Some readers suggesting polling the learned readership (see poll in the right column).
I also thought your justifications could be fascinating to all. Please add them in the comments here if you wish. I look forward to the lobbies.
The options again:
Andrei Markov
Scott Gomez
Brian Gionta
Tomas Plekanec
Mike Cammalleri
Hal Gill
Josh Gorges
Roman Hamrlik
Maxim Lapierre
Carey Price
No Captain
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Negotiating On Price:
Habs New Arguments
Price and his agent have played their opening gambit (in our imaginations)and the Canadiens have answered (in our imaginations again). I think we can all agree that unless Gauthier comes up with some stats wizardry or another #1 goalie, the Price team is looking good to pull salary towards their notion of fair dues.
The negotiation now turns to Gauthier and his team to argue the negative (or if they're inventive, the positive) so the salary cap burden of Price is more what they had in mind when they thought he would be the much cheaper option.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Habs arguments
Other stats
Have you met our new numbers man, Ken Morin? He was only officially hired yesterday, but he came with some numbers in hand which we thought would be handy for these discussions.
You mentioned a 0.912 save percentage. We fully acknowledge that number, but would like to say right off the bat that we don’t exclude playoffs from our analyses, so we’ll be going ahead with a 0.910 number, just so you know.
Just a quick look at other stats from this season. You already mentioned Carey’s 0.912 from the season which ranked him 21st in the league. We’d like to just highlight a few stats to add context:
(min 16 GP)
41 GP (33rd)
39 GS (32nd)
13 W (37th)
0.33 W per start (55th)
0.33 W per 60 min (54th)
2.77 GAA (36th)
0 SO (T 48th)
You present Carey as an established starter with top 20 numbers. Based on what we see, we think he is right where he should be, but is still a developing youngster climbing the ranks. We think it would be fair to pay him as such.
Trends
We have addressed a lot so far, but a common element of 2nd contract negotiations has been conspicuously absent from these talks. Usually, we can all look at a player and draw upward trends. We find the talk about pedigree a bit disingenuous when we consider the decline since season one with Carey.
Our analysis reveals that since his 48th game in the NHL (the 7th game in the 2008 Boston series), where Carey was a 2.49, 0.920 goalie, he has but for very brief bumps been declining or standing still. If this were game 92 we were talking about, there wouldn’t be any reason for concern, but this is 106 games later now – 2 entire NHL seasons.
From game 49 to game 108 (last game of 2009) Carey declined to a 2.76, 0.910 goalie. Since that time, he has stemmed the decline but only to maintain that level.
Again, we are not suggesting this is anyway abnormal for a young goalie, but suggest that paying Carey as a seasoned pro, or a near-elite at this stage is off the mark. He is learning, but learning slowly. We also hope and assume there is still learning to be done and that he’ll be working on this into the upcoming season, if not beyond. As such, we don’t think we should be paying the price as he were the finished article.
Save percentage breakdown
M. Morin has been doing some excellent work, he really has. He has showed us a lot about how to look at save percentage. That is, to see how a goalie comes to his 91% of shots saved.
When we look at when goals are scored, we can see a massive gulf in between what goaltender we get at the beginning of a game compared to the end. Whereas, after a goal is allowed, Carey is on par with those you say are his peers (2.53, 0.920), for the start of games, he has an entirely different set of peers (3.30, 0.892).
Again we’re fully on board with the learning and will support Carey as long as it takes. But this is taken from this past season, and is further evidence of the fact that learning is not done. We think this bolsters our suggestion that paying for the finished article at this point is premature.
Support
Throughout his career until now, we have provided Carey with the best support and opportunities ever afforded to a goaltender of his age. We have showed our support by trading Halak and by signing in a veteran back up willing and able to support 60 games from Carey.
We continue to show this support and will do as he continues to learn his trade at this high level. Knowing Carey the way we do, and knowing what he needs from our years together, we think we offer him the best environment there is to thrive at the moment.
Opportunity
Currently Montreal stands as one of two teams (if we assume Huet and Niemi haven’t been settled on) where there is a starting position. Rather than looking on starts as a burden, we think starts are an asset to your client. We don’t think he can get this opportunity anywhere else in the NHL at the present time.
In the balance
Gauthier digs deep here. But is it enough to overcome the fact he chose Price long ago and would rely on Auld and an AHLer if Price were to opt out?
The negotiation now turns to Gauthier and his team to argue the negative (or if they're inventive, the positive) so the salary cap burden of Price is more what they had in mind when they thought he would be the much cheaper option.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Habs arguments
Other stats
Have you met our new numbers man, Ken Morin? He was only officially hired yesterday, but he came with some numbers in hand which we thought would be handy for these discussions.
You mentioned a 0.912 save percentage. We fully acknowledge that number, but would like to say right off the bat that we don’t exclude playoffs from our analyses, so we’ll be going ahead with a 0.910 number, just so you know.
Just a quick look at other stats from this season. You already mentioned Carey’s 0.912 from the season which ranked him 21st in the league. We’d like to just highlight a few stats to add context:
(min 16 GP)
41 GP (33rd)
39 GS (32nd)
13 W (37th)
0.33 W per start (55th)
0.33 W per 60 min (54th)
2.77 GAA (36th)
0 SO (T 48th)
You present Carey as an established starter with top 20 numbers. Based on what we see, we think he is right where he should be, but is still a developing youngster climbing the ranks. We think it would be fair to pay him as such.
Trends
We have addressed a lot so far, but a common element of 2nd contract negotiations has been conspicuously absent from these talks. Usually, we can all look at a player and draw upward trends. We find the talk about pedigree a bit disingenuous when we consider the decline since season one with Carey.
Our analysis reveals that since his 48th game in the NHL (the 7th game in the 2008 Boston series), where Carey was a 2.49, 0.920 goalie, he has but for very brief bumps been declining or standing still. If this were game 92 we were talking about, there wouldn’t be any reason for concern, but this is 106 games later now – 2 entire NHL seasons.
From game 49 to game 108 (last game of 2009) Carey declined to a 2.76, 0.910 goalie. Since that time, he has stemmed the decline but only to maintain that level.
Again, we are not suggesting this is anyway abnormal for a young goalie, but suggest that paying Carey as a seasoned pro, or a near-elite at this stage is off the mark. He is learning, but learning slowly. We also hope and assume there is still learning to be done and that he’ll be working on this into the upcoming season, if not beyond. As such, we don’t think we should be paying the price as he were the finished article.
Save percentage breakdown
M. Morin has been doing some excellent work, he really has. He has showed us a lot about how to look at save percentage. That is, to see how a goalie comes to his 91% of shots saved.
When we look at when goals are scored, we can see a massive gulf in between what goaltender we get at the beginning of a game compared to the end. Whereas, after a goal is allowed, Carey is on par with those you say are his peers (2.53, 0.920), for the start of games, he has an entirely different set of peers (3.30, 0.892).
Again we’re fully on board with the learning and will support Carey as long as it takes. But this is taken from this past season, and is further evidence of the fact that learning is not done. We think this bolsters our suggestion that paying for the finished article at this point is premature.
Support
Throughout his career until now, we have provided Carey with the best support and opportunities ever afforded to a goaltender of his age. We have showed our support by trading Halak and by signing in a veteran back up willing and able to support 60 games from Carey.
We continue to show this support and will do as he continues to learn his trade at this high level. Knowing Carey the way we do, and knowing what he needs from our years together, we think we offer him the best environment there is to thrive at the moment.
Opportunity
Currently Montreal stands as one of two teams (if we assume Huet and Niemi haven’t been settled on) where there is a starting position. Rather than looking on starts as a burden, we think starts are an asset to your client. We don’t think he can get this opportunity anywhere else in the NHL at the present time.
In the balance
Gauthier digs deep here. But is it enough to overcome the fact he chose Price long ago and would rely on Auld and an AHLer if Price were to opt out?
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Negotiating On Price:
Gauthier Answers
Price and his agent have just given their rationale for a $3 million a year salary to the Canadiens (in our little game).
Now, I play the role of Gauthier and management having just heard the Price stance.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Carey Price camp opening arguments (Team Price in italics)
Starting goalie money
The average goalie salary (cap hit) in the NHL is $2.51 million
The average among starters is $3.75 million
Removing entry level for starters gives $4.1 million
You want Carey to be a starting goalie in one of the biggest fanbases with some of the biggest revenue in the NHL. He shouldn’t be far below average.
Habs response:
Be reasonable.
First let’s remove the top tier:
The average for starters falls to $2.51 million
Even without entry level, that’s $2.87 million
Some of those guys are long-time NHLers, others have outperformed Carey recently (see Halak, Jaroslav). Removing those, we end with an average of $1.98 million.
Carey would be right in the ballpark of his peers with a salary below $2 million.
Comparables
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Kari Lehtonen ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Their average salaries going into the next contracts are $3.8 million, so the $3 million we ask for is very reasonable considering Carey’s closest peers.
Habs response:
Closest peers? Sorry, but allow us to fill in your omissions:
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Career: 2.49, 0.920
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Season: 2.40, 0.924
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Outplayed Carey on the same team
Kari Lehtonen (6 seasons) ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Career: 2.46, 0.914, with 62W, 32L, 9OTL
Rinne is the only possible peer there, but we find it hard to be tied to what we think is a bad contract for a 3rd year NHLer handed out in Nashville.
We propose a few more peers:
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Career: 2.56, 0.915
The average here with Carey’s truest peers in terms of experience and performance to date is in line with what we are proposing, about $1.59 million a season.
Team Price responds:
Hang on, you omit as well.
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Season: 3.09, 0.900
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Season: 3.05, 0.905
Career: 2.56, 0.915
Habs again:
We’ll happily omit Mike Smith from the math if you want.
Pedigree
Drafted 5th overall
CHL goaltender of the year
WJC winning goalie and tournament MVP
Calder Cup winning goalie and tournament MVP
NHL All-Rookie team
NHL All-Star Game
Habs response:
Yes, we’re ware of the pedigree. We did draft Carey.
To be fair to us, we have already paid him for this pedigree in the original contract and offered generous bonuses because his potential merited as much. But let’s be honest, the CHL galtender of the year and WJC are as relevant to this negotiation as Kovalchuk’s contract. The AHL championship run has not been replicated in the NHL playoffs yet. We are paying for NHL play and would prefer to base our offer on NHL numbers that we can all understand.
Team Price responds:
Perhaps, but Carey is a 22 year-old. His age peers are negotiating their contracts with 3 year old CV items weighing heavily in their favour. If you want to discount past success, then we must insist on some adjustment of stance on his numbers to take into account Carey’s young age upon compiling these numbers.
Remember that you as managers must still rely on this pedigree to defend this goaltending decision. If you're using pedigree, so are we.
Save percentage
Save percentage is the only number that can be trusted among goalie statistics, as it is the only number that belongs to the goaltending performance alone. 0.912 this season and for his career are excellent at his age. It was a single tenth of a percent behind Roberto Luongo.
Habs response:
0.912 is very respectable and we were pleased with the rate at which Carey made saves, but let’s not lose the big picture. That rate was average for the league this season. 0.912 put Carey in 20th in this statistic.
We also want to look at this statistic in the context of all others, rather than do a cherry pick. But we will address this again later.
Alternatives
Having traded Halak, without Carey you would look to start the season with Alex Auld in goal and Cedrick Desjardins at back up. Carey offers a massive upgrade to that tandem, replacing the completely NHL-naïve Desjardins from the roster and providing a better start option than Auld.
Habs response:
Pensive look. [Though goes through the miind to respond: "Nabokov, Turco and Theodore can offer us the same solution." Gauthier thinks better of it. He's mocked on the internet and in the media, he doesn't need to be mocked at this negotiating table]
In the balance?
As in arbitration, average salaries and comparables can be spun more than one way. Save percentage still falls in Price's favour for the moment without a statistical riposte and pedigree and alternatives hang over the Habs as problems of their own making.
Now, I play the role of Gauthier and management having just heard the Price stance.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Carey Price camp opening arguments (Team Price in italics)
Starting goalie money
The average goalie salary (cap hit) in the NHL is $2.51 million
The average among starters is $3.75 million
Removing entry level for starters gives $4.1 million
You want Carey to be a starting goalie in one of the biggest fanbases with some of the biggest revenue in the NHL. He shouldn’t be far below average.
Habs response:
Be reasonable.
First let’s remove the top tier:
The average for starters falls to $2.51 million
Even without entry level, that’s $2.87 million
Some of those guys are long-time NHLers, others have outperformed Carey recently (see Halak, Jaroslav). Removing those, we end with an average of $1.98 million.
Carey would be right in the ballpark of his peers with a salary below $2 million.
Comparables
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Kari Lehtonen ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Their average salaries going into the next contracts are $3.8 million, so the $3 million we ask for is very reasonable considering Carey’s closest peers.
Habs response:
Closest peers? Sorry, but allow us to fill in your omissions:
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Career: 2.49, 0.920
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Season: 2.40, 0.924
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Outplayed Carey on the same team
Kari Lehtonen (6 seasons) ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Career: 2.46, 0.914, with 62W, 32L, 9OTL
Rinne is the only possible peer there, but we find it hard to be tied to what we think is a bad contract for a 3rd year NHLer handed out in Nashville.
We propose a few more peers:
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Career: 2.56, 0.915
The average here with Carey’s truest peers in terms of experience and performance to date is in line with what we are proposing, about $1.59 million a season.
Team Price responds:
Hang on, you omit as well.
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Season: 3.09, 0.900
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Season: 3.05, 0.905
Career: 2.56, 0.915
Habs again:
We’ll happily omit Mike Smith from the math if you want.
Pedigree
Drafted 5th overall
CHL goaltender of the year
WJC winning goalie and tournament MVP
Calder Cup winning goalie and tournament MVP
NHL All-Rookie team
NHL All-Star Game
Habs response:
Yes, we’re ware of the pedigree. We did draft Carey.
To be fair to us, we have already paid him for this pedigree in the original contract and offered generous bonuses because his potential merited as much. But let’s be honest, the CHL galtender of the year and WJC are as relevant to this negotiation as Kovalchuk’s contract. The AHL championship run has not been replicated in the NHL playoffs yet. We are paying for NHL play and would prefer to base our offer on NHL numbers that we can all understand.
Team Price responds:
Perhaps, but Carey is a 22 year-old. His age peers are negotiating their contracts with 3 year old CV items weighing heavily in their favour. If you want to discount past success, then we must insist on some adjustment of stance on his numbers to take into account Carey’s young age upon compiling these numbers.
Remember that you as managers must still rely on this pedigree to defend this goaltending decision. If you're using pedigree, so are we.
Save percentage
Save percentage is the only number that can be trusted among goalie statistics, as it is the only number that belongs to the goaltending performance alone. 0.912 this season and for his career are excellent at his age. It was a single tenth of a percent behind Roberto Luongo.
Habs response:
0.912 is very respectable and we were pleased with the rate at which Carey made saves, but let’s not lose the big picture. That rate was average for the league this season. 0.912 put Carey in 20th in this statistic.
We also want to look at this statistic in the context of all others, rather than do a cherry pick. But we will address this again later.
Alternatives
Having traded Halak, without Carey you would look to start the season with Alex Auld in goal and Cedrick Desjardins at back up. Carey offers a massive upgrade to that tandem, replacing the completely NHL-naïve Desjardins from the roster and providing a better start option than Auld.
Habs response:
Pensive look. [Though goes through the miind to respond: "Nabokov, Turco and Theodore can offer us the same solution." Gauthier thinks better of it. He's mocked on the internet and in the media, he doesn't need to be mocked at this negotiating table]
In the balance?
As in arbitration, average salaries and comparables can be spun more than one way. Save percentage still falls in Price's favour for the moment without a statistical riposte and pedigree and alternatives hang over the Habs as problems of their own making.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Negotiating On Price:
Opening Parry
The last Canadiens game was played more than 2 months ago now. As the sun set on the Canadiens season, there were questions everywhere, except it seemed in goal. In goal, Jaroslav Halak had been the undisputed star for the Canadiens, if not the league in the playoffs to that point, and Carey Price warmed the bench.
But the offseason has cast a new light on matters. Halak was traded, of course. But even after that lingering negotiations have led to looming questions. For a brief period on July 1, Robert Mayer was the highest ranked goalie on the Montreal payroll. He was to be bumped to NHL back-up in the depth chart by the signing of Alex Auld and later to a more sensible place as Gauthier retained Desjardins and Sanford. As Price’s contract talks drag on, the depth chart of today still has Mayer in Hamilton, with Auld and probably Desjardins in Montreal.
That situation is pure fantasy, though, as Carey Price must be as near a certainty to sign on as there ever was. But Auld, Desjardins, Sanford, Mayer. Some have said it’s not leverage for the goalie and his agent, fans who ponder their upcoming cable package might disagree.
Anyway, we put aside the possibility that Price will not be signed instead looking to the terms of the contract he will eventually sign. For fun, I thought of the negotiation as a mock arbitration setting (probably not that far from the truth) with each side presenting their arguments and counter-arguments.
For mock purposes, let’s assume that Carey Price’s team is indeed asking for the $3 million that HabsWorld comes up with in its uncited "report" (1 to 3 years). The Habs we’ll assume by the hold up are not into that, we’ll say they started at $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).
Carey Price camp opening arguments
1. Starting goalie money
The average goalie salary (cap hit) in the NHL is $2.51 million
The average among starters is $3.75 million
Removing entry level for starters gives $4.1 million
You want Carey to be a starting goalie in one of the biggest fanbases with some of the biggest revenue in the NHL. He shouldn’t be far below average.
2. Comparables
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Kari Lehtonen ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Their average salaries going into the next contracts are $3.8 million, so the $3 million we ask for is very reasonable considering Carey’s closest peers.
3. Pedigree
Drafted 5th overall
CHL goaltender of the year
WJC winning goalie and tournament MVP
Calder Cup winning goalie and tournament MVP
NHL All-Rookie team
NHL All-Star Game
4. Save percentage
Save percentage is the only number that can be trusted among goalie statistics, as it is the only number that belongs to the goaltending performance alone. 0.912 this season and for his career are excellent at his age. It was a single tenth of a percent behind Roberto Luongo.
5. Alternatives
Having traded Halak, without Carey you would look to start the season with Alex Auld in goal and Cedrick Desjardins at back up. Carey offers a massive upgrade to that tandem, replacing the completely NHL-naïve Desjardins from the roster and providing a better start option than Auld.
But the offseason has cast a new light on matters. Halak was traded, of course. But even after that lingering negotiations have led to looming questions. For a brief period on July 1, Robert Mayer was the highest ranked goalie on the Montreal payroll. He was to be bumped to NHL back-up in the depth chart by the signing of Alex Auld and later to a more sensible place as Gauthier retained Desjardins and Sanford. As Price’s contract talks drag on, the depth chart of today still has Mayer in Hamilton, with Auld and probably Desjardins in Montreal.
That situation is pure fantasy, though, as Carey Price must be as near a certainty to sign on as there ever was. But Auld, Desjardins, Sanford, Mayer. Some have said it’s not leverage for the goalie and his agent, fans who ponder their upcoming cable package might disagree.
Anyway, we put aside the possibility that Price will not be signed instead looking to the terms of the contract he will eventually sign. For fun, I thought of the negotiation as a mock arbitration setting (probably not that far from the truth) with each side presenting their arguments and counter-arguments.
For mock purposes, let’s assume that Carey Price’s team is indeed asking for the $3 million that HabsWorld comes up with in its uncited "report" (1 to 3 years). The Habs we’ll assume by the hold up are not into that, we’ll say they started at $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).
Carey Price camp opening arguments
1. Starting goalie money
The average goalie salary (cap hit) in the NHL is $2.51 million
The average among starters is $3.75 million
Removing entry level for starters gives $4.1 million
You want Carey to be a starting goalie in one of the biggest fanbases with some of the biggest revenue in the NHL. He shouldn’t be far below average.
2. Comparables
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Kari Lehtonen ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Their average salaries going into the next contracts are $3.8 million, so the $3 million we ask for is very reasonable considering Carey’s closest peers.
3. Pedigree
Drafted 5th overall
CHL goaltender of the year
WJC winning goalie and tournament MVP
Calder Cup winning goalie and tournament MVP
NHL All-Rookie team
NHL All-Star Game
4. Save percentage
Save percentage is the only number that can be trusted among goalie statistics, as it is the only number that belongs to the goaltending performance alone. 0.912 this season and for his career are excellent at his age. It was a single tenth of a percent behind Roberto Luongo.
5. Alternatives
Having traded Halak, without Carey you would look to start the season with Alex Auld in goal and Cedrick Desjardins at back up. Carey offers a massive upgrade to that tandem, replacing the completely NHL-naïve Desjardins from the roster and providing a better start option than Auld.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Salary Cap Issues In Need Of Change
By now, we're all up on the league's stance on long and unrealistic contracts. A lot of people are praising the league for their stance on this.
But from my point of view, this is only an important stance if solid action is taken in the form of rule changes, changes to the CBA, else interpretation becomes a bit flaky (see Pronger contract). While the league is at it, I think there’s a few other issues that have come to light that they need to address too.
Contract rules
It’s not only the length of a contract that’s important. In fact, it’s not the length at all. Everything hinges on the age at which the player will receive his last payday.
Yesterday, I saw a good suggestion on the matter. A simple and elegant solution that the league could implement tomorrow:
Don’t allow any long-term contracts to extend past a player’s 39th birthday.
Why 39? Well, the number was chosen based on league averages, but the number it self isn’t that important after all, another number (36, 37, 40) would work just as effectively in setting clear boundaries.
In addition to finishing age, it appears there’s also some concern about what a player is paid at the beginning and the end of the contract. This isn’t really an issue if the player plays those years (see Scott Gomez), as the cap treats every year as equal. It is an issue if the player retires,, though, since a false cap number was calculated with the lower salary which might never be paid out.
The Kovalchuk deal was new because it had so many years at league minimum to bring down the cap hit that it seemed disingenuous. I can see the problem with it. After all, if Kovalchuk was intending to play till then, he’d already have signed for $6 million every year until 44 by now.
There might be an easy-ish solution here too. Limits could be set on how much the top salary and bottom salary in a deal could vary (e.g., 50%, 30% or something) and there could be guidelines about how many seasons at less than say 60% of the average pay there could be.
Whatever, the eventual solutions, the point is that they need to be put to paper and made clear to everyone. Until that happens, the league’s whim will be seen as the rule.
Minor league duty
Just as outrageous as Kovalchuk’s contract is the idea that the Blackhawks can simply put Cristobal Huet in the minors in order to free up salary cap space. In the event they do that, the Hawks will erase Huet’s entire salary from their cap tabulation. Other teams will be on this boat too, as Jeff Finger may be helping Brian Burke from another cap overshoot by playing in the minors.
This situation is fraught with issues as well.
For starters, it seems quite unfair to the player. Huet may be in the minors for his sketchy play, but there will be others who suffer the same fate for their big payday alone. For another thing, the player can still play late on in the season when cap spae is clearer and is free as anyone else to play in the playoffs..
It’s an extreme example, but imagine Chicago opts to sign Kovalchuk and Frolov and gets them to commit to the minors. No matter what outlandish salaries they pay them, come playoff time they could insert the two of them and then Huet back into the lineup without consequence.
Clearly this issue needs to be revisited as well, as the loophole unfairly allows irresponsible GMs to correct errors at a players expense. It also creates an uneven playing field for people who play the cap as if it means something.
Salary cap penalty
While we’re on the topic, how about the salary cap penalty?
Because of bonuses, Chicago went way over the salary cap last season. While it’s causing them some headaches now (and Huet an NHL continuance), the penalty is less than a slap on the wrist.
In a way, I can see Chicago’s point of view. They exceeded the cap for playoff bonuses. That’s hard to account for.
But what’s Toronto’s excuse? And why do they get the same free pass? If it’s true that Toronto went over the salary cap last season, it must also be true that they did so in the regular season (there were no playoffs, after all). I think we all have to ask:
a) Why was this allowed to happen?
b) Why haven’t they been punished beyond the penalty on this year’s cap?
As it stands, with regular season cap busters exceeding the cap without consequence, does it not lead to the next logical question: What is there a salary cap for?
Here, I think the league needs to take action for the next time this occurs, or rather before it happens again. Forfeit of games, draft picks and funds are no brainers. Perhaps something more drastic, though, is what it would take.
Arbitration
Did anyone else see that Clarke MacArthur was awarded $2.4 million a season from the league arbiter? Did anyone else see Jamie Langenbrunner is making $2.8 million a season?
Maybe the MacArthur case is a one off, but I get the feeling it isn’t. Because teams are so terrified of arbiter rulings like this one, they avoid arbitration like the plague. And how do they do that? Well, by overpaying, of course.
An unbalanced arbitration system is good for escalating salaries and not much else. Maybe it too needs a re-look.
Lamoriello is taking some heat and mockery now for his attempt to circumvent the salary cap. However, it must be said that he did it because the laws are loose. If the NHL is at all serious about having this cap, it's high time they took the action to see that things like salary rules, minor league demotions and cap penalties are calibrated correctly. The salary cap was meant to level the playing field, not tilt it towards the unrepentant.
But from my point of view, this is only an important stance if solid action is taken in the form of rule changes, changes to the CBA, else interpretation becomes a bit flaky (see Pronger contract). While the league is at it, I think there’s a few other issues that have come to light that they need to address too.
Contract rules
It’s not only the length of a contract that’s important. In fact, it’s not the length at all. Everything hinges on the age at which the player will receive his last payday.
Yesterday, I saw a good suggestion on the matter. A simple and elegant solution that the league could implement tomorrow:
Don’t allow any long-term contracts to extend past a player’s 39th birthday.
Why 39? Well, the number was chosen based on league averages, but the number it self isn’t that important after all, another number (36, 37, 40) would work just as effectively in setting clear boundaries.
In addition to finishing age, it appears there’s also some concern about what a player is paid at the beginning and the end of the contract. This isn’t really an issue if the player plays those years (see Scott Gomez), as the cap treats every year as equal. It is an issue if the player retires,, though, since a false cap number was calculated with the lower salary which might never be paid out.
The Kovalchuk deal was new because it had so many years at league minimum to bring down the cap hit that it seemed disingenuous. I can see the problem with it. After all, if Kovalchuk was intending to play till then, he’d already have signed for $6 million every year until 44 by now.
There might be an easy-ish solution here too. Limits could be set on how much the top salary and bottom salary in a deal could vary (e.g., 50%, 30% or something) and there could be guidelines about how many seasons at less than say 60% of the average pay there could be.
Whatever, the eventual solutions, the point is that they need to be put to paper and made clear to everyone. Until that happens, the league’s whim will be seen as the rule.
Minor league duty
Just as outrageous as Kovalchuk’s contract is the idea that the Blackhawks can simply put Cristobal Huet in the minors in order to free up salary cap space. In the event they do that, the Hawks will erase Huet’s entire salary from their cap tabulation. Other teams will be on this boat too, as Jeff Finger may be helping Brian Burke from another cap overshoot by playing in the minors.
This situation is fraught with issues as well.
For starters, it seems quite unfair to the player. Huet may be in the minors for his sketchy play, but there will be others who suffer the same fate for their big payday alone. For another thing, the player can still play late on in the season when cap spae is clearer and is free as anyone else to play in the playoffs..
It’s an extreme example, but imagine Chicago opts to sign Kovalchuk and Frolov and gets them to commit to the minors. No matter what outlandish salaries they pay them, come playoff time they could insert the two of them and then Huet back into the lineup without consequence.
Clearly this issue needs to be revisited as well, as the loophole unfairly allows irresponsible GMs to correct errors at a players expense. It also creates an uneven playing field for people who play the cap as if it means something.
Salary cap penalty
While we’re on the topic, how about the salary cap penalty?
Because of bonuses, Chicago went way over the salary cap last season. While it’s causing them some headaches now (and Huet an NHL continuance), the penalty is less than a slap on the wrist.
In a way, I can see Chicago’s point of view. They exceeded the cap for playoff bonuses. That’s hard to account for.
But what’s Toronto’s excuse? And why do they get the same free pass? If it’s true that Toronto went over the salary cap last season, it must also be true that they did so in the regular season (there were no playoffs, after all). I think we all have to ask:
a) Why was this allowed to happen?
b) Why haven’t they been punished beyond the penalty on this year’s cap?
As it stands, with regular season cap busters exceeding the cap without consequence, does it not lead to the next logical question: What is there a salary cap for?
Here, I think the league needs to take action for the next time this occurs, or rather before it happens again. Forfeit of games, draft picks and funds are no brainers. Perhaps something more drastic, though, is what it would take.
Arbitration
Did anyone else see that Clarke MacArthur was awarded $2.4 million a season from the league arbiter? Did anyone else see Jamie Langenbrunner is making $2.8 million a season?
Maybe the MacArthur case is a one off, but I get the feeling it isn’t. Because teams are so terrified of arbiter rulings like this one, they avoid arbitration like the plague. And how do they do that? Well, by overpaying, of course.
An unbalanced arbitration system is good for escalating salaries and not much else. Maybe it too needs a re-look.
Lamoriello is taking some heat and mockery now for his attempt to circumvent the salary cap. However, it must be said that he did it because the laws are loose. If the NHL is at all serious about having this cap, it's high time they took the action to see that things like salary rules, minor league demotions and cap penalties are calibrated correctly. The salary cap was meant to level the playing field, not tilt it towards the unrepentant.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The Kovalchuk Deal
Coming back from holiday, I heard the news that Ilya Kovalchuk had signed with the New Jersey Devils on one of the most piss-taking deals yet.
I was neither surprised that the Devils won this pursuit, nor that the deal took advantage of a cheating opportunity in the CBA. The Devils are on top of things like this, and it's a big reason they are on top of the conference year after year.
From a Habs point of view, the deal isn't good. With Washington and Pittsburgh already decked out, Philly a better team and others on the rise, the Eastern also rans like the Habs needed a Parise-Kovalchuk 1-2 like they needed a kick in the teeth. The fact that it is now viable long-term due to contract craftiness is more disheartening.
I would write morw on what I think the Habs should do about it, but JT at The H Does Not Stand For Habs has done a good mind reading job on me.
Other thoughts and questions
Why is Plekanec signed at $5 milli9on a year for a mere 6 years? Wouldn't $50 million for 15 years have made more sense?
Was Halak unaffordable with this contract math?
Will the Habs be on the insdie or outside of this loophole before it gets closed? (And Gomez doesn't really count...)
I was neither surprised that the Devils won this pursuit, nor that the deal took advantage of a cheating opportunity in the CBA. The Devils are on top of things like this, and it's a big reason they are on top of the conference year after year.
From a Habs point of view, the deal isn't good. With Washington and Pittsburgh already decked out, Philly a better team and others on the rise, the Eastern also rans like the Habs needed a Parise-Kovalchuk 1-2 like they needed a kick in the teeth. The fact that it is now viable long-term due to contract craftiness is more disheartening.
I would write morw on what I think the Habs should do about it, but JT at The H Does Not Stand For Habs has done a good mind reading job on me.
Other thoughts and questions
Why is Plekanec signed at $5 milli9on a year for a mere 6 years? Wouldn't $50 million for 15 years have made more sense?
Was Halak unaffordable with this contract math?
Will the Habs be on the insdie or outside of this loophole before it gets closed? (And Gomez doesn't really count...)
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
One Year Deals:
Pros And Cons
Maxim Lapierre became the second Habs forward to sign a new on year deal under Pierre Gauthier. And, like Pouliot before him, Lapierre received a generous and debatable raise over and above his 2009-10 paycheque.
The news came in yesterday that Lapierre had been signed to a one-year pact, worth $900,000 to the player. Last season he pocketed $800,000. As I mentioned, it was the second raise doled out to an RFA, as Pouliot goes into 2010 with a $1.35 million payday, a hefty raise for the spectre of the playoffs from a similar eight tenths of a million.
Both deals can indeed be viewed in multiple lights.
From a positive outlook, the Canadiens need forwards. They got two here. They need forwards who aren't Ben Maxwell, again they got two here. Both Lapierre and Pouliot have talent and can really turn it on for spurts. The problem is that they really turned it off for spurts last season too. Pouliot for his part took our leave some time in March, round about the time Lapierre joined us this season.
It brings the inevitable question. Why, if they didn't perhaps perform to the desired standard were they rewarded with generous raises?
It's the culture of the NHL for a start. Young players come in, get an initial deal and then earn their next few contracts by building off that initial number, no matter how outlandish it was to begin with.
Pouliot may well deserve a raise for improving his numbers so dramatically, but does his agent not even blush to think he earned at an $800,000 a year rate for his paltry output the season before. Lapierre somehow got an unexplained $800,000 sweetheart second year from his last negotiation, and now, despite his terrible regular season, the Canadiens management must hold to that for negotiations?
It's silly, but let's accept that it could have been worse. Lapierre's a good player even at a near million, and Pouliot might be.
I was reading on the Lapierre deal over at The Daily Hab-It today, and Arpon said something I thought was dead on here:
In deciding not to decide, he sets up another precarious year where top players need to be traded so that erosive salary bumps can take their toll. He doesn't risk signing in Lapierre or Pouliot too long, but also might miss a window to sign them at a low going rate.
Carey Price
The really interesting implication of Gauthier's nervous off-season steps to date are in the negotiations with Carey Price.
The one good thing about watching Carey Price struggle to wrestle wins from the schedule this season was the feeling that at least he might play himself into a more modest contract. That hope appears to be disappearing fast.
While a dip in form is good leverage, it might not be good enough compared to Price's option to make the Canadiens consider starting the season with Auld and Sanford. What's more, Price's agent won't have to look very far to garner examples of players being given raises for potential rather than merit. The Pouliot contract will no doubt be close at hand.
At this point and on this evidence, it seems very unlikely that Price will be signing anything long-term at a modest salary. It's a shame really.
The news came in yesterday that Lapierre had been signed to a one-year pact, worth $900,000 to the player. Last season he pocketed $800,000. As I mentioned, it was the second raise doled out to an RFA, as Pouliot goes into 2010 with a $1.35 million payday, a hefty raise for the spectre of the playoffs from a similar eight tenths of a million.
Both deals can indeed be viewed in multiple lights.
From a positive outlook, the Canadiens need forwards. They got two here. They need forwards who aren't Ben Maxwell, again they got two here. Both Lapierre and Pouliot have talent and can really turn it on for spurts. The problem is that they really turned it off for spurts last season too. Pouliot for his part took our leave some time in March, round about the time Lapierre joined us this season.
It brings the inevitable question. Why, if they didn't perhaps perform to the desired standard were they rewarded with generous raises?
It's the culture of the NHL for a start. Young players come in, get an initial deal and then earn their next few contracts by building off that initial number, no matter how outlandish it was to begin with.
Pouliot may well deserve a raise for improving his numbers so dramatically, but does his agent not even blush to think he earned at an $800,000 a year rate for his paltry output the season before. Lapierre somehow got an unexplained $800,000 sweetheart second year from his last negotiation, and now, despite his terrible regular season, the Canadiens management must hold to that for negotiations?
It's silly, but let's accept that it could have been worse. Lapierre's a good player even at a near million, and Pouliot might be.
I was reading on the Lapierre deal over at The Daily Hab-It today, and Arpon said something I thought was dead on here:
It appears that Gauthier decided that he didn't want to decide.More than the value of the deals (which are slightly inflated), the one year term of each deal is somewhat infuriating.
In deciding not to decide, he sets up another precarious year where top players need to be traded so that erosive salary bumps can take their toll. He doesn't risk signing in Lapierre or Pouliot too long, but also might miss a window to sign them at a low going rate.
Carey Price
The really interesting implication of Gauthier's nervous off-season steps to date are in the negotiations with Carey Price.
The one good thing about watching Carey Price struggle to wrestle wins from the schedule this season was the feeling that at least he might play himself into a more modest contract. That hope appears to be disappearing fast.
While a dip in form is good leverage, it might not be good enough compared to Price's option to make the Canadiens consider starting the season with Auld and Sanford. What's more, Price's agent won't have to look very far to garner examples of players being given raises for potential rather than merit. The Pouliot contract will no doubt be close at hand.
At this point and on this evidence, it seems very unlikely that Price will be signing anything long-term at a modest salary. It's a shame really.
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Free Agent Washout
Is anyone but TSN surprised that July 1st yielded nothing of even mild interest this year from the NHL.
As the Toronto Sycophant Network stewed over its ban from showing any feed from the most noteworthy sporting event of the year, they decided instead to build the threshold of 2010 NHL free agency as an event to be held in high regard. Long before the time the hockeyheads began talking about LeBron James, it had become apparent that the event was to be complete washout.
And why not?
After all, there are two things that make free agency exciting -- involvement of teams of consequence and the availability of players of consequence. In the age of 15 years contracts, it seems that both concerned parties had made other plans.
Last season, you will remember it differently. The Habs through a combination of deliberate conviction and criminal spring inaction ended up at the end of June requiring half a team. As aresult, the week produced some of the most noteworthy trades and signings in recent memory, and all at once. Only the most begrudging could have called it boring.
But why so different this year then? Has the NHL really changed that dramatically?
My feeling is that this has been building now for some time. That the salary cap is catching up with the big spenders.
A look at the current salary cap numbers seems to confirm the same. These 9 teams (including the one we sometimes adore) went over the cap last year and face a reduction in this year's ceiling:
1. Chicago Blackhawks, $4,157,753
2. Boston Bruins, $1,759,795
3. Toronto Maple Leafs, $1,400,000
4. Edmonton Oilers, $354,500
5. San Jose Sharks, $327,500
6. Vancouver Canucks, $90,000
7. Pittsburgh Penguins, $83,979
8. Montreal Canadiens, $68,751
9. Detroit Red Wings, $50,000
Those same teams are up against it again, and also happen to be the teams people might be interested in when it comes to signings.
Only 11 teams in the market have more than $3 million available per opening on their roster. But with the exception of the Oilers tell me if you care what Columbus, Florida, Phoenix , Dallas, Anaheim, Nashville, St. Louis, Colorado, Atlanta and the Islanders will do to plug the remaining roster spots. Tell me if you think any one of them will break from character and spend to anywhere near the cap anyway.
So the spenders have spent. Just as dooming to free agency has been the scarcity of stock.
Just this morning I was reading an article about the best remaining free agents and it listed Carlo Colaiacovo. it gives you an idea. Really, Kovalchuk is the only toy worth spending for, and the teams with space know it. They're neither desperate nor stupid enough to jump the Kovalchuk deal to ink Paul Kariya or Maxim Afinogenov when the moves can wait until September.
As it relates to the evolution salary and the way it flows around the league, the washout of this free agent season is tat least interesting forman academic point of view. It has been a wshout nonetheless. Maybe someone should tell Pierre McGuire, he's still waiting for someone to listen to his shouting.
Pierre Gauthier? Could be worse...
I am not at all impressed with our new GM's dealings to date. If his trades and signings have been feeble, ex-communicating Halak and his agent (and then admitting to as much publicly) was unforgiveable.
But fret not. It could be worse. Did anyone perchance notice on that list above that the Toronto Maple Leafs got a salary cap penalty for overspending last season?
To which the inevitable quesion must be: Really? How?
The worst team in a Leafs decade cost more than every team who made the playoffs? And was only surpassed for playoff bonuses?
Well don't look now, but the Leafs are also the team with the highest cap hit of all NHL outfits at present, thanks to their stunning acquisition of Colby Armstrong whose penchant to hit less than Nik Antropov will surely make Tyler Bozak the scorer Burke's alleged other suitors were apparently gagging over.
They make this mark by paying unproven players like Bozak, Grabovski and Schenn millions more than they should command.
So, next time you're cursing Gauthier for losing another trade, signing a huge lump to sit in front of the net, or jettisoning useful players when he could do otherwise, spare a thought for Leafs fans who should they manage to cobble together a top line this year will face losing their first rounder again and face another cap penalty to cut the legs beneath them for next season's free agency.
As the Toronto Sycophant Network stewed over its ban from showing any feed from the most noteworthy sporting event of the year, they decided instead to build the threshold of 2010 NHL free agency as an event to be held in high regard. Long before the time the hockeyheads began talking about LeBron James, it had become apparent that the event was to be complete washout.
And why not?
After all, there are two things that make free agency exciting -- involvement of teams of consequence and the availability of players of consequence. In the age of 15 years contracts, it seems that both concerned parties had made other plans.
Last season, you will remember it differently. The Habs through a combination of deliberate conviction and criminal spring inaction ended up at the end of June requiring half a team. As aresult, the week produced some of the most noteworthy trades and signings in recent memory, and all at once. Only the most begrudging could have called it boring.
But why so different this year then? Has the NHL really changed that dramatically?
My feeling is that this has been building now for some time. That the salary cap is catching up with the big spenders.
A look at the current salary cap numbers seems to confirm the same. These 9 teams (including the one we sometimes adore) went over the cap last year and face a reduction in this year's ceiling:
1. Chicago Blackhawks, $4,157,753
2. Boston Bruins, $1,759,795
3. Toronto Maple Leafs, $1,400,000
4. Edmonton Oilers, $354,500
5. San Jose Sharks, $327,500
6. Vancouver Canucks, $90,000
7. Pittsburgh Penguins, $83,979
8. Montreal Canadiens, $68,751
9. Detroit Red Wings, $50,000
Those same teams are up against it again, and also happen to be the teams people might be interested in when it comes to signings.
Only 11 teams in the market have more than $3 million available per opening on their roster. But with the exception of the Oilers tell me if you care what Columbus, Florida, Phoenix , Dallas, Anaheim, Nashville, St. Louis, Colorado, Atlanta and the Islanders will do to plug the remaining roster spots. Tell me if you think any one of them will break from character and spend to anywhere near the cap anyway.
So the spenders have spent. Just as dooming to free agency has been the scarcity of stock.
Just this morning I was reading an article about the best remaining free agents and it listed Carlo Colaiacovo. it gives you an idea. Really, Kovalchuk is the only toy worth spending for, and the teams with space know it. They're neither desperate nor stupid enough to jump the Kovalchuk deal to ink Paul Kariya or Maxim Afinogenov when the moves can wait until September.
As it relates to the evolution salary and the way it flows around the league, the washout of this free agent season is tat least interesting forman academic point of view. It has been a wshout nonetheless. Maybe someone should tell Pierre McGuire, he's still waiting for someone to listen to his shouting.
Pierre Gauthier? Could be worse...
I am not at all impressed with our new GM's dealings to date. If his trades and signings have been feeble, ex-communicating Halak and his agent (and then admitting to as much publicly) was unforgiveable.
But fret not. It could be worse. Did anyone perchance notice on that list above that the Toronto Maple Leafs got a salary cap penalty for overspending last season?
To which the inevitable quesion must be: Really? How?
The worst team in a Leafs decade cost more than every team who made the playoffs? And was only surpassed for playoff bonuses?
Well don't look now, but the Leafs are also the team with the highest cap hit of all NHL outfits at present, thanks to their stunning acquisition of Colby Armstrong whose penchant to hit less than Nik Antropov will surely make Tyler Bozak the scorer Burke's alleged other suitors were apparently gagging over.
They make this mark by paying unproven players like Bozak, Grabovski and Schenn millions more than they should command.
So, next time you're cursing Gauthier for losing another trade, signing a huge lump to sit in front of the net, or jettisoning useful players when he could do otherwise, spare a thought for Leafs fans who should they manage to cobble together a top line this year will face losing their first rounder again and face another cap penalty to cut the legs beneath them for next season's free agency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)