Last Seen Blogs
almostgeneralwitch
The Joker
numbtothebone
numbtothebone
bobbystrainart
Bobby Strain
daylightcommand3
Messed Up Masterpiece
Text
NHL, Chicago Blackhawks great Stan Mikita dies at 78 years old
One of the NHL’s smallest players and biggest scorers, Blackhawks legend Stan Mikita died at 78 years old on Tuesday. (AP)
Chicago Blackhawks great Stan Mikita has died at 78 years old.
His family announced his passing in a statement on Tuesday.
”He was surrounded by his loving family whom he fiercely loved,” the statement reads. “Details of planned services will be released when they become available. We respectfully ask for privacy at this time.”
Mikita played 22-year Hall of Fame career with Blackhawks
Mikita played his entire 22-year career with the Blackhawks, leading them to the 1961 Stanley Cup championship. Mikita’s Blackhawks also made the Stanley Cup finals and lost in 1962, 1965, 1971 and 1973. He retired in 1980.
Mikita’s family did not provide details of his death. In 2015 his family announced that Mikita had been diagnosed with Lewy body dementia, a degenerative disease that affects cognitive and motor systems, causing problems with thinking, behavior, movement and mood, similar to Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease.
Mikita’s accolades
Mikita retired as the Blackhawks’ all-time leading scorer with 1,467 points on 541 goals and 926 assists. The Hall of Famer was an eight-time All-Star and two-time Hart Trophy winner as the NHL’s most valuable player. He earned the Art Ross trophy for leading the NHL in scoring four times.
Mikita is the only player to have won the Ross, Hart and Lady Bing Trophy for sportsmanship in the same season. He did it twice, in 1967 and 1968.
Mikita, the innovator
The 5-9, 169-pound center wasn’t one of the game’s biggest players, but he was one of its most feared scorers. He was an innovator on offense and with equipment, a creative player known for his ability to control the puck and set up teammates.
“He designed the distinctive helmet he donned later in his career, when that still was a rarity,” NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said in a statement. ”He curved his stick blade to an extent previously unthinkable, causing his shot to do tricks. He utterly transformed his playing style in his prime, going from one of the league’s most penalized players to one of its most gentlemanly.”
Mikita was born in Czechoslavakia in 1940 before moving to Canada in 1948. He joined the Blackhawks at 18 years old in 1959.
Mikita, Blackhawks made amends after broken relationship
His relationship with the Blackhawks deteriorated under long-time owner William Wirtz before he and fellow Chicago great Bobby Hull were invited back into the fold in 2007 when Wirtz died and his son Rocky took over control of the team.
“There are no words to describe our sadness over Stan’s passing,” Wirtz said in a statement. “He meant so much to the Chicago Blackhawks, to the game of hockey, and to all of Chicago.”
More from Yahoo Sports:
• Dez Bryant reportedly not interested in joining Browns
• Pat Forde: Rally supporting Urban Meyer should shame Buckeye Nation
• Chris Mannix: With LeBron gone, Celtics and Brad Stevens ready to seize the East
• Giancarlo Stanton suffers his most embarrasing strikeout of MLB career
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_author:Jason Owens#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_uuid:89073c69-c8ef-35e3-b74f-3eaaa49dc364
0 notes
Text
Puck Daddy Countdown: No guarantees for Henrik Zetterberg
Has Henrik Zetterberg played his last game? (Getty)
6. Arbitration
One of the things that’s stupid about arbitration in the NHL is that every time you hear “The team came in at $1 million and the player is asking for $3 million,” you can feel good about betting your entire life savings on “The arbitrator’s going to give him $2 million.”
A lawyer on Twitter with a locked account who I’m therefore not going to link to said there’s a pretty simple reason for this: If an arbitrator goes in one direction or the other — that is, if the player or team makes a compelling case for their number — the side that “loses” has the power to fire that arbitrator. If you split the difference, nobody’s happy and everyone is simultaneously.
But that kinda takes all the intrigue out of the arbitration process, and really makes you wonder how on earth Jacob Trouba’s took six damn hours. The artifice of it is appalling — why not just come up with your numbers and split the difference right away — but that’s all billable hours I guess.
Anyway, it’s stupid.
5. Overvaluing your own players
So the Canucks re-signed Troy Stecher the other day to a two-year deal with a $2.325 AAV, which sounds just about right I think. But the way that worked out for Canucks fans, you’d think they just got the steal of the century. Oh my god Troy Stecher, wow he’s great!!!
And it’s like, “Is he?”
Don’t get me wrong, he seems like he’s fine. But he doesn’t really move the needle in terms of, say, underlying numbers and he has a grand total of 35 points in 139 career games and he’s already 24 years old.
This is one of those things where he was highly touted coming out of college (probably a little too highly) because he scored a good (but not massive) amount on a very good team. This is a guy who averaged less than 19 minutes a night and was basically used as the sheltered No. 4 defenseman on a Canucks team with Mike Del Zotto as the No. 2, so you tell me how good he is, really.
The answer seems to be “not very.” Don’t get me wrong, it’s good to have useful depth players and he’s definitely one of them, but lower-end middle-pair defenseman seems to be his quality level, if you even want to call him that much, aren’t the kinds of guys you should be celebrating if you’re even moderately well-run. The Canucks are of course not moderately well-run, so fair play there, but does it really serve you to get your hopes up about a guy who can’t even crack this Canucks team’s top-three? I feel like probably it doesn’t.
4. Zetterberg?
Seems like there’s not a lot of info out there right now about whether Henrik Zetterberg — who very quietly had 11 goals and 45 assists in a lost season at age 37 — is going to play next season, which is weird.
I know everyone wants to give all due caution with respect to his health and, yeah, he’s 38 so that’s pretty old for a hockey guy of any quality, let alone one who probably doesn’t want to just be a token addition because of Who He Is.
But still, it’s weird that we might have seen Zetterberg play his last game (in the NHL at least) to literally no fanfare. Imagine if he just kinda retires? That would be bizarre.
(By the way, did you know Zetterberg doesn’t have 1,000 career points? He’s only at 960. Now granted, 22 other guys over 37 have scored 40 in a season in the lockout era, nine of them more than once. Zetterberg is absolutely good enough to do that. If he can stay actually play and his team doesn’t totally crap out on them. Neither of those things seem like guarantees. Bummer.)
3. Getting your hopes up
Speaking of the Canucks, there sure seems to be a lot of talk about whether Quinn Hughes, who apparently dazzled at rookie camp, will bail on the University of Michigan to sign with Vancouver before the season starts.
I could see it going either way, to be honest. I don’t think Hughes would struggle at the NHL level because of what he did at Worlds and how he plays a very modern game. But at the same time, what would he play in the NHL, like 15 or 16 minutes a night? At Michigan he would probably play more like 25-plus, get top power play minutes, all that kind of stuff.
It’s an interesting question as to what’s better for his development in the long run, but if it’s me making the call here I don’t try to sign him despite the local pressure. Let him make that decision if he wants to but I’m not leaning on him at all.
Zach Werenski, a guy I’ve compared Hughes to a lot (not just because they both went to Michigan), went back for a second season and now he’s really good. Would he have helped in a doomed season in Columbus a few years ago? I dunno, but probably not. Hughes is in the same boat. Why burn a year of his ELC when the team’s gonna stink?
2. Making a comeback
All this stuff about “Jaromir Jagr isn’t sure about an NHL return this season but it probably won’t happen” is some very “no kidding” stuff. The Flames bounced him, no one was interested because he was injured after that.
He says it’s his goal to make it back and I believe him, but he’s 46 and might not be able to stay healthy. Might be the end of the line, at least in North America. That, too, is a bummer.
1. The waiting game
The other thing I don’t like about arbitration is how spread out it is. That’s done for logistical reasons, obviously, but there are a few guys whose numbers will be really interesting if the process gets that far.
Brandon Montour today can maybe make a case for a decent chunk of change.
Jason Zucker on July 28 will be fascinating.
I wanna see that Cody Ceci number on Aug. 1 for a real solid laugh, probably on both sides.
Kevin Hayes on Aug. 2 and Mark Stone on Aug. 3 are two guys I bet get super lowballed by their teams.
And then on Aug. 4, that William Karlsson hearing could be hysterical.
Again, that’s all “if it gets that far,” which it so often doesn’t. But those are the guys where I’m really hoping it gets that far.
(Not ranked this week: Unsigned veterans.
And speaking of unsigned free agents, one of the things I always think sucks at this time of year, but which definitely makes sense from a team perspective, is when a guy like Toby Enstrom has to sit around all summer waiting for the phone to ring. These are guys who can play a bit but probably isn’t worth a huge multi-year deal or anything, and clubs just take a ton of caution with them.
Like obviously it behooves a team that has use for an early-to-mid-30s player to just give him a training camp invite in September, because it’s not like there’s a line of employers around the block for him. And it’s not just Enstrom, because there’s always a handful of guys who can meaningfully contribute but it’s easier to just give them a PTO and, maybe, a $1 million, one-year deal.
But for those guys? No good.)
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
(All statistics via Corsica unless otherwise noted.)
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:35f8e99c-6cae-38ba-abd4-b983199bb3a1
0 notes
Text
Trending Topics: What's next for Jacob Trouba and the Jets?
What’s next for Jacob Trouba and the Jets? (Getty)
At this point you have to think the new contract Jacob Trouba signed after going through arbitration — a split-down-the-middle, one-year deal worth $5.5 million — is a Band-Aid on a gaping wound.
All indications are that maybe, just maybe, Trouba might not have been appeased after his brief holdout-but-not-technically and then trade request in 2016. While the Jets have certainly improved a lot and addressed many of his concerns (such as playing him on the right side of the ice) since then, there’s now an air of, let’s say, uncertainty around what this one-year deal means.
Unfortunately for the Jets, a lot of people seem to think that this might all be a precursor to Trouba bolting town at the earliest opportunity; unfortunately for him he’ll be an RFA with arbitration eligibility again next season, but few NHLers would want to play on one-year arbitration contracts for the latter half of his entire RFA run? The question, then, is whether this is at all a tenable relationship.
Because if the Jets don’t think they’re going to be able to re-sign Trouba long-term next season — and he’ll be due a huge raise because he’s a high-end defenseman who will be locked up for his entire prime — then their options are immediately not that good in terms of long-term success.
Generally speaking you don’t give up a player as good and young as Trouba and get an equal return from the other team. You might be able to make up most of his value piecemeal but certainly it’s rare to go star-for-star or anything like it. Especially when you’re the team that has decided you can’t keep the player around in the first place.
There are a few options for Kevin Cheveldayoff here. The most immediate is also the one he probably likes the least: Trade Trouba before the season starts. I know, I know: He’s probably the best defenseman on one of the best teams in the league, and trading him would be a huge blow to that team’s likely success this season.
But you have to consider two things here. First, his actual dollars-and-cents value — at just $5.5 million AAV this year — is incredible. You would be losing a great, cheapish, young player but that only jacks up what you can reasonably demand, even if you are negotiating from a position that isn’t particularly strong. Second, you get out in front of potentially thousands of questions being asked of players, coaches, and front-office types in the organization all season long about Trouba, preventing him from becoming the kind of Poochie figure the Winnipeg media has traditionally sharpened its knives against.
This is an unattractive option, for sure, but it’s one that must be considered simply because if you think this team minus-Trouba-but-plus-maybe-two-other-goodish-NHLers is still going to be a potential top-five club. Certainly, it’s clearly in the top five right now, but the loss of a player like that hurts badly.
I can’t imagine a scenario in which this actually happens, but it has to be kicked around. See what’s out there for an offer and if someone just about knocks your socks off, then you have to really consider it, because you don’t want to let this get much farther without some kind of clarity. No player should be untouchable in this league, with the possible exception of Connor McDavid, so these are important conversations to have.
Another option: You can keep Trouba around headed into the season, let him be as good as he is for you, and hope all the success convinces him to stay. Maybe you can even work out an extension before the season ends. Obviously Cheveldayoff would know a lot better than me whether Trouba’s days in Winnipeg are all but over the second he sheds his RFA status, and that’s a big consideration there, but if you have even a bit of hope that a player this good can be convinced that this is a team worth staying for, you probably have to take it right?
The other consideration there is that if you don’t keep Trouba and potentially endanger the team’s viability near the top of a tough division, anything resembling a return to the Western Conference Final probably goes up in smoke. Is that something the Jets organization would accept as part of the cost of doing business with a player like that? I don’t know. Obviously the Jets are getting a little better at being able to retain high-end talent than their previous reputation might have suggested would be the case, but at the same time, it’s not like they’re really attracting it either.
That makes Trouba difficult, if not impossible, to replace, and could therefore topple the team’s ability to meaningfully compete for a Cup with this group. So just given where the team is right now as a group, keeping him seems to be the wisest and probably only reasonable course of action, even if it causes you a problem later.
That’s the most likely scenario. You keep Trouba around, let the season go how it goes. The Jets are obviously a top contender for the Cup (if they can get past Nashville in that divisional final again) and it’s important to remember that Trouba is technically still improving as a player given that he won’t be 25 until late February.
And if at some point in the season it becomes clear he’s not going to sign long-term (seemingly a distinct possibility), then you trade him at the draft or at least before July 1. The return certainly won’t be as big as it would have been if you traded him with two years of RFA status, but the idea of potentially entering into another acrimonious six-hour arbitration hearing to get one more year of would likely be a below-market AAV then losing him for nothing really can’t be entertained either, right?
The question of whether the Jets should have made a trade when the request was made two years ago is silly. He was an elite up-and-coming defenseman but he certainly hadn’t proven much with two injury-plagued seasons and only about a third of a point per game. In fact, that Trouba has only played more than 65 games just once in his career is another issue for Cheveldayoff to navigate here because that, too, probably brings down the resale value.
But when he’s actually on the ice, Trouba is incredible. Certainly one of the four or five best defensemen under the age of 25 in the league today. To lose him would be a crushing blow to the Jets’ D corps. You really have to ask, though, how much longer they can actually afford to keep him.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:5c5c37ae-54c9-3b19-84e8-591cd87ebb75
0 notes
Text
What We Learned: The Wild are going to be expensive, but will they be good?
The Wild have a large range of outcomes for 2018-19. (Photo by Jason Halstead /Getty Images)
Off the top of your head, where do you see the Minnesota Wild finishing in the Central this season?
They’re only technically in the same league as the division’s twin titans of Nashville and Winnipeg, which seem destined to finish 1-2 (you pick the order).
Of course, the Wild finished in that third spot last year; a distant third, mind you, with a 13-point gap between Winnipeg and themselves. And that came with some serious ups and downs; they were one of the worst possession teams in the league last year, and really only got to where they were because of an a PDO that was ninth-highest in the league.
And to be fair, they had a number of key players miss a pretty good amount of time. Jared Spurgeon only played 61 games. Zach Parise just 47. Nino Niederreiter checked in at only 63. Those are all very useful players and if they’re missing a quarter or close to half of a season, your on-ice results are going to suffer, especially if they miss a bunch of games at the same time.
But at the same time, Eric Staal scored 42 goals and 76 points. Jason Zucker cleared 30 in both goals and assists. Mikael Granlund had 67 points. Ryan Suter and Matt Dumba both hit 50 points from the blue line. Devan Dubnyk was once again top-notch at .918 in 60 appearances.
The problem for the Wild, then, is that the rest of the division seems to be improving, and it was pretty tightly packed around the middle of the Central to begin with. Nine points separated Minnesota from sixth-place Dallas, with Colorado and St. Louis between them. I would argue that all those teams improved this offseason, and Chicago should be (much) better if Corey Crawford is fully healthy, even if they’re not the Chicago of old.
Note that many of the Wild players I just listed as having enjoyed great seasons are, for the most part, outside their prime production years. Staal and Suter will turn 34 during next season. Spurgeon will turn 29. Dubnyk just turned 32. Other teams have aging producers as well, obviously, but these were some pretty outsized years from past-their-primes players, so it’ll be interesting to see what they can actually put together in 2018-19.
The real problem with the Wild, though, is the playoff format. The gap between Nashville/Winnipeg and the rest of that division is so significant in terms of on-paper quality (you can never guess when injury or quirky underperformance will rear their heads) that you’re better off finishing in the wild card spot in the division and taking your chances with the winner of the Pacific than finishing third and getting as brutally crumpled as the Wild did in the first round last year.
And with the new contract Matt Dumba signed over the weekend — five years with a $6 million AAV, the value of which I’ll get to in a minute here — this team is about $5.6 million south of the cap limit, and still have to re-sign Zucker, who has 111 points over the last two seasons. That scoring total ties him for 63rd in the league in that time, just ahead of Jordan Eberle and Sean Couturier, for instance, and likely means he’s going to be looking for a fat paycheck. That probably pushed Minnesota up around the absolute top of the league in terms of cap obligations.
(Also worth noting: There are few Bruce Boudreau stans in the hockey media bigger than me, but my man only has so much to work with, y’know?)
So this is a cap-limit team with a first-round-limit ceiling in the playoffs unless things go very heavily their way. This is, I guess, why the team brought in a new front office crew this summer; there’s a recognition that they’ve built a rather expensive team that probably reached its peak in terms of reasonable competition within the division, let alone the Western Conference or league writ large. And with so many of their top players (such as they are) on the wrong side of 30, one wonders how much longer this approach is going to be kept up.
Simply put, seventy-nine-point-something million dollars a year to get bounced in the early rounds of the playoffs again isn’t and shouldn’t be viewed as a tenable situation, but as I wrote repeatedly like four or five years, simply paying a lot of money to players who are above-average but certainly not stars in the league doesn’t make them worth their contracts. The Parise and Suter contracts don’t expire for seven more seasons and it’s a hell of a lot of money to spend on two guys whose impact on the ice is going to diminish.
The good news is there aren’t too many long-term commitments otherwise — Dumba and Niedereitter, both of whom are under 26, are the only other guys signed for more than the next three seasons — and the team does have some promising, youngish players to supplement the old guard. That Dumba contract is probably a little too much in terms of AAV, but he has 35 goals over the last three seasons and you gotta pay for guys like that, I guess.
Only 12 defensemen in the salary cap era besides Dumba have cleared 50 points in a season before the age of 24, so what are you gonna do? The term is fine, for sure, but Dumba doesn’t really move the needle in terms of underlying numbers; he’s still improving given his age, but paying a lot for that particular player seems more optimistic than rational. Because of those 13 defensemen, only eight repeated their 50-performances at least once before turning 28.
Nice to have young players who can make an impact, certainly, but the Wild fall into that classic trap of having a number of goodish, cheapish young guys and goodish, expensive old guys and very little in between, which doesn’t allow for a continuity of quality over years.
And with this team in particular, what even is that quality, really? Can you really afford to run out the clock with all these early-to-mid-20s and mid-30s players over the next three years if this is where you’re gonna get?
While anyone can get on a hot run and make a deep playoff push, the Wild don’t really have a realistic chance to do that unless they land outside their own division for the playoffs. Which is theoretically possible, but in actual practice you shouldn’t want to hope you finish seventh or eighth in the West to get a viable path to the Conference Final, where you’re likely to get clubbed anyway.
So the Wild, again, seem to be at a crossroads with the direction of their franchise, but none of their paths forward seem particularly favorable.
What We Learned
Anaheim Ducks: They’re officially bringing back, well, a version of the original Mighty Ducks jersey, which should just be their actual jersey anyway. This one kinda stinks but what are you gonna do?
Arizona Coyotes: God if the Coyotes are worth $500 million, what’s Vegas worth now, a year after paying that same amount of money to be a team?
Boston Bruins: The cool thing about if the Bruins got Artemi Panarin? He would be the second-best left wing on the team.
Buffalo Sabres: Casey Mittelstadt looks like he could soon be a difference-maker at the NHL level, which is probably a little ahead of schedule to be honest.
Calgary Flames: The Flames love putting useful young depth players on waivers for no reason, but at least they didn’t lose Brett Kulak for nothing like they did Paul Byron.
Carolina Hurricanes: I would not recommend making a 19-year-old rookie your No. 1 center, no.
Chicago: Jonathan Toews wants a big bounce-back season for himself and his team. I want a million dollars. Nice to want things.
Colorado Avalanche: The Avs are probably going to avoid arbitration with Patrik Nemeth and that’s the only guy they need to re-sign at this point.
Columbus Blue Jackets: *Craig Finn voice* Don’t let Oliver Bjorkstrand explode!!!!
Dallas Stars: You can say what you want about the Stars but there really aren’t that many bad contracts on the books.
Detroit Red Wings: Wow the Red Wings might actually play talented kids instead of mediocre 29-year-olds in important situations. Signs and wonders.
Edmonton Oilers: Put Joe Gambardella in the NHL. Yes. Do it. Think about where he went to college and don’t be a coward!!!
Florida Panthers: Vinnie Viola is selling his mansion in New Jersey and I’m buying it.
Los Angeles Kings: A great mid-July pastime is to look at NHL signings and guess what percentage of them are AHL-quality goons. Here’s one now.
Minnesota Wild: The Wild have a new AHL head coach and it seems like when you’re hiring guys out of the Penguins coaching system you’re making a good decision.
Montreal Canadiens: This is brutal.
Nashville Predators: Yes. Thanks for asking.
New Jersey Devils: Only roster eight defensemen if you’re gonna play seven every night. Which, by the way, you should do that.
New York Islanders: Frankly, gang, I don’t know that they have much of a choice in the whole “should we tank?” discussion.
New York Rangers: When the richest and biggest-name teams in the league are openly saying they’re “rebuilding” that should be a good indication that it’s a perfectly okay thing for every team to do when needed.
Ottawa Senators: This is going really great.
Philadelphia Flyers: Man, that Forsberg-to-Nashville trade effectively got the Flyers Scottie Upshall, Ryan Parent, Scott Hartnell, and Kimmo Timonen plus a third-round pick? Good lord!
Pittsburgh Penguins: Okay, sure, Derek Grant. That’s someone.
San Jose Sharks: Chris Tierney? That’s even more someone.
St. Louis Blues: This is a take where I go, “Ahhhh, maybe?” Which kinda defeats the purpose of the take.
Tampa Bay Lightning: Really feels like everyone in Tampa is just sitting around going, “Well jeez hey when’s this Karlsson thing happening? Soon? Soon. Gotta be soon.”
Toronto Maple Leafs: Andreas Johnsson‘s one of those guys where it’s like, “Yeah he’s probably a real player.” He went point-a-game in his second AHL season and 1.5 a game in the playoffs. Granted, that’s on a stacked team, but he’s 23 and a guy who can score like that is probably a good bottom-six option at an absolute minimum.
Vancouver Canucks: I would not want to be in the business of extending Alex Edler, despite his long-term status with the org.
Vegas Golden Knights: It’s really too bad the Golden Knights didn’t have to change their name. That would have been so funny.
Washington Capitals: Yeah, no.
Winnipeg Jets: I’m gonna write more about Trouba this week but: yikes.
Gold Star Award
Maybe this makes me a kook in hockey circles but every NHL team should have as many jerseys as they want. Who cares as long as they’re cool or weird or whatever? I don’t like the Ducks’ new “classic-inspired” thirds but at least they’re trying something. More throwbacks would be a good thing.
Minus of the Weekend
This is some kinda take.
Perfect HFBoards Trade Proposal of the Week
User “Kshahdoo” loves this time of year.
STL gets Panarin (but only with extention)
Toronto gets Parayko
Columbus gets Nylander
Signoff
Help! Help!
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
(All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.)
#_uuid:47ac8521-b818-3623-9b54-36431b9dd47b#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert
0 notes
Text
Trending Topics: What should Columbus do with Artemi Panarin?
Columbus has a decision to make when it comes to the Breadman (Jamie Sabau/NHLI via Getty Images)
The Artemi Panarin drama in Columbus continues to roll on.
First there was the revelation that the player and GM Jarmo Kekalainen met in France early in the week to discuss the decision not to re-sign with the Blue Jackets this summer. That’s fair enough on both sides; the team wants to make sure this elite driver of offense can be locked up as soon as possible for as long as possible, while the player wants to keep his options open.
Then, it came out that not only did Panarin not want to negotiate right now, and also doesn’t want to negotiate after training camp opens because he, predictably, wants to focus on hockey.
It certainly puts Columbus in an interesting spot, because this is now something like the Matt Duchene situation in Colorado last year, or the current one in Ottawa aroudn Erik Karlsson. Something has to happen to get this guy moved out of town because it’s an untenable situation.
The problem, apparently, is that Columbus isn’t likely to get back any kind of helpful asset unless the team to which Panarin is being traded would have a reasonable assurance that it would be able to re-sign him before the end of the season. So if Panarin won’t negotiate after the season begins, the pressure is on for Kekalainen to get a list of teams where the player would be willing to go for the long-term, and start negotiating with them directly.
The idea that Columbus would keep Panarin to start the season, maybe hang onto him until the deadline or longer, and then let him walk for nothing is something to consider as well.
If Columbus isn’t going to get anything of particularly significant value for this coming season — when they should be fairly competitive in the Metro if not the Eastern Conference as a whole — they have to at least consider the idea of keeping him just to be competitive.
It’s easy to forget that Panarin scored 82 points in 81 games this season, and the next-closest scorer on the team was Seth Jones, 25 points back. That’s a huge gap, and one that didn’t get a lot of talk around awards season; he got one fourth- and one fifth-place vote for the Hart, neither from Columbus-based writers, and that doesn’t really seem fair to a guy on a team whose next-highest-scoring forward only had 48 points.
So if Kekalainen can’t make a deal in the next seven weeks or so, and Panarin’s trade value drops to the point that you’re only getting picks, prospects, and probably a cash dump for him, can the team actually afford that? It’s an interesting question because this was a very good team last year despite the lack of non-Panarin offense, but they already scored eight goals below the league average. Maybe you say the maturation of a few players on the roster helps bridge that gap, but Panarin was on the ice for almost 44 percent of his team’s goals last season, and either scored or had the primary assist on more than 26 percent of them.
This is a guy you can’t give away for futures if you want the current team to be any good. No other player on the Columbus roster has the ability to make that kind of a difference. Probably none of them are even close.
So if Columbus can’t get anything for him to help this season, they basically have to keep him unless they really feel like missing the playoffs. Simply put, they cannot expect to go into this season and remain competitive by bumping every left wing on the roster up a spot in the rotation.
I guess it depends on what Kekalainen thinks this team can do with Panarin in the fold, right? Because if you look at this group and say it could come out of the Metro and at least make the Conference Final if things go right (and that’s an extremely plausible scenario as far as I’m concerned) then the playoff revenues alone maybe make it worth the risk. This is, again, a good young team that has plenty of potential to be dangerous in the playoffs.
But it’s a big gamble knowing that if you’re, say, first or second in the division and third or fourth in the conference around mid-January, you probably aren’t going to trade him and he’s probably going to walk on July 1. If you basically have to keep him at the deadline and then you run into a hot goalie in Round 1 and only get two or three home dates out of it? Well, crap. That probably wouldn’t be as valuable to the franchise as the picks and prospects you could have pulled if you traded him around the deadline or, indeed, at some point this summer.
The hard negotiation deadline of “at the start of training camp” might be an attempt to get Columbus to ante up with an eight-figure AAV or something. Panarin can very reasonably make an argument that he’s worth this kind of money; he’s seventh in league scoring over the past three seasons behind former linemate Patrick Kane, Sid Crosby, Connor McDavid, Nikita Kucherov, Blake Wheeler, and Jamie Benn. Panarin can reasonably make a claim to a good chunk of Kane’s offensive explosion as well as his big season with no meaningful help in Columbus last year. And unlike Kucherov, who just re-signed on a massive contract in Tampa, he doesn’t have any lower-cost RFA years left to give.
In an ideal world, you re-sign him now and sort out the other money issues later. There are plenty of too-big contracts on the team for players that don’t have as much of an impact as Panarin, so if you need to get rid of David Savard somehow, well, that’s the cost of doing business.
It is, unfortunately, not an ideal world, so Kekalainen is probably looking at some tough decisions.
Sure, if Columbus can find a destination where they can get a good or even very good player back, then trading him now is worth the hit. That player isn’t likely to be as helpful as Panarin, but the roster overall is very solid and they would probably still be a playoff team with a guy who might max out around, I dunno, like 65 points.
And yeah, you also don’t want a whole season in which every player on the team is asked every day, “What’s gonna happen with Panarin?” And that’s for sure what would happen. There’s almost no good outcome here short of an extension. Players this good just don’t come to any franchise, let alone Columbus, all that often.
But if you’re looking at nothing but futures anyway, you might as well roll the dice and enter the season knowing you’re in a tough spot. Given the makeup of this group, the alternative is, somehow, a lot worse.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.
#_uuid:171b611c-840e-3746-bebf-485f00580653#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert
0 notes
Text
Puck Daddy Bag of Mail: Chiarelli showing restraint?
General manager Peter Chiarelli has avoided his usual blunders of late. (Dave Sandford/NHLI via Getty Images)
I’m bored, man.
It feels like we’re all just sitting around watching the clock on a Karlsson trade for the second full week in a row and at this point it feels like something that’s more likely to happen in September than the next six weeks.
And six weeks is already a long time, so here are are. Really seems like hockey people hit the cabin sooner than usual this year, I guess. So here’s a bunch of questions about other stuff, and only one Karlsson thing because it would have made me mad otherwise.
Let’s have fun out there:
Megan asks: “Has Peter Chiarelli truly exercised restraint this offseason, or is there another reason the Oilers haven’t panic-traded Ryan Nugent-Hopkins for a pick and the corpse of Marc Staal?”
The Oilers haven’t really done very much at all, period. I think Tobias Reider and Michael Hutchinson were the only really notable NHL pickups here, right? Plus they got backup goalie Mikko Koskinen.
And I think that’s mostly fine. You can chalk a lot of the team’s problems last year up to tough luck and some bad decisions on Chiarelli’s part (obviously), but there wasn’t a lot of wiggle room for the team to add anyone who could really help.
Like I said above about the Karlsson trade maybe happening in September, the summer isn’t over yet, so the Oilers might still have some moves, but if you want to call that restraint or maybe just learning from past mistakes, then okay sure.
Kelly asks: “Should the NHL be doing anything in the summer to generate interest? More of the Shanahan summits? A summer league similar to the NBA?”
I almost answered a similar question last week but I didn’t because my answer would have been “Of course” and that’s about it, but let’s really talk this out.
The NBA summer league is an unexpectedly popular version of the classic NHL tradition of 30 different teams having their own rookie/prospect orientation camps.
For those who don’t know the NBA too well: Instead of scrimmaging against each other and otherwise just working out under the watchful eye of team personnel, the NBA actually has their young players participate at least one of three summer leagues (Utah Jazz, Sacramento, and Las Vegas).
Utah and Sacramento only bring a handful of teams, but all 30 participate in the Vegas version. They play three games in Vegas, then participate in a single-elimination 30-team tournament, meaning guys will play as many as 10 games over the course of a couple weeks.
Everyone has fun and it can really provide a good glimpse into the future of the game. Past Vegas league MVPs include Dame Lillard, Jonas Valanciunas, and Lonzo Ball.
There is no reason for the NHL not to do this besides the expense and some of the logistical issues with college players who aren’t under contract, but one wonders about the “Why not?” factor. Get all 31 teams anywhere you like and do the same schedule as the NBA does. People are more than happy to pay for summer league games, so this could be a revenue source if you do it in, oh I don’t know, say, maybe, just putting this out there, perhaps, Toronto???
Brandon asks: “Do you believe a team can win the Stanley Cup without a superstar (excluding goalie) or is a rebuild like the Rangers are doing pointless unless they find a way to get a superstar as part of it?”
You need superstars, full stop. Name a team that’s won a Cup in the cap era without an established elite player. Maybe Carolina (Eric Staal was a total wild card) but other than that almost all of them had at least two elite players, and often more.
The point of tanking, or “rebuilding” if you like, is to get a superstar out of the draft. The lower you end up in the standings, the greater the chances of picking in the top three, which is where most ultra-elite talents come from. That’s not the only way to do it, of course. Most of Pittsburgh’s best players were top-five picks, but certainly not all of them. On the other hand, Alex Ovechkin was the only true “lottery” pick on the Caps. Toews and Kane were both top-three picks but Duncan Keith and Corey Crawford certainly weren’t.
Basically you can pull elite players from anywhere in the draft — see also: Datsyuk and Zetterberg — but you get the best chances of doing that by picking higher. So if you know you’ve reached a dead end with your current group, it’s better to well and truly blow it up (to the extent that you can in a league with a cap floor) and really invest in your AHL team. That’s what Toronto did, and it seems to have worked out pretty well so far.
Mitch asks: “If you were in charge of the Sharks as of May 1, how would you have run things?”
Honestly, I think they probably did they best they could have possibly done with the options available to them.
They were reportedly in on Tavares, Kovalchuk, and maybe even a Karlsson swap via trade, plus they pulled off those twin deals with Mike Hoffman. Obviously adding any of those guys they didn’t get would have been a big help, and to be left holding the bag with all that unused cap space isn’t ideal, but there’s no penalty for not-using cap space.
This is still a very good team in a very bad division, so the kind of flexibility they probably have to add talent at some point this season is significant. Even with all their old players getting a year older, they were never likely to suffer or anything, and it’s important to be in on good players even if you don’t get them. The thing to not-do here is to say, “Well we missed out on Tavares so let’s make a panic signing and overpay for the fourth-best center on the market instead.”
They’re fine!
Christine asks: “Could a top college hockey program win a game against the Arizona Coyotes?”
This is like that old “Could Kentucky beat the Sacramento Kings?” question.
The answer is kinda the same: Almost certainly not. Hockey’s fairly random and the Miracle on Ice is a perfect example of the randomness of a single game between a relatively weak club and one of the world’s best. I can assure you that even if you think the Coyotes are the worst NHL team by a mile, they’re significantly better than virtually every other professional hockey team on earth. At absolute worst, they’re like 34th-best in the world.
But let’s put it this way: In a seven-game series, the Coyotes would annihilate even the best college team. It might not be a sweep but the college team would be lucky to win more than once.
While almost all good college teams have guys who could absolutely be effective in the NHL right away, the extent to which their best starting lineup — probably Clayton Keller, Derek Stepan, Richard Panik, Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Jason Demers, and Antti Raanta — is better than, say, Minnesota-Duluth’s top group is obscene.
Joshua asks: “You’re GM of the Rangers this year, what do you do this summer to make them a top 4 team in the East – extensions, trades, waives, FAs, the whole thing. I know it can be done.”
I think if you can swing trades for Crosby, McDavid, Karlsson, Doughty, and maybe a handful of middle-six forwards, you’re in pretty good shape.
German asks: “When is Karlsson getting traded or is this going to turn into a Duchene thing?”
Okay so that thing about a trade in September makes a lot of sense to me, for sure, but I can absolutely see this turning into a dragged-out process in which everyone is miserable. Only because it’s the Senators.
If you get to U.S. Thanksgiving and there’s no resolution here (which would be a hell) then this might indeed stretch all the way to the trade deadline. That’s some seventh-circle stuff, but there’s a non-zero chance it happens.
I still think he’s gone before the season starts but man, this organization is exactly incompetent enough to let it go on much longer than that.
Andy asks: “You praised the Hurricanes in the Hamilton trade and there’s big optimism around rookies like Necas and Svechnikov that are expected to make the team this year – but none of it matters if our starter is stopping 88.8 percent of pucks. What do you expect from Darling in a make or break year?”
I can’t imagine an NHL goalie of any skill level playing behind a defense and forward group of that quality for two seasons and going .880-something. Now, whether that means Darling gets back to league average is a different story entirely, but the number of wins versus even a replacement-level goalie he cost them was significant.
Put another way, I think Darling can absolutely bounce back behind a team that doesn’t actively hate its coach. The team missed the playoffs by 14 points, which is a ton, but Darling and Ward alone accounted for about 11 of those points versus two league-average goalies.
And they’re improved this summer, overall. Darling doesn’t even need to be great for Carolina to make the playoffs. Of course, he and Mrazek are potentially big gambles in net again, but I’m bullish that things can be just fine.
Michael asks: “With Quinn/Montgomery hires, plus further NCAA hires, what does this mean for the future stability of NCAA coaches being hired into the NHL?”
I’m not really sure what you mean by “stability,” but it depends on how those guys do. I think the jury is still a little bit out with even Dave Hakstol after a few years, so it’s tough to say.
But the fact that three guys have jumped right from college to the NHL in the last three years, after the NHL went decades without having that happen, portends good things for high-end coaches going right from college to the bigs going forward. And if those guys have some amount of sustainable success at the game’s highest level, well, more NHL teams are likely to start thinking “outside the box” until it’s no longer outside-the-box thinking.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless noted otherwise. Some questions in the mailbag are edited for clarity or to remove swear words, which are illegal to use.
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:644d6bf3-8a0b-3a2b-a871-6356c192e26a
0 notes
Text
Puck Daddy Countdown: Could the Senators, Canadiens solve each other's problems?
A Karlsson-Pacioretty swap is an interesting idea but that doesn’t mean it’s a good one for either team. (Getty)
6. Undoing a good thing
A thing the Flyers announced last week was that they’re considering moving Claude Giroux back to the middle of the ice this season.
Now, I wasn’t sure last year that moving him away from the middle of the ice (because maybe it was hurting his productivity) was a good idea, and then he ended up being an MVP candidate. So y’know, the idea that you’d move him BACK? I dunno man.
Obviously the Flyers don’t have a ton of centers on the roster, right? Couturier is awesome and the addition of James van Riemsdyk really crowds the left side of the ice if you keep Giroux there as well. But this guy just saw his production increase from 58 points in 2016-17 to 102, and it’s like, “Well I bet there’s a pretty good reason for that.”
Maybe that reason isn’t that they moved him to the left wing, but like I said with the 3M line in Calgary, why would you mess with what is pretty clearly a successful mix on that top line. Obviously a lot of Giroux’s scoring can be attributed to some pretty good luck, but still! You don’t see too many teams say, “This change that made a guy into a 100-point scorer? Let’s hit CTRL+Z on that one.”
Curious to see how it works out, that’s for sure.
5. That Adam Henrique contract
I truly don’t see where Adam Henrique is worth $5.85 million a year from ages 29 to 34.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s definitely a good player, but that’s “high-end No. 2 center” money and it’s tough for me to say for sure that he’s a high-end No. 2 center. Currently, it’s the 32nd-largest AAV for a center. That ranking will likely drop next summer, but nonetheless, it’s a bit high.
He scores 40-plus points a year pretty reliably but his underlying numbers over the last three seasons are really not very good in comparison with what his teams did when he was off the ice.
Plus, among the 90 forwards with at least 3,000 minutes at 5-on-5 since 2015-16, Henrique ranks 78th in primary points per 60. For most of that time, he was just past his prime. The idea that he’s going to keep up that level of scoring as he ages out of his 20s and into his early 30s? Not well-founded, that’s for sure.
So I’m uncertain where the value in that deal comes from if you’re Anaheim.
4. Wild ideas
Saw something on TSN the other day that the Canadiens and Senators may be able to solve each other’s problems by just trading their captains.
Obviously that couldn’t be a 1-for-1 deal because Erik Karlsson has a lot more value than Max Pacioretty, but it’s, uhh, intriguing for sure. With Shea Weber out until December, the Habs need a high-end defender and they don’t come much higher-end than Karlsson. And while the Senators would probably want a defenseman in addition to some scoring pop, there aren’t many guys who score at the rate Pacioretty does.
But could this actually work? The Senators would, once again, be kicking the can down the road because much like Karlsson and Kyle Turris before him, Pacioretty would want big money next summer and why would anyone on earth choose to tether themselves to this franchise long-term? Can you imagine if the Sens traded a generational talent for a good goalscorer who would almost certainly want out immediately?
Plus, for the Habs, why on earth would Karlsson sign there after this season? And are the Habs on Karlsson’s no-trade list? (Pacioretty doesn’t have any trade protection, not that he cares too much right now, you figure.)
You’re just swapping problems to divisional rivals in what are almost certain to be lost seasons for the respective franchises. It’s an interesting idea but that doesn’t mean it’s a good one for either team. Which, hey, given how these teams are run, is why it’s probably going to happen.
3. Getting very mad at the Coyotes
Ahhhh, can you believe the Coyotes made use of their cap space to acquire a good young player? I hate when that happens!
Now, to be fair, it happens a lot, but as has been pointed out by plenty of people this isn’t a case of the team using this contract to sneakily get above the salary floor. They were already well above it.
People just like to get mad at the Coyotes for existing and I get the impulse but also like, take it easy.
2. That Jussi Saros contract
Over the last two seasons, 53 goaltenders have played at least 2,500 minutes in all situations. Of that group, only nine have exceeded their expected save percentages (based on the quality of shots they faced) by 10 points.
Those goalies: Sergei Bobrovsky, Philipp Grubauer, John Gibson, Juuse Saros, Antti Raanta, Jon Quick, Corey Crawford, Roberto Luongo, and Carter Hutton.
You’ll note that a number of them are guys who were backups and moved into starting jobs — or at least 1b roles — this summer. Saros, fourth on the list at a .924 save percentage versus .909 expected, is potentially one of them.
His three-year contract carries an AAV of just $1.5 million and could provide the Preds with insane value when Pekka Rinne’s contract expires after this coming season. You never want to project a guy’s backup numbers as directly correlating with what he’d do as a starter, but that’s an impressive list to be on and well, the Preds have the personnel to make his job awful easy.
Even if Saros is only league-average, getting that for $1.5 million over the next three seasons would be amazing, especially because this team will need to re-sign Ryans Hartman and Ellis, and Kevin Fiala, next summer as well.
(Man, how does a team this good have 15 players signed for 2019-20 at just $56.2 million already? Come on.)
1. An interesting approach
New Rangers coach Dave Quinn hiring Greg Brown and David Oliver to be his assistants is something you don’t see much in the NHL.
These are two guys with plenty of assistant-coaching experience at the lower levels of the game (Brown with Boston College for more than a decade, Oliver with Lake Erie for just two seasons) but nothing on their resumes at the NHL level except for Oliver being Colorado’s director of player development for the last four years.
Non-traditional hires, to be sure, from a guy who was himself a non-traditional hire. One might normally expect a team with a coach who has as little big-league experience as Quinn to lean on him to hire guys named like Gord Toilet who has been an NHL assistant coach for each of the last 80 seasons and gave Gordie Howe his first cigarette or something.
But nope, two guys with no real experience at this level. Pretty bold move, but if you’re a team like the Rangers with plenty of money and a clear mandate to rebuild from the ground up, you have the luxury of fooling around with traditional thought and maybe getting somewhere with it.
Definitely something to watch this season, but knowing Quinn and Brown in particular from their college days, I bet it works out.
Also, the fact that Brown — long considered the heir apparent to Jerry York as the head coach of Boston College’s legendary program — made the jump here kinda indicates to me that, ahh, York ain’t retiring any time soon even though he’ll be 73 next week. Pretty interesting, to me.
(Not ranked this week: Ray Emery.
Seems like a lot of people in hockey took this one particularly hard. It was just horrible news.)
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
(All statistics via Corsica unless otherwise noted.)
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:a0bbba65-12d5-3c90-85e1-4f7c869c5fdc
0 notes
Text
Trending Topics: With new forwards in the fold, will Calgary break up 3M line?
Where does Elias Lindholm fit amongst Calgary’s lines? (Getty Images)
The Calgary Flames knew they had a lot of areas they needed to improve this summer, and perhaps the most pressing was the team’s forward group.
To that end, GM Brad Treliving brought in Elias Lindholm (via trade) and James Neal (via UFA signing). These are two perfectly good top-six forwards who can be productive in a way that many of the Flames’ other forward options really haven’t been in the past two seasons.
If you want a list of their top-six forwards during that time, talent-wise, the Flames could really only offer five names: Johnny Gaudreau, Sean Monahan, Matt Tkachuk, Mikael Backlund, and Michael Frolik.
One might also argue for Micheal Ferland, who went to Carolina in the Lindholm/Hamilton/Hanifin trade, but I would note that if you only rack up 66 points playing a huge chunk of your minutes with Gaudreau and Monahan, that’s the barest amount of work you can actually do and still be considered an NHL player.
Anyway, bringing in Lindholm and Neal brings the grand total of legitimate top-six forwards on the Flames roster to seven, which you’ll note is one greater than the six they need. It’s never a bad thing to have seven top-six forwards, of course. All the best teams do. But where the Flames in particular are concerned, the dynamic has the potential to create an interesting ripple effect for the roster.
Over the past two seasons — which are delineated here because that’s when Tkachuk came into the league — the Flames’ top two lines have been pretty clearly defined. The top line was Gaudreau, Monahan, and literally any guy the coach felt wouldn’t fall down too often. The second line was the 3M line of Tkachuk, Backlund, and Frolik. Both were, to one extent or another, pretty effective. None of those five named forwards scored fewer than 69 points over the past two seasons, and while Frolik’s lack of offensive production is arguably a problem, it’s also worth noting that both of his linemates averaged close to 50 points a season in these last two campaigns.
Moreover — and this is the important part — the 3M line is and has been a possession juggernaut of a quality rarely seen in the league. Over the last two years, only eight lines have been together for at least 800 minutes at 5-on-5, and these three lead the way in ice time at almost 1,360 minutes. Their expected goal difference over that time is pushing 57 percent. Just as a point of reference, Boston’s big line of Patrice Bergeron between Brad Marchand and David Pastrnak — the best line in the league — is only a little more than half a percentage point ahead of the 3M boys.
Which is to say, this is probably a line you don’t want to break up, even if their actual goals-for number (55.3 percent) is a smidge below what they “should” score based on expected goals.
More to the point, they dramatically underperformed expected goals in the Flames’ no-playoffs 2017-18 campaign (58 percent expected, 46.8 percent scored) due largely to a killed combination of rotten shooting luck and worse goaltending, which added up to a PDO of just 96.8.
So the question for the Flames, and specifically new coach Bill Peters, is a simple one: What do you do with both Lindholm and Neal? One of them is going to have to take bottom-six minutes if you don’t break up the 3Ms, which you shouldn’t do.
It would seem the natural fit for a trigger man like Neal is to play alongside Gaudreau and Monahan because, well, they’re going to create a lot of open looks and if someone who is a proven scorer without elite talent gets put with elite talent, that’s only going to result in more goals.
Plus, the Flames extended Lindholm on a new six-year deal with an AAV of $4.85 million just yesterday. Solid number, maybe a little too long on the term; that’s the cost of doing business. But that’s not the kind of contract you give to someone who’s going to be getting third-line-and-second-power-play-unit minutes, y’know? (Not that Frolik, at $4.3 million against the cap, is exactly making bottom-six money either.)
Let’s talk this out, then. Frolik played more than 200 minutes away from his normal running buddies last season (and almost 620 with). All of Tkachuk and Backlund’s underlying numbers suffered, but their goals-for percentage did not. In fact, they went from getting outscored by three to outscoring by one, which is a swing of about 1.2 goals per 60 minutes.
Pushing a negative goal difference into positive territory is always a good thing, so it seems as though Frolik would be the natural pick to be bumped to the third line, with the option, one supposes of changing it back if things go sideways with one of the other lines.
But again, you’re talking about a roughly 11-point swing in expected and actual goal difference, and one wonders if the 3Ms scored as they did in 2016-17, if the Flames are even pressing this hard to sign two top-six forwards or trade Dougie Hamilton at all. I mean this is the difference between perceived and actual performance; if a baseball player hits it right at the center fielder or shortstop all season, it doesn’t matter how often he wasn’t striking out. People, even in baseball’s mostly smart front offices, aren’t gonna look deep enough to see his BABIP was x far below the league average if that x is a big enough number.
It seems to me the Flames perhaps went searching to solve a problem they didn’t have, but again, having talent on the roster is certainly preferable to not having it. I wouldn’t break up the 3M line with a gun to my head, but I at least see where the decision-making comes from here.
In fact, I even see the argument for moving Frolik, who’s a good, solid two-way forward, onto a line with Sam Bennett and Mark Jankowski in hopes of making them both more productive and less likely to concede goals. But whether that actually works out depends a lot on Lindholm’s performance. Not that you’d move Backlund for Lindholm (right???).
I don’t think they really counted on Tkachuk to be as effective over two seasons as he has been, and Backlund’s big-money contract is directly attributable to that effectiveness. This is a unit that went from just okay and maybe a little underwhelming individually to incredible thanks mostly to what Tkachuk brings to the table.
There are, potentially, a number of creative and effective solutions here, and Lindholm being able to play both center and the right wing really improves the team’s flexibility. The club had to do something about the previously awful forward group and it has. One just hopes they have the good sense to stick with what works extremely well even if luck sometimes goes sideways.
Put another way, the Flames have undoubtedly gotten better up front. But they’ve got one hell of a gift horse in that 3M line and it really seems like Treliving is looking it straight in the mouth.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:b76fdb70-c271-3d4d-988f-cdc335fe743d
0 notes
Text
What We Learned: The Marc-Andre Fleury contract is inexplicable
There’s no doubting the importance Fleury has to the organization as a sort of goaltender-slash-spokesman, but it seems they put the latter title first in signing this contract. (Getty)
I have been trying to wrap my head around the deal Marc-Andre Fleury signed with Vegas since it was first announced.
There is not a universe in which it makes any kind of sense.
For one thing, the Golden Knights signed Fleury a year early, and coming off a career-best season in which he dragged an otherwise not-great team to a Cup Final. As a general rule, you don’t want to pay guys who get bad teams to places no one thought they could go the kind of money commensurate with reaching those levels.
It should be obvious to everyone on earth that Fleury is not as good as he was in the regular season or playoffs. This was a .927 season — the highest of his career by a decent margin — followed by a .927 playoff that was much, much more impressive before he totally melted down against Washington. That kind of outsized outlier performance screams “Beware,” but George McPhee refused to heed that call.
Instead, he shackled his club to a goalie that, while popular in the city and among his teammates, is signed until he’s well past 37 years old. At a $7 million AAV.
To be fair to both sides here, Fleury has almost inexplicably gone .920 over his last 200 regular-season games, and .920 goalies have to get paid, but they don’t have to get paid a year early when you’re only bidding against yourself, and they absolutely shouldn’t get paid through their age-37 seasons. The fact of the matter is that it’s quite likely Fleury turns back into something resembling his career average, which is right around the league average.
And to give a little more credit to both sides here, the money probably doesn’t matter that much because if Vegas hasn’t changed its plans for building slowly through the draft, trades and so on, then you gotta spend money on somebody, and the top line, plus Paul Stastny, plus Fleury seems like a perfectly fair place to do it.
There is, of course, no use arguing whether the money or term are good. Neither are. Everyone knows that. You can’t justify paying a career-average goaltender $7 million dollars for his age-35, 36, and 37 seasons. Full stop. Unless this guy is Dominik Hasek — and he of course is not — this is a nonsense signing.
Maybe people won’t notice so much if Fleury doesn’t perform well next season — or any of the three after that — because Vegas isn’t likely to keep having the kind of offensive success it did last year, but even if you’re getting better-than-average goaltending, it won’t be so much better that Vegas can reasonably sustain the success it had last year. They probably won’t come close.
That likelihood creates a lot of problems, not the least of which is that we don’t know what the fan support in Vegas looks like when the team isn’t any good. Not that they haven’t cultivated a solid base or anything here, and not that people don’t love Fleury in particular, but if this team finishes in the bottom-10 next year, the year after that, etc., will people keep showing up? Fleury was always going to be the poster boy of the franchise, regardless of how he did last season, so now just as everyone else seems to have increased their own internal expectations for how good this team can be going forward, this contract might do the same for Fleury.
Again, if he’s average, or worse, at some point in this contract, one wonders how the revelation that this was a bad contract is actually taken. People in this sport are willing to throw all but the absolute very best goalies under the bus, and this particular goalie now has an untradeable contract.
More to the point, though, the issue is that Vegas just put Fleury into a tie for the third-highest goalie cap hit in the league. He now trails only Carey Price and Henrik Lundqvist, and is dead even with Tuukka Rask. I don’t think anyone on earth would confuse Fleury’s career numbers with any of those three players, and Lundqvist, a guaranteed first-ballot Hall of Famer, the best goalie of his generation by a good distance, is the only one who signed in his mid-30s.
I guess the primary reason I don’t understand this contract is that it didn’t have to happen. Vegas wasn’t under any type of time crunch to sign him before a certain date (well, I guess technically July 1, 2019, but they had dozens of weeks) and seem to have wrung no type of hometown discount from getting out in front of this issue now. They bought as high as humanly possible on a goalie who, unlike another recent goalie signing in Connor Hellebuyck, isn’t likely to maintain even previous levels of performance. Everything after 34 or 35 is a total guessing game. Guys can go from great to bad in a single offseason. And put simply, they often do.
So it’s difficult to say what Vegas was doing here, except making a PR signing now, on an otherwise quiet day for the league. There’s no doubting the importance Fleury has to the organization as a sort of goaltender-slash-spokesman, but it seems they put the latter title first in signing this contract.
What We Learned
Anaheim Ducks: Why would you turn to Adam Henrique to spark your offense? He’s perfectly good but 50 points seems like his absolute ceiling.
Arizona Coyotes: The Coyotes faced what could fairly be considered “undue backlash” for that Hossa trade. Like, I get it because they trade for dead money a lot but they got a good player out of it and it doesn’t really matter. Stop bailing out Chicago, sure, but whatever.
Boston Bruins: The idea that the Bruins would shake up the defense, perhaps by trading Torey Krug, does not seem well-considered.
Buffalo Sabres: Gotta keep locking in those 2015 BU Terriers.
Calgary Flames: I easily can see the Flames being a very bottom-of-the-barrel playoff team next season, for sure. Not quite certain where that actually gets them, but they could do it in that division. For the record, I can also see them missing by a dozen points.
Carolina Hurricanes: Yeah when you put it this way: Adding de Haan and Hamilton to your blue line is a pretty good upgrade for just about anyone in the league.
Chicago: I really hope Corey Crawford is over all his health issues but man, imagine what happens to this team if he isn’t. Yikes.
Colorado Avalanche: Speaking of which, Grubauer being a 1b in Colorado seems pretty good but also who really knows?
Columbus Blue Jackets: That’s some nice value for Oliver Bjorkstrand. He seems like he could turn into a very useful forward.
Dallas Stars: Yeah, sure, the Stars should trade for literally everyone. Why not.
Detroit Red Wings: Really wonder how much more room Anthony Mantha has to grow here. Another 24-goal season would be a nice resume-builder.
Edmonton Oilers: Well, “impressive” is one word for it.
Florida Panthers: We’re at the “I’m writing about AHL depth signings” part of the summer already? Good lord.
Los Angeles Kings: This headline is the reason the phrase “don’t put the cart before the horse” was invented.
Minnesota Wild: Yes they absolutely have hit their ceiling. Definitely.
Montreal Canadiens: The Habs keep signing first-round picks, which isn’t a bad idea because they tend to be talented players, but also: Ehhhh.
Nashville Predators: Haven’t seen much this summer to convince me shouldn’t be the Cup favorite again this year. Doesn’t mean they’ll win but this is a great team despite having no additions.
New Jersey Devils: Oh come on.
New York Islanders: Get ready for Barzal to have way too much expectation heaped on him in the next few years. Good luck kid.
New York Rangers: Imagine thinking there’s a “right” guy to be your enforcer who isn’t “nobody.”
Ottawa Senators: No, don’t do it Brady!!!
Philadelphia Flyers: Stop getting your hopes up about prospects based on rookie camp performances. Come on.
Pittsburgh Penguins: Giving Daniel Sprong a chance to actually play at the NHL level seems like a good idea. He was ridiculous in the AHL last year as a rookie.
San Jose Sharks: Jeez there are a lot of jokes to make here.
St. Louis Blues: Ah yes I have to agree: The Blues’ recent failures are definitely Vladimir Tarasenko’s fault.
Tampa Bay Lightning: Brian Bradley being on the Lightning’s Mount Rushmore is absolutely indefensible.
Toronto Maple Leafs: The Leafs keep making nice, cheap signings and that’s what you gotta do if you have a bunch of expensive elite players.
Vancouver Canucks: Hard to put yourself in the mindset of being a coach who has to run a mess of a team for the full 82 knowing you’re not coming into the playoffs.
Vegas Golden Knights: Important to get out in front of those high expectations now.
Washington Capitals: Totally have my popcorn ready for that Tom Wilson deal.
Winnipeg Jets: Mark Scheifele is great but he would never ever get anything resembling a John Tavares contract.
Gold Star Award
That Phil Danault contract is like a Magic Eye puzzle. You really have to not think about it to see the reason why it’s a value.
Minus of the Weekend
Rest in peace, Ray Emery. Truly awful news.
Perfect HFBoards Trade Proposal of the Week
User “Jokerz89” is an agent of chaos.
Something along the lines of Krug, Backes, Lauzon, Senyshyn, and a 1st for Nugent-Hopkins and Klefbom
Signoff
Well Seymour, you are an odd fellow, but I must say: You steam a good ham.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
(All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.)
#_uuid:b924f8be-48fd-32d8-90b0-c747911e166d#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert
0 notes
Text
Trending Topics: Connor Hellebuyck and paying for goaltending
Connor Hellebuyck just made himself some serious coin. (Jason Halstead/Getty Images)
Connor Hellebuyck became the first of Winnipeg’s notable restricted free agents to get a new contract this summer, signing Thursday for six years at $6.167 million AAV.
It’s a perfectly reasonable number for a 25-year-old goaltender who was a couple years away from UFA status and who was a Vezina finalist this season. The deal puts him sixth in cap hits among goalies, which might seem a little high given that Hellebuyck has exactly one season as a starter under his belt. But teams always pay out the nose for big contract years, and he’s probably still improving given that he’s only 25.
The fact is, though, that from the Jets’ perspective, a .920-plus save percentage seems like a reasonable expectation based on his complete CV, from college to the AHL to his career .917 as an NHLer who played his early years behind a notoriously leaky defense.
Yes, .920 is a lofty expectation in reality; over the last five seasons, only seven goaltenders have played at least 120 games and also posted a .920 save percentage or better. That Hellebuyck is now the sixth-highest-paid netminder in the league says that’s what the Jets want from him.
For reference, the seven goalies north of that number are John Gibson, Carey Price, Antti Raanta, Corey Crawford, Sergei Bobrovsky, Roberto Luongo (what a marvel!), and Tuukka Rask. And to give you an idea of how tight things are at the very top of the league, the gap between Gibson and Rask is about three extra goals per 1,000 shots faced. Of course, the gap between that and the league average is an additional five pucks per 1,000 shots, so margins are already pretty thin.
Which is, I guess, the issue with teams giving goaltenders big money. The guys who are the absolute very best make a huge difference for their teams, but the margins are closer than you might think. Take Price, for example. It’s reasonable to say he’s the best goalie of the last five years: .923 over 248 games behind a team that hasn’t been that good.
He allowed just 574 goals on more than 7,400 shots, but over a five-year period, he only prevented the Canadiens’ opponents from scoring about 46 goals versus what an average goaltender would have done with the exact same workload. This is a guy who gets paid $10 million against the cap, and when healthy is probably worth that. Winning and losing in hockey is done on razor-thin margins, so a guy who saves you fewer than 10 goals a season versus an average player is surprising valuable.
Plus, as the old saying goes, “Goalies are voodoo.” Which is to say that their performance is very difficult to predict. Let’s circle back to Hellebuyck: He was .918 in limited appearances as a 22-year-old and looked for all the world like he was the Jets’ surefire starter. Except he sucked in his first chance at the No. 1 job, going .907 in 56 appearances simply because Winnipeg didn’t have any better options. But then last season, he rebounded to be .924 in 67 games and was a big part of the reason the Jets were so difficult to play against from October to May.
So the Jets just gave their goalie with fewer than 150 games of NHL experience the sixth-biggest cap hit in the league, and are clearly counting on him to be the goalie he was most recently, instead of the one whose career save percentage before 2017-18 was well below the league average.
On the surface, most of the goaltending stats (save percentage minus expected save percentage, goals saved above average, etc.) kind of indicate that among NHL starters, Hellebuyck is pretty good — certainly in the top 15 in the world — but maybe not worth as much as this new contract.
No one can know what the Jets are really getting here, but they’re making an educated guess that the nearly 4,300 shots Hellebuyck has faced tells the story regardless of the most recent performance, and that based on aging curves and all that, the team will get more of the .920 version than the .910. And sure, plenty of goalies have had a good year or two then flamed out; the Penguins have to be concerned about that with Matt Murray, whose performance this year versus that of Marc-Andre Fleury’s unrepeatable .930 with Vegas led to a lot of tiresome “did the Penguins choose the right goalie” pieces.
But a reasonable basis for comparison here is to compare Hellebuyck to his peer group. Take all the U-25 goalies in the league over the last three seasons and say “What does Hellebuyck look like there?” Again, aging curves are important to keep in mind, because U-25s are technically still improving, and finding ones with the kind of workload Hellebuyck has shouldered in his two-plus seasons is not all that common. In fact, he’s second among U-25 goalies in terms of minutes played, only about 240 behind John Gibson.
And he’s tied for third in save percentage among the group of seven U-25 goaltenders who played at least 80 games over the last three seasons. His .917 is dead even with Andrei Vasilevskiy and Matt Murray, both of whom I think we’d say are really good goalies (though again, Murray was abysmal this past season), behind Gibson and Robin Lehner, who clock in at .923 and .921, respectively.
But in the end, the reason you pay a lot of money for star players is that they drive goal difference in your direction more heavily than anyone else, right? And because goalies are more valuable in terms of doing that, based on the amount of minutes they play, it’s reasonable to argue that all but the highest-paid goalies are, in fact, undervalued in the market.
Gibson is likely to cash in when his contract is up next summer, probably to a greater extent than Hellebuyck, and Tampa can still expect strong value from the Vasilevskiy deal for the next two seasons before he gets insanely expensive. Murray’s current deal also lasts for two more years and I’d probably bet on a bounce back season, though to what extent is hard to guess; his early career numbers behind an elite team are so good that to set them as a good expectation is probably unfair to him.
As a general rule, if you’re posting any save percentage at or above Hellebuyck’s career average of .917, you’re probably worth a boatload of money. But it’s also easy to understand why anyone would look at any goalie contract over $5 million and say, “Ehh, that’s risky.” But in terms of the raw cost of every point in the standings, any performance resembling another Vezina-worthy campaign will pay for itself very, very quickly
Murray showed this year that the bottom can drop out at any second and there’s no guarantee that it ever comes back, and the reams of criticism Rask has absorbed for half a decade despite being one of the best goaltenders of his generation, show that unless a goalie is .920-plus literally every year, people are always going to have their doubts.
Hell, that kind of performance wasn’t even enough to keep Roberto Luongo in Vancouver, and it took a second Stanley Cup before anyone acknowledged that Corey Crawford was anything close to an elite goaltender.
So again, I get the due caution people want to pay a goalie contract, but if you have a goalie you like, you gotta pay to keep him around. And Hellebuyck has given Winnipeg relatively little reason to dislike him both in his first three seasons and for the next six.
It may seem like a little too much money for a goalie that might just be a little better than average, but maybe overpaying is preferable than the alternative. And based on its goaltending history, Winnipeg should know that better than anyone.
—
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:2ad62637-9430-3502-a87a-cb2dc7a00ada
0 notes
Text
Puck Daddy Bag of Mail: Should we expect the Devils to regress?
Should we expect the New Jersey Devils to fall back out of the playoff picture? (Getty)
Now we’re just kind of picking through the rubble.
All the speculation is pretty much over and we’ve seen pretty much every notable player land somewhere. There are a number of restricted free agents that still need to be signed but, this being the NHL, it’s not like there’s any real concern anywhere regarding an offer sheet.
The questions, then, are pretty much all over the place, with people worrying about keeping players long-term, having let guys walk, and the general path forward for a number of teams that might have designs on actually doing something next season.
Let’s go:
Louie asks: “A lot of Flyers fans/commentators say they’d rather lose Simmonds in free agency than trade him at the deadline due to the effect that trade would have on the locker room. To what extent should GMs consider ‘leadership’ and ‘chemistry’ versus asset management?”
One need look no further than what the Canucks and Islanders have done so far this summer when it comes to adding intangibles to understand that yeah of course most GMs probably overvalue those things.
But the specific argument around Simmonds isn’t a particularly good one because unless you feel like you’re absolutely on the verge of winning a Cup, or at least having a reasonable shot at doing so, then there would be no real point to losing a player that good on July 1 for nothing.
Simmonds is really good. Had a bit of a down year and he’s almost 30, but hey that happens. He would absolutely be an asset to the Flyers down the stretch. But the Flyers aren’t likely to be Cup-competitive, so the idea that you’d keep Simmonds around when another, more competitive team (or at least one with a more inflated sense of self) might give you a pick and a prospect for him? That’s silly.
Maybe it’s a thing where you go “well the other players would think you’re throwing in the towel on them,” and that might be true. But your job as a GM is to make the team better not keep your players feeling good 100 percent of the time.
You can’t let coveted players walk. Period.
Jason asks: “What three teams will be the worst this upcoming season and which one will turn it around first?”
As of right this second, the bottom three looks something like Ottawa, Vancouver, and Detroit, I think. Definitely Ottawa (the absolute bottom of the barrel), but you could talk me into a couple of teams for that second- and third-worst spot. Vancouver might have enough young talent to keep them from being really really awful but I’m not betting on it.
And with that said, yeah, gimme the Canucks as the first team to “turn it around” from that group. Not that they’re gonna win a Cup or anything but getting back to “being watchable” seems in the cards for them given the good young players they have in the pipeline. You just need to hope management doesn’t sign four more bottom-six forwards on multi-year deals to crowd the talent out of the lineup too much.
John asks: “If Tampa lands Karlsson is it fair to call them the Golden State of the NHL?”
Yes insofar as no team has had a collection of talent like that in the cap era, with the exception of the 2006-2009 Red Wings teams. With Karlsson, they would have three legit first-pairing defensemen, four or five legit first-line forwards and an All-Star goalie.
The Warriors, of course, have probably two of the top three (Durant and Curry), three of the top 15 (Thompson), and four of the top 25 players (Green) in the world. And not that I’m counting on Boogie Cousins being anything resembling his former self but he was in the starting lineup for his team last year so if he’s anything close to like 85 percent of his abilities — which, again, I doubt — he could be a top-50 player as well.
The Lightning don’t have that. Because the nature of hockey dictates that nobody really can.
Steve asks: “What do the Boston Bruins need to do to win The Cup?”
I’m not being facetious here: Their best path comes in finishing fourth in the Atlantic but ahead of the fourth-place Metro team.
If they have to play, say, Toronto in the first round then Tampa in the second, that’s going to be almost impossible for them. It would be for any team. I’ve said it before but the divisional playoff format screws them very hard; they’re a top-five team in the league but they happen to play in a division with two other top-five teams. Not particularly fair but that’s life.
To win in those first two rounds, they would probably need someone besides the Marchand-Bergeron-Pastrnak line to score in the playoffs. Just a thought.
Southern Point asks: “How truly impactful are Calgary’s offseason moves?”
They added one of the worst coaches in the league whose team quit on him in Carolina, so that’s probably not a great move to start out.
I like most of their UFA moves here. They lost aboslutely no one of consequence, and I like the additions of Czarnik, Ryan, and Neal (though maybe not so much on those specific contracts). I think all those guys help shore up the Flames’ forward depth problems.
So does Elias Lindholm, for that matter, but the loss of Micheal Ferland chips away at the size of that upgrade, and the Hanifin-for-Hamilton exchange is very unflattering to Calgary.
Overall I think they improved on the ice, albeit not as much as they probably believe, and maybe took a bit of a step back behind the bench (which, that’s bad because Glen Gulutzan was horrible too).
Their real problem is that their goaltending is still likely to be quite bad next season and I don’t know what they can do to address that. So even in a division that still isn’t very good, I don’t know that this is gonna be anything close to a playoff team.
Katie asks: “Why aren’t the Golden Knights going harder after Erik Karlsson when the have the cap space?”
They know what the price is and didn’t seem comfortable paying it when they thought they were an insanely good team.
You can argue about whether they overvalued their own assets in that alleged deal (which they 10000 percent did) but if they weren’t comfortable paying it then, they probably are even less comfortable negotiating it with Tampa and Dallas (at least) in the picture.
Maybe George McPhee is confident that these other teams will drop out and he can get a decent price for a player Ottawa absolutely positively has to move. Maybe McPhee, who stayed relatively quiet in free agency this summer, just realizes that adding mega-talents isn’t the best long-term option for his still-building club. Maybe he liked Karlsson as a one-plus-year rental but not as a guy they’d keep around long-term.
I’m just speculating there but none of those answers would really surprise me. As always, just because you have cap space doesn’t mean you have to use it. And besides, even if the Golden Knights get involved in the trade as one of those third-party teams to facilitate Karlsson-to-Tampa-or-Dallas, gets a guy like Bobby Ryan and a pick or prospect out of it, that’s not a bad way to go about things.
Jonathan asks: “What teams botched their chance at the worst record next year?”
I think the only answer here, as a team that could have been really bad but probably won’t be, is Montreal. Buffalo probably wasn’t going to be bottom-of-the-barrel again with Dahlin and some of the other additions they made this summer anyway (although, ya never know I guess).
The Habs have had an abysmal offseason and the fact that they’re probably going to have to trade a really good player in Max Pacioretty is only going to make things worse. The reason I say they’re screwing up their chance at a top pick, then, is that they aren’t likely to trade Carey Price.
When you have an elite goalie, it’s almost impossible for even the worst team to be as truly bad as they could have been, and he’s gonna be worth at least 12 points in the standings if he’s anything resembling his career average.
Jen asks: “Have the Devils gotten significantly worse this summer”
*Obama voice* Well look.
They haven’t added anyone of note. Eric Gryba, that’s about it. He’s not good. The problem is what they lost: Brian Gibbons (perfectly okay bottom six guy), Michael Grabner (overrated but scores a lot), John Moore (let the Bruins have him at that price), Jimmy Hayes (who cares), and Patrick Maroon (who I like!).
While none of those guys are particularly great, the collective loss is a tough one to absorb. More problematic, though, is that the Devils made the playoffs (by a hair, mind you) mainly because Taylor Hall had the best season of his career.
Can he do anything like what he did last year again? I mean maybe. And probably Nico Hischier will improve. And maybe Cory Schneider will stay healthy and be his above-average self again.
But also, ehh, I’m not holding my breath.
Marcel asks: “Instead of a NTC how bout a Must Trade Clause where a player can demand to sent to one of a certain number of teams after a few years if he’s not happy. “
Yeah this would be very good but I don’t know why a team would agree to it.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless noted otherwise. Some questions in the mailbag are edited for clarity or to remove swear words, which are illegal to use.
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:c200c806-3569-34ae-ae7b-07d532b42b49
0 notes
Text
Puck Daddy Countdown: Happy trails Alex Burrows
Alex Burrows had himself a very fine NHL career. (Jeff Vinnick/NHLI via Getty Images)”n
7. The Habs
On the one hand, the news that Shea Weber is going to miss probably the first two months of the season is a major bummer for a team that was already dealing heavily in major bummers.
Guys want out, and who can blame them, and now any hope that Weber could be anything resembling a No. 1 defenseman after playing just 26 games last year are potentially dashed. It’s not so much that he’s going to miss a quarter of the season, so much as it is he missed like two-thirds of last year’s too.
This is just starting to feel like the Hockey Gods’ way of piling misery on a team already buried in an avalanche of it. “You want to trade the $10 million hospital donation guy for an older, worse player? Let’s see how that works out for you.” Weber’s odds of being as effective as he was before these injuries are probably pretty low. He’s turning 33 in about a month and guys don’t come back from these kinds of injuries playing the same way they used to, right? More concerning for the Canadiens is that he’s locked in for nearly $7.86 million AAV (although at much less than that in terms of actual dollars) through…….. 2026.
I did NHL Network radio last Friday and they asked what potential solutions the Habs could come up with here. Short of trading Max Pacioretty for a top-three defenseman, which would create its own problems, there’s nothing I can see. There are no particularly good defensemen left on the UFA market. You just have to bump everyone up in the lineup and grit your teeth for the first two months of the season. What a nightmare.
Did Marc Bergevin run over a witch’s dog? Like, man.
6. A reason to leave
It’s probably not a good sign when you announce a cheap four-year contract for a player and the immediate response from a bunch of hockey diehards and professional journalists covering the sport for a living is, “Who the hell is that?”
Such was the reaction when the Islanders gave Ross Johnston four years at $1 million AAV. But it’s understandable: Johnston got more years on this deal than he has career NHL goals. He’s 24, had almost 200 PIMs in just 62 games across the AHL and NHL last season, and was in the ECHL for a spell as recently as 2015-16.
This is a guy who is, uhh, bad. He’s bad. No other way to say it. An insanely ineffective player who only got signed because he averages like two hits a game and Lou Lamoriello loves guys like that.
People wonder why John Tavares left? The Leafs said they’d sign Matthews, Marner, and Nylander. Lamoriello probably said he’d get to play alongside Val Filppula.
I mean honestly, look at what Lou has done since July 1. Traded for(!) Matt Martin, signed Leo Komarov for FOUR years, locked in Filppula, extended Ross. Like, what on earth is going on with this franchise?
This team might as well not play this season. They’re gonna be bottom-three, easy. How are you not insanely depressed if you’re an Isles fan? How do you not look at Tavares leaving and go, “Well no kidding.”
5. Back and forth
I think the worst thing in the history of hockey is this Karlsson trade and all the rumors about “Tampa is the frontrunner, now it’s Dallas, no it’s Tampa again, ah it’s Dallas.”
Especially because as Steve Yzerman said on the Kucherov extension’s conference call, he never really felt like the trade was close to being done, let alone completed pending the trade call. Now, that might be a guy throwing out a smoke screen, for sure, but at the same time, maybe not.
This is going back to that thing I said a few weeks ago about not really believing all these things until things are well and truly settled. At this time of year, people have an interest in selling you these rumors, and you’re a lot more likely to bite on them because there’s less going on in the sport.
What would really be funny is if Vegas came out of nowhere and made the trade after a relatively quiet free agency period. I’m rooting for that as much as I am to see Karlsson on Tampa.
4. Being best buds
Because the Toronto media is absolutely awesome and good, they’re already ginning up controversy about how John Tavares and Auston Matthews are NOT FRIENDS AT ALL and ACTUALLY ENEMIES WHO HATE EACH OTHER.
Imagine being dumb enough to believe these kinds of rumors. Because it was like three weeks ago that they were trying to be like, “Auston Matthews is plotting to murder Mike Babcock click here for proof,” and then both of them were like, “C’mon guys,” so we’ve moved on to the Battle For the No. 1 Center Spot: This Time It’s Personal.
I hope Tavares and Matthews just start holding hands all the time so Steve Simmons and Damien Cox end up having nervous breakdowns.
3. Wanting out
So it turns out the Blue Jackets aren’t doing too good with Artemi Panarin these days because he doesn’t really know if he wants to live in Columbus and play for this particular team for the next eight years.
One wonders how much a certain coach has to do with that (ha ha ha), but also like, it’s a small market and a team that historically isn’t very good. I thought they were well above the league average this past season, thanks in large part to Panarin coming aboard, but they still lost in the first round (again) and they’ve still won a grand total of five playoff games in franchise history.
Wouldn’t you at least want to look at what your options are these days? Especially because of how much teams are willing to give difference-making UFAs a la Tavares.
Not that Panarin is Tavares, necessarily, but this is a guy who’s been in the league for three years and he’s seventh in scoring over that stretch. You don’t think a 27-year-old Panarin couldn’t push $9 million with just about any team in the league in the same kind of UFA environment?
Unless I were absolutely convinced I was on one of the absolute best teams in the league, I would 100000 percent be totally willing to go to market. It’s not even a hard decision.
2. Super team likers
Hey speaking of which, shout out to the Bolts for locking in Kucherov for eight years at a relative bargain price of $9.5 million AAV. Most of that’s in bonuses but who cares. He’s 25 and he’s second in scoring over the last two seasons behind Connor McDavid, who makes considerably more than that.
Kucherov for-sure left money on the table here, but that’s the price you pay to be meaningfully competitive for a Stanley Cup for three, four, five years. Plus the fact of the no-state-income-tax thing. Plus the fact of not having to pack up your life. Plus the fact of $9.5 million being a hell of a lot of money regardless of how much more might have been available.
But the thing with this contract, and also the rumors about Karlsson wanting to dictate his landing spot, and also the Panarin rumors, maybe we’re starting to see the NHL going in the direction of the NBA. Maybe elite talents are starting to realize they can punch their ticket anywhere they want, and they want to play with other great players and have a shot at a championship while also getting rich.
I’ve long felt hockey players are too willing to commit to bad teams long term out of, what, loyalty? Maybe they’re finally figuring out that this isn’t necessarily the best path forward. And that might be what finally shatters the stultifying parity that’s made this league so damn boring in the cap era.
1. Alex Burrows
Happy trails to a guy who didn’t make his NHL debut until he was almost 25, and still somehow managed to play more than 900 career games there. He scored 200-plus goals and 400-plus points, largely as a result of getting to play a huge chunk of his career with the Sedins.
But while I understand why people don’t like the player, for obvious reasons, you gotta respect the fact that he’s probably the best linemate the Sedins ever had and made a whole ton of money for a guy who played parts of four different seasons in the ECHL.
Plus he did the Marc Crawford impression that was so good and is probably the best ball hockey player ever. Have a good one.
(Not ranked this week: Slowing down.
Well we’re not even to July 15 and it already feels like nothing’s gonna happen for the rest of the summer. Probably the Karlsson trade will keep us all busy for a few days but otherwise what are we really looking forward to? The damn Patrick Maroon signing? Cool.)
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
(All statistics via Corsica unless otherwise noted.)
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:49968df0-75e1-3428-bdea-c8c4ba7ae4a6
0 notes
Text
Trending Topics: Rumored Karlsson trade creates juggernaut, at least for a year
(Getty)
Okay, so that rumored Erik Karlsson trade to Tampa hasn’t happened yet.
At least, that’s the case right now, as I write this early on Monday afternoon. I am quite sure that my writing these words will ensure the trade happens as soon as I send this to my editors. If so, much of what I’m about to say could be rendered moot because of who may or may not be moved in the trade, from the players to potential third-party teams involved.
But suffice it to say that Tampa is unlikely to move someone who is an actual difference-maker in this potential swap. They have the good fortune, if you want to call it that, of having given out some bad deals in recent years that could, if necessary, be included to make the money work. Your Dan Girardis, Ryan Callahans, Braydon Coburns, and maybe even Tyler Johnsons — who’s good but arguably not worth $5 million AAV — could be swapped out.
There are, of course, way too many no-trade and no-move clauses for Steve Yzerman to navigate here (Tampa has 10 rostered players with at least some sort of protection, which is an insane amount, including all four of the guys I just mentioned), but that’s where the third team probably comes in.
Add in the fact that one assumes the trade will almost certainly include a good young roster player (Mikhail Sergachev, most likely) and you can see where Ottawa may be set up to add talent and actual dollars against the cap without hurting Tampa’s ability to remain a top team in the league.
However, the question quickly becomes how long that status lasts.
A lot of the guys Tampa has signed for 2019-20, when any new contract for Karlsson would kick in, are already quite expensive, and that’s before you figure in the fact that some guys likely wouldn’t be coming back. This is a team that needs to not only re-sign Karlsson if this trade goes through, but also Nikita Kucherov and Brayden Point the same summer, with room left over to extend Andrei Vasilevskiy at some point before 2020-21 (the same offseason the Callahan contract expires).
Tampa is, obviously, a well-run organization, but they’re not that far away from the cap ceiling right now and might be able to avoid taking on too much money in a Karlsson trade. However, they only have 11 guys signed for 2019-20 and those people already cost $56.3 million against the cap. That’s before extensions for Karlsson, Kucherov, and Point, all of whom will likely be looking for big raises.
This is all well-known, and if it means they can’t bring 32-year-old Anton Stralman back next summer, well, 29-year-old Karlsson seems like a pretty good upgrade, if an expensive one.
I’m more concerned about this year, however, because the extent to which a Tampa team with Karlsson, Kucherov, Point, Stamkos, Palat, Miller, (maybe) Johnson, Hedman, McDonagh, Stralman, and Vasilevskiy could run roughshod over the league almost can’t be overstated.
Assuming everyone is able to stay healthy, the fact that you could put either Hedman or Karlsson on the ice for, what, 52 minutes of any given game is going to give you a massive competitive advantage. Recall, if you will, the extent to which the Anaheim Ducks dominated the NHL when they had Chris Pronger and Scott Niedermayer in 2006-07. Those are two all-time elite defensemen, both of whom were into their early 30s, and played 27 minutes a night, each closer than should be comfortable to being point-a-game from the blue line (Pronger at .89 points a night in 66 games, Niedermayer .87 in 79).
That Ducks team had a good offense, too, but most of those we think of as being big players for the franchise were really only coming into their own. Ryan Getlaf and Corey Perry “only” combined for 103 points. It was 94-point Teemu Selanne, at 36, who drove the offense alongside these two elite defensemen.
Meanwhile, the 2018-19 Lightning are coming off having scored the most goals in the league last season (296, with the next-closest 19 goals back of that number, and the highest number since 2008-09). They also allowed the 13th-fewest in the league.
Adding a multiple-Norris-winning defenseman who has repeatedly scored at a 70-plus-point pace in his career to that mix is absurd. They were plus-60 last year without the best defenseman alive. It’s entirely conceivable that the Bolts would post a plus-80 goal difference depending upon who gets swapped out. Only three teams since 2007-08 have done that. All three won the Presidents’ Trophy, though none of them won the Stanley Cup.
Again, adding a guy who could cost you $11 million or more against the cap is going to make it a tight squeeze for a team that already has two players making at least $7.875 million AAV. It’s hard to justify having three defensemen alone making more than $25 million. But when the defensemen are this good (i.e. if Ryan McDonagh is your No. 3) that sets you up nicely to be a dominant team for at least a few more years regardless of who else you have to shed along the way to make all the money work.
Think of the power play. Think of the 5-on-5 offense. Think of all the highlight-reel goals. Think of how little scoring they would allow at the other end. It might require a “parental discretion advised” warning coming out of every commercial break.
Even the very best teams in the league aren’t guaranteed a Cup, of course. All those elite goal-difference clubs played a combined 34 playoff games. But it’s fair to say that if Karlsson does indeed end up in Tampa, we’ve never seen a collection of talent this good on a single club. Somehow, having Anton Stralman be your fourth-best defenseman is an unbelievable accomplishment.
It might only be for a year, but adding Karlsson would make the Lightning appointment viewing for all 82 games and the entirety of their playoff run. It’s difficult to imagine just how good, and fun, they’d be.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:aab1c141-c927-3829-9f9c-ef12ded7c567
0 notes
Text
What We Learned: The NHL's other looming free agent apocalypse
Blake Wheeler will be difficult for the Jets to retain. (Jonathan Kozub/NHLI via Getty Images)
After all the attention that has been understandably paid to Toronto’s current and future salary cap situation, it got me thinking about other elite teams and what their cap situations look like going forward.
Obviously Tampa is going to have some big issues dealing with their roster, even before the potential addition of Erik Karlsson, simply because they have so many elite and very good players. They’re already close to a cap crunch of sorts, and next summer they will have to strike new deals for Nikita Kucherov, Yanni Gourde, Brayden Point, Anton Stralman, Slater Koekkoek, and Jake Dotchin, among other players.
It’s therefore likely that seismic changes are on the way for that roster, but this is something that’s already pretty broadly acknowledged league-wide. However, there’s another top team that is going to be staring down some serious issues in the future and could end up having to make some difficult decisions in short order.
Winnipeg currently has the lowest cap obligation in the league as of this writing (less than $52.7 million, giving them about $26.8 million to play with right now). As we await word of new contracts for seven restricted free agents. While most of them aren’t going to be too expensive, the new deals for Connor Hellebuyck and Jacob Trouba will likely be significant. Altogether you can expect those seven guys to pull perhaps $20 million against the cap, which leaves the Jets with plenty of room this year.
That is, one supposes, a benefit of finding a buyer for Steve Mason’s contract and Paul Stastny bouncing for Vegas with no replacement in sight except probably from within.
But it’s next year that’s the problem. The Jets will enter the 2019 offseason with about as much money in cap obligations as they have this year, but a good chunk of the core likely locked up long-term. However, they will also have to re-sign Patrik Laine and Kyle Connor among their RFAs, and both will probably be quite costly. Laine especially could potentially command at least Leon Draisaitl money, if not more (one supposes this depends heavily on what the Leafs give their pending RFAs). Again, these are deals the Jets can comfortably fit under the cap.
But it’s the UFAs that pose some serious problems. Can they reasonably afford to retain or find replacements for Blake Wheeler and Tyler Myers? You can say what you like about Myers’ contributions to the team, especially vis a vis his $5.5 million cap hit, but he’s at least a second-pair defenseman and those seem to be getting fairly expensive these days; you can probably get an upgrade at the same price point, but not as much as one might think, even if the cap goes up substantially again (which it probably won’t).
However, you absolutely won’t find a reasonable replacement for Wheeler, who’s a point-a-game guy and makes just $5.5 million against the cap. So the question becomes how much do you pay him, since he’ll be 32 to start the new deal, and what do you reasonably expect from him? Because if you’re committing multiple years and a raise to a player that far past 30, you might be in a bit of trouble sooner than later.
And while there will be a few intriguing UFA forwards potentially hitting the market that same summer (Tyler Seguin, Jeff Skinner, Jordan Eberle) the question, again, becomes what you pay those guys to hopefully be almost as good as Wheeler.
The issue for the Jets isn’t so much the salary cap as it is the fact that they’re a budget team. They have a small venue in a small market and have traditionally shied away from really approaching the cap ceiling. Last year they were more than $5 million short of it, and the season before that their obligations were about $6.5 million short. So the question becomes not only if the Jets will be able to keep those guys, but if they have the stomach to push that close to the cap ceiling (likely over $80 million at the very least) to do it. They have never exceeded $70 million in cap obligations, and though they probably will this year, one wonders if there’s a natural stopping point south of whatever the cap’s upper limit is.
If so, that creates some potentially uncomfortable questions for Kevin Cheveldayoff. On the one hand, the Jets are likely to be a top-five team in the league again this season and that carries with it the need to be as competitive as possible with an elite roster. But can this team really afford to potentially let Wheeler and/or Myers walk in free agency and get nothing in return?
There is only one bad contract on the roster that could be moveable, because that ill-advised Dmitry Kulikov deal expires after 2019-20 and you might be able to talk someone into taking your $4.33 million bottom-pair defender if you sweeten the pot or pull off a stunning con.
I don’t know that there’s a comfortable answer in what to do here, especially if there’s an internal budget that must be adhered to. You probably can’t trade a Wheeler-type player if you’re in the thick of a divisional title and potentially going after the Presidents’ Trophy. But if you keep him, don’t win the Cup, and then maybe have to let him walk in free agency, that’s going to be tough to deal with organizationally.
Again, you don’t often get multiple years of a guy scoring a point a game for just $5.6 million, so the Jets have enjoyed a significant luxury. They likely won’t get anything like it again in this league.
This is, to be sure, a rich man’s problem. When you have so many good players it becomes difficult to pay them all, it’s a lot better than the alternative. And Cheveldayoff has really put the Jets in a position where they have relatively few contracts on the books that could even be considered “iffy.”
How he maneuvers out of this fix will be pretty telling when it comes to the future of one of the best young teams in the league.
What We Learned
Anaheim Ducks: The Ducks’ power play wasn’t that good the past few years, but is it really something they can fix?
Arizona Coyotes: It’s good that we’re getting more stories about how it’s not easy to be a person of color and play this sport at a high level.
Boston Bruins: Yeah, pretty hard to disagree with this assessment.
Buffalo Sabres: Jack Eichel has been in the league too long to be able to change his number without also changing teams. It’s unacceptable.
Calgary Flames: If Spencer Foo makes the Flames’ roster, that’s probably not a good sign for the Flames’ depth.
Carolina Hurricanes: You really have to like that Calvin de Haan deal but at the same time, it’s not some sort of huge game-changer.
Chicago: Bowman hasn’t made a move to improve this team’s not-good defense, which seems like it’s not a good idea.
Colorado Avalanche: Where did anyone on earth get the idea that John Tavares might have even considered signing with Colorado? Come on.
Columbus Blue Jackets: That was a nice little extension for Boone Jenner. Can’t be mad at it.
Dallas Stars: If you get the chance to add Erik Karlsson, you take it regardless of what’s being asked. But Jeff Skinner wouldn’t be a bad consolation prize.
Detroit Red Wings: It’s possible that Filip Zadina would be able to play in the AHL if he doesn’t make the Red Wings roster, but he’ll probably make the Red Wings roster.
Edmonton Oilers: Who could have seen this Lucic deal turning into a nightmare on the day it was signed? No one!
Florida Panthers: The Panthers are gonna be a cap-limit team. Probably should have kept those Vegas guys, eh?
Los Angeles Kings: The Kings have invested in a startup with four employees and no headquarters that makes it cheaper to make good ice for hockey rinks. I’ll believe it when I see it.
Minnesota Wild: Remember when it used to be a big scandal to suggest the Wild didn’t have a lot of impact talent on the roster? Well…
Montreal Canadiens: This Shea Weber thing is so awful for the Canadiens and Marc Bergevin specifically. There are EIGHT years left on this guy’s deal.
Nashville Predators: The Preds just made a big free agency mistake.
New Jersey Devils: No. Next question.
New York Islanders: This is one of those “whether he likes it or not” things.
New York Rangers: A thing teams with cap space should always do is try to get in on trades as third-party negotiators, take on some salary and get picks and prospects out of it. Always use as much cap space as you can if it gets you something.
Ottawa Senators: This headline is bleak.
Philadelphia Flyers: Based on where Christian Folin went to college, this is a very savvy pickup.
Pittsburgh Penguins: Barring a bounceback year from Matt Murray (possible), the Pens are firmly outside the top five teams in the league but also probably somewhere solidly in the top eight.
San Jose Sharks: Nice little contract for Dylan DeMelo. Term and money look good for both sides.
St. Louis Blues: Dmitrij Jaskin never really panned out as expected, huh? He only had six goals last season.
Tampa Bay Lightning: Pretty amazing how fast you can go from “we might be done for the summer” to “we might trade for one of the best players alive.”
Toronto Maple Leafs: We’re still gonna act like the Leafs have the flexibility to trade for a defenseman of note, huh?
Vancouver Canucks: Im… improve the power play? Am I reading that right?
Vegas Golden Knights: I love this Colin Miller deal. Really good player signed cheap for his entire prime.
Washington Capitals: Real nervous to see how this Tom Wilson deal works out. It’s gonna be bonkers.
Winnipeg Jets: This is bold prognostication.
Gold Star Award
This is very nice from Vegas.
Minus of the Weekend
Just trade Karlsson already!!!
Perfect HFBoards Trade Proposal of the Week
User “xNogaitx” has it figured out.
To Montreal:
Carl Hagelin (4M)
Daniel Sprong (750k)
2019 1st round pick
Conditional 2021 2nd round pick *
To Pittsburgh:
Max Pacioretty (4.5M) – Retained 2M
Paul Byron (1.16M)
Signoff
No mother, it’s just the Northern Lights.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
(All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.)
#_uuid:1ade93a4-6f4f-3361-98e8-1f1d29025cf5#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert
0 notes
Text
Trending Topics: You have to take the Leafs at their word
Auston Matthews and William Nylander are re-signing priorities for the Maple Leafs. (Kevin Sousa/NHLI via Getty Images)
By all accounts, the Toronto Maple Leafs’ leadership group laid every card in the deck on the table in courting John Tavares.
Whatever Tavares wanted to know about the team’s present and future plans, Kyle Dubas and Co. were more than happy to accommodate him. This is an interesting strategy because, if he hadn’t chosen Toronto, in theory, he would have been able to tell the GM of his new team, “Here’s everything Toronto wants to do for the next five years.”
But perhaps because of that honesty and certainly in large part because of how clear and achievable the vision the Leafs laid out was, Tavares chose his childhood team and created an elite power in the league in one fell swoop.
A big part of that future plan, presumably, is how the club will handle the pending restricted free agency of its elite young forwards. William Nylander is currently out of contract and likely due a nice raise from his entry-level deal; he is on two consecutive 61-point seasons and will be paid commensurately, after an adjustment for the fact that he’s an RFA. I wouldn’t want to try to nail down the number too much, but he’ll almost certainly make north of $5 million against the cap on what I’d expect to be a long-term deal.
Next summer is the real problem, of course, when the Leafs will have to pay Auston Matthews and Mitch Marner — both of whom produce even more than Nylander — as well. Marner will cost probably a little bit more than Nylander but perhaps not much, barring an explosive offensive season this year which is certainly possible. Matthews will be able to command an eight-figure salary.
This has naturally led to a lot of fretting about how the Leafs will make it work, and it’s understandable for people to wonder if they can at all. After all, Toronto has a lot of money tied up in guys like Patrick Marleau and Nikita Zaitsev who don’t pull their weight (AAV-wise), and in theory, they can jettison those players in one way or another.
But with all that concern for how he’s going to be able to pull off this kind of deal, Dubas has been steadfast: “We can re-sign all of them, and we will.” Literally, every Maple Leafs decision-maker asked about it has expressed utter confidence in this approach. It’s not even being discussed as a vague or likely possible outcome. They’re just straight-up saying it’s going to happen.
How all that comes to pass is obviously up for interpretation, but it’s rare we see statements with this total absence of equivocation or outs being provided. Effectively, Dubas is handing Brendan Shanahan a filled-out pink and saying, “If I can’t keep the Nylander/Marner/Matthews/Tavares group together next summer, feel free to use this.”
Because to come out and say the things he’s now saying with so much force and confidence — and certainly with Shanahan’s full backing — that to not get it done has to be pretty close to a fireable offense.
That doesn’t mean the decisions won’t be tough, though. There was some amount of concern (though not this much) about how Edmonton would make it work with all their talent, such as it was, when Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl had their big raises kick in. Peter Chiarelli’s answer was to trade Jordan Eberle and further hamstring his own team.
Now, that’s not a good answer, mind you, but it’s an answer. One doubts that Toronto would be so foolish as to make a trade like that, but if they have to trade Nazem Kadri, find a buyer for Freddie Andersen when Garrett Sparks is ready, or let Jake Gardiner walk in free agency to keep those four forwards together, that’s the cost of doing business. But unlike the Oilers, the Leafs don’t have a ton of money tied up in depth players. That will be even less of a problem when Ron Hainsey comes off the books next summer.
Obviously, none of us know what the salary cap is going to look like next summer, but I wouldn’t go around expecting an increase on par with what we saw this year. Likewise, it’s impossible to predict whether Nylander, for example, gets hurt this season, that might affect his cap number. If Marner only puts up 55 points or something (also unlikely) that could impact his salary as well.
Moreover, who’s to say that all three taking some level of a hometown discount to keep the band together hasn’t been discussed? I wouldn’t expect any of them to take substantially less than their market value, but if the team can get all three to do that collectively, that would be a big help.
It’s not unheard of for guys to do that, either. San Jose built its great core and kept them all together for years, remaining competitive the whole time, because of solid management decisions farther down the roster to keep costs down. Toronto will need to make similar decisions and find landing spots for at least one or two guys, but the idea that they would let one of these three pending RFAs go elsewhere at the expense of keeping 52-year-old Patrick Marleau is absurd.
Again, it’s more than fair to wonder how they make it all happen, and there’s certainly an element of “show me” to it. But at some point when the Leafs’ front office universally says, “This is 100 percent going to happen,” you have to believe that they’re not lying to you or about to do some sort of semantic sleight of hand.
What further proof of this do you need than Tavares’s commitment to the team? He could have made more money for a longer time in Brooklyn. He could have gotten a comparable deal from Tampa or Dallas. But he chose Toronto and was not shy about saying that it was because their plan for the seven years of his deal was spelled out clearly and effectively.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless otherwise noted.
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:f6dd650c-9434-34f7-9fc3-4ec66774631a
0 notes
Text
Puck Daddy Bag of Mail: Free agency fallout
Summer can’t start until Erik Karlsson is dealt. (Getty)
Despite the fact that we’re now well past July 1, there remains no shortage of intrigue around the league. Buzzards are circling the Senators in hopes of landing Erik Karlsson. Islanders fans are still thrashing around in disgust and anguish over the departure of John Tavares.
And everyone has already begun sizing up potential playoff pictures, three months before the season even starts. Hey, you gotta do something at this time of year.
So as usual, people have plenty of questions about how the events of the last week will affect various teams around the league.
Let’s get after it:
Tom asks: “Is there anything I can look forward to in the upcoming Islanders season?”
Mat Barzal might turn into one of those “worth the cost of admission” kind of guys, but otherwise yeah it’s looking like a long, uncomfortable season for Barry Trotz and Co.
Honestly, I’m not sure this wreck could have been avoided at all, but it was certainly a foreseeable slow-motion car crash.
The Islanders could have traded him, and for all the acrimony like they couldn’t, the guy only had an eight-team no-trade clause. You look at the list of teams, you call the other 22 and say, “Make me an offer.” But Garth Snow kept Tavares around in pursuit of a playoff berth that was never going to happen, realistically, and to save his own job on the off chance that he could keep the guy. That it didn’t happen is entirely on Snow and not at all on Tavares, who always had at least a good chance of leaving.
So the Islanders season is going to be a brutal slog, in all likelihood. But you never know, Robin Lehner could pull a .927 out of his back pocket. That kind of thing happens more than you might think!
Josh asks: “Why give Vanek and Green no trade clauses?”
Because it gives them the ability to say “Don’t trade me to Edmonton,” or some equally undesirable destination where they might not be able to accomplish much, don’t want to live, etc.
If teams come looking for those players, since Detroit will almost certainly be quite bad this year, simply giving them the right of refusal on any trade is not uncommon and would certainly be an enticement for veteran players of that quality. You have to spend money on someone and it’s wise for Detroit to allocate their money to these guys because they can use retention as a bargaining chip and also potentially field more offers.
So if you have to give guys the chance to pass on playing for, say, Carolina, well you’ll probably find interested bidders elsewhere anyway.
Ryan asks: “After missing on Tavares, do you see any other viable impact player the Sharks can acquire to make another run or is it the ol’ ‘stand pat until the deadline’ trick again?”
There aren’t really any impact UFAs left so they’d have to either offer-sheet someone (won’t happen) or pursue someone like Max Pacioretty via trade.
I said it the other day but they cleared so much space and got nothing to show for it, which sucks for them but maybe not that badly, since they’re still a pretty good team (for now) and their division is probably the worst in the league.
What that means for them long-term is a different story entirely but if the worst that happens to them is that they “stand pat until the deadline” I think they’ll be fine in the Pacific specifically.
Matt asks via email: “Given that speed is one of the major assets that tends to go with age, and given that John Tavares has developed an elite game without relying on it much, wouldn’t it stand to reason that that bodes well for his longevity/productivity over the seven years?”
Yeah I’d think so.
He was never swimming in accompanying talent on the Island, which he obviously will be in Toronto, so the fact that he was a pretty reliable 70-plus-point guy bodes well for him to put up those kinds of numbers as he ages into his 30s over the course of this deal.
One wonders how much that actually means he’ll score when he’s 32 or whatever, sure, but as the cap goes up, the cost (in practice) of his $11 million AAV kinda goes down. If this is a guy who’s certainly among the top 10 in the league in points per game over the past five seasons at probably a little less than 1.0 — I just looked it up and it’s 0.98, good for seventh, so I was right again — then even his diminished capacity is going to mean he’s producing pretty effectively.
Unless injuries get in the way, at worst I see him turning into a good (albeit expensive) No. 2 center by the end of this deal.
Dixon asks: “Why is the JVR contract better than Lucic’s or Bobby Ryan’s?”
This is a tricky question. James van Riemsdyk is older than both the guys referenced here were when they signed, so the term (shorter) and money (roughly comparable now) make it a bit interesting.
Not that JVR played with a bunch of stiffs in Toronto, but Ryan’s production with Anaheim was pretty dependent upon the fact that he played a ton of minutes with Getzlaf and Perry. Ryan was also coming off a bit of a down season (23-25-48 in 70 games) but had posted 30-goal campaigns in each of the previous seasons. He didn’t have the same kind of help in Ottawa, and his production dipped.
Worth noting, by the way, that though Ryan makes way too much money for what he brings to the table (if he can stay healthy, which…), but he’s still a solid middle-six guy on any team in the league.
As for Lucic, that contract was a mistake on Day 1 because Lucic was already largely seen as a relic of a bygone age, and had been on the decline since he left Boston.
I’m not a huge fan of the JVR contract but it makes a lot more sense just because they can put talent around him that keeps him productive for years to come, and he’s the kind of guy that is neither ultra-fast nor too slow for the modern NHL. He’s a bit redundant until Wayne Simmonds get traded, but he can play at a level neither of the other guys could.
Brandon asks: “If you’re a rebuilding team like the Rangers do you go after an Erik Karlsson still or continue on in your rebuild without trading assets?”
I don’t really know where this Rangers rumor came from yesterday but it got shot down pretty quickly. I like the question just in terms of what a guy like Karlsson means for a rebuilding team.
Obviously he mega-mega-mega moves the needle for even a rotten team, like Ottawa, so if the Rangers or a team generally in their position could add him, that would be huge.
However, much like the team referenced in the next question, I would urge caution from a team trying to accelerate out of a rebuild by pursuing even top-end talent. Because while Karlsson or someone of his approximate value would probably turn the Rangers into a playoff team, again, to what end? They might be able to fluke their way to a conference final like Ottawa did, but look where the Senators are now.
The Rangers are better off keeping their prospect pool intact and going through a rebuild in the traditional fashion.
Yaya asks: “If all Vegas does with their insane amount of cap space is sign Stastny, where do they rank among free agency losers?”
I don’t think that makes them losers.
They needed to get a guy who could help them and they did, but they’re still not going to be that good unless they can get another .930 season from Marc-Andre Fleury. Which they won’t.
I thought their making the Cup Final might get them to accelerate their internal timeline, and I thought that would have been a mistake, so it’s good to see they’re not doing that. Whether they can sell that to their own fans is a different kind of question, because it’s not hard to see them being bottom-10 even with their first line and having added Stastny.
But they’re a Year 2 expansion team. They shouldn’t be trying to win a bunch of games. They should be stocking up on draft picks and prospects. This is all fine.
Tom asks: “Worse contract for the Pens on Day 1: Scuderi in 2013 or Jack Johnson today?”
Definitely Scuderi.
You can say what you want about the Johnson contract (and it’s very bad) at five years, $3.25 million AAV, for a 31-year-old). But he’s the fifth-highest-paid defenseman on the team. And that number makes up less than 4.1 percent of the salary cap. He’s not a good defenseman but the problem with the deal is the inexplicable term, which will keep him under contract until he’s 36.
Meanwhile Ray Shero gave a 34-year-old Rob Scuderi a four-year contract worth $3.375 million when the salary cap was $64.8 million. That’s 5.2 percent of the cap, for a guy who turned 35 on Dec. 30 that year.
It might not sound like a lot of money, or even a big difference, in today’s dollars, that’s equivalent to $4.14 million — that’s Jake Gardiner money.
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
All stats via Corsica unless noted otherwise. Some questions in the mailbag are edited for clarity or to remove swear words, which are illegal to use.
More NHL coverage on Yahoo Sports:
yahoo
#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert#_uuid:0a1bd7b5-292d-3ed3-98fd-7b8fa7d03a0a
0 notes
Text
Puck Daddy Countdown: John Tortorella gets his feud on
John Totorella is running his mouth once again. (Jamie Sabau/NHLI via Getty Images)
9. Those Canucks signings
Just in case you thought that maybe the Canucks were only doing the thing of signing not-great players to big contracts because they wanted to stay competitive for the Sedins, well, July 1 refutes that pretty effectively.
The money they gave out to Jay Beagle and Antoine Roussel were so far beyond bad — four years each at $3 million AAV — as to defy explanation. For all the credit this team gets for drafting well under Jim Benning, their NHL talent evaluation is quite frankly embarrassing. Yeah young guys need veteran leadership to learn how to play in the NHL and the Canucks have a lot of young guys, but you don’t need to give Jay Beagle “CONOR SHEARY” money and four years to find veterans who can help with that.
These guys just aren’t effective NHLers and for a rebuilding team to torch a roster spot on them for a year or even two, well, you gotta pay somebody with the cap going up this much. But for four years? It doesn’t begin to make sense.
This team is now married to two guys, who are past their primes and only getting older, while they’re supposed to be rebuilding. The idea that they’ll take roster spots and important roles from guys who need to develop is hardly farfetched.
This is everything wrong with the Canucks regime in a nutshell, and there’s no way it’s getting fixed any time soon.
8. Pursuing Slava Voynov
The idea that anyone would want a player like Voynov is understandable on the surface. When last he was in the NHL, he was a high-end second-pairing guy and there are a lot of teams that would love to have someone like that. Hell, for the right price there isn’t a team in the league he wouldn’t fit on.
In theory.
In actual practice, of course, one must consider the moral implications of why Voynov is available in the first place, and what that means in a “Hockey Is For Everyone” league with a Statement of Principles that has been, from what I understand, endorsed by the pope.
If the league allows him to come back — it shouldn’t, regardless of his legal status — any team that debases itself to try to sign him, of which there will be several, should be ashamed of itself. The facts of his case are not up for dispute and the pictures are gruesome reminders of what Voynov thinks is acceptable, based on the fact that there were multiple reported incidents.
So for every guy who can’t keep a job because he likes going to museums or perhaps makes his postgame interviews a little too much about himself, let’s always remember that this guy is a convicted domestic abuser and NHL teams are sadly all too willing to take “If You Can Play, You Can Play” to its logical extreme.
Pathetic.
7. That Jack Johnson contract
I didn’t think I would have to do this but I’ve seen multiple people defending it and I have to go off now. You did this. Not me.
The idea that Johnson is in any way a fit for this team is laughable, and few would even try to force an argument on whether he was good in Columbus, especially in the past two seasons. He ended last year as a healthy scratch and for good reason.
The pro-Johnson-to-Pittsburgh argument goes something like this: Jim Rutherford drafted him and Sergei Gonchar has turned poor defensemen into good ones. Let’s take out the trash on both of them.
Who cares that Jim Rutherford drafted Johnson 15 years ago or whatever? Like honestly, what does that matter? He liked a guy who exhibited a lot of promise at the University of Michigan, traded the kid only because he wouldn’t sign in Carolina, and then got hundreds of games’ worth of data that he couldn’t be a difference-maker at the NHL level. If Rutherford’s teams had controlled Johnson’s rights the whole time and given him this contract despite all the evidence in the world that he’s not good in the NHL, well, wouldn’t we say, “What’s Rutherford thinking?”
But OK, this is a reclamation project. Those work out sometimes. I don’t know why you’d want to try that reclamation project over a five-year period. Especially given that this is a guy who will be 32 years old for half of this coming season. It’s not a gamble, then. This is Rutherford signing up to pay a guy who flatly sucks $3.25 million until he’s 37 years old. If we think Johnson stinks in his age-31 year, what does he look like when he’s 35? Okay great, he has two more years on the books after that, or at least lingers for years as a buyout cap hit.
Now let’s talk about the idea that Sergei Gonchar has turned other bad defensemen into good defensemen, which has been pointed out more often than the Rutherford Connection but is somehow even dumber. Let’s look at it this way: Who are the defensemen Gonchar “made good?” Definitely you would say Justin Schultz. Maybe you would also say, like, Jamie Oleksiak.
The Penguins got both of them when they were, what, 25ish years old? Still in the primes of their careers. Schultz, I think you could argue, was even on the upswing. And more to the point, I think it’s reasonable to argue that the Penguins didn’t necessarily do anything to make Schultz better besides put him in a position to succeed. He was overwhelmed in Edmonton because the Oilers, in their infinite wisdom, thought he was a top-pairing defenseman despite all evidence to the contrary. It’s very not-weird, I think, that when the Penguins stopped putting him out there against top competition, he suddenly looked like a competent second-pair power play specialist!
Plus, y’know, do you think maybe playing behind Crosby and Malkin and now Brassard makes defensemen like Schultz and Oleksiak who previously didn’t play for the Penguins look better than playing behind guys from their other, worse teams? It’s not impossible.
The deal sucks and is going to look continually worse in March, two Novembers from now, February 2020, the fourth year of the contract, and beyond. Any rationalization to the contrary is galaxy-brain nonsense.
I’m not joking when I say the Penguins would probably be better off flushing $3.25 million down the toilet every Oct. 1 and telling the league to count it against their cap number.
6. Those Islanders transactions
How do you make up for losing your franchise center? By signing one of the Leafs’ problems away, trading for another even bigger one, adding a Flyers’ problem (they’re in the same division now), and then getting the 13th-best forward from last year’s Penguins (also in the same division).
Are we sure he’s not still on the Leafs’ payroll?
5. Not using an agent
Drew Doughty didn’t use an agent in negotiating his big contract and, in doing so, saved himself like $2.5 million in agent’s fees (3 percent of the deal’s value).
But because of the way Doughty structured the deal, he’s not only not-buyout-proof, but he gives the Kings a hell of a lot of incentive to buy him out the second he turns out to no longer be effective.
In the end, the math works out such Doughty, in an effort to save himself $2.5 million, he might end up costing himself like six times that amount.
Smart stuff.
4. Trading Karlsson
I’m really just hoping this happens sooner than later. Like, just do it already. Everyone knows it’s going to happen. Everyone knows you’re gonna get an embarrassing return for him. Let’s go already.
3. James Neal?
Had someone ask me what’s in it for James Neal to sign with Calgary and not Vegas. It’s an interesting question.
From what I can tell, the Flames only offered an extra $750,000 per year in AAV, which is more than wiped out by the provincial income tax. So the answer, I guess, is that he thinks the Flames have a better chance to be competitive in the next five years, or maybe Calgary promised him a better role (i.e. with Monahan and Gaudreau, who could probably use a legit finisher). It’s not because the Flames buyout-proofed his contract, because every cent is paid in straight salary.
I’m not sure Neal is going to like what he finds in terms of either Vegas or Calgary being in contention for anything within the next five years, but hey, it’s a bunch of money.
2. St. Louis
I wrote WWL before the Ryan O’Reilly trade, so here’s a quick take on that:
The Blues now have some very promising center depth between Schenn (who should stay the No. 1), O’Reilly, and Bozak. Like I’ve always said, if Bozak is your No. 3, you’re in good shape.
I’m not sure it puts them in the same neighborhood as Winnipeg and Nashville even in that division, but they just became a much tougher out in the postseason. Which, hey, they didn’t even make it last year. So that’s something.
1. Feuds
I love when John Tortorella starts dropping F-bombs about the Penguins. He’s gonna tell Brandon Dubinsky to use a guillotine on Sidney Crosby next season.
(Not ranked this week: Helping the Leafs.
I made a joke in WWL this week about the Leafs being able to find a buyer for Matt Martin is the most incredible thing in the world to me. As many as a dozen teams were in on him to one extent or another. Why in the world should that be true? It’s still 2018, right?)
Ryan Lambert is a Puck Daddy columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.
(All statistics via Corsica unless otherwise noted.)
#_uuid:8cfd89e1-95c5-3bd0-96fc-c4670b1247ef#_revsp:21d636bb-8aa8-4731-9147-93a932d2b27a#_lmsid:a077000000CFoGyAAL#_author:Ryan Lambert
0 notes