 01 - 06 (don't even think it)
05% - finish 07 - 09 (perchance)
10% - finish 10 - 12 (if it ALL works out)
45% - finish 13 - 16 (most probable)
25% - finish 17 - 20 (injuries)
10% - finish 21 - 25 (shouldn't be this bad)
05% - finish 26 - 30 (PHX, CBJ, CHI)

------

(Two weeks earlier than last year!) Have a great evening everyone.

Oilers - An Off-Season Review - 2008 Edition

2009-01-05T21:12:00.002-07:00

I remain the ultimate fanboy of Kevin Lowe's career as GM of the Edmonton Oilers.

The Good

Visnovsky for Stoll and Greene is an excellent trade to make. Greene is still years away from developing the positional game he will need to be effective while Stoll needed powerplay time to be an effective scorer. Visnovsky is coming off a poor year, after playing second fiddle to Blake and being forced to play off-wing, but he is the most talented player in this deal by a fair bit and so Lowe won the trade handily.

The only issue is that of the salary cap, given the Visnovsky and Souray contracts total some $11 million in Cap dollars the risk impacts are high if performance isn't up to snuff.

Cole has long been a player I have coveted for the Oilers. Hemsky followed by Cole followed by Pisani makes for a team that has the potential to ice three outscoring lines. That is a rare, and good, thing to have.

Without getting into the 'was-it-a-good-trade?' specifics (I will do so later in the post) the only issue I have here is this one: who centers this guy? We have a lot of young, talented C's but right now the emphasis is on 'young'.

Greene was doing nothing here. Given that a defenseman came back in the trade we aren't really losing anything here. Greene may get it together in LA and if so, good for him, but for the Oilers this should be an addition by subtraction kind of deal. Really. His numbers were that bad.

The Meh

Brule is a good kid. Bunch of NHL games under his belt he was/is a highly touted draft pick who plays with fire in his belly. What's not to like? Maybe the fact that he has a LOT of NHL games under his belt and it looks more and more like his game will have to be rebuilt from the ground up? Yeah. Maybe that.

Stoll could play the PK, man the point on the powerplay and take face-offs. He also had a year, back in 2005-06 that was going to make him a rich, rich man. His on-ice production, in Edmonton, with Souray and Visnovsky getting the lionshare of the PP toi, would not have justified those dollars. I will say it again - good trade.

Strudwick looks to be able to fill the role of 4th line winger (read: fighter) and/or #7 defenseman. While his skills aren't up to snuff, getting a 2-for-1 deal makes this a likable pick-up.

The Bad

Glencross and Torres. Either one, by themself, no big deal. Both? With no incoming, position specific replacement (a la Greene)? This is really, really bad. In combination the moves shift undue risk onto the team. Rookies, sophomores (and maybe Cole?) will have to pick up the slack and there is no proof any will be able.

Also note: both guys were proven EV performers (albeit small sample size per Glencross). Maybe if both players were sheltered I could see the wisdom in this but that isn't the case here.

Finally, both Torres (conference) and Glencross (division) went to immediate rivals ; teams that just got harder to beat. With the trade of Torres, not signing Glencross - given the make-up of the current roster - looks like a big miss for Lowe.

Reasoner. Normally, not signing a player like Reasoner isn't that big a deal; 3rd line PK and face-off specialists should be a relatively easy pick-up and ofttimes a young prospect, with veteran support on the wings, can also fill the spot, but with Stoll also gone the probability that the Oilers will not be able to fill the hole rises dramatically.

Since we know that Lowe didn't pick a veteran up, via trade or signing, we know that it is up to the kids.

On Cole-Pitkanen

It really doesn't matter how poor Pitkanen may be in the dressing room. Unless he is a outright disruption (fighting with his teammates bad), trading a defenseman who:

- has two RFA years left;
- plays 25+ minutes a night;
- should be good for 40+ pts in a bad year;
- is a decent EV player even when his head isn't in the game; and
- already has 269 games in the NHL

for a guy who is an UFA at the end of the year, and unaffordable as a long-term signing regardless (anticipated salary, imo, is $4.75 million if he has a bad year and as much as $6 million on a good year), this was a horrible trade.

Sure, our forward depth is increased - but not where we need it. As much as I like Cole, and I love his game, this was a poor trade in terms of team assets. Unless Cole signs here for a salary roughly equal to current year then everything that was gained in the Lupul trade is lost here.

On Brule-Torres

As much as I like Brule, the problem is that we already have one of these - his name is O'Marra. How many reclamation projects does one team need? Forget reclamation - how many young forwards needing to find their game do we need? Heh - how many undersized forwards do we need?

With Gagner, Pouliot, Cogliano, Brodziak, et al all looking for sheltered time finding a spot for Brule won't happen any time soon.

Why did the pursuit of Hossa entail trading Torres before Hossa was signed? This is simple - a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush - stuff. Even IF Hossa is signed and Lowe is forced to dump Torres just to make Cap space, it is a far better fate than that of having no one incoming on the left wing.

Finally, if you know you aren't bringing back Reasoner then why are you trading for Brule when a good 3rd line PK center is there? Even if you have to throw in a late round draft pick bringing a guy like Malhotra back makes it a much better trade.

As far as Hossa goes... 9 years at $9 million a year? I think the world of Hossa but thank-god we missed on that one.

SUMMARY

Visnovsky and Cole are nice additions to the team. I may not like the asset management involved per the Cole trade (a conditional pick based on signing should have been included at the least) but there is no question the team added two players who bring a lot to the team.

Much like the miss on Hejda last off-season, the 'not' signing of Reasoner and Glencross makes little sense. Team depth, at those positions is weakened for no, imo, reason.

Unless, of course, you think that Lowe is, again, trying to have it both ways. Adding Visnovsky and Cole means a push for the playoffs while not signing Glencross and Reasoner means a development year.

Good luck with that.

There Is a Difference

I think Lowe may just pull it off (making the playoffs despite spending a year on development that is) but it is important to note that this review is about the moves made.

On that front this was not a good off-season. The risk factors are through the roof:

- Gagner, Nilsson, Cogliano, et al will all have to continue to improve at a warp-speed rate;
- annual LTIR candidates (Souray, Moreau, Pisani) will have to stay healthy for 70+ games;
- someone will have to pick-up the hard minutes Stoll and Reasoner took at center;
- someone else will have to slot in, sucessfully, at the LW spot;
- Garon will have to maintain his status as a top-20 starter and remain the gold standard for shoot-outs;

etc.

That is a lot to ask of a season.

To top it all off a significant asset was spent on what will be, at best, a 6th place finish. Yay.

------

Heh... a full 11 days earlier than last years post... wheee! Have a great evening everyone.

Pouliot Scores! oh, and a note on Souray(s)

2008-12-23T00:02:00.006-07:00

First of all - props to my buddy Kevin, here in Edmonton, who secured tickets to the game for tonite. I predicted a 4-2 win for the Oil and duly promise to only use my powers for the forces of good.

Big game for Pouliot. Possibly his best NHL game ever. Personally I thought he looked slow at times but I have to say that this is the first time I have watched him, as a player in the NHL, that he reminded me of what he was like so long ago when I watched him play with Crosby.

i.e. he is a smart player who complements his linemates: play him with quality and you get improved quality, play him with lesser quality players (insert name here) and... well... yeah...

Props to Stortini on his goal btw. Well deserved.

Also, second game in row (I believe) where Pouliot was all about the powerplay and Brodziak was all about the penalty kill.

What does that mean?

MacT is back my friends. He is playing to win now so expect to see player skill sets utilized efficiently and effectively. Look at the TOI numbers tonite: over 26 minutes for both Souray and Visnovsky and over 24 for Horcoff.

MacT wanted the win.

Too bad it may still be too late for anything but a run at the last couple play-off spots.

------

I find it interesting, in Edmonton we have a powerplay mindset that is all about the point shot while in Montreal the powerplay mindset is all about the puck control and passing.

Take the puck control and passing game out of the Edmonton powerplay handbook and the powerplay suffers because everyone knows where the puck will go.

Take the big shot out of the Montreal powerplay handbook and the powerplay suffers because everyone knows to shut down the lanes and take away the shot.

What I find interesting is the role a guy like Souray (or Streit or Stoll) can have in determining the effectiveness of a powerplay. In both cases the powerplay is much LESS effective than it should be. And it is obviously so.

Yet teams still build powerplay units that lack, definitively, in certain areas.

Blows my mind that Montreal didn't think they needed a big league shooter on their powerplay. Blows my mind that Edmonton doesn't work the puck control and passing aspects of a powerplay more.

Souray, and the guys like him, deserve better imo.

So do us fans.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Franchise 101 - Part 05 - Objectivity

2008-12-22T14:20:00.005-07:00

Part 5 of a series of posts regarding NHL (sports really) teams. The series will serve as a template by which a casual fan can better determine the present and future state of the team they love.

Each team enters each stage of the each annual cycle (a different post) in a certain competitive state or standing. The examination of this state, or standing, powers billion dollar industries (from bookies to sports writers to internet sports blogs... okay... maybe not billions) and those who win (read: bookies) are those who consistently exercise their ability to be objective about said state or standing.

A quick lesson on Objectivity and Subjectivity:

Objectivity

Yes. Halle Berry is better looking than my wife.

Subjectivity

My wife is every good thing for me. She rocks my world in every way. Absolutely gorgeous. Get lost Halle.

The Goal

There is the rub. As long as the topic, or goal, is simply that of 'who is most attractive' then my example stands, if however, the issue is that of lifemate and compatibility then my example is stood on its head (pointed as it may be).

Does luck play a role? Of course. Is some subjectivity a good thing? Of course. Too much of either however is, typically, a bad thing.

The lesson - as important as it is to objectively classify the competitive standing of a team it is even more important to understand the goal at hand. Ostensibly this is to win the Stanley Cup.

------

In the NHL there are, really, only four categories needed to classify the competitive standing of each team: Play-off Longshot, Play-off Bubble Team, Play-off Probable and Cup Contender.

Play-off Longshot

The team, as currently constituted, won't be in the play-off chase. Too young, too injured, too dysfunctional, too short on talent in key spots and/or too much of any combination of the items already mentioned - it just isn't a play-off team.

Everything would have to break right for this team to make a run.

Play-off Bubble Team

The team, as currently constituted, has some issues but is strong enough in other areas to compensate. If the team can avoid the injury bug and/or long-term slumps from key players then they should be competitive most nights and right in the thick of it.

Throw in a career year from a key player and/or a rookie that blows the doors off and this team is in and may be making a run.

Play-off Probable

The team, as currently constituted, has few issues and a lot of strengths. Barring impairment caused by long-term injuries to, or unexplicable drops in performance from, key players or a total break-down in team chemistry this team will be 'in' the play-offs, not 'trying' to get in.

If a few things break right this team will be competing for a top-4 conference finish and can be considered a Cup contender.

Cup Contender

The team, as currently constituted, is a powerhouse that only total catastrophe can derail from a play-off berth. A solid team without any real weaknesses the roster will have players whose talent is undeniable, players whose performance is dependable, and players who know how to compete night after night. The team probably has a few players who have all three of those qualities.

These are strong teams that can survive the odd set-back quite easily and if players play like they should they will be in it to the end.

------

A GM who has an accurate gauge of the competitive standing of their team should have an advantage over the GM's who do not. I said 'should' because other factors may be in play; the most common being, of course, interference from higher management.

So again. Think about your team. Is it operating in a way that is consistent with what it's competitive standing is? What is the goal, or purpose to which, the management team is working towards? Are standing, actions and goal in sync?

Really?

The first was a bit of a trick question folks. Worry not, we'll get to another another day.

Franchise 101 - Introduction and Chapter Listing

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Franchise 101 - Chapter Listing

2008-12-18T20:14:00.005-07:00

This will serve as the prologue for my Franchise 101 series of posts. The series will, hopefully, serve as a template by which a casual fan can better determine the present and future state of the team they love.

This is all on a 'as-I-write-it' basis so don't go hoping I lay it all out for you in a timely manner; just check back from time to time and remain patient (I guess).

Also, it should be obvious that it isn't in a 'should-be-the-way-a-real-book-would-do-it' format. That would take a lot more work and, quite possibly, some talent. I do not claim to have the latter and given my posting history on this blog you should know better.

That said, here is what I have down so far:

Franchise 101

Ch. 1 - Markets

Ch. 2 - Owners

Ch. 3 - Money

Ch. 4 - Corporate Structure

Ch. 5 - Objectivity

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Gladiator

2008-12-17T22:35:00.006-07:00

Anyone who has ever visited here knows that timeliness, at least in terms of writing, is not my strong suit.

The current trend in blogging - had that down cold over a year ago. Just not a word of it here (though to be fair I do have a draft version dating some time back saved here).

This time I am going to get my thoughts down now. Which is to say: the Edmonton Oilers suffer from serious group think. This is not a team that can think originally or independently anymore.

The Good Soldier

Craig MacTavish is, imo, an excellent coach who has only ever had three serious flaws (again, my opinion), in order:

1. Can't coach a powerplay to save his life

----- (every year) the personnel is never good enough?

2. Toes the company line too often

----- (2006-07) i.e. Smid's playing time versus that of Hejda's

3. Plays to his favorites and his whipping boys a bit too much

----- (prior to this year) it was always Pouliot's fault? Always?

The last item isn't that big of a deal as it is true of many coaches but the other two items can be killers. And this is the year they will kill MacT. Unlike Ted Nolan - who was fired because he wouldn't do what management asked - MacT will resign exactly because he has done what management asked.

There is no way Ted Nolan would have sacrificed a full 20+ games to Cole playing LW, Smid sitting in favor of Strudwick, Pisani playing at center and Gagner getting mouthfull after mouthfull of hard minutes. After 6 games (8 tops) he would have done what any reasonable coach would have done:

a. sat Strudwick
b. played Smid w/Staios (at least they knew each other)
c. reunited Horpensky
d. played Moreau and Pisani w/Brodziak or Pouliot
e. fed the kid line soft minutes
f. rolled 3 lines because the 4th line sucked
g. slotted Cole where he could
h. picked a two tender rotation

I do not say all of that to blow sunshine up Nolan's ass. (Nolan saw it as his job to win games. Period. Hence, when Snow and Wang wanted development and didn't get it guess who got fired?) I say it to make the point - MacT has blown a large chunk of the season doing exactly what the team asked him to do: try to spin gold from what, it turns out, may be only be pyrite.

We know that MacT is a good bench boss. His history proves it. Something is not right here.

Commodus

Every year this team has an obvious hole in the roster. Every year, except for late in 2005-06, it goes unfilled.

Every year this team has a sub-standard power play. Every year.

Every year this team sacrifices a smart contract; sometimes for a poor contract and sometimes for nothing at all, not even beans. Every year.

Every year, excepting 2005-06, smart roster moves are a negated by poor roster moves that are equal in the measure. Every year.

Those items are all items of management. And this year it is coming home to roost.

Why?

Because this team doesn't match the coach. Make no mistake folks. I am pinning the overall blame on Lowe. I don't think MacT has lost the room - he never had this one.

To change the metaphor a bit: He just doesn't have the tools and the ones he does have he has been asked to use in ways he would not normally do so.

Like trying to drill into concrete using a regular drill.

or maybe

Like trying to use Pisani, RW stalwart extraordinaire, as a center for the first quarter of a season.

But if all you are given is a regular drill, or in MacT's case, a bunch of overwhelmed younglings, then maybe you pick the best drill you have and pray for the miracle you know won't come.

Concrete being what it is anyways.

In The Colisseum

And so we have a team that looks good on paper, Cole and Visnovsky are great players and Souray is playing at an all-star level, but it all falls down when it is all put together.

Which brings me back to the first point.

A team which has forward thinking management would not be making these mistakes. For all the great potential Cole has he would not have been brought onto a team which has no where for him to play.

A team which has independent thinkers in management would not have watched Stoll, Reasoner and Glencross leave, without adequate replacement, without someone yelling to the highest heavens - "THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE".

A team which has results orientated managment in place would not rely on the same tacticians, every year, to run the same incompetent powerplay - at the very least new brains would have been brought in to work with the existing ones.

A team which has capable management in place would not watch its penalty killing units degrade to the point of uselessness without rectifying the situation long before it got chronic... or even fatal.

A team that says it's goal is to win would use its resources in that way. Win first. Experiment and babysit later.

A team that has too much groupthink on the otherhand... well that team had better hope for a miracle because this season will bleed MacT dry by the time it is over.

I'll miss MacT. I really like him and I think he is an excellent coach.

-----

Had a trade thought the other day:

Vermette, Kuba & a draft pick
FOR
Cole, Brodziak & Grebeshkov

-----

Have a great evening everyone.

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Introduction

2008-12-17T22:08:00.003-07:00

Atlanta Thrashers

v. 2008

Historical Review of Draft Results

Introduction

Please leave your comments here.

Welcome to the 2008 edition of the Atlanta Thrashers Draft Review. It is a comprehensive study of the draft history of the Atlanta Thrashers NHL Hockey team. This is the first version of this study to be produced by myself.

Follow the links and you will see where I review the last 10 years of the Atlanta Thrashers draft history, grade every player on their performance as a hockey player, and then dissect that information into seven (7) key analysis groups so that I can measure the success of the organization in terms of: Draft Year, Draft Pick, Draft Round, Player Age When Drafted, Drafting by Position, Developmental League and Nationality.

"... grade every player on their performance as a hockey player... ". This is very important and I will devote an entire chapter (the 'Player Grading System') of this review to that goal. For now I will limit my comments to a single, pertinent point: This study is concerned with the organizations ability to draft talent - how that player played for the Thrashers or what 'value' that player had in relation to trades made (for example) is irrelevant.

While every page of this review will have some of my commentary on it, I am leaving much of the analysis open for discussion. Take from it what you will. The data set is, as of yet, small but there is ancillary work that could be done so feel free to go to town with it.

"... It is, after all, my work." Please keep that in mind, not just for purposes of copyright, but for purposes of simple etiquette as well. Feel free to critique - just don't be an ass about it.

Thanks.

Chapter links can be found below. The study is best read by following the links in order.

Without further ado, I invite you to read and enjoy, the Atlanta Thrashers Draft Review (2008) Edition.

------

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Introduction
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results Summation

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Yrs 1999 to 2003
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Yrs 2004 to 2008

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Year
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Round
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Pick
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Age
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Position
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By League
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Country of Birth

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Player Grading System
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Graded Players Summary

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Short Summary

2008-12-13T22:25:00.005-07:00

Atlanta Thrashers

v. 2008

Historical Review of Draft Results

Short Recap / Summary

Please reserve comment for a future post wherein I will request commentary on the review as a whole.

The Atlanta Thrashers started out with a whole lot of nothing and it didn't get much better from there. From the work I have done I have to blame a lot of it on timing.

Think Expansion Draft lists for a second. The Thrashers Expansion Draft was held in 1999. Drafting one year AFTER the Thrashers one would think that the Columbus Blue Jackets and Minnesota Wild would be picking from the dregs of the pool yet the draft rules in place and the expiry of another year (in terms of player career timelines) meant that those teams actually did BETTER than Atlanta.

That meant that the Entry Draft had to be Atlanta's salvation.

Sadly, their first Entry Draft year was 1999. Quite possibly one of the weakest draft years of the modern (read: expansion) era. Atlanta took the best player they could and that player was Patrik Stefan.

Stefan was/is a good honest player. Just not that good. Exelby, the only other player of note to come out of that year had development timelines that reflected his draft pick; not a good thing.

Heatley and Kovalchuk were the obvious picks in their years but Lehtonen, as good as he was touted to be, was a serious mis-step. Coburn was a great pick but Atlanta management had performance issues and wasted the potential.

With a derth of quality coming out of their later round picks the team's staging years, from which the Thrashers could build a solid foundation for Stanley Cup contention, were wasted.

So, combine:

1. a poor starting point (the 1999 Expansion and Entry Drafts) with
2. a below par performance from the scouting staff** and
3. questionable trades with few pure 'winners' in the group

and it really didn't matter how good some subsequent 1st round picks were - they all had to be superstars for this team to succeed.

** note the fail marks per draft rounds 2 through 7

Despite the loss of Coburn, 2003 may actually mark the beginning of a new building program for the club as Enstrom has proven to be an effective driver of the powerplay, Valabik (2004) might actually have a career and Little (2006) is showing well in early results.

If Lehtonen can be the goalie he projected to be, albeit a few years later than needed, and the team can get a nice return on Kovalchuk then the future could be bright. If Pavelec is the goalie of the Thrashers future then all the better as that makes Lehtonen available for trade.

Could make for a nice next five.

In summary, from:

-- 1999 to 2003 (5 drafts) the team fared, at best, average but needed to do far better;

-- 2004 to 2008 (5 drafts) the team has a chance to start all over and maybe 2013 will be the magic year

Maybe.

------

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Introduction
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results Summation

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Yrs 1999 to 2003
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Yrs 2004 to 2008

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Year
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Round
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Pick
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Age
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Position
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By League
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Draft Results By Country of Birth

Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Player Grading System
Atlanta Thrashers 2008 HRDR - Graded Players Summary

------

Have a great evening everyone.