Ever year I make a post this this and every year it makes me look foolish by April. And yet, that never deters me from doing it all over again the very next September...
I'll have more in depth looks at NW division elsewhere, but here's my guess for Conference Standings:
EAST -
Pittsburgh
Washington
Buffalo
Philadelphia
Carolina
Boston
Montreal
New Jersey
-----------------
New York
Toronto
Ottawa
Tampa Bay
Florida
Atlanta
New York Islanders
I know, picking the Stanley Cup champs to win the division isn't terribly ballsy, but it's hard to ignore the turn around the team experienced under Byslma last season. I think they're legit. Washington looks like the real deal to me as well, especially if Varlamov gets more starts and can give the team better goaltending than the worse-than-average fare Theodore served up last season. They will probably feast on the weak sisters in their division again as well.
Nothing else is too controversial there aside from Boston falling down the standings and Buffalo winning the NE.
The Bruins won the Conference last year on the back of some unreal percentages (both SV% and SH%) that created a whole host of simultaneous career seasons as well as the best year goaltending we've seen since Kipper broke the modern SV% record back in '04. The Bruins also lost Phil Kessel to Toronto, David Krejci had major off-season surgery and the only significant summer acquisitions were Steve Begin and the criminally overrated Derek Morris. I think they're a decent team with a good coach, but there's bound to be some regression to the mean there.
As for Buffalo, they'll benefit from the still relatively weak NE division and they were the only non-play-off club with a positive goal differential (+16) in the EC. They probably got unlucky last year and should be in line for bump up the standings - especially if BOS falls.
WEST -
Chicago
San Jose
Vancouver
Detroit
Calgary
Anaheim
Columbus
St. Louis
----------
Minnesota
Los Angeles
Edmonton
Dallas
Nashville
Colorado
Phoenix
I expect basically the same crew to make the post season again in the West with the only significant difference being Chicago un-seasting Detroit at the top of the Conference. The Red Wings are still quality, but Lidstrom isn't getting any younger, they still have Osgood as a starter and they bled too much talent this summer (Hossa, Hudler, Samuelsson) without replacing it. Addiing Bertuzzi didn't help either.
Most would make a case for San Jose over Chicago, but I like the Blackhawks depth at both forward and defense better. The Sharks have the most formidable top line no doubt, but things get real ugly real fast. The Hawks, in contrast, boast Toews, Kane, Hossa, Ladd, Sharp, Bolland, Versteeg, Madden, etc. They also have some of the best young defensemen in the game, including Duncan Keith who should have been in the running for a Norris last season in my humble opinion. If Huet can bounce back to his previous form I think the Hawks take the West.
St. Louis was as surprise to make the play-offs at all last year, but with guys like McDonald, Kariya and Johnson healthy and ready to compliment the likes of Berglund, Perron, Oshie, Backes, Tkachuk and Boyes, the Blues should be a more legitimate threat going forward. Add in a cheap but capable goaltending duo in Mason and Conklin and St. Louis is difficult to ignore.
Vancouver winning the NW was a tough one, but we'll get into that elsewhere...
Flame away folks.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Canucks Walking the precarious LTIR Wire
Tom Benjamin has a post on the Canucks cap position, noting the club is currently well over the ceiling but are enabled in their over indulgence by the LTIR exemptions of Pavel Demitra and Mathieu Schneider.
Take it from a Flames fan, folks - betting on LTIR to stay under the cap is dancing with the Devil. last year, Calgary was flush against the upper limit thanks to Sutter's failure to buy out Rhett Warrener before the year began. The broken warrior remained on the Flames cap hit all year long, albeit "exempt" via LTIR. Which meant it wasn't an issue...right up until the point when it was. Cap space isn't static as players cap hits tend to shrink as the season progresses. That also means that any extra cap space tends to "expand" in relation to the maturity of the year as well.
But the Flames didn't really have cap space all year. They began the season with Dustin Boyd on the farm because he could be demoted without being exposed to waivers. Sutter was able to employ some more LTIR exemptions thanks to Bertuzzi, Giordano and Langkow injuries (plus move out a bit of salary in Lombo and Prust) to deal for Jokinen and Leopold at the deadline, but those moves came back to bite him in the ass when the schedule caught up to the club at the end of March. Not only was Dustin Boyd once again subject to a demotion of convenience, but the team was forced to play several meaningful games short a number of men - in the midst of a NW division title race, no less.
The Canucks are a team prone to injury and for good reason - they travel a lot. They could be in line for a disaster similar to the Flames if Gillis doesn't do something to clear out some of the bloat.
Take it from a Flames fan, folks - betting on LTIR to stay under the cap is dancing with the Devil. last year, Calgary was flush against the upper limit thanks to Sutter's failure to buy out Rhett Warrener before the year began. The broken warrior remained on the Flames cap hit all year long, albeit "exempt" via LTIR. Which meant it wasn't an issue...right up until the point when it was. Cap space isn't static as players cap hits tend to shrink as the season progresses. That also means that any extra cap space tends to "expand" in relation to the maturity of the year as well.
But the Flames didn't really have cap space all year. They began the season with Dustin Boyd on the farm because he could be demoted without being exposed to waivers. Sutter was able to employ some more LTIR exemptions thanks to Bertuzzi, Giordano and Langkow injuries (plus move out a bit of salary in Lombo and Prust) to deal for Jokinen and Leopold at the deadline, but those moves came back to bite him in the ass when the schedule caught up to the club at the end of March. Not only was Dustin Boyd once again subject to a demotion of convenience, but the team was forced to play several meaningful games short a number of men - in the midst of a NW division title race, no less.
The Canucks are a team prone to injury and for good reason - they travel a lot. They could be in line for a disaster similar to the Flames if Gillis doesn't do something to clear out some of the bloat.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Cliches: not just for talking heads or casual fans
I like to read Jay Feaster's blog now and then on The Hockey News website. Sometimes it's fluff, but sometimes he brings his past experience as the Lightning's GM to bear.
That's why I was looking forward to his recent post entitled "Trading for Heatley a mistake." I figured he might shed some light on the real issues behind Heatley's trade demand or, at the very least, discuss the nature of San Jose's resultant cap crunch and top heaviness.
No such luck.
First, he declares Bryan Murray to be the front runner for "the executive of year" for extracting Milan Michalek and the broken Jonathan Cheechoo from San Jose. The same GM that paid Alex Kovalev $5M and signed Chris Neil to a $2M contract this summer. Maybe Feaster relates to the pain-in-the-ass of trying to deal a high-priced malcontent with a NTC, but that's a pretty silly statement even if you agree the package the Sens got for Heatley was a good one.
Things get worse after that:
Historically, I have been a Doug Wilson fan. He seemed to understand the importance of chemistry and the need to acquire players who value the crest on the front of their sweater more than the name on the back.
...
For a group that appears to need more leadership, grit and mental toughness how is Heatley the answer?
This sounds eerily like the diatribe of a ranting no-nothing fan during a post-game radio call-in show rather the insights of a former NHL executive. I don't know if Feaster is writing for his supposed audience here, but giving credence to the mythical values of "more leadership!" and "mental toughness" is dubious enough to make me question Feaster's qualifications as an analyst, let alone an NHL decision maker.
Do fuzzy things like "playing for the team!!1!" exist? Probably. Do they outweigh the fact that Heatley is one of the best pure offensive players in the game (who will, incidentally, be playing alongside one of the best puck distributors)? I really doubt it. It's like Feaster forgets Heatley was part of one of the most dominant lines (and teams) in hockey a few short years ago - one that, incidentally, made it to the Stanley Cup finals.
Maybe Heatley is a gaping asshole who is going to stamp his foot in the middle of the Sharks dressing room and piss everyone off and that's somehow going to impair the Sharks "chemistry". And maybe we don't know the real reasons he wanted out of Ottawa (like, say, the club's rapid decline under Murray?) and Heatley's just going to score 50 goals and 100 points. Again. I have my own reasons for raising an eyebrow at the trade for Sharks perspective but Feaster doesn't touch on a single one of them.
That's why I was looking forward to his recent post entitled "Trading for Heatley a mistake." I figured he might shed some light on the real issues behind Heatley's trade demand or, at the very least, discuss the nature of San Jose's resultant cap crunch and top heaviness.
No such luck.
First, he declares Bryan Murray to be the front runner for "the executive of year" for extracting Milan Michalek and the broken Jonathan Cheechoo from San Jose. The same GM that paid Alex Kovalev $5M and signed Chris Neil to a $2M contract this summer. Maybe Feaster relates to the pain-in-the-ass of trying to deal a high-priced malcontent with a NTC, but that's a pretty silly statement even if you agree the package the Sens got for Heatley was a good one.
Things get worse after that:
Historically, I have been a Doug Wilson fan. He seemed to understand the importance of chemistry and the need to acquire players who value the crest on the front of their sweater more than the name on the back.
...
For a group that appears to need more leadership, grit and mental toughness how is Heatley the answer?
This sounds eerily like the diatribe of a ranting no-nothing fan during a post-game radio call-in show rather the insights of a former NHL executive. I don't know if Feaster is writing for his supposed audience here, but giving credence to the mythical values of "more leadership!" and "mental toughness" is dubious enough to make me question Feaster's qualifications as an analyst, let alone an NHL decision maker.
Do fuzzy things like "playing for the team!!1!" exist? Probably. Do they outweigh the fact that Heatley is one of the best pure offensive players in the game (who will, incidentally, be playing alongside one of the best puck distributors)? I really doubt it. It's like Feaster forgets Heatley was part of one of the most dominant lines (and teams) in hockey a few short years ago - one that, incidentally, made it to the Stanley Cup finals.
Maybe Heatley is a gaping asshole who is going to stamp his foot in the middle of the Sharks dressing room and piss everyone off and that's somehow going to impair the Sharks "chemistry". And maybe we don't know the real reasons he wanted out of Ottawa (like, say, the club's rapid decline under Murray?) and Heatley's just going to score 50 goals and 100 points. Again. I have my own reasons for raising an eyebrow at the trade for Sharks perspective but Feaster doesn't touch on a single one of them.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Some Thoughts Heading into 09-10
With the season nearly upon, it's time to put together (another) post that will almost assuredly make me look foolish in 7 months or so. No, it's not my annual standings predictions (that's upcoming), but some gut feelings heading into the new year which may contradict the intuitions of many. Shared in no particular order:
- The Boston Bruins are going to disappoint some people. They had the lions share of the bounces last year (PDO = 102.8), they lost Phil Kessel in the off-season, their defensive depth after Chara and Wideman is questionable (Morris, Hunwick, Ference, Stuart) and, as good as he is, I can't imagine Thomas will save 94% of the shots he faces at ES this season. They're a good team and well coached, but they aren't the class of the Eastern Conference. I think they'll place middle of the pack.
- Similarly, I don't think San Jose will be all that dominant, even with the Heatley addition. Their depth at both forward and defense drops off sharply after the difference makers and they don't have the cap space to rectify anything if injuries cause things to go sideways. Like Calgary, they also have serious serious question marks in goal with the increasingly mediocre Nabokov backed-up by Thomas Greiss who has only had one stand-out season in the AHL out of three - and that was his rookie effort. Heatley and Thornton will probably get a lot of points, but the Sharks bottom two lines are going to be a black hole.
- It'll be fascinating to watch what happens in Minnesota this season under a brand new regime. Adding Havlat gives Koivu some support meaning he'll either have a quality linemate to take on the tough minutes or he'll be relieved of facing the big boys every night. Either way, the young Koivu, who led his club by a full 17 points depsite the tough assignment last season, could surprise a lot of people. In addition, new coach Todd Richards promises to implement an upbeat, offensively charged system instead of Lemaire's stifling defensive strategy.
Minnesota still has lackluster forward depth, but at least it'll be more entertaining to watch them this season. If the players take to the coach - and if Richards is competent - they could surprise some people. Especially in the NW division, where things are wide open after Calgary and Vancouver.
- A Western bottom feeder is going to move up the charts this year, but I can't decide if it'll be St. Louis or Los Angeles. The former surprised by sliding into the post-season last year, despite numerous injuries to key pieces. They also have a whole bunch of fantastic youngsters who may or may not take a step forward (Oshie, Berglund, Perron, Johnson, Backes, Polak) and a cheap but capable goaltending duo (Mason, Conklin). If Kariya, McDonald and Johnson stay healthy and a couple of the kids outperform their entry-level deals, the Blues could be better than respectable.
Los Angeles, on the other hand, might be my dark horse pick. I really like their top 9 depth:
Smyth - Kopitar - Brown
Frolov - Stoll - Williams
Prucell - Handzus - Simmonds
and they're a team that actually excelled defensively last year despite a roster full of kids (only Columbus, Detroit and San Jose allowed less shots on net) and it was only a team wide power outage at ES that killed their play-offs hopes. If guys like Kopitar, Brown, Purcell and Williams get their SH% back up within range of career norms, LA should be at least passable offensively, if not better. Goaltending is an issue, although at some point you'd think one of Quick, Ersberg or Bernier would emerge as a legit starter.
- Phoenix has a 45M payroll, no coach and no future to speak of. If anyone finishes behind them in the WC (if not the NHL) there should be a public flogging of the coach and GM behind the team in question.
- Chicago looks frightening to me. I expect them to challenge for the Conference crown, even with Hossa out till December. Three lines deep, two of the best shut-down defenders in the game and an underrated starter in Huet. With Lidstrom aging and Osgood in net, Detroit could fall to CHI in the Central.
- Anyone else think the Tampa Bay Lightening won't be terrible this year? A top six that features St. Louis, Lecavalier, Tanguay, Stamkos and Malone can't be that bad. In addition, they actually have some quality on the back-end with Ohlund, Hedman and Ranger. If Mike Smith - who put together better than solid numbers last season behind an awful squad - can stay healthy, TBay could be battling for a play-off spot.
- With Sammy Pahlsson in Columbus, Rick Nash might be freed up from facing the big boys every shift, meaning he may be in line for an even better season. Also, I can't imagine guys like Huselius and Nash (2.85 and 4.27 PPP/60 respectively) scoring at such relatively nominal rates with the man advantage again this year, even if the club failed to land a PP quarterback. A healthy Derek Brassard and a full season of Vermette should help as well. Despite all the accolades, Mason remains a question mark until he can repeat his Calder performance, although Garon should be a capable back-up. Flames fans should keep an eye on Kevin Lalande in the BJ's farm system, especially since Matt Keetley is looking more and more like a bust.
That's it for now. Full standings predictions coming once the pre-season comes to a close.
- The Boston Bruins are going to disappoint some people. They had the lions share of the bounces last year (PDO = 102.8), they lost Phil Kessel in the off-season, their defensive depth after Chara and Wideman is questionable (Morris, Hunwick, Ference, Stuart) and, as good as he is, I can't imagine Thomas will save 94% of the shots he faces at ES this season. They're a good team and well coached, but they aren't the class of the Eastern Conference. I think they'll place middle of the pack.
- Similarly, I don't think San Jose will be all that dominant, even with the Heatley addition. Their depth at both forward and defense drops off sharply after the difference makers and they don't have the cap space to rectify anything if injuries cause things to go sideways. Like Calgary, they also have serious serious question marks in goal with the increasingly mediocre Nabokov backed-up by Thomas Greiss who has only had one stand-out season in the AHL out of three - and that was his rookie effort. Heatley and Thornton will probably get a lot of points, but the Sharks bottom two lines are going to be a black hole.
- It'll be fascinating to watch what happens in Minnesota this season under a brand new regime. Adding Havlat gives Koivu some support meaning he'll either have a quality linemate to take on the tough minutes or he'll be relieved of facing the big boys every night. Either way, the young Koivu, who led his club by a full 17 points depsite the tough assignment last season, could surprise a lot of people. In addition, new coach Todd Richards promises to implement an upbeat, offensively charged system instead of Lemaire's stifling defensive strategy.
Minnesota still has lackluster forward depth, but at least it'll be more entertaining to watch them this season. If the players take to the coach - and if Richards is competent - they could surprise some people. Especially in the NW division, where things are wide open after Calgary and Vancouver.
- A Western bottom feeder is going to move up the charts this year, but I can't decide if it'll be St. Louis or Los Angeles. The former surprised by sliding into the post-season last year, despite numerous injuries to key pieces. They also have a whole bunch of fantastic youngsters who may or may not take a step forward (Oshie, Berglund, Perron, Johnson, Backes, Polak) and a cheap but capable goaltending duo (Mason, Conklin). If Kariya, McDonald and Johnson stay healthy and a couple of the kids outperform their entry-level deals, the Blues could be better than respectable.
Los Angeles, on the other hand, might be my dark horse pick. I really like their top 9 depth:
Smyth - Kopitar - Brown
Frolov - Stoll - Williams
Prucell - Handzus - Simmonds
and they're a team that actually excelled defensively last year despite a roster full of kids (only Columbus, Detroit and San Jose allowed less shots on net) and it was only a team wide power outage at ES that killed their play-offs hopes. If guys like Kopitar, Brown, Purcell and Williams get their SH% back up within range of career norms, LA should be at least passable offensively, if not better. Goaltending is an issue, although at some point you'd think one of Quick, Ersberg or Bernier would emerge as a legit starter.
- Phoenix has a 45M payroll, no coach and no future to speak of. If anyone finishes behind them in the WC (if not the NHL) there should be a public flogging of the coach and GM behind the team in question.
- Chicago looks frightening to me. I expect them to challenge for the Conference crown, even with Hossa out till December. Three lines deep, two of the best shut-down defenders in the game and an underrated starter in Huet. With Lidstrom aging and Osgood in net, Detroit could fall to CHI in the Central.
- Anyone else think the Tampa Bay Lightening won't be terrible this year? A top six that features St. Louis, Lecavalier, Tanguay, Stamkos and Malone can't be that bad. In addition, they actually have some quality on the back-end with Ohlund, Hedman and Ranger. If Mike Smith - who put together better than solid numbers last season behind an awful squad - can stay healthy, TBay could be battling for a play-off spot.
- With Sammy Pahlsson in Columbus, Rick Nash might be freed up from facing the big boys every shift, meaning he may be in line for an even better season. Also, I can't imagine guys like Huselius and Nash (2.85 and 4.27 PPP/60 respectively) scoring at such relatively nominal rates with the man advantage again this year, even if the club failed to land a PP quarterback. A healthy Derek Brassard and a full season of Vermette should help as well. Despite all the accolades, Mason remains a question mark until he can repeat his Calder performance, although Garon should be a capable back-up. Flames fans should keep an eye on Kevin Lalande in the BJ's farm system, especially since Matt Keetley is looking more and more like a bust.
That's it for now. Full standings predictions coming once the pre-season comes to a close.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Glen Sather, Ladies and Gentlemen!
Foudn via Kuklas Corner:
The contract situation is the same as it has been for weeks. The Rangers have their one-year qualifying offer of $522,500 on the table to Dubinsky that represents nearly an 18-percent cut in pay from last year, when he earned $635,000, including Entry Level bonuses.
Ha! I've enjoyed making fun of Sather in this space this summer, and if stuff like this keeps up there'll be plenty more in the future. Ol' Glen has already chased Nik Zherdev out of town. Now, in the same off-season in which he signed washed-up enforcer Donald Brashear to a $1.4M contract, he's nickle-and-diming Brandon Dubinsky. Hands up those of who think Brashear will be of more value to the club? I didn't mention the 700k deal for Tyler Arnason (who is, quite frankly, terrible at this point in his career), but you get the picture.
Has anyone taken a close look at the Rangers roster recently? Delete Marian Gaborik (since he's a good bet to be out of the line-up for a third of the season) and things get scary fast. Look at the blueline...they still only have 5 NHL defensemen by my count.
I don't think I'll ever stop asking this, but...how do Rangers fans put up with this?
The contract situation is the same as it has been for weeks. The Rangers have their one-year qualifying offer of $522,500 on the table to Dubinsky that represents nearly an 18-percent cut in pay from last year, when he earned $635,000, including Entry Level bonuses.
Ha! I've enjoyed making fun of Sather in this space this summer, and if stuff like this keeps up there'll be plenty more in the future. Ol' Glen has already chased Nik Zherdev out of town. Now, in the same off-season in which he signed washed-up enforcer Donald Brashear to a $1.4M contract, he's nickle-and-diming Brandon Dubinsky. Hands up those of who think Brashear will be of more value to the club? I didn't mention the 700k deal for Tyler Arnason (who is, quite frankly, terrible at this point in his career), but you get the picture.
Has anyone taken a close look at the Rangers roster recently? Delete Marian Gaborik (since he's a good bet to be out of the line-up for a third of the season) and things get scary fast. Look at the blueline...they still only have 5 NHL defensemen by my count.
I don't think I'll ever stop asking this, but...how do Rangers fans put up with this?
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Offensive Defensemen are grossly overvalued
One of my expressed goals for the summer was coming up with a way to determine the value of defensive defenseman.
It hasn't gone all that well.
A result of this endeavor, however, was the realization that NHL GM's pay entirely too much for offense from the blueline. By way of introduction, here's the leagues top paid blueliners next season, by cap hit:
Zdeno Chara
Nicklas Lidstrom
Brian Campbell
Scott Niedermayer
Jay Bouwmeester
Dan Boyle
Wade Redden
Dion Phaneuf
Ed Jovomonkey
Kimmo Timonen
Chris Pronger
Brian Rafalski
Andrei Markov
Bryan McCabe
Lubomir Visnovsky
Some of these guys play against top notch competition. Some don't. They all play on the PP. Some got their dollars because of a single season of offensive brilliance. Some are more consistent.
That's not really the point, though. Here's the ranked ESP rates of all NHL defenders last year. You'll notice that only one rearguard topped 1.5 ESP/60 (Mike Green) and 1 point per 60 minutes of ES time was the 86th percentile. Most of the leagues defenders scored less than a point per hour at 5on5 (even those expensive guys listed above). The mean rate was a mere 0.70 ESP/60.
By contrast, most forwards who garner less than a point per 60 at ES are scrubs - 4th liners, goons, guys on the downslope or the rawest rookies. Of the Flames regular skaters, only Eric Nystrom scored at the defenders mean rate (0.76).
If the rates thing is too ephemeral for some, let's go by the raw totals. last year, only 13 defenders scored 50 or more points. Three scored 20 or more goals. Not even 30 guys broke the 40 point plateau.
Now, it's only human to covet that which is rare. The unique is frquently in high demand. Thus why blueliners with relatively big points score massive contracts. But to my eye, paying a guy 6M to score 50 points a year is poor use of cap space in most instances - because forwards are far more efficient producers of offense.
96 forwards scored 50 or more points last season. One hundred and seventeen of them scored 20 or more goals. Sunny Mehta recently posted this article on the subject of positional shooting percentage - in his analysis, he found that forwards averaged 134 goals over 1385 shots or 9.6% in 08/09. Defensemen averaged just 18 goals over 442 shots for a 4.1% average.
By the virtue of the nature of their position, forwards are more dangerous offensively - they get closer to to the net and therefore manage more shots from better positions. Plus, many of them are more adept offensively, that being a primary requirement of being a forward.
What's more, Defenders are even more circumstantially reliant than forwards when it comes to generating offense. Blueliners need lots of ice time (since they are much more inefficient at scoring), they need capable forwards (since a bulk of a defenders points come in the form of assists) and they need favorable deployment by the coach (PP time, offensive zone draws, weaker match-ups). Take a gander at the ranked defender offense by efficiency table: you'll notice a lot of names in the 90th percentile or above are 3rd pairing guys who didn't actually score a lot of points (Goligoski, Giordano, Bogosian, Lebda, Hunwick, Montador). All sheltered. All limited ice-time. They scored at a good rate, but didn't have enough volume of minutes to make much of an impact. And even with the best circumstances - think lots of PP time, second tier competition, lots of offensive zone face-offs - your 6.5M PP quarterback might not even break the 50 point barrier.
The flip side, of course, is that defensive defenseman are relatively undervalued in the league. Let's look at that list of cap hits again. How many inside the top 30 are "pure defensive" types? I count three: Hannan (4.5M), Komisarek (4.5M) and Brewer (4.25M). Jan Hejda took on some of the toughest competition in the league for the Blue Jackets last year. He wouldn't even register on most fans radars: not only because he isn't the flashiest of players, but because his counting stats are necessarily suppressed by the circumstances in which he plays - own zone draws versus tough assignments. How would his results look like if someone else was getting fed to the wolves? Because the range of production at ES for rearguards is so limited (1.50 - 0), it probably makes sense to have a team full of $2M Jan Hejda's: you'd likely find a production efficiency curve based on the level of competition (and concurrent circumstances, ie face-off position) each Hejda clone was facing. Put another way - Cory Sarich faced the second toughest competition on the Flames amongst defensemen in 07/08 - he had a negative corsi rate and scored 0.25 ESP/60. Last year, Sarich spent most of the season on the third pairing. His level of competition was on par with Mark Giordano. His corsi jumped to +10 and his ESP rate more than tripled to .89.
So when GM's shell out dollars for points from the blueline, a lot of the time they're probably paying for a perception based on circumstances. They're also putting money into a vastly inferior offensive option in terms of efficiency relative to forwards. This isn't to say that some defensemen aren't better than others offensively speaking - that's self-evidently false. However, even the best defenders offensive contributions are muted. Suppressed by the demands of the position, by circumstances and by the fact thet they're beholden to the men in front of them; defenders need a lot of things to go right in order to be (seen as) offensively capable. Even then, they probably won't outscore your better than average 2nd liner.
As such, I think it makes sense to invest the big dollars (assuming offense is the goal) in forwards and then target the guys who can quietly handle the tough minutes in the defensive end. Like goaltending, it may make sense to abandon this strategy if one of the truly elite players is available (Nik Lidstrom), but, overall, I think the market overvalues offense from the back-end.
It hasn't gone all that well.
A result of this endeavor, however, was the realization that NHL GM's pay entirely too much for offense from the blueline. By way of introduction, here's the leagues top paid blueliners next season, by cap hit:
Zdeno Chara
Nicklas Lidstrom
Brian Campbell
Scott Niedermayer
Jay Bouwmeester
Dan Boyle
Wade Redden
Dion Phaneuf
Ed Jovomonkey
Kimmo Timonen
Chris Pronger
Brian Rafalski
Andrei Markov
Bryan McCabe
Lubomir Visnovsky
Some of these guys play against top notch competition. Some don't. They all play on the PP. Some got their dollars because of a single season of offensive brilliance. Some are more consistent.
That's not really the point, though. Here's the ranked ESP rates of all NHL defenders last year. You'll notice that only one rearguard topped 1.5 ESP/60 (Mike Green) and 1 point per 60 minutes of ES time was the 86th percentile. Most of the leagues defenders scored less than a point per hour at 5on5 (even those expensive guys listed above). The mean rate was a mere 0.70 ESP/60.
By contrast, most forwards who garner less than a point per 60 at ES are scrubs - 4th liners, goons, guys on the downslope or the rawest rookies. Of the Flames regular skaters, only Eric Nystrom scored at the defenders mean rate (0.76).
If the rates thing is too ephemeral for some, let's go by the raw totals. last year, only 13 defenders scored 50 or more points. Three scored 20 or more goals. Not even 30 guys broke the 40 point plateau.
Now, it's only human to covet that which is rare. The unique is frquently in high demand. Thus why blueliners with relatively big points score massive contracts. But to my eye, paying a guy 6M to score 50 points a year is poor use of cap space in most instances - because forwards are far more efficient producers of offense.
96 forwards scored 50 or more points last season. One hundred and seventeen of them scored 20 or more goals. Sunny Mehta recently posted this article on the subject of positional shooting percentage - in his analysis, he found that forwards averaged 134 goals over 1385 shots or 9.6% in 08/09. Defensemen averaged just 18 goals over 442 shots for a 4.1% average.
By the virtue of the nature of their position, forwards are more dangerous offensively - they get closer to to the net and therefore manage more shots from better positions. Plus, many of them are more adept offensively, that being a primary requirement of being a forward.
What's more, Defenders are even more circumstantially reliant than forwards when it comes to generating offense. Blueliners need lots of ice time (since they are much more inefficient at scoring), they need capable forwards (since a bulk of a defenders points come in the form of assists) and they need favorable deployment by the coach (PP time, offensive zone draws, weaker match-ups). Take a gander at the ranked defender offense by efficiency table: you'll notice a lot of names in the 90th percentile or above are 3rd pairing guys who didn't actually score a lot of points (Goligoski, Giordano, Bogosian, Lebda, Hunwick, Montador). All sheltered. All limited ice-time. They scored at a good rate, but didn't have enough volume of minutes to make much of an impact. And even with the best circumstances - think lots of PP time, second tier competition, lots of offensive zone face-offs - your 6.5M PP quarterback might not even break the 50 point barrier.
The flip side, of course, is that defensive defenseman are relatively undervalued in the league. Let's look at that list of cap hits again. How many inside the top 30 are "pure defensive" types? I count three: Hannan (4.5M), Komisarek (4.5M) and Brewer (4.25M). Jan Hejda took on some of the toughest competition in the league for the Blue Jackets last year. He wouldn't even register on most fans radars: not only because he isn't the flashiest of players, but because his counting stats are necessarily suppressed by the circumstances in which he plays - own zone draws versus tough assignments. How would his results look like if someone else was getting fed to the wolves? Because the range of production at ES for rearguards is so limited (1.50 - 0), it probably makes sense to have a team full of $2M Jan Hejda's: you'd likely find a production efficiency curve based on the level of competition (and concurrent circumstances, ie face-off position) each Hejda clone was facing. Put another way - Cory Sarich faced the second toughest competition on the Flames amongst defensemen in 07/08 - he had a negative corsi rate and scored 0.25 ESP/60. Last year, Sarich spent most of the season on the third pairing. His level of competition was on par with Mark Giordano. His corsi jumped to +10 and his ESP rate more than tripled to .89.
So when GM's shell out dollars for points from the blueline, a lot of the time they're probably paying for a perception based on circumstances. They're also putting money into a vastly inferior offensive option in terms of efficiency relative to forwards. This isn't to say that some defensemen aren't better than others offensively speaking - that's self-evidently false. However, even the best defenders offensive contributions are muted. Suppressed by the demands of the position, by circumstances and by the fact thet they're beholden to the men in front of them; defenders need a lot of things to go right in order to be (seen as) offensively capable. Even then, they probably won't outscore your better than average 2nd liner.
As such, I think it makes sense to invest the big dollars (assuming offense is the goal) in forwards and then target the guys who can quietly handle the tough minutes in the defensive end. Like goaltending, it may make sense to abandon this strategy if one of the truly elite players is available (Nik Lidstrom), but, overall, I think the market overvalues offense from the back-end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)