So the Sens cleared up this Meszaros mess by dealing him to the Lightning for Kuba, Picard and a first rounder. That seems like a massive return for a player that is still a restricted free agent. They turn a player they couldn't agree with into two guys (who will cost about as much - or less - than the guy in question) and they get a quality draft choice as well?
Score.
I dont know much about Picard, but I think Filip Kuba is decent value for 3M a year. Moving him and adding Meszaros looks like something of a lateral move for Tampa - add the probable higher price tag and well...
at least Andrej is younger I guess.
Anyways, who the hell do we deal Aucoin to now?
Friday, August 29, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
I think it's called PRE-cognition
So one day after I condemn Ottawa for dicking around with the Meszaros negotiations, the guy goes and signs a big, fat offer sheet (allegedly):
"I think Mez is a potentially good young defenseman who had a bit of an off-year this past year, and we've asked their camp to entertain that in what we're trying to do with him," Murray said. "I think we've made more than a fair offer and put ourselves in a position where he could come here and, with some help, we think he can be a top player.
"We need their camp to help us in that area as well. I've tried to get that message across, but to this point, we haven't gotten there."
The Ottawa Sun is reporting Meszaros was looking for a deal in the $4.5 million per year range while Ottawa had countered with an offer of $3.5 million per.
Murray should have heeded my warning:
News Flash guys...you have destroyed any leverage you might have had in negotiations. Meszaros has you over a barrel and I'm sure his agent knows it. From the angle out west, it looks like you need him more than he needs you. I would suggest paying him whatever he wants (short of ridiculous Phaneuf money) or dealing him for some sort of return forth-with.
Heh. Fortunes told and futures revealed! Please have your credit card ready when you call...
H/T Mirtle
UPDATE - there's some question of what Meszaros might be worth, particularly to the team he'll no doubt be leaving soon. Murray suggests above that Mez had an "off-year". Some Sens fans seem to agree. Here's what the stats say:
9g-27a-36pts
QUAL COMP: 0.00
ESP: 0.80
GFON/60: 2.88
GAON/60: 2.69
Corsi: +1.6
Meszaros saw slightly better competition than Redden, scored at a similar rate and allowed 0.37 less goals against per hour. What's more, he was more effective than the $6.5M Man on the PP as well, scoring 3.78 PPP/60 to Redden's 3.12. Further, Meszaros was the bigger "difference maker" with the man advantage: the team scored at a rate of 7.03 goals per hour with Mez on the ice, but only 6.49 with him off the ice (a difference of 0.54). In contrast, the Sens actually improved without Redden, managing 7.11 goals/60 with him on the bench but just 6.25 when he was manning the blueline (-0.86).
Let's not forget that Meszaros is just 22 years-old and several years away from reaching his ceiling. Redden, after a couple years of tangible decline, is probably on the wrong side of the career curve.
The kid has scored more than 30 points in each of his three seasons in the league. He leapt directly from the junior leagues in Slovakia into the Sens top 4. He's no shut-down guy yet, but that really looks like a fairly valuable asset to me and a potential very good to elite player in the future. Whoever gave him the offer-sheet may be onto something, even at what seems like an over-pay of $5M plus.
The Sens? I think they'll let the guy walk. Im not so sure that's the right move, however.
"I think Mez is a potentially good young defenseman who had a bit of an off-year this past year, and we've asked their camp to entertain that in what we're trying to do with him," Murray said. "I think we've made more than a fair offer and put ourselves in a position where he could come here and, with some help, we think he can be a top player.
"We need their camp to help us in that area as well. I've tried to get that message across, but to this point, we haven't gotten there."
The Ottawa Sun is reporting Meszaros was looking for a deal in the $4.5 million per year range while Ottawa had countered with an offer of $3.5 million per.
Murray should have heeded my warning:
News Flash guys...you have destroyed any leverage you might have had in negotiations. Meszaros has you over a barrel and I'm sure his agent knows it. From the angle out west, it looks like you need him more than he needs you. I would suggest paying him whatever he wants (short of ridiculous Phaneuf money) or dealing him for some sort of return forth-with.
Heh. Fortunes told and futures revealed! Please have your credit card ready when you call...
H/T Mirtle
UPDATE - there's some question of what Meszaros might be worth, particularly to the team he'll no doubt be leaving soon. Murray suggests above that Mez had an "off-year". Some Sens fans seem to agree. Here's what the stats say:
9g-27a-36pts
QUAL COMP: 0.00
ESP: 0.80
GFON/60: 2.88
GAON/60: 2.69
Corsi: +1.6
Meszaros saw slightly better competition than Redden, scored at a similar rate and allowed 0.37 less goals against per hour. What's more, he was more effective than the $6.5M Man on the PP as well, scoring 3.78 PPP/60 to Redden's 3.12. Further, Meszaros was the bigger "difference maker" with the man advantage: the team scored at a rate of 7.03 goals per hour with Mez on the ice, but only 6.49 with him off the ice (a difference of 0.54). In contrast, the Sens actually improved without Redden, managing 7.11 goals/60 with him on the bench but just 6.25 when he was manning the blueline (-0.86).
Let's not forget that Meszaros is just 22 years-old and several years away from reaching his ceiling. Redden, after a couple years of tangible decline, is probably on the wrong side of the career curve.
The kid has scored more than 30 points in each of his three seasons in the league. He leapt directly from the junior leagues in Slovakia into the Sens top 4. He's no shut-down guy yet, but that really looks like a fairly valuable asset to me and a potential very good to elite player in the future. Whoever gave him the offer-sheet may be onto something, even at what seems like an over-pay of $5M plus.
The Sens? I think they'll let the guy walk. Im not so sure that's the right move, however.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Sakic to return afterall
“Ultimately it came down to the fact that I still enjoy playing and competing,” said Sakic. “I’m comfortable with my conditioning and my overall health. I’m ready for the start of camp and am looking forward to the upcoming season.”
Good for Avs fans and hockey in general I guess. Still...as a Flames fan this made me say "CRAP".
Good for Avs fans and hockey in general I guess. Still...as a Flames fan this made me say "CRAP".
WTF?
With September looming large on the horizon, there seems to be a lot of loose ends around the league just sort of sitting lonely and un-attended. Many of them are no-brainer type issues and the fact that they continue to linger will start to raise questions in the minds of various fanships around the league sooner rather than later. Here's my list of 8 curiosities that should have been taken care of weeks ago.
1.) Flames cap issues.
Sutter waived Nilson, Warrener and Eriksson in the first week of July, ostensibly for the purposes of allowing other clubs to take them for free or, failing that, buying one or more of the bad contracts out. Neither happened and Sutter has instead gone about stocking the roster beyond it's fill point, both in terms of number of players and total cap hit. Now, Calgary's GM has just over a month to shave some 3M from the Flames pay-roll, with ever-narrowing avenues to do so.
2.) Chicago Blackhawks and their $12M crease.
Signing Huet to a 5M+ multi-year contract is one thing, but adding him while you have Khabibulin and his ridiculous 6.75M+ cap hit under contract is quite another.
The Hawks are over the salary cap by nearly $4M and, despite their active off-season, still have a relatively thin group of forwards. The smart move would have been to ensure a destination for the Bulin wall before acquiring Huet. The second smartest move would have been to deal the former Tampa Bay Lightning 'tender as quickly as possible after acquiring Huet, but before teams blew their budgetary brains out on other free agents. Now the Hawk's have about a month to move what is nearly an unmovable contract. There's also word Chicago management is considering keeping both goalies and employing a "hot-hand" philosophy during the season. Two problems with that:
a.) How else do they get under the salary cap? Thin out already thin forward ranks? Robert Lang seems to be the most "disposable" of the big dollars up-front, but would probably be useful as a mentor to the Hawks Kane and Toews. Plus, he isn't quite Amonte-useless yet.
b.) Is there a more inefficient use of cap space? No matter who plays each night, it means you'll have $5M+ or more dollars sitting on the bench doing nothing.
3.) LA Kings lack of RFA signings.
As far as I know, Brad Richardson, Jarrett Stoll and Patrick O'Sullivan still need new deals. All figure to be part of the club next year and none of them should be having overly-contentious negotiations. In addition, the Kings are still struggling to make it to the cap floor. One would assume that GM Lombardi would like an accurate idea of the salary he might need to add in order to get the Kings to the 40M or so figure. What's the freaking hold-up?
4.) Ottawa Senators continue their descent.
The Sens back-end has been decimated by the departures of Redden and Commodore (that Corvo deal sure looks stupid now) and yet they dilly-dally when it comes to signing 22 year-old already-vet Andrej Meszaros? News Flash guys...you have destroyed any leverage you might have had in negotiations. Meszaros has you over a barrel and I'm sure his agent knows it. From the angle out west, it looks like you need him more than he needs you. I would suggest paying him whatever he wants (short of ridiculous Phaneuf money) or dealing him for some sort of return forth-with.
Ottawa only has 4 NHL caliber defensemen currently and none of them are offensively capable. They are going to be getting very desperate for defenders very soon.
5.) The Tampa Bay boondoggle.
The Lightning currently have 17 NHL caliber forwards. That isn't counting hopefuls like David Koci, Brandon Bochenski, Andreas Karlsson, Zenon Kanopka, Blair Jones or Wyatt Smith, most of whom Tampa Bay added this summer. Conversely, the club dealt away Dan Boyle (whom they had only recently signed to a big dollar, long-term deal) and replaced him with...Matt Carle and Andrew Hutchinson. As such, they now have one of thinnest defense corps in the league but could staff 8 full forward lines. Baffling.
6.) Florida Panthers symmetry.
After dealing their best goal scorer and Captain to the Coyotes for a couple of defensemen, word is the Panthers are now going to add Maple Leaf anchor and whipping boy Bryan McCabe and his $5.75M cap hit. That will give Martin 8 viable NHL defenders, a blueline worth about 22.62M (assuming Van Ryn goes to the Leafs in the deal). While the move would catapult the Panthers into the top quarter of the league in terms of priciest bluelines, that's not the funny part. The fact that they will be spending as much on 8 defenders as they are on 12 forwards (23.416M) is.
Good thing they re-signed Wade Belak this summer, hey? Wow the SE Division is wacky.
7.) Why won't anyone sign Marek Malik?
He's done nothing but put up positive results all over the place for years now. It's true he and NYR coach Tom Renney had their issues last year, but, really...even while in the doghouse, Malik put up stellar advanced stats last season:
QUAL COMP: 0.06
QUAL TEAM: -0.02
GA/60: 1.63 (!!)
plus/minus: +15
Corsi: +5.5
All arrows point in the right direction. Just about every team in the league could use a guy like that. He's big and kind of slow, but you can't argue with the results. Besides, he scores great shoot-out goals.
Either Malik and agent are asking for some ridiculous dollars or there's something going on behind the scenes away from the fans view (*dressing room cancer, harms puppies, sells dope, denies Global Warming - err, Climate Change - exists, etc.). If not, one has to seriously question the collective intelligence of the leagues general managers.
*(none of these are serious suggestions or worthy of rumor-mongering. Please don't sue me Mr. Malik.)
8.) Colorado Avalanche and the worst. Goaltending. Duo. Ever.
Seriously. What the hell is Giguere thinking? Peter Budaj, backed-up by...Andrew Raycroft? In stark contrast to the Hawks, the Avs have the cheapest - and worst - goaltending pair in the league, bar none. Lose Theodore to free agency? Okay. Decide to run with Mr.Mediocre Budaj as your starter? Eh. Sign one of the leagues most obviously terrible goalies to back him up? FAIL. Especially in a division that boasts Kiprusoff, Luongo and Backstrom/Harding (and Garon...I guess). Look, Giggy, I know the Avs have a reputation for re-invigorating puck-stoppers careers and all, but I think you're really pushing it this time. Give Dale Tallon a call, I hear he might have what you're looking for...
That's my collection of the biggest head-scratchers. Feel free to add your own in the comments (or add any clarifications of the above).
1.) Flames cap issues.
Sutter waived Nilson, Warrener and Eriksson in the first week of July, ostensibly for the purposes of allowing other clubs to take them for free or, failing that, buying one or more of the bad contracts out. Neither happened and Sutter has instead gone about stocking the roster beyond it's fill point, both in terms of number of players and total cap hit. Now, Calgary's GM has just over a month to shave some 3M from the Flames pay-roll, with ever-narrowing avenues to do so.
2.) Chicago Blackhawks and their $12M crease.
Signing Huet to a 5M+ multi-year contract is one thing, but adding him while you have Khabibulin and his ridiculous 6.75M+ cap hit under contract is quite another.
The Hawks are over the salary cap by nearly $4M and, despite their active off-season, still have a relatively thin group of forwards. The smart move would have been to ensure a destination for the Bulin wall before acquiring Huet. The second smartest move would have been to deal the former Tampa Bay Lightning 'tender as quickly as possible after acquiring Huet, but before teams blew their budgetary brains out on other free agents. Now the Hawk's have about a month to move what is nearly an unmovable contract. There's also word Chicago management is considering keeping both goalies and employing a "hot-hand" philosophy during the season. Two problems with that:
a.) How else do they get under the salary cap? Thin out already thin forward ranks? Robert Lang seems to be the most "disposable" of the big dollars up-front, but would probably be useful as a mentor to the Hawks Kane and Toews. Plus, he isn't quite Amonte-useless yet.
b.) Is there a more inefficient use of cap space? No matter who plays each night, it means you'll have $5M+ or more dollars sitting on the bench doing nothing.
3.) LA Kings lack of RFA signings.
As far as I know, Brad Richardson, Jarrett Stoll and Patrick O'Sullivan still need new deals. All figure to be part of the club next year and none of them should be having overly-contentious negotiations. In addition, the Kings are still struggling to make it to the cap floor. One would assume that GM Lombardi would like an accurate idea of the salary he might need to add in order to get the Kings to the 40M or so figure. What's the freaking hold-up?
4.) Ottawa Senators continue their descent.
The Sens back-end has been decimated by the departures of Redden and Commodore (that Corvo deal sure looks stupid now) and yet they dilly-dally when it comes to signing 22 year-old already-vet Andrej Meszaros? News Flash guys...you have destroyed any leverage you might have had in negotiations. Meszaros has you over a barrel and I'm sure his agent knows it. From the angle out west, it looks like you need him more than he needs you. I would suggest paying him whatever he wants (short of ridiculous Phaneuf money) or dealing him for some sort of return forth-with.
Ottawa only has 4 NHL caliber defensemen currently and none of them are offensively capable. They are going to be getting very desperate for defenders very soon.
5.) The Tampa Bay boondoggle.
The Lightning currently have 17 NHL caliber forwards. That isn't counting hopefuls like David Koci, Brandon Bochenski, Andreas Karlsson, Zenon Kanopka, Blair Jones or Wyatt Smith, most of whom Tampa Bay added this summer. Conversely, the club dealt away Dan Boyle (whom they had only recently signed to a big dollar, long-term deal) and replaced him with...Matt Carle and Andrew Hutchinson. As such, they now have one of thinnest defense corps in the league but could staff 8 full forward lines. Baffling.
6.) Florida Panthers symmetry.
After dealing their best goal scorer and Captain to the Coyotes for a couple of defensemen, word is the Panthers are now going to add Maple Leaf anchor and whipping boy Bryan McCabe and his $5.75M cap hit. That will give Martin 8 viable NHL defenders, a blueline worth about 22.62M (assuming Van Ryn goes to the Leafs in the deal). While the move would catapult the Panthers into the top quarter of the league in terms of priciest bluelines, that's not the funny part. The fact that they will be spending as much on 8 defenders as they are on 12 forwards (23.416M) is.
Good thing they re-signed Wade Belak this summer, hey? Wow the SE Division is wacky.
7.) Why won't anyone sign Marek Malik?
He's done nothing but put up positive results all over the place for years now. It's true he and NYR coach Tom Renney had their issues last year, but, really...even while in the doghouse, Malik put up stellar advanced stats last season:
QUAL COMP: 0.06
QUAL TEAM: -0.02
GA/60: 1.63 (!!)
plus/minus: +15
Corsi: +5.5
All arrows point in the right direction. Just about every team in the league could use a guy like that. He's big and kind of slow, but you can't argue with the results. Besides, he scores great shoot-out goals.
Either Malik and agent are asking for some ridiculous dollars or there's something going on behind the scenes away from the fans view (*dressing room cancer, harms puppies, sells dope, denies Global Warming - err, Climate Change - exists, etc.). If not, one has to seriously question the collective intelligence of the leagues general managers.
*(none of these are serious suggestions or worthy of rumor-mongering. Please don't sue me Mr. Malik.)
8.) Colorado Avalanche and the worst. Goaltending. Duo. Ever.
Seriously. What the hell is Giguere thinking? Peter Budaj, backed-up by...Andrew Raycroft? In stark contrast to the Hawks, the Avs have the cheapest - and worst - goaltending pair in the league, bar none. Lose Theodore to free agency? Okay. Decide to run with Mr.Mediocre Budaj as your starter? Eh. Sign one of the leagues most obviously terrible goalies to back him up? FAIL. Especially in a division that boasts Kiprusoff, Luongo and Backstrom/Harding (and Garon...I guess). Look, Giggy, I know the Avs have a reputation for re-invigorating puck-stoppers careers and all, but I think you're really pushing it this time. Give Dale Tallon a call, I hear he might have what you're looking for...
That's my collection of the biggest head-scratchers. Feel free to add your own in the comments (or add any clarifications of the above).
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Filling in the blanks - Marvin, Fulton and Deilert
In my ongoing quest to take a closer look at the future assets (and fill the idle time August), I stumbled across some information on a few of the Flames more "obscure" prospects.
First, a couple of the NCAA guys, Aaron Marvin and Jordan Fulton. Jonathan Willis of coppernblue and Oilers Nation fame turned me onto "Inside College Hockey" website which has proved to be pretty decent data source, particularly qualitative stuff that can help put flesh on the bare bones of a stats line.
On Marvin:
He finished with three goals and 10 assists but his coach says the numbers are deceiving when he considers the impact Marvin had as a rookie. He was named the team’s Most Improved Player at season’s end.
Huskies head coach Bob Motzko on Marvin: “Aaron is a big horse who works his tail off, and he has a motor that just doesn’t quit. He’ll take on a bigger offensive role for us this season, but he took on a big role for us last season and grew into it. He was one of our best players in the playoffs."
That sounds encouraging.
On Fulton, via the UMD Bulldogs site:
Showed plenty of promise in a respectable college debut last winter ... contributed 10 points (which tied him with Drew Akins for top honors among freshmen) to the Bulldog scoring attack in 2006-07...
ended a prosperous four-year run at The Breck School (Minneapolis) in March 2006 ... landed a spot on the 2005-06 Associated Press All-State team after finishing third in points (83) and second in goals (45) among all Minnesota high school competitors ... amassed that impressive offensive harvest in a mere 28 games ... was also a finalist for the Minnesota Mr. Hockey Award for 2005-06
Not too shabby either.
College hockey players are tougher to track and their development tends to be "murkier". Rookies ("juniors") are usually 19 or 20, which is when the typical Canadian Junior player is ending his minor league career. NCAA is also much lower scoring relative to the CHL, with less games played every season. Finally, rookies are often bottom of the totem pole when they join a college team (similar to NHL teams) and typically have to grow into bigger roles as their collegiate careers progress. This is why both Marvin and Fulton, despite relatively nominal offensive contributions, apparently yielded some rather glowing reviews. Safe to say, we'll know a great deal more about these guys after their sophomore seasons.
And finally, eurohockey.net has numbers on Swedish defensemen Alexander Deilert, Calgary's 7th rounder from this summer. In 38 games for J20 Superelit, the 19 year-old managed 6 goals, 18 points and a +11. I dont know how that league compares to the multitude of others, but I do know other decent Swedish prospects have spent some time there recently.
First, a couple of the NCAA guys, Aaron Marvin and Jordan Fulton. Jonathan Willis of coppernblue and Oilers Nation fame turned me onto "Inside College Hockey" website which has proved to be pretty decent data source, particularly qualitative stuff that can help put flesh on the bare bones of a stats line.
On Marvin:
He finished with three goals and 10 assists but his coach says the numbers are deceiving when he considers the impact Marvin had as a rookie. He was named the team’s Most Improved Player at season’s end.
Huskies head coach Bob Motzko on Marvin: “Aaron is a big horse who works his tail off, and he has a motor that just doesn’t quit. He’ll take on a bigger offensive role for us this season, but he took on a big role for us last season and grew into it. He was one of our best players in the playoffs."
That sounds encouraging.
On Fulton, via the UMD Bulldogs site:
Showed plenty of promise in a respectable college debut last winter ... contributed 10 points (which tied him with Drew Akins for top honors among freshmen) to the Bulldog scoring attack in 2006-07...
ended a prosperous four-year run at The Breck School (Minneapolis) in March 2006 ... landed a spot on the 2005-06 Associated Press All-State team after finishing third in points (83) and second in goals (45) among all Minnesota high school competitors ... amassed that impressive offensive harvest in a mere 28 games ... was also a finalist for the Minnesota Mr. Hockey Award for 2005-06
Not too shabby either.
College hockey players are tougher to track and their development tends to be "murkier". Rookies ("juniors") are usually 19 or 20, which is when the typical Canadian Junior player is ending his minor league career. NCAA is also much lower scoring relative to the CHL, with less games played every season. Finally, rookies are often bottom of the totem pole when they join a college team (similar to NHL teams) and typically have to grow into bigger roles as their collegiate careers progress. This is why both Marvin and Fulton, despite relatively nominal offensive contributions, apparently yielded some rather glowing reviews. Safe to say, we'll know a great deal more about these guys after their sophomore seasons.
And finally, eurohockey.net has numbers on Swedish defensemen Alexander Deilert, Calgary's 7th rounder from this summer. In 38 games for J20 Superelit, the 19 year-old managed 6 goals, 18 points and a +11. I dont know how that league compares to the multitude of others, but I do know other decent Swedish prospects have spent some time there recently.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Eurohockey stats
The Flames don't have a lot of European players or prospects. In fact, Calgary might have the most jingoistic roster in the whole league.
Still, there were/are a couple of Flames connections playing overseas every now and then. I tried in vain to follow Mark Giordano's progress last season, for example.
Anyways, for those unaware, Eurohockey.net is a pretty decent stat/roster resource for the various European leagues/clubs that I stumbled across awhile ago. I was looking through it recently and thought I might share some of the relevant links.
1.) Mark Giordanos RSL results. Gio had a so-so regular season but managed to be Dynamo Moscow's 2nd leading scorer in the play-offs with 1 goal and 7 points in 9 games. Keep in mind, this is the 2nd best league on the globe behind the NHL and one that doesn't award 2nd assists.
2.) Mikael Backlunds HockeyAllsvenskan results. Like Gio, Backlund didn't do much during the RS but managed 6 goals and 9 points in 14 post-season games. It'll be interesting to see if he can carry that forward into this year (assuming he goes back).
3.) Per Jonssons DIV-1/Elitserien results. The mysterious and relatively unknown 20 year-old Swedish defenseman split time between DIV-1 and the Elite League last season. He scored 3 goals and 18 points 38 games for Skåre BK before being called-up (?I presume) to Färjestads BK, where he garnered just 1 assist in 16 contests. Still, for him to be considered good enough to play some games against men in one of the tougher leagues in the world is a good sign. I'll be interested to get a good look at Jonsson in the pre-season this September (that is, if he makes the trip over this time).
UPDATE -
I figured I should add Andrei Taratukhin's stats, just for curiosity's sake. He's still technically Flames property, but chances are he's never coming back after a breaking a contract to return home.
Last season in the RSL, Taratukhin scored 10 goals and 26 points, good for 5th on Salavat Yulayev Ufa in scoring. Looks like he was the club's 2nd line center behind RSL vet Aleksei Tereschenko. Ex-Hab Alexander Perezhogin led the club with 21 goals and 41 points in 50 games.*
*(Price, Higgins, Plekanec, Kostitsyn(s), Komisarek, Chipchura, Latendresse, O'Byrne...how good has Montreal's drafting been recently?? Maybe the Flames should have waited until after the Canadiens picked at #25 to trade Tanguay this summer).
Still, there were/are a couple of Flames connections playing overseas every now and then. I tried in vain to follow Mark Giordano's progress last season, for example.
Anyways, for those unaware, Eurohockey.net is a pretty decent stat/roster resource for the various European leagues/clubs that I stumbled across awhile ago. I was looking through it recently and thought I might share some of the relevant links.
1.) Mark Giordanos RSL results. Gio had a so-so regular season but managed to be Dynamo Moscow's 2nd leading scorer in the play-offs with 1 goal and 7 points in 9 games. Keep in mind, this is the 2nd best league on the globe behind the NHL and one that doesn't award 2nd assists.
2.) Mikael Backlunds HockeyAllsvenskan results. Like Gio, Backlund didn't do much during the RS but managed 6 goals and 9 points in 14 post-season games. It'll be interesting to see if he can carry that forward into this year (assuming he goes back).
3.) Per Jonssons DIV-1/Elitserien results. The mysterious and relatively unknown 20 year-old Swedish defenseman split time between DIV-1 and the Elite League last season. He scored 3 goals and 18 points 38 games for Skåre BK before being called-up (?I presume) to Färjestads BK, where he garnered just 1 assist in 16 contests. Still, for him to be considered good enough to play some games against men in one of the tougher leagues in the world is a good sign. I'll be interested to get a good look at Jonsson in the pre-season this September (that is, if he makes the trip over this time).
UPDATE -
I figured I should add Andrei Taratukhin's stats, just for curiosity's sake. He's still technically Flames property, but chances are he's never coming back after a breaking a contract to return home.
Last season in the RSL, Taratukhin scored 10 goals and 26 points, good for 5th on Salavat Yulayev Ufa in scoring. Looks like he was the club's 2nd line center behind RSL vet Aleksei Tereschenko. Ex-Hab Alexander Perezhogin led the club with 21 goals and 41 points in 50 games.*
*(Price, Higgins, Plekanec, Kostitsyn(s), Komisarek, Chipchura, Latendresse, O'Byrne...how good has Montreal's drafting been recently?? Maybe the Flames should have waited until after the Canadiens picked at #25 to trade Tanguay this summer).
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Prospect ranking by expected NHL production
Click to enlarge.
Building on yesterdays post, I decided to calculate each forward prospects expected NHL output using Desjardins translation figures.
The kids are ranked from best to worst expected performance, where "league" is the last place the guy in question played, "PPG" is points per game from their most recent season, "ratio" is the difficulty of the league relative to the NHL, "NHL equiv." is the expected PPG and "season PR" is a pro-rated, 82 game point total.
Discussion:
- Players expected results assumes circumstances similar to those in which a player produced actual results in the lower league. Therefore, Daniel Ryder might be reasonably expected to get around 38 points if he made the big team this season, as long as he got ample PP and ES time (assuming he played big minutes during his last year in the OHL). Obviously, Ryder wouldn't be topping 30 points if he played 5 minutes a game with Primeau and Roy.
- Keep age in mind when looking at the chart. Obviously 18 year-olds like Mitch Wahl and Greg Nemisz have many years of development ahead of them, whereas Carsen Germyn does not. Hugo Carpentier doesn't look too far behind those guys either, but his 65 point season as a 19/20 year old last year isn't nearly as compelling as Wahl's 73 point season as a 17/18 year-old, because Wahl has a few steps forward to take in Junior. Carpentier, however, does not - 63 points is the best he can do.
- Also not considered above is a hopefuls development arc. A general trend upwards suggests improvement, ie; building towards making the leap. Flat or declining rates usually mean a kid is at or nearing his peak already.
Chucko, for example, isn't a disappointing prospect only because his expected NHL results are crappy: he's disappointing because he's 22 and his performance has basically been flat for years.
- I included graduates Giordano, Nystrom and Boyd to test the predictive power of this process. As you can see, Giordano's expected and actual rates were very close while Nystrom actually outperformed his expected point total (not really though - again that final shinny game against the Canucks is skewing things. If one removes that, Nystrom drops down to 0.14 PPG pace).
Boyd underperformed his expected number, mainly due to circumstances. He likely got primo ice-time during his 60 point rookie year in the AHL, whereas he spent all his time as a 4th liner with the Flames. The pro-rated 30 point figure is what Boyd could probably have done with better line-mates and more ice-time.
- Backlund, Larson, Seitsonen and Cracknell were excluded because there were no difficulty ratios for their various leagues (Swe-1, USHL, ECHL).
- Of course, this methodology does not predict how often a kid will get scored on in the big leagues, which is probably half the equation. Ryder might be expected to theoretically score 35-40 points in a top 6 role for the Flames this coming season, but chances are he'd give up shots, chances and goals against by the boat-load.
The full prospect picture
I've decided to put together an organizational prospect depth chart for referential purposes. I worked from the one on the Flames website which is fairly complete, but limited in it's utility (the players positions beyond "forward", "defense", aren't listed, for example).
Here's the future assets, listed by birthdate:
Click on each to enlarge.
Guys like Germyn and Peters are probably past their best before date when it comes to being "prospects". If you haven't made the show by the time you're 26, chances are you're AHL fodder. Similarly, if VDG doesn't make the jump this year, he'll join that not-so exclusive club.
Maki and Puustinen are still included even though both bolted for Europe this summer. In fact, the Flames didn't even extend Puustinen a qualifying offer, meaning they've probably lost his rights anyhow. Both can probably be excluded at this point.
Other oddities: Per Jonsson is listed as a forward even though Im pretty sure he's a defender. He played in the SEL last year, but didn't make much of a dent.
Depth Chart:
The depth chart is based on my own perceptions of which players are closest to being NHL ready.
LW - Prust gets the first chair LW position thanks to his seniority and one-way contract, although Greentree could probably be sitting there as well. The rest of the left-side options are...lackluster, to say the least. Chucko, Cunning and others are nowhere near NHL ready and none of them have the kind of results that suggest they ever will be.
C - Obviously too many guys, which is mitigated by the fact that half of them probably can't even hack it in the AHL (Fulton, Seitsonen, Armstrong, Marvin, Grantham). Backlund is the cream of the crop at center (and overall), while there may be something to Ryder and Carpentier as well. Peters is the "grizzled vet" who could probably play Primeau's role in the bigs, maybe as well as Primeau but no better.
Mitch Wahl, the Flames 2nd rounder from this summer, jumps above Fulton and company because he looks like more of a player in my estimation. He's younger, his results are better and he was recently invited to the State's U-20 national team evaluation camp, where he centered former first rounder James van Riemsdyk:
Mitch Wahl has looked pretty good on the top line, although it is hard to look bad with a dominant James vanRiemsdyk on your wing. The combo of Wahl, Motin (sic...I think) and Jeremy Morin has created more chances than any other line in this tournament and Wahl has played his part. He has kept up with the pace and has shown a knack of finding vanRiemsdyk and Morin, especially when the two wings drive aggressively to the net.
He could also leap-frog Carpentier with a step forward this coming season I think.
RW - Nothing beyond VDG on the Flames right side. Cracknell is 23 year-old that played in the ECHL last year and JD Watt is a 21-year old pest who has yet to make his pro debut. Nemisz is listed as center, but word is he played mainly on the wing last season. While he's a good 3+ years away from making any kind of impact (if any), he's 2nd in line thanks to his decent numbers and draft pedigree (plus the lack of quality competition in general).
Defense:
Pardy, Pelech and Negrin form the top layer, while the rest of the field is a bunch of question marks or worse. Of those three, I'd say only Pelech and Negrin have "top 4" potential in them. I also added free agent signing Ryan Wilson here, but excluded last years roll of the dice Brad Cole because he failed to stick with the farm team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For those struggling to appreciate what stats in lower leagues mean in terms of NHL performance, Gabe Desjardins has a handy little post over at behindthenet called "League Transaltions"
How difficult is it to score a goal in the National Hockey League (NHL) relative to another league? With half of NHL players coming from the minor leagues, a quarter from European Elite Leagues, 20% coming directly from Canadian Major Junior and 10% from the NCAA, that’s a question NHL teams try to answer every day. In evaluating these players, it is critical to know how a player’s performance translates to the NHL.
One way to evaluate the difficulty of one league relative to another is examine the relative performance of players who have played in both leagues. Players rarely play significant time in two leagues in the same year, but they often play in one league in one year and in another the next. As long as a player’s skill level is approximately constant over this two year period, the ratio of his performance in each league can be used to estimate the relative difficulty of the two leagues.
Read the whole thing if you're interested. The pertinent bit for current purposes is the "conversion table" -
So, assuming a player playing the same role (minutes, relative quality of line mates and opposition), one could reasonably expect his results to look like N*(Difficulty), where N is his PPG rate and Difficulty is the ratio associated with whatever league he's currently in.
So, for Kris Chucko - 0.375 PPG*0.44 (AHL) = 0.165 PPG is what we could probably expect from Chucko if he somehow made the team next year (and had a similar role to what he's playing in the minors).
82 games times 0.165 PPG = about 14 points.
Obviously it's not an easy conversion and young players are going to improve...but it gives one a rough indication of where a prospect is right now in his development. Desjardins has a more extensive discussion of the issue in this pdf, where he shows equivalencies between minor leagues like the WHL and AHL (0.43).
(Thanks go to Lowetide for making me aware of this process.)
Here's the future assets, listed by birthdate:
Click on each to enlarge.
Guys like Germyn and Peters are probably past their best before date when it comes to being "prospects". If you haven't made the show by the time you're 26, chances are you're AHL fodder. Similarly, if VDG doesn't make the jump this year, he'll join that not-so exclusive club.
Maki and Puustinen are still included even though both bolted for Europe this summer. In fact, the Flames didn't even extend Puustinen a qualifying offer, meaning they've probably lost his rights anyhow. Both can probably be excluded at this point.
Other oddities: Per Jonsson is listed as a forward even though Im pretty sure he's a defender. He played in the SEL last year, but didn't make much of a dent.
Depth Chart:
The depth chart is based on my own perceptions of which players are closest to being NHL ready.
LW - Prust gets the first chair LW position thanks to his seniority and one-way contract, although Greentree could probably be sitting there as well. The rest of the left-side options are...lackluster, to say the least. Chucko, Cunning and others are nowhere near NHL ready and none of them have the kind of results that suggest they ever will be.
C - Obviously too many guys, which is mitigated by the fact that half of them probably can't even hack it in the AHL (Fulton, Seitsonen, Armstrong, Marvin, Grantham). Backlund is the cream of the crop at center (and overall), while there may be something to Ryder and Carpentier as well. Peters is the "grizzled vet" who could probably play Primeau's role in the bigs, maybe as well as Primeau but no better.
Mitch Wahl, the Flames 2nd rounder from this summer, jumps above Fulton and company because he looks like more of a player in my estimation. He's younger, his results are better and he was recently invited to the State's U-20 national team evaluation camp, where he centered former first rounder James van Riemsdyk:
Mitch Wahl has looked pretty good on the top line, although it is hard to look bad with a dominant James vanRiemsdyk on your wing. The combo of Wahl, Motin (sic...I think) and Jeremy Morin has created more chances than any other line in this tournament and Wahl has played his part. He has kept up with the pace and has shown a knack of finding vanRiemsdyk and Morin, especially when the two wings drive aggressively to the net.
He could also leap-frog Carpentier with a step forward this coming season I think.
RW - Nothing beyond VDG on the Flames right side. Cracknell is 23 year-old that played in the ECHL last year and JD Watt is a 21-year old pest who has yet to make his pro debut. Nemisz is listed as center, but word is he played mainly on the wing last season. While he's a good 3+ years away from making any kind of impact (if any), he's 2nd in line thanks to his decent numbers and draft pedigree (plus the lack of quality competition in general).
Defense:
Pardy, Pelech and Negrin form the top layer, while the rest of the field is a bunch of question marks or worse. Of those three, I'd say only Pelech and Negrin have "top 4" potential in them. I also added free agent signing Ryan Wilson here, but excluded last years roll of the dice Brad Cole because he failed to stick with the farm team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For those struggling to appreciate what stats in lower leagues mean in terms of NHL performance, Gabe Desjardins has a handy little post over at behindthenet called "League Transaltions"
How difficult is it to score a goal in the National Hockey League (NHL) relative to another league? With half of NHL players coming from the minor leagues, a quarter from European Elite Leagues, 20% coming directly from Canadian Major Junior and 10% from the NCAA, that’s a question NHL teams try to answer every day. In evaluating these players, it is critical to know how a player’s performance translates to the NHL.
One way to evaluate the difficulty of one league relative to another is examine the relative performance of players who have played in both leagues. Players rarely play significant time in two leagues in the same year, but they often play in one league in one year and in another the next. As long as a player’s skill level is approximately constant over this two year period, the ratio of his performance in each league can be used to estimate the relative difficulty of the two leagues.
Read the whole thing if you're interested. The pertinent bit for current purposes is the "conversion table" -
So, assuming a player playing the same role (minutes, relative quality of line mates and opposition), one could reasonably expect his results to look like N*(Difficulty), where N is his PPG rate and Difficulty is the ratio associated with whatever league he's currently in.
So, for Kris Chucko - 0.375 PPG*0.44 (AHL) = 0.165 PPG is what we could probably expect from Chucko if he somehow made the team next year (and had a similar role to what he's playing in the minors).
82 games times 0.165 PPG = about 14 points.
Obviously it's not an easy conversion and young players are going to improve...but it gives one a rough indication of where a prospect is right now in his development. Desjardins has a more extensive discussion of the issue in this pdf, where he shows equivalencies between minor leagues like the WHL and AHL (0.43).
(Thanks go to Lowetide for making me aware of this process.)
Thursday, August 21, 2008
More prospect discussion
...Sort of. The Hockey News' Mark Seidel has posted some thoughts re: each NHL teams recent draft performance. It's mostly just a general overview and an associated letter grade:
C+, Calgary Flames – Greg Nemisz is a lot like Joe Colborne in that he has the potential to become a big-time player, but the clock is ticking and he hasn’t shown enough consistency yet.
That's about the grade I'd give the orgs drafting since Sutter took over, so seems right. At least the Oilers and Wild got slightly worse evaluations.
Seidel isn't just some schmo like myself posting assessments based on hazy 2nd hand reports and incomplete stats. According to his bio line at HN he "is the chief scout for North American Central Scouting and appears as a host on Leafs Lunch on AM 640 radio in Toronto", so he's likely basing his impressions on some first-hand information. That said, assessing prospects a few months after they're chosen is more art than science, no matter who you are.
hat-tip to PPP.
C+, Calgary Flames – Greg Nemisz is a lot like Joe Colborne in that he has the potential to become a big-time player, but the clock is ticking and he hasn’t shown enough consistency yet.
That's about the grade I'd give the orgs drafting since Sutter took over, so seems right. At least the Oilers and Wild got slightly worse evaluations.
Seidel isn't just some schmo like myself posting assessments based on hazy 2nd hand reports and incomplete stats. According to his bio line at HN he "is the chief scout for North American Central Scouting and appears as a host on Leafs Lunch on AM 640 radio in Toronto", so he's likely basing his impressions on some first-hand information. That said, assessing prospects a few months after they're chosen is more art than science, no matter who you are.
hat-tip to PPP.
Hockey Talk
Flames discussion on the FAN960 with Peter Maher.
Highlights:
- Flames are kicking tires with salary floor teams, trying to dump some salary. No surprises here.
- Teams needs include: a better start by Kipper, more effective defense (Aucoin and Sarich mentioned).
- Adam Pardy has a chance to stick with the team.
- The first line scoring unit will likely be Bert, Langkow and Iginla to start. Organization expects Lombardi to step up as a 2nd line center.
- Some discussion of NW division opponents.
Nothing ground-breaking but, hey...it's the middle of August. Plus, it's good to hear from Maher, who is close with the players and coaches and always has his ear to the ground.
Highlights:
- Flames are kicking tires with salary floor teams, trying to dump some salary. No surprises here.
- Teams needs include: a better start by Kipper, more effective defense (Aucoin and Sarich mentioned).
- Adam Pardy has a chance to stick with the team.
- The first line scoring unit will likely be Bert, Langkow and Iginla to start. Organization expects Lombardi to step up as a 2nd line center.
- Some discussion of NW division opponents.
Nothing ground-breaking but, hey...it's the middle of August. Plus, it's good to hear from Maher, who is close with the players and coaches and always has his ear to the ground.
On the periphery
I've looked at the big club from just about every angle I can think of so far this summer. Perhaps it's time I considered some of the future assets and fringe players that will be skating from the organization this season.
David Van Der Gulik -
A guy I've pimped in this space for awhile. He's managed just over a 0.5 PPG pace in the AHL in checking/PK role the last two years. Charting VDG's progression prior to his professional career is tough because he spent most of his final season at Boston U being injured. He moved from 20 points his first two years, to 18 goals and 31 points in season three before managing 11 goals and 22 points in just 25 games in 05-06. His PPG rate those 4 seasons moved from 0.5 to 0.88 so there's a hint of improvement, despite the injury woes.
As mentioned previously, Van Der Gulik led the Omaha Flames and all AHL rookies in plus/minus in 06-07. He dropped back down to earth last season by this measure, largely because the team as a whole was markedly worse (lost Moss, Boyd, Taratuhkin, Giordano, Regehr and Nystrom), although he was still amongst the clubs leaders.
One of the most frustrating things about following AHL prospects from afar is the total dearth of in-depth stats. Counting numbers are available, but it's basically impossible to know how many minutes a guy is playing per night, or against whom. My impression that VDG is a top-notch penalty killer and shut-down guy has been culled from fan reports, media quotes and sound-bites, so it's possible Im mistaken. Still, the former 7th rounder has consistently out-performed guys like Nystrom, Chucko, Maki, Cunning, Peters and Prust by the counting numbers since he broke into the league.
All that said, this is probably Gulik's last kick at the NHL cat. He's already 25 and is at risk to become one of those lifetime AHL players who's kept around to help break in the kids every year. A lot of things will have to go right for him to even get a sniff at the big league this year, though, given the Flames overly stuffed roster and preponderance of one-way contracts. Not to mention the fact that four of his peers have been promoted ahead of him the last couple of seasons (Boyd, Moss, Nystrom and Prust) even though a couple of them put up lesser results. That seems to signal he's a "low priority" prospect in the organizations eyes and he will have to knock some asses out of the seats to get any kind promotional consideration.
Adam Pardy -
After an excellent training camp last September in which he appeared to be head and shoulders above many of the franchises other defensive prospects, Pardy went on to become one of the farms top defensemen. He's been mentioned as being close to "NHL ready" by Ryan McGill and has shown a decent development arc during his pro career. He played 41 games in the ECHL in 05/06, before making the AHL full time the next season and garnering 8 points in 70 games. Last year, Pardy was forced up the depth chart with the deletions of Richie Regehr and Mark Giordano and he responded with 5 goals and 18 points in 65 games.
Pardy will likely be on the top pairing again this season with Matt Pelech, unless one of the free-floating vets on the big squad gets sent down (Eriksson/Warrener). Even then, it'll be good news if Pardy can take another step in the right direction.
Daniel Ryder -
The Flames prodigal son. I considered Ryder one of the organizations top prospects along with Boyd and Taratuhkin a few years ago and was fairly disappointed when he washed out after just 5 AHL games last year. For a team lacking legitimate offensive youngsters, Ryder's apparent defection was a significant blow to the club's depth chart.
After taking a year off to...do whatever he needed to do, Daniel has decided to return. He's lost a season of development and it remains to be seen how committed he is to hockey after his hiatus, but it's still good news for Flame fans.
Ryder had himself an outstanding Junior career. He scored a boatload of points, was voted one of the leagues best penalty killers and face-off men, won the "Wayne Gretzky 99 award" as a play-off MVP in 05-06 (where he scored 15 goals and 31 points in 19 games) and twice went to the Memorial cup. Safe to say, no Flames prospect in recent memory has had anywhere near the kind of impressive resume Ryder now boasts.
A lot of curious eyes will be watching the younger Ryder to see what kind of steps he can take this time around. He wont be pressing for a big league job this year, but a solid season may indicate he's back on track.
Kris Chucko -
I've never liked this guy as a prospect and he's done little to sway me. His stats beyond one good year in the BCHL are worse than mediocre and he's failed to make any kind of impact the last couple seasons on the farm. I've seen Chucko live a couple of times and have never been impressed with any part of his game - from the physical tools down to the mental aspects. He skates awkwardly, can't seem to stick handle and doesn't have a nose for the net. There's nothing about him that is notable or compelling.
This is a swing year for Chucko. His development has been flat in the AHL and unless he takes a sizable step forward, he'll likely be passed-by for good by other kids. Were I a betting man, I'd say he puts up another 15 goal, 30 or so point performance and sinks into the morass ever after.
Matt Pelech -
By all accounts, a player that developed by leaps and bounds during his rookie year and one who could press to be a NHLer sooner rather than later. Being a Regehr-esque defender, his performance isn't really captured by the stats, so I have to take this stuff on faith for now.
Pelech is a big guy at 6'4", 220 pounds and is rumored to be both relatively mobile and hard hitting. He's not going to score a lot of points, but that's secondary if he can develop into shut-down stalwart type. Likely tabbed by the organization as the top defensive prospect, there's a chance he could make the leap this year or next. It will be interesting to see how long he lasts this pre-season and whether he can continue to make gains on the farm.
Ryan Wilson -
A free agent signing by Sutter this summer, I'd never heard of Wilson before the deal was announced. I was pleasantly surprised to discover he was a big-time point getter in his Junior days, scoring 60+ points in each of his last 3 years (twice topping 70 points). Those are some serious numbers for a defenseman.
Of course, the kid was undrafted and obviously comes with some warts. Word is he is a very awkward skater and has some decision-making issues, especially in his own end:
The areas of Wilson’s game that most need work are skating and defense. He was caught scrambling in his own end far too often, and lacks the recovery speed to conceal his mistakes. A hard worker and on-ice leader, if Wilson could clean up his defensive zone coverage, and work on his skating stride he would be a very solid prospect.
Wilson is a no-risk acquisition. The Flames have zero real offensive prospects on the back-end, so the 21 year-old will probably be handed the keys to the QC power-play. At worst, his weaknesses overwhelm him and we never hear from him again. At best, the minor club has a PP quarterback who could potentially become a 3rd pairing, special teams kind of guy down the road. Good news for fans (and Wilson) is the Flames have been pretty good at identifying undrafted defensive talent since Sutter took the reigns (although they haven't been very good at developing it).
Matt Keeltey/Leland Irving -
The battle to become Kipper's heir apparent begins this October in Quad Cities.
Keetley put up decent stats during his WHL career. He won a memorial cup with the Medicine Hat Tigers his last year in the Dub, then managed some not-too-bad numbers in his rookie debut last year (10-8-1, 2.33 GAA 0.912 SV%).
Irving had the better Junior career stats-wise, but took a very notable step backwards his last season in the league. I'm not sure if this was due to internal or external factors. Even with that, Irving was in the top 10 in terms of WHL goaltenders, meaning he didn't fall off a ledge and land into the land of the mediocre.
With Krahn gone and McElhinney (probably) shuttled upwards, the way is clear for Keetley and Irving to duke it out mano-a-mano. I assume the two will be deployed as a duo unless one proves to be obviously better than the other. I'm not even going to try to predict who will come out the victor, although Irving has the better pedigree.
That's my look at the possibles. Excluded were Lundmark (AHL fodder), Greentree and Backlund (discussed elsewhere), Taratuhkin (gone, never coming back), the newly drafted who remain in Junior and the various indistinguishables that clutter every team's minor ranks. What I have here are the guys I think are approaching a transition phase of their young career or are within spitting distance of making the bigs. Feel free to add your own comments or impressions.
David Van Der Gulik -
A guy I've pimped in this space for awhile. He's managed just over a 0.5 PPG pace in the AHL in checking/PK role the last two years. Charting VDG's progression prior to his professional career is tough because he spent most of his final season at Boston U being injured. He moved from 20 points his first two years, to 18 goals and 31 points in season three before managing 11 goals and 22 points in just 25 games in 05-06. His PPG rate those 4 seasons moved from 0.5 to 0.88 so there's a hint of improvement, despite the injury woes.
As mentioned previously, Van Der Gulik led the Omaha Flames and all AHL rookies in plus/minus in 06-07. He dropped back down to earth last season by this measure, largely because the team as a whole was markedly worse (lost Moss, Boyd, Taratuhkin, Giordano, Regehr and Nystrom), although he was still amongst the clubs leaders.
One of the most frustrating things about following AHL prospects from afar is the total dearth of in-depth stats. Counting numbers are available, but it's basically impossible to know how many minutes a guy is playing per night, or against whom. My impression that VDG is a top-notch penalty killer and shut-down guy has been culled from fan reports, media quotes and sound-bites, so it's possible Im mistaken. Still, the former 7th rounder has consistently out-performed guys like Nystrom, Chucko, Maki, Cunning, Peters and Prust by the counting numbers since he broke into the league.
All that said, this is probably Gulik's last kick at the NHL cat. He's already 25 and is at risk to become one of those lifetime AHL players who's kept around to help break in the kids every year. A lot of things will have to go right for him to even get a sniff at the big league this year, though, given the Flames overly stuffed roster and preponderance of one-way contracts. Not to mention the fact that four of his peers have been promoted ahead of him the last couple of seasons (Boyd, Moss, Nystrom and Prust) even though a couple of them put up lesser results. That seems to signal he's a "low priority" prospect in the organizations eyes and he will have to knock some asses out of the seats to get any kind promotional consideration.
Adam Pardy -
After an excellent training camp last September in which he appeared to be head and shoulders above many of the franchises other defensive prospects, Pardy went on to become one of the farms top defensemen. He's been mentioned as being close to "NHL ready" by Ryan McGill and has shown a decent development arc during his pro career. He played 41 games in the ECHL in 05/06, before making the AHL full time the next season and garnering 8 points in 70 games. Last year, Pardy was forced up the depth chart with the deletions of Richie Regehr and Mark Giordano and he responded with 5 goals and 18 points in 65 games.
Pardy will likely be on the top pairing again this season with Matt Pelech, unless one of the free-floating vets on the big squad gets sent down (Eriksson/Warrener). Even then, it'll be good news if Pardy can take another step in the right direction.
Daniel Ryder -
The Flames prodigal son. I considered Ryder one of the organizations top prospects along with Boyd and Taratuhkin a few years ago and was fairly disappointed when he washed out after just 5 AHL games last year. For a team lacking legitimate offensive youngsters, Ryder's apparent defection was a significant blow to the club's depth chart.
After taking a year off to...do whatever he needed to do, Daniel has decided to return. He's lost a season of development and it remains to be seen how committed he is to hockey after his hiatus, but it's still good news for Flame fans.
Ryder had himself an outstanding Junior career. He scored a boatload of points, was voted one of the leagues best penalty killers and face-off men, won the "Wayne Gretzky 99 award" as a play-off MVP in 05-06 (where he scored 15 goals and 31 points in 19 games) and twice went to the Memorial cup. Safe to say, no Flames prospect in recent memory has had anywhere near the kind of impressive resume Ryder now boasts.
A lot of curious eyes will be watching the younger Ryder to see what kind of steps he can take this time around. He wont be pressing for a big league job this year, but a solid season may indicate he's back on track.
Kris Chucko -
I've never liked this guy as a prospect and he's done little to sway me. His stats beyond one good year in the BCHL are worse than mediocre and he's failed to make any kind of impact the last couple seasons on the farm. I've seen Chucko live a couple of times and have never been impressed with any part of his game - from the physical tools down to the mental aspects. He skates awkwardly, can't seem to stick handle and doesn't have a nose for the net. There's nothing about him that is notable or compelling.
This is a swing year for Chucko. His development has been flat in the AHL and unless he takes a sizable step forward, he'll likely be passed-by for good by other kids. Were I a betting man, I'd say he puts up another 15 goal, 30 or so point performance and sinks into the morass ever after.
Matt Pelech -
By all accounts, a player that developed by leaps and bounds during his rookie year and one who could press to be a NHLer sooner rather than later. Being a Regehr-esque defender, his performance isn't really captured by the stats, so I have to take this stuff on faith for now.
Pelech is a big guy at 6'4", 220 pounds and is rumored to be both relatively mobile and hard hitting. He's not going to score a lot of points, but that's secondary if he can develop into shut-down stalwart type. Likely tabbed by the organization as the top defensive prospect, there's a chance he could make the leap this year or next. It will be interesting to see how long he lasts this pre-season and whether he can continue to make gains on the farm.
Ryan Wilson -
A free agent signing by Sutter this summer, I'd never heard of Wilson before the deal was announced. I was pleasantly surprised to discover he was a big-time point getter in his Junior days, scoring 60+ points in each of his last 3 years (twice topping 70 points). Those are some serious numbers for a defenseman.
Of course, the kid was undrafted and obviously comes with some warts. Word is he is a very awkward skater and has some decision-making issues, especially in his own end:
The areas of Wilson’s game that most need work are skating and defense. He was caught scrambling in his own end far too often, and lacks the recovery speed to conceal his mistakes. A hard worker and on-ice leader, if Wilson could clean up his defensive zone coverage, and work on his skating stride he would be a very solid prospect.
Wilson is a no-risk acquisition. The Flames have zero real offensive prospects on the back-end, so the 21 year-old will probably be handed the keys to the QC power-play. At worst, his weaknesses overwhelm him and we never hear from him again. At best, the minor club has a PP quarterback who could potentially become a 3rd pairing, special teams kind of guy down the road. Good news for fans (and Wilson) is the Flames have been pretty good at identifying undrafted defensive talent since Sutter took the reigns (although they haven't been very good at developing it).
Matt Keeltey/Leland Irving -
The battle to become Kipper's heir apparent begins this October in Quad Cities.
Keetley put up decent stats during his WHL career. He won a memorial cup with the Medicine Hat Tigers his last year in the Dub, then managed some not-too-bad numbers in his rookie debut last year (10-8-1, 2.33 GAA 0.912 SV%).
Irving had the better Junior career stats-wise, but took a very notable step backwards his last season in the league. I'm not sure if this was due to internal or external factors. Even with that, Irving was in the top 10 in terms of WHL goaltenders, meaning he didn't fall off a ledge and land into the land of the mediocre.
With Krahn gone and McElhinney (probably) shuttled upwards, the way is clear for Keetley and Irving to duke it out mano-a-mano. I assume the two will be deployed as a duo unless one proves to be obviously better than the other. I'm not even going to try to predict who will come out the victor, although Irving has the better pedigree.
That's my look at the possibles. Excluded were Lundmark (AHL fodder), Greentree and Backlund (discussed elsewhere), Taratuhkin (gone, never coming back), the newly drafted who remain in Junior and the various indistinguishables that clutter every team's minor ranks. What I have here are the guys I think are approaching a transition phase of their young career or are within spitting distance of making the bigs. Feel free to add your own comments or impressions.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Special Teams and penalty differentials
One of my standing assumptions heading into the new season is the Flames will take a step back in terms of even-strength play. The prediction primarily springs from the loss the of Alex Tanguay, Calgary's second best ES player the last few years. Now, a number of things could prove this assumption false come October: a Kiprusoff bounce back, a sizable step forward by Dion Phaneuf and/or any of the new guys, etc. That said, let's proceed assuming the Flames will in fact be worse at ES next season. Meaning the team will have to drive results (ie; goal diffential) some other way.
Calgary was actually a decent ES team last year. They scored the 12th most goals 5on5 (145) and were in the top 10 in terms of GA (135). Problem was, they gave it all back thanks to their dreadful special teams (STGD was -13). Not only were both the PP and PK below average in terms of efficiency, but the Flames also took more penalties than they drew (-37).
I looked at the penalty differential because in discussing some of the players this off season the issue of taken/drawn ratios has been breached a couple times. It occured to me that penalty differential might be a potential driver of results for the special teams goal differential. It makes intuitive sense: spending more time on the PP and less on the PK should mean more goals for, less goals against. The possibility of scoring climbs with the man advantage, while the chances of getting scored on plummet. The opposite is true of the penalty kill. So perhaps a healthy differential could actually make up for mediocre efficacy rates? Maybe the Flames could merely concentrate on, say, not taking as many penalties (they were the 2nd most penalized team in the league last year) rather than hope they can significantly ratchet up a 20th ranked PK?
I began my inquiry by looking at last year's ST results:
Included are raw numbers (including times shorthanded and power-play opportunites), PP and PK rates, as well as penalty differential, ST goal differential and a combined score for each club's special teams (PP+PK). At the bottom, I correlated ST GD with combined ST score and then again with penalty differential.
As you can see, the PK+PP score had the strongest correlation with GD (0.89). However, PEN DIFF was also significantly correlated with GD last season (0.64). This perhaps suggests that a higher positive penalty differential can lead to a higher ST goal differential, although this suggests doing things well with a man up or down is still the best way to drive results.
For a more robust investigation, I decided to compile all the ST data from the last five seasons (2002/2003-present) to maybe smooth out some wrinkles:
Both correlations dropped, although the Penalty differential suffered the bigger decline. PP+PK remained above .80 (0.83), while penalty differential, though still statistically significant, dropped down to 0.51.
Findings:
- There's no substitute for being good. The Detroit Red Wings had a negative penalty differential over 5 seasons, taking 37 more penalties than they drew, but still ended up in the black by 106 goals. The reason? Their league best combined special team score of 105.9. Conversely, really bad ST teams couldn't overcome their crappiness through discipline alone: the NY Rangers had 354 more PPs than PKs since 2002 and a GD of -30...all due to their pitiful ST score of 94. Both teams were around 6 ticks away from the league mean of 100 (99.9) in either direction.
- Penalty differential probably exerts something of a moderating effect on GD outside of the extremely good and extremely bad ST clubs. In addition, it obviously exacerbates gains at the good end and losses at the bad end.
- Flames were -37 in terms of penalties for/against in 07/08, -13 in terms of GD and were below average in terms of ST score (98.3). Nothing good there. The team should at least try to get up to the mean on the latter measure (100) as well as shoot for a minimum penalty differential of 0 if they want contribute to (rather than deflate) their overall GD.
- Over the five year period, the Flames were -61, -31 and 99 in PEN DIFF, GD and ST score respectively. No wonder special teams seem like a perennial sore spot.
Im not sure what drives PEN DIFF, be it team make-up, coaching, difficulty of schedule or some combination of therein, but the 3 best clubs by this measure over the long-term were CAR (+278), San Jose (+280) and TBL (+284). The three worst were BOS (-245), CHI (-322) and FLA (-343). The first three had positive GDs, while the latter three were negative.
Implications for the Flames -
PEN DIFF:
The worst Flames in terms of taken/drawn differential, according to behindthenet: (Player, Taken/60/Drawn/60)
Cory Sarich, 1.8/0.3
Wayne Primeau, 1.8/0.5
Matthew Lombardi, 1.6/0.8
Craig Conroy, 1.6/0.9
David Hale, 1.3/0.4
Owen Nolan, 1.3/0.7
Rhett Warrener, 1.2/0.5
Robyn Regehr, 1.0/0.4
Guys like Regehr and Sarich are always going to take more than they draw because they spend a lot of time against big guns, ie: guys who draw a lot of penalties. So there likely won't be much improvement there, although Sarich's appalling ratio suggests he may be in over his head a tad.
Craig Conroy took a lot of stick-related penalties last year and like Regehr and Sarich that probably had to do with his quality of competition. Primeau, Hale and Warrener, on the other hand, are just guys that can't keep up to anyone. Hale's gone, so here's hoping Warrener and Primeau stay off the ice as much as possible.
Matthew Lombardi is a head scratcher, although his 64 PIM were a career high. Better surroundings may just mean a return back to normal for him.
Now, some of the additions:
Bertuzzi, 1:3/1:4
Cammalleri, 0.6/1.0
Bourque, 1.2/1.3
Glencross, 1.1/1.5
Surprise of the day: Bertuzzi, known league-wide for taken dumb penalties, was actually in the black in terms of penalty differential last year. In fact, all the new Flames were, which is encouraging. The combination of losing guys like Warrener, Hale and Nolan while adding 4 new "penalty drawers" suggests the Flames could close the gap on that -37 PEN DIFF from last season.
ST score
Calgary's PP will enjoy an infusion of new players on both units (Giordano, Cammalleri, Bertuzzi, Boyd?, Lombardi) as well as the expulsion of some old ones, both good (Huselius) and bad (Nolan, Conroy, Tanguay, Eriksson). Also, the Flames home PP rate of 14.6% was the 2nd worst in the league and almost a full 5% below their road rate of 19.5%. What's more bizarre is they enjoyed far more PPs at home than on the road and most teams enjoyed a bump in PP efficacy on home ice. In fact, just by eye-balling the list, it looks the Flames had the biggest difference between their road and home PP percentage in the NHL.
That doesn't make a lick of sense to me and I would expect the home performance to jump up a bit next season just because it should.
The PK was discussed at length here and a bit here. Like the PP above, the personnel changes are potentially beneficial, although a significant improvement likely rests on Kippers shoulders.
Overall
Penalty Differential apparently contributes to goal differential, although it's effects can be overridden by a good or bad combined special team score. The Flames have historically been poor in almost all special teams areas, but seemed poised to make gains in both penalty differential, ST score and therefore, ST goal differential. If true, the improvement may help assuage the potential step back in ES play, as long as it's not too sizable a decline. Naturally, ES play trumps all.
Calgary was actually a decent ES team last year. They scored the 12th most goals 5on5 (145) and were in the top 10 in terms of GA (135). Problem was, they gave it all back thanks to their dreadful special teams (STGD was -13). Not only were both the PP and PK below average in terms of efficiency, but the Flames also took more penalties than they drew (-37).
I looked at the penalty differential because in discussing some of the players this off season the issue of taken/drawn ratios has been breached a couple times. It occured to me that penalty differential might be a potential driver of results for the special teams goal differential. It makes intuitive sense: spending more time on the PP and less on the PK should mean more goals for, less goals against. The possibility of scoring climbs with the man advantage, while the chances of getting scored on plummet. The opposite is true of the penalty kill. So perhaps a healthy differential could actually make up for mediocre efficacy rates? Maybe the Flames could merely concentrate on, say, not taking as many penalties (they were the 2nd most penalized team in the league last year) rather than hope they can significantly ratchet up a 20th ranked PK?
I began my inquiry by looking at last year's ST results:
Included are raw numbers (including times shorthanded and power-play opportunites), PP and PK rates, as well as penalty differential, ST goal differential and a combined score for each club's special teams (PP+PK). At the bottom, I correlated ST GD with combined ST score and then again with penalty differential.
As you can see, the PK+PP score had the strongest correlation with GD (0.89). However, PEN DIFF was also significantly correlated with GD last season (0.64). This perhaps suggests that a higher positive penalty differential can lead to a higher ST goal differential, although this suggests doing things well with a man up or down is still the best way to drive results.
For a more robust investigation, I decided to compile all the ST data from the last five seasons (2002/2003-present) to maybe smooth out some wrinkles:
Both correlations dropped, although the Penalty differential suffered the bigger decline. PP+PK remained above .80 (0.83), while penalty differential, though still statistically significant, dropped down to 0.51.
Findings:
- There's no substitute for being good. The Detroit Red Wings had a negative penalty differential over 5 seasons, taking 37 more penalties than they drew, but still ended up in the black by 106 goals. The reason? Their league best combined special team score of 105.9. Conversely, really bad ST teams couldn't overcome their crappiness through discipline alone: the NY Rangers had 354 more PPs than PKs since 2002 and a GD of -30...all due to their pitiful ST score of 94. Both teams were around 6 ticks away from the league mean of 100 (99.9) in either direction.
- Penalty differential probably exerts something of a moderating effect on GD outside of the extremely good and extremely bad ST clubs. In addition, it obviously exacerbates gains at the good end and losses at the bad end.
- Flames were -37 in terms of penalties for/against in 07/08, -13 in terms of GD and were below average in terms of ST score (98.3). Nothing good there. The team should at least try to get up to the mean on the latter measure (100) as well as shoot for a minimum penalty differential of 0 if they want contribute to (rather than deflate) their overall GD.
- Over the five year period, the Flames were -61, -31 and 99 in PEN DIFF, GD and ST score respectively. No wonder special teams seem like a perennial sore spot.
Im not sure what drives PEN DIFF, be it team make-up, coaching, difficulty of schedule or some combination of therein, but the 3 best clubs by this measure over the long-term were CAR (+278), San Jose (+280) and TBL (+284). The three worst were BOS (-245), CHI (-322) and FLA (-343). The first three had positive GDs, while the latter three were negative.
Implications for the Flames -
PEN DIFF:
The worst Flames in terms of taken/drawn differential, according to behindthenet: (Player, Taken/60/Drawn/60)
Cory Sarich, 1.8/0.3
Wayne Primeau, 1.8/0.5
Matthew Lombardi, 1.6/0.8
Craig Conroy, 1.6/0.9
David Hale, 1.3/0.4
Owen Nolan, 1.3/0.7
Rhett Warrener, 1.2/0.5
Robyn Regehr, 1.0/0.4
Guys like Regehr and Sarich are always going to take more than they draw because they spend a lot of time against big guns, ie: guys who draw a lot of penalties. So there likely won't be much improvement there, although Sarich's appalling ratio suggests he may be in over his head a tad.
Craig Conroy took a lot of stick-related penalties last year and like Regehr and Sarich that probably had to do with his quality of competition. Primeau, Hale and Warrener, on the other hand, are just guys that can't keep up to anyone. Hale's gone, so here's hoping Warrener and Primeau stay off the ice as much as possible.
Matthew Lombardi is a head scratcher, although his 64 PIM were a career high. Better surroundings may just mean a return back to normal for him.
Now, some of the additions:
Bertuzzi, 1:3/1:4
Cammalleri, 0.6/1.0
Bourque, 1.2/1.3
Glencross, 1.1/1.5
Surprise of the day: Bertuzzi, known league-wide for taken dumb penalties, was actually in the black in terms of penalty differential last year. In fact, all the new Flames were, which is encouraging. The combination of losing guys like Warrener, Hale and Nolan while adding 4 new "penalty drawers" suggests the Flames could close the gap on that -37 PEN DIFF from last season.
ST score
Calgary's PP will enjoy an infusion of new players on both units (Giordano, Cammalleri, Bertuzzi, Boyd?, Lombardi) as well as the expulsion of some old ones, both good (Huselius) and bad (Nolan, Conroy, Tanguay, Eriksson). Also, the Flames home PP rate of 14.6% was the 2nd worst in the league and almost a full 5% below their road rate of 19.5%. What's more bizarre is they enjoyed far more PPs at home than on the road and most teams enjoyed a bump in PP efficacy on home ice. In fact, just by eye-balling the list, it looks the Flames had the biggest difference between their road and home PP percentage in the NHL.
That doesn't make a lick of sense to me and I would expect the home performance to jump up a bit next season just because it should.
The PK was discussed at length here and a bit here. Like the PP above, the personnel changes are potentially beneficial, although a significant improvement likely rests on Kippers shoulders.
Overall
Penalty Differential apparently contributes to goal differential, although it's effects can be overridden by a good or bad combined special team score. The Flames have historically been poor in almost all special teams areas, but seemed poised to make gains in both penalty differential, ST score and therefore, ST goal differential. If true, the improvement may help assuage the potential step back in ES play, as long as it's not too sizable a decline. Naturally, ES play trumps all.
Musings of Interest: Eric Nystrom
I was initially planning on skipping over Nystrom for this series, only because I dont find anything particularly interesting about him. Of all the Flames prospects still growing into their big boy
Nystrom was a jeans model draft pick. He has a nice skating stride, plays the game in earnest and isn't afraid of the physical play. Lastly and perhaps most importantly, he has decent pedigree. Name recognition can go a long way in horse breeding, politics and, sometimes, hockey drafts.
Nystrom's results certainly don't match his draft position - never have. He was picked 10th overall by the Flames back in 2002, after an okay rookie campaign for the University of Michigan (18-12-30). Unfortunately, he would never go on to replicate those results through the next three years in NCAA, scoring 15, 10 and 13 goals consecutively. After college, Nystrom turned pro where he continued to be little more than mediocre. Although hampered by a nagging shoulder injury, Nystrom managed to play in 108 games over parts of 3 seasons, scoring just 21 goals and 42 points. That's less than 20 year-old, former third-round selection Dustin Boyd managed in 60 some games during his rookie year.
The persistent claim about Nystrom is that he excels in the defensive aspects of the game, therefore counting stats in the lower leagues aren't indicative of his play. Except Nystrom was never a plus player during his AHL time either (cumulative -5). David Van Der Gulik, for comparisons sake, who is described as the farm teams top penalty killer and shut-down guy, was a +27 in his rookie year (06/07). That was best on the team by a country mile and 4th best in the entire league. His peers in that regard were Zenon Konopka (+25), Andrei Kostitsyn (+24) and Dave Steckel (+28). Of the 4, only Van Der Gulik was a rookie. He also scored 16 goals and 43 points that same year.
Get my drift? Nystrom has never been at the head of the class in any regard. What's more, there has never been any real progression in his game. He was ordinary in NCAA. He was ordinary in the AHL. His rookie year for the parent club was pretty much a disaster, despite the fact he was already 25 years-old. There's no upward trend to give one hope of a break-out.
Anyways, here's his advanced stats:
ESP/60: 1.43 (number grossly inflated by the last game of the season in which he managed 4 points against a Vancouver team that showed up only because they were paid to. He had 6 points in the 43 previous games).
QUAL Comp: -0.04
QUAL team: -0.35
GFON: 1.57/60
GAON: 2.15/60
Corsi: -7.7
Meh. As mentioned, Nystrom is a good skater and he's game for anything. Unfortunately, his numerous weaknesses tend to overwhelm his few strengths. He has hands of granite, poor offensive instincts, a bad shot and tends to get lost whenever he drifts into the middle of the ice. He invariably shoots pucks wide or into pads in the offensive zone. He kills rushes in the neutral zone because he's never really sure what to do (outside of dumping it in). He's the kind of player you hope doesn't get the pass on the two-on-one, and you audibly groan when he does. He's also willing to drop the gloves, but invariably gets pummeled whenever he does. He's that guy.
Nystrom does have a couple of things going for him:
1.) The organization seems keen on developing him, despite his ongoing ordinariness.
2.) He had nice PK numbers last season (3.41 GA/60 - a number sullied by a very small sample size) albeit in limited action.
3.) He only has a small body of work on which Im basing my impressions, meaning I could be mistaken.
Problem is, I see more obstacles than opportunities for Eric going forward. Sutter was forced to acquire two comparable (but demonstrably better) players this summer in Bourque and Glencross since it was clear Nystrom would be unable to step into the divide once Huselius and Tanguay left. In addition, Kyle Greentree, a player of similar age and superior AHL results, was added to the farm club this off-season. The depth chart is filling up all around Nystrom and the window for assuring his place on the big team is rapidly closing. He turns 26 in February, has already been lapped by Dustin Boyd and David Moss and will be fighting off the likes of Glencross, Prust, Van Der Gulik and potentially the aforementioned Greentree this coming season...
Prognosis: negative.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
A closer look at Flames salary issues
Mirtle's salary series has inspired me to look again at the Flames salary situation. I've decided to do that by splitting the roster roughly in half, according to "top half" players (top 6 forwards, top 4 defensemen, starter) and "bottom half" players (everyone else). Dollar figures included are cap hits rather than actual salary.
Top Half:
Iginla - 7M
Langkow - 4.5M
Cammalleri - 3.35M
Bertuzzi - 1.9M
Lombardi - 1.817
Bourque - 1.3M
Conroy - 1.05M
Phaneuf - 6.5M
Regehr - 4M
Sarich - 3.6M
Kipper - 5.83M
---------------
Total: 40.847M
Mean: 3.71
Potenially Good value: (perform at or above cap hit): Iginla, Cammalleri, Lombardi, Bertuzzi, Bourque, Conroy, Regehr, Phaneuf, Sarich
Potentially Bad value (likely to under-perform relative to cap hit): Phaneuf, Kiprusoff
I included guys that are established top 6 forwards or top 4 defensemen, as well as a couple of players that are likely to make better than average contributions or take a step forward into the upper class (Bourque). Conroy is here because, though I think he'll play in the bottom 6, I assume he's going to see a lot of time against tough competition and will be big on the PK. Fifteen or more minutes per night for him is not unrealistic. Plus he might get the "play with your buddy Jarome" card again.
Obviously a huge portion of the rosters dollars are going to invested here. This is where the difference makers and starting goalies reside. This is where money should be spent, on guys who are good bets to carry the mail. To Sutter's credit, there isn't a lot of bad money here. Even Kipper and Phaneuf could prove to be good value players, steps forward depending. Most of the big guns aren't bargains, but their results should just about sync-up with their cap-hit, at least.
Something interesting we can see here is a steep drop-off in the forwards: after Iggy, Langkow and Cammalleri (mean: 4.95M), the remaining 4 players salaries average just 1.51M. Keep in mind we're talking about the top half of the roster - most, if not all, of these players should be expected to do some kind of heavy lifting. The primary problem with this roster slice, therefore, is many of the skaters aren't proven difference makers (or else they'd be more expensive). While they will probably provide value for dollars, there's a good chance some of them won't be able to provide the type of results required of top half players.
Unless a organization has a bunch of kids ahead of the curve (CHI with Kane and Toews for example), I think an ideal salary structure for this portion of the line-up is a gradual decline (eg: 6M-5M-4.5M-3.5M-2.5M-2M) rather than the step off a cliff we see above. A big gap probably means you have guys playing where they shouldn't be and there's a lot of money invested elsewhere - perhaps unwisely.
Bottom Half:
Wayne Primeau - 1.4M
Curtis Glencross - 1.2M
Marcus Nilson - 1M
Dustin Boyd - 0.742M
Eric Nystrom - 0.688M
David Moss - 0.55M
Andre Roy - 0.55M
Brandon Prust - 0.50M
Adrian Aucoin - 4M
Rhett Warrener - 2.35M
Jim Vandermeer - 2.3M
Anders Eriksson - 1.5M
Mark Giordano - 0.8M*
*estimate
Curtis McElhinney - 0.55M
--------------------------
Total: 18.13M
Mean: 1.39M
Potentially Good value: Glencross, Moss, Boyd, Giordano
Potentially Bad value: Primeau, Aucoin, Warrener, Eriksson, Vandermeer, Nilson (due only to Keenan's irrational hatred of him)
Meh (low cost+low utility=irrelevent): Prust, Roy, Nystrom
Here's where you hide your kids, your checkers, your projects, your long bets and your useless enforcers. Aside from the fact there's simply too many players and future healthy scratch Wayne Primeau is making more than two of the top 6 forwards (Bourque, Conroy), the Flames bottom 6 forward structure looks alright. You have a couple of good bets to provide value or value+ results (Moss, Boyd, Glencross) and the standard replacement level guys (Prust, Roy, Nystrom). Deleting Primeau (1.4M) and Nilson (1M) may have helped land another top forward, if anything.
Course, the real bad investment is revealed in the bottom half of defense corps. The Flames not only have 5 potential third pairing (or worse) defenders, four of them make more than the average bottom-half salary of 1.39M (which is, of course, skewed by their inclusion). In Aucoin, Warrener and Vandermeer's cases, much more. I suppose I could have moved Vandermeer up into the "top half" of the roster, since he's the best bet to play there next year. However, I dont honestly know if he'll be top 4 by mid-season; he may very well be usurped by the likes of Giordano or one of the lingerers (Warrener, Eriksson). Based on his past results, I dont think of Vandermeer as a guy who can consistently fill a top 4 role, nor is he good bet, at 29 years old, to suddenly make that leap. So here he stays for now.
The Flames have 10.15M invested in the bottom-half of the blueline alone. This is where the gap in the top 6 forwards comes from (not to mention the lack of a genuine top 4 guy to play with Phaneuf): a ton of dough wrapped in players who could probably be replaced at half their respective price points. Hell, since there's 5 of them, one of the anchors could be cut outright without being replaced at all. If Warrener et al. weren't bottom half players, the heavy investment in the defense and subsequent gap in the top 6 forwards wouldn't be an issue, since the Flames would theoretically be getting big contributions from the back-end. They aren't top half guys though, so the contributions won't be as notable and it is an issue.
Of course, the best time to trim salary is at the onset of the off-season, so management has the maximum amount of time and options to re-invest the freed up dollars. Sutter failed to do that, meaning the only reasons to cut fat now is to get under the cap (necessary) or have cap space to play with at the trade deadline (useful if play-off bound). There's certainly no difference makers to be found in UFA pool currently: the bones have been picked clean. Accepting another clubs salary dump is sometimes a viable way to inject some talent (albeit a hazardous one), but one needs cap space to do that.
Which brings me to the point that cap space is a commodity itself. It can be dealt for players, prospects or draft picks (just ask San Jose). Therefore, even if Darryl figured this summer's UFA pool was too shallow to swim in, he should have sought to expunge as many of the bad value guys as possible; if only for the sake of having more cap space because it is, in itself, valuable. Certainly Moreso than bad salaries.
As it is, the Flames are likely to be the ones dealing assets for cap-space in a few weeks. As October approaches, the chances of a Aucoin/Warrener+high draft pick or decent prospect for nothing (low draft pick, bad prospect) type deal increase substantially.
Top Half:
Iginla - 7M
Langkow - 4.5M
Cammalleri - 3.35M
Bertuzzi - 1.9M
Lombardi - 1.817
Bourque - 1.3M
Conroy - 1.05M
Phaneuf - 6.5M
Regehr - 4M
Sarich - 3.6M
Kipper - 5.83M
---------------
Total: 40.847M
Mean: 3.71
Potenially Good value: (perform at or above cap hit): Iginla, Cammalleri, Lombardi, Bertuzzi, Bourque, Conroy, Regehr, Phaneuf, Sarich
Potentially Bad value (likely to under-perform relative to cap hit): Phaneuf, Kiprusoff
I included guys that are established top 6 forwards or top 4 defensemen, as well as a couple of players that are likely to make better than average contributions or take a step forward into the upper class (Bourque). Conroy is here because, though I think he'll play in the bottom 6, I assume he's going to see a lot of time against tough competition and will be big on the PK. Fifteen or more minutes per night for him is not unrealistic. Plus he might get the "play with your buddy Jarome" card again.
Obviously a huge portion of the rosters dollars are going to invested here. This is where the difference makers and starting goalies reside. This is where money should be spent, on guys who are good bets to carry the mail. To Sutter's credit, there isn't a lot of bad money here. Even Kipper and Phaneuf could prove to be good value players, steps forward depending. Most of the big guns aren't bargains, but their results should just about sync-up with their cap-hit, at least.
Something interesting we can see here is a steep drop-off in the forwards: after Iggy, Langkow and Cammalleri (mean: 4.95M), the remaining 4 players salaries average just 1.51M. Keep in mind we're talking about the top half of the roster - most, if not all, of these players should be expected to do some kind of heavy lifting. The primary problem with this roster slice, therefore, is many of the skaters aren't proven difference makers (or else they'd be more expensive). While they will probably provide value for dollars, there's a good chance some of them won't be able to provide the type of results required of top half players.
Unless a organization has a bunch of kids ahead of the curve (CHI with Kane and Toews for example), I think an ideal salary structure for this portion of the line-up is a gradual decline (eg: 6M-5M-4.5M-3.5M-2.5M-2M) rather than the step off a cliff we see above. A big gap probably means you have guys playing where they shouldn't be and there's a lot of money invested elsewhere - perhaps unwisely.
Bottom Half:
Wayne Primeau - 1.4M
Curtis Glencross - 1.2M
Marcus Nilson - 1M
Dustin Boyd - 0.742M
Eric Nystrom - 0.688M
David Moss - 0.55M
Andre Roy - 0.55M
Brandon Prust - 0.50M
Adrian Aucoin - 4M
Rhett Warrener - 2.35M
Jim Vandermeer - 2.3M
Anders Eriksson - 1.5M
Mark Giordano - 0.8M*
*estimate
Curtis McElhinney - 0.55M
--------------------------
Total: 18.13M
Mean: 1.39M
Potentially Good value: Glencross, Moss, Boyd, Giordano
Potentially Bad value: Primeau, Aucoin, Warrener, Eriksson, Vandermeer, Nilson (due only to Keenan's irrational hatred of him)
Meh (low cost+low utility=irrelevent): Prust, Roy, Nystrom
Here's where you hide your kids, your checkers, your projects, your long bets and your useless enforcers. Aside from the fact there's simply too many players and future healthy scratch Wayne Primeau is making more than two of the top 6 forwards (Bourque, Conroy), the Flames bottom 6 forward structure looks alright. You have a couple of good bets to provide value or value+ results (Moss, Boyd, Glencross) and the standard replacement level guys (Prust, Roy, Nystrom). Deleting Primeau (1.4M) and Nilson (1M) may have helped land another top forward, if anything.
Course, the real bad investment is revealed in the bottom half of defense corps. The Flames not only have 5 potential third pairing (or worse) defenders, four of them make more than the average bottom-half salary of 1.39M (which is, of course, skewed by their inclusion). In Aucoin, Warrener and Vandermeer's cases, much more. I suppose I could have moved Vandermeer up into the "top half" of the roster, since he's the best bet to play there next year. However, I dont honestly know if he'll be top 4 by mid-season; he may very well be usurped by the likes of Giordano or one of the lingerers (Warrener, Eriksson). Based on his past results, I dont think of Vandermeer as a guy who can consistently fill a top 4 role, nor is he good bet, at 29 years old, to suddenly make that leap. So here he stays for now.
The Flames have 10.15M invested in the bottom-half of the blueline alone. This is where the gap in the top 6 forwards comes from (not to mention the lack of a genuine top 4 guy to play with Phaneuf): a ton of dough wrapped in players who could probably be replaced at half their respective price points. Hell, since there's 5 of them, one of the anchors could be cut outright without being replaced at all. If Warrener et al. weren't bottom half players, the heavy investment in the defense and subsequent gap in the top 6 forwards wouldn't be an issue, since the Flames would theoretically be getting big contributions from the back-end. They aren't top half guys though, so the contributions won't be as notable and it is an issue.
Of course, the best time to trim salary is at the onset of the off-season, so management has the maximum amount of time and options to re-invest the freed up dollars. Sutter failed to do that, meaning the only reasons to cut fat now is to get under the cap (necessary) or have cap space to play with at the trade deadline (useful if play-off bound). There's certainly no difference makers to be found in UFA pool currently: the bones have been picked clean. Accepting another clubs salary dump is sometimes a viable way to inject some talent (albeit a hazardous one), but one needs cap space to do that.
Which brings me to the point that cap space is a commodity itself. It can be dealt for players, prospects or draft picks (just ask San Jose). Therefore, even if Darryl figured this summer's UFA pool was too shallow to swim in, he should have sought to expunge as many of the bad value guys as possible; if only for the sake of having more cap space because it is, in itself, valuable. Certainly Moreso than bad salaries.
As it is, the Flames are likely to be the ones dealing assets for cap-space in a few weeks. As October approaches, the chances of a Aucoin/Warrener+high draft pick or decent prospect for nothing (low draft pick, bad prospect) type deal increase substantially.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Evaluating Keenan
I haven't said a lot about Mike Keenan, mainly because I think the Flames issues mainly lie in the roster and at the feet of Darryl Sutter.
Of course, it's not like Keenan had no effect on the club. There were definately things I liked about Iron Mikes first year and there were areas I'd like to see improved next season.
The good
With Nervous Jimmy in charge, the Flames looked like cowed war-crime victims, especially down the stretch. the team certainly played with more panache under Keenan, even though Playfair had the benefit of an arguably superior blueline (Stuart, Phaneuf, Regehr and Hamrlik in top 4, plus Giordano slightly healthier Rhett Warrener) a more effective Miikka Kiprusoff and career seasons from Huselius, Langkow, Lombardi and Tanguay.
I also thought Keenan's ES bench management was above average. Sometimes it was too active, especially at home where he tried to feed Iginla some of the softer competition. That didn't work out as well as one would think, but the theory was sound.
A lot of nay-sayers and Oilers fans are probably looking at Kippers numbers and pointing at Keenan as an explanation, given his reputation for mishandling goaltenders. The truth is, Kippers problems were Kippers own. Keenan stuck with him early in the season even though he was bad-to-dreadful and only pulled when it was sensible (ie, when any other coach would have done the same). In addition, Kiprusoff's numbers improved as the year wore on, which is the opposite trend one would expect with deleterious coaching effects.
The bad
It's hard for me to ignore the fact that the two guys that were predicted last summer to struggle under Keenan were, in fact, run out of town.
Perhaps that's an unfair phrase. There was no obvious public brow beating of either Huselius or Tanguay (aside from, perhaps, Huselius benching during the last few weeks) and both guys got generous amounts of ice time.
However, I can't imagine what else would possess Tanguay to request a trade less than half way through the year. If Sutter's story is true and Tanguay was looking for a way out by December, the explanation that he disliked his role as a checker doesn't hold much water. Because, well, Tanguay mostly played with Iginla up until that point. December was when Keenan moved Huseius and Langkow up to play with Iginla (at Jarome's request) and the trio tore up the SE Division, setting the tone for the rest of the season. That suggests Tanguay was already unhappy by that point.
I've heard it whispered that Keenan doesn't practice special teams. Perhaps that goes a ways to explaining the Flames worse than average PP (16.8%) and PK (81.5%) from last season. He had lousy personnel for the 2nd PP unit and Kipper was inexcusably bad SH for the first couple months, but still...a roster like Calgary's shouldn't struggle with STs to this degree.
Finally, there were certain player deployment and line-up issues that surfaced and re-surfaced during the season, despite their obvious lack of utility. My list of quibbles:
Tanguay on checking unit, Lombardi on the third line, constant presence of players like Godard and Primeau, the "kids line" fiasco, benching of Nilson, Eriksson in the top 4.
Here's how I would have preferred to see things:
Tanguay-Langkow-Iginla
This combination could go power v. power against almost anyone (outside of Detroit's big line) and come out on top.
Huselius-Lombardi-Nolan
A combination of speed, vision and grit. Nolan was fairly dreadful on both the PK and PP last year, but held his own at ES. This puts Lombardi in a position to succeed and creates a 2nd line with good outscoring potential (assuming soft competition).
Nystrom-Conroy-Moss
Conroy baby-sits the kids and doesn't have to worry about taking on the big guns or trying to score every so often. I would give this line the bulk of own-zone draws, leaving the better opportunities to lines one or two above. Likely to end up a bit under-water but probably not to an extreme degree (especially with Tanguay/Iginla doing the heavy lifting). Sub in Yelle or Nilson if Nystrom struggles.
Nilson-Boyd-Yelle
This way, Boyd interns with players that can actually teach him something and every icing call against isn't panic time. This also means the 4th line could play more than 5 minutes a game. Sub-in Nystrom if Nilson and Yelle are needed on line 3.
Godard, Primeau
Should play only if they have to.
The defensive pairings were tougher, thanks to the teams two very obvious "tiers" of defenders. There was Phaneuf/Sarich/Regehr and then the varying suckitude of Aucoin/Hale/Eriksson and eventually Vandermeer. Keenan went with Regehr/Sarich as the shut-down duo, meaning Phaneuf got to baby-sit whoever got the top 4 pass out of the bottom-end. Usually it was Eriksson, sometimes it was Aucoin and Vandermeer got a few chances later on. The result was usually a "chaos pairing" that was frequently dangerous at ES. I would have liked to see less Eriksson throughout the year personally, although Keenan admittedly didn't have a lot of options. I probably would have tried a Phaneuf/Regehr, Sarich/other (Eriksson,Vandermeer,Aucoin) top 4 combination, although I don't know if that would have yielded any better results.
Overall, I think Keenan's first season was a mixed bag: some good and some bad. I ended up relatively satisfied since the club seemed to respond better to him overall, his bench management was good and the implosion that was theorized as probable didn't occur.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
The trouble with drafting goaltenders
During my look at the Sutter's draft history as the Flames GM, I commented that I was surprised the club drafted two goalies in a single year (Keetley and Lalande in '05). That and the preponderance of goaltending prospects the organization (the two above plus McElhinney, Irving and James Spratt) has got me wondering about goalies recently, in particular the draft/develop part.
Well, I've come to the shaky but ever strengthening conclusion that drafting goaltenders is just about a complete waste of time.
Bear with me.
Utility
Goaltending is a wholly unique position and one that is paradoxical by nature. It is arguably the most difficult role in team sports and probably the most important one in the game. On the other hand, no other position is more team dependent since a goalie can only exert influence on one half of the goal differential equation - goals against. In a game of six goalies versus six skaters, the former loses every single time because the latter can both score and defend. Goalies can only play for the shut-out: they can't check anyone or shoot from the point during the power-play.
A goalies influence is deep, therefore, but narrow. Outside of stopping the puck (which, of course, is a vital function) he is pretty much useless.
Various issues afflict the development of goaltenders. They have vastly different needs and parameters as they progress relative to skaters. The margin of error for prospective 'tenders is slimmer than any other position: there is no hiding a goalie on the 4th line, or with better line mates, or with a couple of shifts a game. A goalie's night is always 60+ minutes long (barring the hook) and the consequences of his mistakes are always significant (goal against). As such, goalies dont get the same opportunity to work their way up through a depth chart like forwards and defenders. There are usually 12 or 13 forwards and 6-8 defensemen on any given team, many with differing roles that are parceled out according to idiosyncratic abilities. Guys who can't score, defend. Guys who can't defend, score. Some do both. Others fight, draw penalties or pester. A few are only good at special teams. What's more, skaters can slowly grow into their roles, cushioned by the soft bosom of "depth", meaning older and better guys are there to carry the mail while the kid gains experience.
There are no such options for Mr.Sieve: if he can't reliably stop the puck, he's finished. Even those goalies relegated to back-up, playing a few contests a year, are mercilessly alone in the crease when the game starts. A single bad mistake - a slap shot from center ice that squeaks through your trapper - can end night or a career.
I can identify two resultant difficulties goalie developments:
1.) there is only 2 roster spots for goaltenders at each level - starter and back-up. An organization can't have a lot of goalies on hand with the hope of culling the few sharp ones from a wide field like they can with skaters. Brent Krahn, a Flames former first rounder into whom the club has sunk a bunch of time and money, is out the door this year because there just isn't any room for him anymore.
2.) High pressure development. Small number of spots + low margin for error = brutal development environment.
For an up-and-comer, displacing an established starter is very difficult. The nature of the position means teams are rarely willing or able to experiment with a new 'tender or allow him to "find his legs". No, a goalie has to be at least as good or better than the guy ahead of him in order to get the time and opportunity to play.
What all this means is:
- Excess goalies in a system are basically useless.
- Working your way up through a system as a goalie is a long, difficult, pressure-filled process.
- There are way more goalies than there are roster spots for goalies.
Value
Another apparent paradox: goalies are worth next to nothing on the trade market. Anything outside of an honest-to-goodness established top 5 puck-stopper might get you a prospect, a draft pick or even nothing at all. Again, despite the relative difficulty and importance of the position, the league-wide need is strictly limited. There are around 700 players in the NHL currently...several hundred forwards, several hundred defensemen and about 50 or 60 goalies. And a bunch of those are superfluous back-ups that could likely be swapped out for a whole host of prospects that are bubbling underneath (right Andrew Raycroft?). Maybe half of those are starters in the league. And maybe a small percentage of those guys have results that are worth trading for. And those guys are almost never available, meaning there's a median class of goaltenders that are good enough to be better than their back-ups, but virtually inter-changable with each other. Again, a team can always be looking for more scoring or more defense or the like...but there really isn't such a thing as "more goaltending". There's only better goaltending and a new goalie has to be a significant improvement above the current guy to garner any interest at all. Even then, a team that supplants their starter with someone else is almost always stuck with a player and contract that are suddenly expendable (Nikolai Khabibulin and Dwayne Roloson are good examples) but is worth jack squat on the trade market. Ilya Bryzgalov, Manny Legace and Manny Fernandez are all capable goalies who were acquired for little to nothing by their current teams. The former was actually 10th in the league in terms of SV% last year and the Ducks handed him to the Coyotes via waivers*.
*(tangentially related, how stupid was it for Brian Burke to go out and sign Jonas Hiller to a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract when he already had two capable puck-stoppers on the roster? He spent money he didn't need to and rendered an asset of already dubious value even more worthless)
If NHL caliber goalies aren't worth much, goalie prospects are worth even less (as much as that's possible). If the Flames decide to trade any of their current crop (including Leland Irving) they'd be lucky to find an interested partner, let alone any kind of return. Because, again, spots and opportunities are extremely limited. I'd be willing to wager pretty much every single NHL franchise has their own Keetleys and Spratts and Lalandes and Irvings. With a batch of undrafted back-stops in various junior, minor and European leagues to choose from besides.
Because of the various unique issues afflicting the goaltender position, draft order seems to have less predictive power in terms of future success. I say "seems" because I haven't done a thorough investigation on the topic, but the conclusion strikes me as intuitive. I did take a look at last year's results with an interest in how well a players draft position matched with his performance. First skaters:
This is fairly simple. I took the top 30 scorers from last year and looked at where each guy got drafted. Turns out, 21 of the top 30 scorers (70%) were former first rounders. Only four of the thirty were chosen outside the first 4 rounds.
This suggests that GMs significantly improve the chances of landing a viable scorer earlier the draft. Which, of course, makes perfect sense. Higher pick, better player.
Now goalies:
Much different results. Only 8 of the top 30 (27%) SV% guys were picked in the first round. Thirteen of the 30, however, were chosen in the 5th round or below (43%). In fact, Ty Conklin and Tim Thomas, who placed inside the top 5, weren't even drafted at all (I have a "9" beside them because I wanted to stick values. Plus, the 9th round doesn't even exist anymore, so the effect is the same). Tomas Vokoun and Henrik Lundqvist were two of the best goalies in the league last year: they were 9th round and 7th round picks, respectively.
This is a very basic and cursory look at the predictive value of draft order for goalies, but this first glance suggests it is significantly reduced for goalies versus skaters.
Altogether:
- Goalies are very important but have a low utility relative to skaters. There are only a precious few positions for goalies in an organization and they can't differentiate themselves from competitors for the spots, outside of simply being better at stopping the puck.
- Having lots of goalies in a system is rather pointless since goaltending isn't additive like scoring.
- A goalies development path is often difficult and long.
- Goalie supply far outweighs demand.
- Outside of the best in the biz, goalies have very little value as trade assets. Goalie prospects are worth even less by several orders of magnitude.
- It is very difficult to predict a goalie prospects future success. Current SV% leaders were liberally sprinkled through-out the draft.
Based on all this Im forced to conclude that drafting goalies is next to pointless. Trading even a first round pick for, say, a decent NHL goaltender whenever you need one (which isn't that often) seems to make WAY more sense than drafting a goalie prospect with the same pick. The first option is proven at the NHL level and ready to contribute now. The prospect probably wont be ready for many years and may not be a viable NHL back-stopper anyhow. Meaning a GM in that position has to address the need immediately anyways (trade, sign, waiver wire) and chances are his first round goalie will turn out to be an un-tradable dud a few years down the road.
This is a sensible strategy, because, as established, goalies can be had cheaply. The Leafs moved a couple of draft picks for Toskala. Martin Biron, Alex Auld, Nicklas Backstrom...all acquired for picks or nothing at all. The best goalie to play in LA colors last year was Erik Ersberg (in terms of SV%). He was an unsigned Swedish 'tender the Kings turned to in desperation. He put together far superior numbers in his brief stint than their former first round pick Jonanthan Bernier.
It's hard to develop goalies and hard to determine whether young goalies will turn into bona fide NHLers. And there's a whole bunch of them out there, to the degree that there are always seems to be quality guys looking for work every year.
Were I a NHL GM, I would focus on skaters and forbid the drafting of goalies, aside from perhaps the odd perfunctory 6th or 7th rounder every 4 years or so...
Am I out in left field here?
Well, I've come to the shaky but ever strengthening conclusion that drafting goaltenders is just about a complete waste of time.
Bear with me.
Utility
Goaltending is a wholly unique position and one that is paradoxical by nature. It is arguably the most difficult role in team sports and probably the most important one in the game. On the other hand, no other position is more team dependent since a goalie can only exert influence on one half of the goal differential equation - goals against. In a game of six goalies versus six skaters, the former loses every single time because the latter can both score and defend. Goalies can only play for the shut-out: they can't check anyone or shoot from the point during the power-play.
A goalies influence is deep, therefore, but narrow. Outside of stopping the puck (which, of course, is a vital function) he is pretty much useless.
Various issues afflict the development of goaltenders. They have vastly different needs and parameters as they progress relative to skaters. The margin of error for prospective 'tenders is slimmer than any other position: there is no hiding a goalie on the 4th line, or with better line mates, or with a couple of shifts a game. A goalie's night is always 60+ minutes long (barring the hook) and the consequences of his mistakes are always significant (goal against). As such, goalies dont get the same opportunity to work their way up through a depth chart like forwards and defenders. There are usually 12 or 13 forwards and 6-8 defensemen on any given team, many with differing roles that are parceled out according to idiosyncratic abilities. Guys who can't score, defend. Guys who can't defend, score. Some do both. Others fight, draw penalties or pester. A few are only good at special teams. What's more, skaters can slowly grow into their roles, cushioned by the soft bosom of "depth", meaning older and better guys are there to carry the mail while the kid gains experience.
There are no such options for Mr.Sieve: if he can't reliably stop the puck, he's finished. Even those goalies relegated to back-up, playing a few contests a year, are mercilessly alone in the crease when the game starts. A single bad mistake - a slap shot from center ice that squeaks through your trapper - can end night or a career.
I can identify two resultant difficulties goalie developments:
1.) there is only 2 roster spots for goaltenders at each level - starter and back-up. An organization can't have a lot of goalies on hand with the hope of culling the few sharp ones from a wide field like they can with skaters. Brent Krahn, a Flames former first rounder into whom the club has sunk a bunch of time and money, is out the door this year because there just isn't any room for him anymore.
2.) High pressure development. Small number of spots + low margin for error = brutal development environment.
For an up-and-comer, displacing an established starter is very difficult. The nature of the position means teams are rarely willing or able to experiment with a new 'tender or allow him to "find his legs". No, a goalie has to be at least as good or better than the guy ahead of him in order to get the time and opportunity to play.
What all this means is:
- Excess goalies in a system are basically useless.
- Working your way up through a system as a goalie is a long, difficult, pressure-filled process.
- There are way more goalies than there are roster spots for goalies.
Value
Another apparent paradox: goalies are worth next to nothing on the trade market. Anything outside of an honest-to-goodness established top 5 puck-stopper might get you a prospect, a draft pick or even nothing at all. Again, despite the relative difficulty and importance of the position, the league-wide need is strictly limited. There are around 700 players in the NHL currently...several hundred forwards, several hundred defensemen and about 50 or 60 goalies. And a bunch of those are superfluous back-ups that could likely be swapped out for a whole host of prospects that are bubbling underneath (right Andrew Raycroft?). Maybe half of those are starters in the league. And maybe a small percentage of those guys have results that are worth trading for. And those guys are almost never available, meaning there's a median class of goaltenders that are good enough to be better than their back-ups, but virtually inter-changable with each other. Again, a team can always be looking for more scoring or more defense or the like...but there really isn't such a thing as "more goaltending". There's only better goaltending and a new goalie has to be a significant improvement above the current guy to garner any interest at all. Even then, a team that supplants their starter with someone else is almost always stuck with a player and contract that are suddenly expendable (Nikolai Khabibulin and Dwayne Roloson are good examples) but is worth jack squat on the trade market. Ilya Bryzgalov, Manny Legace and Manny Fernandez are all capable goalies who were acquired for little to nothing by their current teams. The former was actually 10th in the league in terms of SV% last year and the Ducks handed him to the Coyotes via waivers*.
*(tangentially related, how stupid was it for Brian Burke to go out and sign Jonas Hiller to a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract when he already had two capable puck-stoppers on the roster? He spent money he didn't need to and rendered an asset of already dubious value even more worthless)
If NHL caliber goalies aren't worth much, goalie prospects are worth even less (as much as that's possible). If the Flames decide to trade any of their current crop (including Leland Irving) they'd be lucky to find an interested partner, let alone any kind of return. Because, again, spots and opportunities are extremely limited. I'd be willing to wager pretty much every single NHL franchise has their own Keetleys and Spratts and Lalandes and Irvings. With a batch of undrafted back-stops in various junior, minor and European leagues to choose from besides.
Because of the various unique issues afflicting the goaltender position, draft order seems to have less predictive power in terms of future success. I say "seems" because I haven't done a thorough investigation on the topic, but the conclusion strikes me as intuitive. I did take a look at last year's results with an interest in how well a players draft position matched with his performance. First skaters:
This is fairly simple. I took the top 30 scorers from last year and looked at where each guy got drafted. Turns out, 21 of the top 30 scorers (70%) were former first rounders. Only four of the thirty were chosen outside the first 4 rounds.
This suggests that GMs significantly improve the chances of landing a viable scorer earlier the draft. Which, of course, makes perfect sense. Higher pick, better player.
Now goalies:
Much different results. Only 8 of the top 30 (27%) SV% guys were picked in the first round. Thirteen of the 30, however, were chosen in the 5th round or below (43%). In fact, Ty Conklin and Tim Thomas, who placed inside the top 5, weren't even drafted at all (I have a "9" beside them because I wanted to stick values. Plus, the 9th round doesn't even exist anymore, so the effect is the same). Tomas Vokoun and Henrik Lundqvist were two of the best goalies in the league last year: they were 9th round and 7th round picks, respectively.
This is a very basic and cursory look at the predictive value of draft order for goalies, but this first glance suggests it is significantly reduced for goalies versus skaters.
Altogether:
- Goalies are very important but have a low utility relative to skaters. There are only a precious few positions for goalies in an organization and they can't differentiate themselves from competitors for the spots, outside of simply being better at stopping the puck.
- Having lots of goalies in a system is rather pointless since goaltending isn't additive like scoring.
- A goalies development path is often difficult and long.
- Goalie supply far outweighs demand.
- Outside of the best in the biz, goalies have very little value as trade assets. Goalie prospects are worth even less by several orders of magnitude.
- It is very difficult to predict a goalie prospects future success. Current SV% leaders were liberally sprinkled through-out the draft.
Based on all this Im forced to conclude that drafting goalies is next to pointless. Trading even a first round pick for, say, a decent NHL goaltender whenever you need one (which isn't that often) seems to make WAY more sense than drafting a goalie prospect with the same pick. The first option is proven at the NHL level and ready to contribute now. The prospect probably wont be ready for many years and may not be a viable NHL back-stopper anyhow. Meaning a GM in that position has to address the need immediately anyways (trade, sign, waiver wire) and chances are his first round goalie will turn out to be an un-tradable dud a few years down the road.
This is a sensible strategy, because, as established, goalies can be had cheaply. The Leafs moved a couple of draft picks for Toskala. Martin Biron, Alex Auld, Nicklas Backstrom...all acquired for picks or nothing at all. The best goalie to play in LA colors last year was Erik Ersberg (in terms of SV%). He was an unsigned Swedish 'tender the Kings turned to in desperation. He put together far superior numbers in his brief stint than their former first round pick Jonanthan Bernier.
It's hard to develop goalies and hard to determine whether young goalies will turn into bona fide NHLers. And there's a whole bunch of them out there, to the degree that there are always seems to be quality guys looking for work every year.
Were I a NHL GM, I would focus on skaters and forbid the drafting of goalies, aside from perhaps the odd perfunctory 6th or 7th rounder every 4 years or so...
Am I out in left field here?
Connecting the dots
I've decided to gather all the musing series links into one post. Mainly for organizational and reference purposes, particularly for any new readers dropping by.
In chronological order:
Mikael Backlund
Dustin Boyd
David Moss
Brandon Prust
Rene Bourque
Curtis Glencross
Mike Cammalleri
Matthew Lombardi
I tried to target guys that were new or had some question marks going into the new season. As such, I dont really have any intention of looking at players I've already talked about extensively for other reasons (Eriksson, Aucoin or Bertuzzi for example) or guys that are "known commodities" like Iginla, Regehr or Langkow. I May change my mind as the summer drags on or with enough belligerent emails/requests.
In chronological order:
Mikael Backlund
Dustin Boyd
David Moss
Brandon Prust
Rene Bourque
Curtis Glencross
Mike Cammalleri
Matthew Lombardi
I tried to target guys that were new or had some question marks going into the new season. As such, I dont really have any intention of looking at players I've already talked about extensively for other reasons (Eriksson, Aucoin or Bertuzzi for example) or guys that are "known commodities" like Iginla, Regehr or Langkow. I May change my mind as the summer drags on or with enough belligerent emails/requests.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Musings of Interest: Matthew Lombardi
The question of Matthew Lombardi as top 6 forward is a divisive one among Flames fans. Some will contend that he has too many deficiencies to consistently contribute offensively. Others, like myself, think that Lombardi could deliver decent results under the right circumstances. This is the year Lombardi settles the debate.
Last season went poorly for Lombardi by the numbers. His counting stats were meh (14-22-36) and his advanced stats were bad-to-dreadful. He spent most of the season skating with rookies or sunset veterans at even-strength and 157 more minutes killing penalties than on the power-play. He also took more own-zone draws than either Conroy or Langkow.
Lombardi was basically stuck in the mud: he played a nebulous, poorly defined role with bad line mates in bad circumstances. He scored the most points of any "bottom 6" forward on the club, but was pretty much in the red by every measure by the end of the year. Had he driven results despite his surroundings, there wouldn't be much of debate at this point. But he didn't, so the question marks remain.
The 26 year-old is a tweener in every sense of the word. AT 26 years of age, he'll be heading into his 5th NHL season this October. He's got 297 NHL games under his belt - not a vet, but certainly not a prospect either, so his ceiling is still fuzzy. He's 2 years removed from scoring 20 goals and 46 points, a season in which his PPG pace went right in the toilet after the re-acquisition of Conroy (and Lombo's subsequent burial behind him). That same summer, he was one of the top scoring players in the World Championships, where he centered a line with Shane Doan and Rick Nash. Although he's not the type of player that performs in any or every situation or makes bad lines float, his world class speed and flashes of offensive prowess hint at unrealized potential. He has trouble against top-notch defenders, but eats third-pairing guys for breakfast. In some games, Lombardi looks like one of the best players on the team. In others, he'll look frustrated and ineffectual.
It's no secret that I like Lombardi. I think he's a one-man scoring chance generator, especially off the rush, and I think he could excel with the proper teammates and ice management. I caught some of the Flames/Sharks play-off series re-runs on the NHL Network a few weeks ago and was struck by how frequently Lomabardi caused havoc at the good end of the rink in those games and how rarely he was rewarded for it. Some might say that that is proof positive Lombardi lacks the killer instinct and the hands to become anything more than what he is already. Personally, I think creating scoring chances is 3/4 of the battle and the puck is bound to start going in eventually, especially if he's playing with someone other than Yelle or Moss or Nystrom.
Calgary has only a few top 6 options in their line-up: Iginla, Langkow, Cammalleri and Bertuzzi (I guess). Only two of them are proven difference makers against tough competition. The Flames will need more than a couple guys to step up and fill the void. As such, this season represents Lombo's best - and perhaps last - opportunity to prove he's more than a Paul Ranheim clone. Im of the opinion that he will (20 goals, 55 points sound about right?), but that remains to be seen.
Last season went poorly for Lombardi by the numbers. His counting stats were meh (14-22-36) and his advanced stats were bad-to-dreadful. He spent most of the season skating with rookies or sunset veterans at even-strength and 157 more minutes killing penalties than on the power-play. He also took more own-zone draws than either Conroy or Langkow.
Lombardi was basically stuck in the mud: he played a nebulous, poorly defined role with bad line mates in bad circumstances. He scored the most points of any "bottom 6" forward on the club, but was pretty much in the red by every measure by the end of the year. Had he driven results despite his surroundings, there wouldn't be much of debate at this point. But he didn't, so the question marks remain.
The 26 year-old is a tweener in every sense of the word. AT 26 years of age, he'll be heading into his 5th NHL season this October. He's got 297 NHL games under his belt - not a vet, but certainly not a prospect either, so his ceiling is still fuzzy. He's 2 years removed from scoring 20 goals and 46 points, a season in which his PPG pace went right in the toilet after the re-acquisition of Conroy (and Lombo's subsequent burial behind him). That same summer, he was one of the top scoring players in the World Championships, where he centered a line with Shane Doan and Rick Nash. Although he's not the type of player that performs in any or every situation or makes bad lines float, his world class speed and flashes of offensive prowess hint at unrealized potential. He has trouble against top-notch defenders, but eats third-pairing guys for breakfast. In some games, Lombardi looks like one of the best players on the team. In others, he'll look frustrated and ineffectual.
It's no secret that I like Lombardi. I think he's a one-man scoring chance generator, especially off the rush, and I think he could excel with the proper teammates and ice management. I caught some of the Flames/Sharks play-off series re-runs on the NHL Network a few weeks ago and was struck by how frequently Lomabardi caused havoc at the good end of the rink in those games and how rarely he was rewarded for it. Some might say that that is proof positive Lombardi lacks the killer instinct and the hands to become anything more than what he is already. Personally, I think creating scoring chances is 3/4 of the battle and the puck is bound to start going in eventually, especially if he's playing with someone other than Yelle or Moss or Nystrom.
Calgary has only a few top 6 options in their line-up: Iginla, Langkow, Cammalleri and Bertuzzi (I guess). Only two of them are proven difference makers against tough competition. The Flames will need more than a couple guys to step up and fill the void. As such, this season represents Lombo's best - and perhaps last - opportunity to prove he's more than a Paul Ranheim clone. Im of the opinion that he will (20 goals, 55 points sound about right?), but that remains to be seen.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
The One Percent Solution
When you're looking at the Goaltender position and you're glancing at the stats and your eyes glance over the SV% column I think there is a temptation to say, 'ah, my guy or this guy is going at a 90, 91 percent clip, he's playing ok'. But the point I'll try and make over the next few paragraphs is that there is a big difference between seemingly small increments. I mentioned here that SV% of .920 is really the standard of excellence in the NHL. Above .920 and a goalie is in the running for the Vezina, but if he's below .900 the AHL is probably in his future. So almost all of the NHL starters are clustered in a very tight group. Let's use Miika Kiprusoff and the Flames as an example. Last year Kipper's SV% was .906, a very low number for him considering his previous years' excellent work. Here's a more itemized breakdown of the numbers.
- Kiprusoff 2096 SA 197 GA .906 SV%
- C. Joseph 181 SA 17 GA .906 SV%
- M. Keetley 2 SA 0 GA na
- McElhinney 51 SA 5 GA .902 SV%
- Cgy Totals 2330 SA 219 GA .906SV%
Where: SA is shots against, GA is goals against, SV% is save percentage. Empty net goals are not included.
So last year Kipper's SV% was the same as the Team SV%. But lets say Kipper and the other goalies were only 1 percent better, what would the result have been? That changes the Cgy SV% to .916 from .906.
Over the 2330 shots against a .916 SV% would have yielded 196 (195.72) goals instead of 219 goals. That reduction in 23 goals against would have:
- moved Kipper from 30th to 15th in SV% ranking
- pushed the Flames from 16th to 6th in League Goals Against ranking
- changed the Flames Goal Differential from +2 ( ranking 17th) to +25 (ranking them 6th behind Detroit, Montreal, Dallas, Pittsburgh, San Jose.)
Even if the Flames SV% only improved half of one percent last year (12 goals fewer allowed), their Goal Differential would have become the best in the NW division and fourth in the conference.
But Joe, I hear you say, its too much to ask of our goalies, can't we improve team defence instead? Yeah, I guess we could, but to get that same reduction in goals (23) by limiting shots instead of improving SV% the Flames would have to reduce Shots Against to 2085 a reduction of 245 shots. This would mean giving up only 25.4 shots/game. Only two teams last year managed that number or better: Detroit and San Jose. Calgary needs to get better in limiting shots against, but I think an improving SV% is a more efficient way of improving the goal differential.
So...C'mon Kipper! Just give us one more percent!
Flames cap problems persist
Two weeks into August and the Flames still have some significant cap issues to consider. NHLnumbers puts Calgary at 1.479M over the salary ceiling. The true number is actually worse than that since Giordano's contract details are still "TBA". Assuming an $800k dollar figure for Gio, the Flames are actually closer to 2.3M in the red, or, about the amount of Rhett Warrener's contract. If management wants a bit of breathing room to work with during the season, guys like Nilson and Eriksson have to go away as well.
The problem is, the number of potential solutions is narrowing. The buy-out option went bye-bye weeks ago. All Sutter is left with is 1.) trade or 2.) demote.
1.) Trade - it seemed somewhat likely in July that Calgary might be able to unload a bad contract or two on one of the salary floor clubs. I really don't think that's the case anymore. Mike Chen does a good job of cataloging the suddenly numerous organizations in cap trouble here. You'll notice teams like Philly, Chicago, Washington, San Jose and Anaheim also have dollars they'll be trying to give away in short order. And many of them are connected to players who still have some value - think Nylander, Khabibulin, Schneider, Knuble or Simon Gagne. Not to mention some of the capable players that are still floating around the UFA pool - think Gelinas, Nagy and Marek Malik.If Im looking to fatten my cap hit and maybe improve my team, these are the type of players I consider before the likes of Warrener or Eriksson.
In the same piece, Chen rightly identifies Adrian Aucoin as the Flames lone viably-tradable salary-dump. I've been an advocate of getting rid of Aucoin in this space for months, mainly because I think he'll be poor value for the money this coming year: Im not, however, an advocate of dealing Aucoin in lieu of moving guys like Eriksson or Warrener. However out of line I think his contributions will be relative to his cap hit, they would likely be considerably more valuable than what Warrener et al. can offer. If Aucoin is moved in a desperate attempt to duck the cap, here's what the resutling depth chart looks like:
Regehr-Sarich
Phaneuf-Vandermeer
Giordano-Eriksson
Warrener
Ugly folks. I originally hoped Aucoin would be expunged so his cap dollars could go towards a better value contract. Now we're looking at moving him so other immovable dead weight can reside on the roster another year longer.
2.) Demotion - considering Sutters fetish for "depth", especially on the back-end, the potential for the Flames Bad Contract Brigade to spend a bunch of time in minors is a very real one at this point. Questions:
- Can the Flames afford to spend nearly $5M for 3 washed-up guys to play in the AHL?
- What does it say about management when the Flames have to resort to burying expensive mistakes in the minors to survive? When did Calgary start acting like the cash-drunk, over-spending GMs in giant markets?
- Moving vets up and down exposes them to waivers, specifically re-entry waivers. Meaning if someone else gets desperate enough, they could claim one of the anchors listed, thereby sticking the Flames with 50% of the remaining salary - and, more concerning - cap hit. What's worse, paying Warrener 2.35M to play in the minors? Or absorbing 1.175 in real money and cap space for him to play elsewhere?
In light of these on-going cap issues, the Roy and Prust contracts seem very silly (more so). Not to mention the baffling decision to not buy-out the last year of Warrener's contract back in July (the resulting cap hit would have been around 650k). As it stands right now, the Flames have way too many players making too much money and increasingly fewer options to do anything about it. I think it's safe to say at this point that whatever solution Sutter arrives at in the coming weeks will probably be a less than ideal one.
The problem is, the number of potential solutions is narrowing. The buy-out option went bye-bye weeks ago. All Sutter is left with is 1.) trade or 2.) demote.
1.) Trade - it seemed somewhat likely in July that Calgary might be able to unload a bad contract or two on one of the salary floor clubs. I really don't think that's the case anymore. Mike Chen does a good job of cataloging the suddenly numerous organizations in cap trouble here. You'll notice teams like Philly, Chicago, Washington, San Jose and Anaheim also have dollars they'll be trying to give away in short order. And many of them are connected to players who still have some value - think Nylander, Khabibulin, Schneider, Knuble or Simon Gagne. Not to mention some of the capable players that are still floating around the UFA pool - think Gelinas, Nagy and Marek Malik.If Im looking to fatten my cap hit and maybe improve my team, these are the type of players I consider before the likes of Warrener or Eriksson.
In the same piece, Chen rightly identifies Adrian Aucoin as the Flames lone viably-tradable salary-dump. I've been an advocate of getting rid of Aucoin in this space for months, mainly because I think he'll be poor value for the money this coming year: Im not, however, an advocate of dealing Aucoin in lieu of moving guys like Eriksson or Warrener. However out of line I think his contributions will be relative to his cap hit, they would likely be considerably more valuable than what Warrener et al. can offer. If Aucoin is moved in a desperate attempt to duck the cap, here's what the resutling depth chart looks like:
Regehr-Sarich
Phaneuf-Vandermeer
Giordano-Eriksson
Warrener
Ugly folks. I originally hoped Aucoin would be expunged so his cap dollars could go towards a better value contract. Now we're looking at moving him so other immovable dead weight can reside on the roster another year longer.
2.) Demotion - considering Sutters fetish for "depth", especially on the back-end, the potential for the Flames Bad Contract Brigade to spend a bunch of time in minors is a very real one at this point. Questions:
- Can the Flames afford to spend nearly $5M for 3 washed-up guys to play in the AHL?
- What does it say about management when the Flames have to resort to burying expensive mistakes in the minors to survive? When did Calgary start acting like the cash-drunk, over-spending GMs in giant markets?
- Moving vets up and down exposes them to waivers, specifically re-entry waivers. Meaning if someone else gets desperate enough, they could claim one of the anchors listed, thereby sticking the Flames with 50% of the remaining salary - and, more concerning - cap hit. What's worse, paying Warrener 2.35M to play in the minors? Or absorbing 1.175 in real money and cap space for him to play elsewhere?
In light of these on-going cap issues, the Roy and Prust contracts seem very silly (more so). Not to mention the baffling decision to not buy-out the last year of Warrener's contract back in July (the resulting cap hit would have been around 650k). As it stands right now, the Flames have way too many players making too much money and increasingly fewer options to do anything about it. I think it's safe to say at this point that whatever solution Sutter arrives at in the coming weeks will probably be a less than ideal one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)