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

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.

Some Recent Past

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.

Edmonton Oilers - 2009 Off-Season

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.

NHL CBA - Revenue Sharing and Salary Cap

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.

Impacts

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.

Heh. So....

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.

Simple Things and the Cap

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.

Edmonton Oilers - A Treatment

Edmonton has some issues. Even if one thinks the roster is strong the salary grid is strained to the breaking point. By that I mean both Cap and budget.

Immediate Notes

The chart shows that Edmonton has, in 2008/09, ~ 36.88 mill of next years Cap space allocated to 8 forwards, 5 defensemen and 2 goalies. This leaves some 3 or 4 forwards and 3 or 4 defensemen left to be signed.

Let's deal with one of those spots right away - the 12th forward (Stortini) will automatically be slotted in at 650k /year. The new total is ~ 37.53 mill for 16 players.

If next years Cap rises the 4 million some are predicting then the new Cap is 54.30. The difference is ~ 16.77 mill.

The RFA's

Stoll, Nilsson, Pitkanen, Grebeshkov and Gilbert

Stoll has had, by many accounts, a very poor season. On the positive side, this will serve to stall the inflationary effect of his 2005-06 season and prevent any RFA sheets from coming his way. On the negative side, he already gets paid a lot. If he remains with the team look for him to get a short-term 'prove-it' contract in the 2.5 mill /year range.

Nilsson, on the other side of the spectrum, has had a great year. He has been put in a position to succeed and has done so. A lot of players don't. Look for his agent to keep him to a 3 year deal that earns him between 2.0 and 2.5 mill /year.

Pitkanen is, despite the questions swirling around his headspace, the most talented d-man we have. He wants the money but doesn't have the counting numbers on his side. Less than 4 million and this is a 2 year deal. I expect 4 years in the 4.25 mill range.

Grebeshkov has justified the trade Lowe made to get him. By a fair bit. Luckily, he isn't one to score a lot. I half expect to see a 3 or 4 year deal in the 2.0 range but wouldn't be surprised if a crafty agent kept it to a cheaper, and shorter deal.

Gilbert is the kind of player coaches can only dream about. Pitkanen might have more talent but Gilbert possesses superior presence of mind. I have him pegged for a Carle style contract but an RFA offer may be his future.

One of the keys for Lowe will be to keep inflationary effects out of the contracts he signs the players to. For example, a contract for Nilsson at 2.15 / 2.25 / 2.35 is much better for the Oilers than one at 1.75 / 2.25 / 2.75.

The UFA's

Glencross and Reasoner

Glencross is this years Hejda. Not the kind of player the Oilers should lose for nothing. I have to think that Lowe that Lowe won't make the same mistake twice. I have to. I fear a Pisani style overpay but have it pegged much lower.

Reasoner will be here if Stoll is not and, I suspect, vice-versa. Reasoner won't be a big money signing. I would offer him a long-term deal at lower dollars but I expect that Lowe will offer a quickie at par.

Cap Flex and Maneuvers

Add it all up and the Oilers sit at ~ 53.58 million in Cap salary next year. This leaves some 700k or so for Lowe to play with.

In terms of Cap flex... I don't see a lot. Who would you not want on the roster? Even if a player or two is sent to Springfield I hope you all noted that I don't have Brodziak on the roster. Nor do I have Pouliot. It's gonna be tight.

So I hope Lowe knows a few maneuvers. He can jerk the Falcon around all he wants but if he wants to make a move later in the season he needs to jettison someone. One of Stoll, Torres or Reasoner is probable. Roloson might be on the outs as well but that assumes JDD is ready.

Not to be too snarky about it but whatever happened to a 10% buffer hmmmm?

Danger Is My Middle Name

The Souray contract is a given. He had better have a great year next year and the next year and the next year and... well... you get the picture. Somewhere along the way his contract has to be worth more than hot press and hot flashes (so sayeth the Hot Oil girls).

How about that Gagner eh? Cogliano? The future IS BRIGHT! Gotta love rookies who outperform expectations! Right! Right? Well, wait until you have to pay them. Gagner better be something extra special because his next contract could cost us Pisani.

No question, the Oilers (and us fans) have a great team forming up. Keeping it together is what will be the problem. Call me a pessimist but Lowe's contract negotiations, to date, haven't led me to believe that this will be handled well.

The next big issue is that of goaltending. Sure, Roloson is done near future. How long, and for how much, will the team be keeping Garon around for? JDD is not tearing up the AHL and Dubnyk still needs a couple years full shot so the ride rests on Garon for now and in 2009-10 his price goes up - regardless of whether or not he can carry the load. And wants to do so here.

Lastly we come to the issue of depth. What issue you say?

Well. While it is true we have an embarrassment of riches on the forward lines right now, try thinking about AFTER we have purged all our proven veteran depth. I see Nash as probable and Vande Velde as mostly possible but after that the difference maker list gets a bit thin (Reddox?). That is a far cry from what we had happen this year.

Do not dismiss the issue of depth lightly. Having 3rd/4th line guys like Pisani, Stoll and Reasoner step up so that guys like Gagner and Cogliano can play against weak opposition is a gift not to be taken for granted.

Summary

The future looks bright. And scary. There are a LOT of good, smart decisions that will need to be made between now and 2010/11 and 2011/12 (the last two Hemsky years) to lock in the gains made this year and work a system that looks a lot more Detroit/New Jersey than it does... well... Edmonton Oilers post 1990.

Edmontons gains this year mean that the team build took a huge leap forward. Because of Cap issues however that leap may involve a rather awkward landing. The overpricing of certain contracts (Souray, Roloson, Penner and Moreau among others) means that Lowe has little or no flex to work with and to get that flex he will have to trade players (Torres, Reasoner and Stoll) he would actually be better off keeping.

It's a high price to pay. My hope is that that is as high as it goes.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Conventional Wisdom Cracked Wise - Part 02

It is no secret that I get tired with most of those who post on the fanboards now-a-days. Considering the incredible amount of NHL data and analysis now available there is no excuse, excepting that of age I guess, for some of the junk that gets written out there.

What REALLY bugs me however is when said junk gets transmogrified into some kind of commonly accepted principle.

As in... there is no reason to wait for the off-season for valuable RFA's and UFA's to become available because the teams which own their rights will sign them in a timely fashion.

Proper analysis of this issue comes in two parts a) a look at the term 'valuable' and b) will players come available.

In this post I will focus on b) will players come available?

To which I give you:

Philadelphia Cream Cheesed

Please note - I am not picking on the Flyers as I think Paul Holmgren has done an outstanding job rebuilding that team. However, they illustrate my point rather nicely and such gifts I cannot refuse.

Roster Detail



Immediate Notes

Gauthier isn't included because he is already in the minors and will probably stay there until his contract is up. Also, Rathje's LTIR status is irrelevant because he starts and ends his year on that list.

The chart shows that the Flyers have, in 2008/09, ~ 45.04 mill of next years Cap space allocated to 8 forwards, 3 defensemen and 2 goalie's. This leaves some 4 or 5 forwards and 4 or 5 defensemen left to be signed.

Let's deal with 2 of those spots right away - the 12th forward spot and the 8th defenseman spot will automatically be slotted in at 550k /year. New total is ~ 46.14 mill for 15 players.

If next year's Cap rises the 4 million some are predicting then the new Cap is 54.30. The difference is ~ 8.16 mill.

The RFA's

Umberger, Carter, Cote, Kukkonen and Jones.

Of these, the two guys who have counting numbers above expectations are Umberger (++) and Jones (+++). Carter (+) isn't dominating as people would like but is still showing respectably while Cote (+) is doing pretty well considering the opposition he plays. Kukkonen isn't doing anything special either way.

Of the 25+ age group, Cote and Kukkonen will probably come cheap. Without the benefit of big year's they can't demand much and while both can play the 'almost 27' card only Kukkonen has the 'Europe is HOME' card. So let's be fair here. Maybe 600k for Cote and 1.25 mill for Kukkonen?

Now the two outperformers. Umberger and Jones. If both players keep performing well they won't come cheap. Umberger, on a deal that takes him into his UFA years will net an easy 2.5 mill while Jones is no less than a 1.8 mill signing under the same auspices.

I am being very nice to Holmgren with both of those deals.

That leaves Carter. Hard to say what will happen there. Hard not to note that he is still on pace to score 20+ goals and 40+ points. In today's NHL that means a two year deal of 2.0+ million. Let's be nice to Holmgren (again!) and assume that no one makes a RFA run at Carter and he signs at 2.0.

RFA signings should cost the Flyers a cool 8.15 mill. (to answer the obvious question - no, I didn't plan that)

UFA's

Smith and Vandermeer

No money left to sign them. If there was I would expect that Smith would get the going rate of 3+ mill for 'veteran stay-at-home defensemen and respected by all Captain types' while Vandermeer will be hoping GM's notice he is consistent at playing well against weaker opposition (say 1.5 mill?).

Cap Flex and Maneuvers

Holmgren does have some moves he can make. I will rate them by degree of difficulty.

EASY: Moving Sami Kapanen (poor performance) and Antero Nittymaki (expensive back-up). At the very least they are easy salaries to swallow (via the minors). If replacements come in at 550k each the savings total 1.4 mill in Cap space and certainly add breathing room.

MEDIUM: Moving Hatcher is a possibility. Holmgren could then seek an equivalent (maybe keep Smith) or make the deliberate switch to Coburn, Kukkonen, Jones and eventually Picard/Parent. Option 1 doesn't free up Cap space while Option 2 could really pay off if Coburn takes another leap forward in development. Moving Kukkonen is also an option but the Cap Flex gained is marginal at best.

HARD: Trading other roster players. Philadelphia has very few 'poor' bets on the roster. Most of their players are underpaid given performance (Coburn, Upshall), earning their keep (Biron, Knuble, Lupul), too new and shiny to trade (Timonen) or close to unmovable regardless (Gagne, Hartnell).

Summary of the Cheese

Philadelphia is, due to one great trade deadline/off-season, looking at a successful future. Most of their salary issues are minor in nature (Kapanen/Nittymaki), will resolve themselves over time (Knuble/Hatcher) or have the promise of established performance (Gagne/Timonen). Hartnell's underlying play is fine so if he can improve his counting numers he will earn his contract.

That means the issue is, quite simply, the Cap itself. None of the raises that I have proposed for any of the roster players I named is overcosted - to get any better Holmgren would have to replicate the success of Coburn's contract... good luck with that.

So, even given that his roster is well constructed, he (Holmgren) STILL looks to be losing one of Hatcher/Smith and then Vandermeer off his roster at the end of the season.

For the record - I believe that the progression of Coburn, et al will result in the Flyers having a better team next year and that Holmgren has set that team up for continuing sucess over the next 5 years (if not more).

Summary of the Point

There are more teams like the Flyers out there. There may not be a lot of big hitters available this coming off-season but RFA's and UFA's will come available this off-season and steady, veteran players like Smith and Vandermeer will be in that group.

Think further for a second. Everything I just wrote about the Flyers goes out the window if they pull Stanley Cup Cinderella run. If Carter or Umberger pulls a 2005/06 Fernando then all bets are off and Holmgren's off-season gets a lot more interesting real quick.

So remember, sometimes conventional wisdom has it wrong.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Conventional Wisdom Cracked Wise - Part 01

OH DEAR LORD! A NEW POST!

One that is almost topical, even.

Lord Bob (see: South Smythian Rolo-Gator link on the right) was making me look bad so it was time to post again. Immediately following this post will be a series of BADLY outdated posts - all in limbo for far too long because of house reno's, work stress and writer's block - posted because I will be damned if I am going to waste all of that. Still... sorry gone so long.

Without further ado...

How To Trade The Untradeable...?

I read a lot about how goalies, specifically Roloson, have no trade value in the NHL these days. I disagree with this assessment. I believe that a team merely has to get creative.

Think about Tampa Bay for a second. Tight budget, lots of Cap space, top-heavy team with no depth, no goaltending to speak of and a dead-weight of a deal for a goalie they simply don't want or need right now in Marc Denis.

Enter Dwayne Roloson

Roloson
FOR
Denis & 2nd round pick

Why? Simple.

a) Roloson (sv% .901) is better than Holmqvist (sv% .892);
b) Roloson's Cap hit (Roloson = 3.667 vs. Denis = 2.867) is easy for TBay;
c) Roloson's higher salary only costs ~350k (pro-rated) this year with no increase next*
d) Edmonton, even keeping Denis, gains a Cap savings of ~ 800k;
e) Edmonton gains the ability to buy Denis out (cannot do with Roloson);
f) Edmonton gains a 2nd round draft pick for losing the better player

* Roloson and Denis have the same 2008/09 salary

The needs of both teams are served. Tampa gets a guy who might save their year and he won't cost them much more than they were willing/committed to spending in the first place while Edmonton gets greater Cap flex and a pick.

wheeeeee!

------

Have a great evening everyone.

The Penner Offer

I have a great many concerns about the Penner offer, most of them having been covered by Lowetide (who is not taking this one well) on his blog. mc79hockey, PunjabiOil, IOF, BDHS and CiO also chime in (links to the right).

I am a little more ambivalent on it. Penner does have potential and does seem a natural fit for a passer like Hemsky. He isn't as good as Torres is defensively BUT he hasn't played as many games either. It is easy to point at Penner's age but his NHL hockey age is still just one.

The Penner offer is fraught with peril imo but the pay-off could be astounding. My hope is that he either

a) hits expectations or
b) is unloaded in a timely fashion should he development stall.

A big, BIG guy who is a force at the net or on the boards and who is a shooter first, last and always

vs.

A plodder who glomed off of a true 1st line talent in Getzlaf and PP pointmen like Neidermayer and Pronger

Oh just WHAT will he be when he grows up?

One thing though. And I will not say it again. Anyone who thinks this was just a grand plan by Lowe to force Burke's hand and cause Anaheim budget and Cap troubles isn't being rational.

To be more blunt about it: shut the f%^k up.

Anaheim

A 1st / 2nd / 3rd offer sheet has a pay range of $3,515,645 to $4,687,527.

Anaheim currently sits at $48.80 million in committed Cap salary with 21 players on the payroll. That is 12 forwards, 7 defensemen and 2 goalies. Selanne and Penner are not included in those numbers but Ryan is.

With the Cap at $50.3 million a quick look at the Ducks roster reveals that the team has the following flex:

~ 0.60 in easy dump (Bryzgalov)*
~ 0.60 in easy wire (May or Parros)
~ 6.75 in retirement limbo (Neidermayer)**

* Hillier has a big signing bonus so Burke would have to send him down and get a 600k man to play back-up. ** Selanne isn't counted in the $48.80 so I don't count him in the above.

Other than Neidermayer's contract Anaheim doesn't have a lot of flex to play with. Most of their players are priced appropriately to, or even outperforming, their contracts. Many are critical to team success and a few would be hard to trade regardless (Bertuzzi).

The Math

500k represents ~ 1% of the Cap. It also represents:

~ 33% of Anaheim's immediately available Cap space, and
~ 20% of Anaheim's easy flex

Ergo 500k, to the Ducks, is a LOT of money. Neidermayer being the wildcard.

Ryan's contract will cost the team ~ $2.2 million in Cap.

Kevin Lowe

So we know two things:

1. Lowe wants to sign Penner and he thinks he is worth $4.3 mill /yr,
2. Lowe was bidding against himself.

Look at the numbers again. No way was Penner going to get any real money out of Anaheim. They couldn't afford it. Burke is practically banking on Neidermayer retiring - he can't afford to keep the team together otherwise.

Look at the numbers again. Lowe had a $1.15 million spread to work with and he went 800k above the minimum - a minimum that Penner would not have seen from Burke. At least not this year. Lowe was, to say it again, bidding against himself.

Look at the numbers again. If Lowe had wanted to whip out his Sword of Damocles and begin busting Burke with it his best bet would have been to get Penner to sign at $3.8 million. At 3.8 Burke can keep Ryan in the minors and work flex to keep Penner.

i.e. At $3.8 Lowe makes Burke sweat as the 'right' decision isn't also the obvious one.

At $4.3 Penner makes more than Hemsky. I will leave that right there. On a secondary point, it is also more than Anaheim can afford sans knowledge of Neidermayer's plans. Look for Burke, and quite rightly so, to not match the offer.

Best of All Worlds and Finale

The best contract for Penner would have been at the top-end of the next band down ($2,343,764 - $3,515,645 for a 1st and 3rd round pick). The contract would have been heavily front-loaded and looked like this:

6.5 / 3.5 / 2.5 / 2.0 / 3.0

At $3.5 million it is still a tough pill for Burke to swallow as Getzlaf and Perry are due next year and Cap space will be at a premium for this team for the next few years.

Meanwhile Lowe keeps the 2nd round pick and protects himself in the last 3 years of the deal (as Penner would be easy to unload to a small budget team that has the Cap room but not the money).

A win-win deal for Lowe all-around.

At $4.3 million however... the risk is ALL on Lowe. And that is the problem

This contract offer does not represent Lowe at his finest. He paid high for a player who would have been lucky to break $5 million as an UFA and committed long to a guy with one season played and no obvious superstar skill sets.

In his last RFA season Penner would have been lucky to get $2.0 million out of Burke on a one-year deal and I can't see Burke breaking either the $4 million or the 3 year barrier on a longer term deal. Burke holds onto his wallet hard.

Much like the Souray signing Lowe failed to manage his risk. Penner has to be the real deal for this contract to represent value. He has to. Otherwise Lowe:

-- failed to get a good, risk managed, contract, and
-- failed to impair Anaheim's ability to manage its Cap, and
-- failed to hurt Anaheim by taking a key player, and
-- failed to keep a good draft pick in a deep draft, and
-- succeeded in overpaying a mediocre hockey player

wheeeee....

Here's hoping Burke matches the offer or that Penner really is the next Bertuzzi. Otherwise we's in trouble.

Heh. I started this post as kind-of ambivalent about it all... oh well... at the least I can appreciate watching Lowe play the role of RFA spoiler.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

2006-07 Off-Season UFA's (Part Three - Centers) - A

The third in a series of posts on the UFA market that will hit this coming off-season. The first post was all about goalie's and the second was all about defensemen. My latest update to those posts is here.

Convential wisdom has it that building a team starts from the net out. All else being equal it is better to have a good goalie than it is to have a good defensemen than it is to have a good center than it is to have a good winger. Funny then that marquee centers have traditionally received more pay and press than most goalie's or defensemen.

Easy call really. The top-scorer on a team is almost always a forward and the center on a line tends to direct the play. Goalie's and defensemen might have a greater impact on wins and losses but for the vast majority of fans out there it is the center who sells the tickets.

Centermen

Age .. .$$ .. avg toi .. pp .. sh/gm

32 .. 5.75 .. 18.17 .. 4.07 .. _.10 .. Peter Forsberg
29 .. 3.08 .. 18.46 .. 4.25 .. 2.56 .. Chris Drury
29 .. 2.13 .. 20.59 .. 5.13 .. 3.02 .. Michal Handzus
28 .. 5.00 .. 19.18 .. 4.45 .. _.18 .. Daniel Briere
26 .. 5.00 .. 18.55 .. 4.28 .. _.02 .. Scott Gomez
32 .. 7.42 .. 17.04 .. 3.33 .. _.24 .. Alexei Yashin

36 .. 0.80 .. 12.20 .. 1.56 .. 1.34 .. Trevor Linden
34 .. 1.98 .. 17.59 .. 3.15 .. 2.08 .. Bryan Smolinski
33 .. 1.63 .. 19.07 .. 3.09 .. 3.06 .. Josef Stumpel
31 .. 1.48 .. 17.13 .. 2.27 .. 2.35 .. Todd White
31 .. 0.87 .. 16.24 .. 2.06 .. 1.24 .. Viktor Kozlov
28 .. 1.30 .. 16.14 .. 2.34 .. 1.58 .. Eric Belanger

35 .. 3.80 .. 16.49 .. 3.34 .. _.06 .. Robert Lang
33 .. 2.50 .. 14.39 .. 3.34 .. _.02 .. Eric Lindros
32 .. 0.50 .. 12.05 .. 2.17 .. _.14 .. Glen Metropolit
30 .. 0.60 .. 14.08 .. 1.39 .. _.24 .. Randy Robitaille
29 .. 2.90 .. 16.39 .. 4.37 .. _.04 .. Petr Sykora
28 .. 2.85 .. 12.30 .. 1.47 .. _.31 .. Mike York

36 .. 1.44 .. 14.53 .. _.10 .. 2.05 .. Wes Walz
32 .. 2.50 .. 17.24 .. _.24 .. 4.17 .. Michael Peca
31 .. 0.73 .. 10.55 .. _.24 .. 1.49 .. Kevyn Adams
31 .. 0.53 .. 12.32 .. _.08 .. 3.14 .. Scott Nichol
30 .. 2.39 .. 15.52 .. _.28 .. 2.57 .. Radek Bonk
30 .. 1.13 .. 13.32 .. _.51 .. 2.29 .. Wayne Primeau
30 .. 0.95 .. __.__ .. _.__ .. _.__ .. Jason Wiemer (inj.)

25 .. 3.00 .. 15.14 .. 3.22 .. _.19 .. Mike Comrie
25 .. 0.90 .. 12.12 .. _.08 .. 1.19 .. Patrick Stefan
25 .. 1.15 .. 13.23 .. _.53 .. _.31 .. Josef Vasicek

37 .. 0.45 .. _8.17 .. _.04 .. 1.51 .. Jim Dowd
36 .. 1.50 .. 13.53 .. 2.01 .. 1.09 .. Jeremy Roenick
35 .. 0.70 .. 15.33 .. 3.15 .. _.24 .. Yanic Perreault
35 .. 0.50 .. _8.53 .. _._5 .. 2.59 .. Travis Green
34 .. 1.52 .. _9.53 .. _.20 .. 1.38 .. Mike Ricci

29 .. 0.50 .. _9.30 .. _.12 .. _.02 .. Wyatt Smith
29 .. 0.45 .. _9.27 .. _.07 .. _.01 .. Eric Rasmussen
29 .. 0.45 .. _9.46 .. _.15 .. 1.06 .. Byron Ritchie
29 .. 0.45 .. 10.46 .. 1.55 .. _.__ .. Mark Hartigan
28 .. 0.70 .. 10.24 .. _.51 .. _.41 .. Mark Smith
28 .. 0.48 .. 12.55 .. 3.21 .. _.02 .. Jeff Hamilton
27 .. 0.63 .. 13.46 .. _.51 .. 2.56 .. Mikael Holmqvist
27 .. 0.75 .. 13.37 .. 1.06 .. _.48 .. Brett MacLean
27 .. 0.68 .. _7.33 .. _.04 .. _.02 .. Adam Mair
27 .. 0.45 .. 13.40 .. 1.21 .. 1.57 .. Toby Peterson
27 .. 0.45 .. _7.22 .. _.16 .. _.02 .. Tommi Santala

Group A: the 'name' players

This is an interesting category. Forsberg and Handzus have health issues, Briere and Gomez are offensive dynamo's who don't play much defense and Yashin will put up the points without a care in world (which IS the problem). Drury lacks the big numbers but is the better all-around player.

If Forsberg plays it will be in Philly or Colorado so look for him to be in Philly at $4.8 mill /yr (one year). Briere and Gomez are proven point producers and could end up anywhere so look for them to sign 4 or 5 yr deals in the $6.5 mill /yr range.

Handzus will cash in on his 'potential' (big guy who can play) yet again and will garner a $4.0 mill /yr payday while Yashin will get signed late August by some team that needs some offense ($3.5 mill /yr for one year).

The wildcard is Drury. Great leadership and 'clutch-player' rep will get him a payday a la Briere and Gomez but the question becomes - where? I will, actually, be disappointed if San Jose doesn't make a play for him. Signing Drury and trading Marleau for the pieces they need is the smart move.

Group B: the 'all-around good guys' group

Not the 1st-line ES, PP of PK but they can do it all and are often first over the boards for the 2nd-line PP or PK teams. It may be because they really are good at everything (a guy like Linden has years of veteran savvy to fall back on) or it may be because the team is undermanned (Stumpel is THAT good on the PK?) so do your research and make your call accordingly.

Linden will retire in Vancouver so look for a retirement contract for him (2 yrs at < $1 mill /yr). Smolinski is a guy who is good enough to be wanted by teams but not so good that they keep him, look for him to sign for a couple of years at $2 to 2.5 mill /yr. Florida likes Stumpel and Stumpel likes Florida; he'll get 3 years at $1.8 - 2.2 mill /yr.

After years of working his tail off White will finally get land a paycheque that fits his tweener status (better than 3rd line but not quite 2nd line); he'll want 3 or 4 years at $1.8 mill /yr or 2 years at $2 mill /yr. Belanger's numbers improved in Atlanta so he may get a slight bump into the $1.5 mill /yr range (expect a 2 year deal).

Kozlov is the wildcard of the group. Is he finally putting it all together? He had a good year last year and that may just land him a bigger contract. Look for a 3 year deal in $1.2 to 1.5 mill /yr range. I think he would like to go to a team that wants him - I do not know if that is New York.

Group C: the 'friends of the power-play' group

Players who, for better or for worse, aren't known for how they play defense. They tend to get lots of power-play time and some of them even earn it. The wildcard in the group is Lindros. His injury history is scary and he has changed his play because of it BUT he can still play the game pretty well. He will sign where he can, probably short-term, and get some $2 mill /yr for his troubles.

Lang and Sykora are more consistent than most but neither one is a 'core' kind of guy. I expect both to take pay-cuts. Sykora will probably stay in Edmonton the next 2 years for $2.8 mill /yr while Lang will get a chance to see more of the USA; also a 2 year deal and this one pegged at $2.5 to $3.25 mill /yr.

Metropolit, Robitaille and York represent the bottom end of this group. They will be paid accordingly. The first two will sign anywhere that needs a center who can work a 2nd power-play unit and they will be happy to make 700k to 800k a year doing it. York, after a dismal season is kind of in the same boat. His good years in Edmonton will get him a 2 year deal somewhere making $1.2 - 1.6 mill /yr.

Group D: the 'what's a power-play?' group

Players who, for better or worse, never see PP time because they are too busy being relied upon to play well defensively or because they wouldn't be any good on the PP regardless and SOMEONE has to play 2nd unit minutes on the PK. If Wiemer can ever play again (I never looked it up) he will get short-term 'see-if-he-can-play-again' deal for 550 - 700k /yr.

Peca is the big name and if healthy he is a legit difference maker. His big payday days are long gone but expect the Leafs or Islanders to give him a multi-year deal that averages $2.2 mill /yr or so. Walz is the elder statesman of the group and he will go to a team that needs a veteran like him who can play. Expect a 2 year retirement deal at $1.2 mill /yr or so.

Bonk has turned himself into a legit, top-end, defensive forward. I see him taking a pay-cut but it shouldn't be much of one - he'll go to anyone who pays him and I expect it will be 3 years at $2.2 mill /yr. Primeau is the very definition of generic 3rd line defensive forward. Given the lack of quality depth in the NHL a 2 year deal awaits him, somewhere, for $1.2 mill /yr.

Nichol and Adams are the guys who are kicking around because they can play better than the current rookie de jour and thus will hurt the team less in tight games. Look for Nichol to get a slight bump in pay to 650k /yr while Adams will take a slight cut in pay to 650k /yr. Both players will sign short term deals.

Group E: the 'wanna-be' players

A small group of players who have the talent to make some noise, and are still young enough to do so, BUT don't have the 'it' that it takes to get them over the hump. Comrie had a good play-offs with Ottawa and he will probably get the biggest paycheque of the bunch - just smaller than before. 3 year deal, somewhere that needs an offense first-last-always forward, for $2.5 mill /yr.

Stefan and Vasicek were both, once, highly touted prospects. Not great years for them however. Vasicek will get roughly $1 mill /yr for a couple of years from someone who wants to take a chance while Stefan may be re-inventing himself into a defensively sound forward. Take a couple more years for him to do that so expect another couple of 800 - 900k paydays for him this round.

Funny thing about Vasicek... not a good year in Carolina but dig a little deeper and you find out the guy played some very tough competition through-out the year. One of the best 'Quality of competition' stats in the NHL last year (courtesy of Desjardins). Interesting.

Group F: the 'it's a good-life' players

The guys are hanging on to their jobs every game of every year. I won't go into detail on most of these as it is fairly clear that the majority of them will be lucky to get 2 year contracts that aren't two-way deals. The best of them will get 650 - 750k contracts and the average will probably be in the 500k range.

Of the guys mentioned above, Peterson and (M) Smith may have solidified a reputation for being dependable utility forwards while Hamilton, MacLean and Hartignan may have given themselves a future as 2nd line PP fill-ins. Holmqvist and Ritchie make up the PK utility set of this this group. Rasmussen and Mair haven't done themselves any favors and (W) Smith and Santala are just fill-ins.

With this group of forwards it is always hard to say as to what will really happen. Why they even get playing at all can often be up for debate (some are only injury fill-ins, etc). The only thing that isn't debateable is that they won't make much more than the minimum and that even the smallest NHL paycheque is still a pretty good paycheque to have.

Group G: the 'you still play?' players

Centers tend to be under a LOT of pressure to perform in the NHL. They can get pushed out of their roster spot very quickly. Excepting Perreault, all the players in this group are guys who have fallen off the map (sts) in regards to their level of play and they should probably retire soon or sooner. None of them will get a contract longer than 2 years.

Perreault gets by on superior face-off skills and some decent PP work. He will find a job somewhere and make $1.2 mill /yr or so doing it. Ricci, Green and Dowd may get work as dependable 4th-line PK vets while Roenick never learned how to adjust his game to match his roster spot (not specialized enough in any one area of the game) and so he may be waiting on a new contract for quite a while. Expect most of the signings to be at or near the minimum.

------

Next part of this post follows directly below.

2006-07 Off-Season UFA's (Part Three - Centers) - B

Part 'B' of the third in a series of posts on the UFA market that will hit this coming off-season. Part 'A' is directly above this one.

Who To Target?

For my money the best players to target are (from each group):

Drury

Belanger

Smolinski

White

Sykora

Lang

Bonk

Walz

Peterson / Ritchie

For less money than Briere or Gomez might make, Drury will provide more versatile and dependable play AND he can play the tough minutes. A team could do worse than making Drury one of the key building blocks of their forward group and a long-term deal on $6 mill/yr would be money expensively, but well, spent. Drury is also good as a 'put-us-over-the-top' guy on a short-term contract.

I only like Gomez and Briere on long, long term deals where they can become the identity of the team and the team can be built around them. I think Briere will actually stay in Buffalo but in any case both figure to be very expensive signings. I don't like them for the Oilers at all.

Smolinski and White are veteran guys who can anchor the 3rd line or cover the 2nd line and as such, if a team needs help in that area they would be great signings - short or long-term. I do think that they would both prefer longer-term deals in the 3 -4 year range at $2 mill /yr or so. Those would be good deals.

Belanger is a guy I like however. Given that quality 3rd line guys make anywhere from $1.5 to 2.5 mill /yr regardless, the smart GM will sign this guy to a long-term deal (5 years+) that tops out at $2 million but averages $1.6 mill /yr. Quality 3rd line cornerstone at an affordable price and inflation protected out the wazoo - what's not to like?

Sykora and Lang are both good pick-ups for a team that needs offensive depth for now and is willing to trade them at the deadline if the play-offs are out of sight for a while. Short-term deals of a single year is preferable - even if a premium has to be paid. I pegged their prices above.

Bonk has transformed himself into a valuable player. He is generally underappreciated and as a defensive minded guy he is undervalued. Belanger is the lesser version of Bonk imo. The smart GM knows what Bonk offers and gets him to sign a long-term deal in the $2 mill /yr range. Barring personality issues this is the kind of guy who can become a 'core' player on a good team.

Walz is a good, short-term, solution to any team needing veteran defensive depth and a leadership boost. Much like Lang/Sykora however his best use is as trade bait at the deadline. Short-term deal for few bucks means a nice draft pick later.

Peterson and Ritchie are great for any team that needs a veteran to baby-sit some rookies on the 4th-line and as such they should get picked up by some enterprising GM. I like them because they should stay at or near the minimum and out-perform their price at that level. 500k /yr for a couple of years.

------

So those are the centers. Were I Lowe and I was going to play it conservatively ('make-the-play-offs') I make my plays for:

-- Gomez, Briere or White.

Seriously. this team is so far away that only the offense of the big boys may get them a shot at the play-offs. White is a 'chance' pick in that he might help Horcoff and Stoll enough that the three of them carry the team in.

If I treat my team as a rebuild I look at:

-- Peterson, Bonk, Lang, Sykora and Belanger.

Peterson because he plays utility forward on the bottom two lines for me, Bonk because eventually Horcoff/Stoll may move on or be traded, Sykora nd Lang because I want the prospects/draft picks that come with trading them later and Belanger because I want to risk a little to maybe gain a lot.

Not a lot of solutions for the Oilers from the UFA centers available this off-season.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

NHL CBA - RFA Offer Sheets

This is an archive post to create a quick-reference on RFA (in this case: Group 2 Free Agents) Offer Sheet compensation requirements as negotiated in the CBA. This is not a comprehensive guide.

Used when a team (A) offers a contract to a player, who is a RFA with another team (B), and the player has accepted the contract. Team B has one of two options - they can match the contract and retain the player or they can accept draft pick compensation (per below).

RFA Offer Sheet* .......... Req. Compensation**

2005

_,660,000 or less ......... none
_,660,000 - 1,000,000 ..... 3rd round pick
1,000,000 - 2,000,000 ..... 2nd round pick
2,000,000 - 3,000,000 ..... 1st and 3rd etc.
3,000,000 - 4,000,000 ..... 1st, 2nd and 3rd
4,000,000 - 5,000,000 ..... 1st x2, 2nd & 3rd
5,000,000 or more ......... 1st x4

2007

_,773,442 or less ......... none
_,773,443 - 1,171,882 ..... 3rd round pick
1,171,882 - 2,343,764 ..... 2nd round pick
2,343,764 - 3,515,645 ..... 1st and 3rd etc.
3,515,645 - 4,687,527 ..... 1st, 2nd and 3rd
4,687,527 - 5,859,412 ..... 1st x2, 2nd & 3rd
5,859,412 or more ......... 1st x4

2008 (from NHLSCAP)

_,863,156 or less ......... none
_,863,157 - 1,307,811 ..... 3rd round pick
1,307,812 - 2,615,623 ..... 2nd round pick
2,615,624 - 3,923,434 ..... 1st and 3rd etc.
3,923,435 - 5,231,246 ..... 1st, 2nd and 3rd
5,231,247 - 6,539,061 ..... 1st x2, 2nd & 3rd
6,539,062 or more ......... 1st x4

* Amounts increase in lock-step with Average League salary
** Picks acquired from other teams cannot be used as compensation

In the 2006 off-season, Philadelphia (Team A) offered Ryan Kesler (the RFA) a one-year contract of $1.9 million. Vancouver (Team B) then had 7 days to match the offer. If Vancouver did not match the offer then they would have recieved a 2nd round pick from Philadelphia as compensation.

Note: Vancouver matched the offer and retained Kesler.

------

I hope this has been of assistance.