Big game tonight with the Red Wings. A throwback really, with the two teams both riding quite high. Must have felt tlike this in bygone eras.
As a prelude to the game, I was asked by Red Wings blogger, and extremely dedicated Norwegian hockey fan, to answer a few questions for his blog "Fight Night at the Joe". In turn, I asked him a few of my own. I'll post his answers below, and will link to the my answers on his site when they're up.
Fight Night at the Joe asks LIW:
1. The Habs have looked great so far this year, what reasons are behind the improvement from last year?
2. Will they be able to hold on for the entire season?
3. Which player do you guys plan to boo next?
4. Going into this game, what do you fear about the Wings? What should the Wings be looking out for?
5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!
(See answers on the Fight Night at the Joe pre-game post)
LIW asks Fight Night at the Joe:
1. Can you explain briefly how the Red Wings do it? Perennial contention, what's the secret?
The secret is pretty simple I think. First of all, the Wings have always drafted very well. They were very early on to focusing on Europe and got a lot of draft steals from Sweden and Russia. Generally good scouting has also helped.
Secondly, the Wings tend to never rush anyone. Except for in a few cases, prospects have to play at least a year, often more in the AHL before they get up to the NHL and they are well developed when they finally come up.
The Wings have also done very well at trading. There have been a few busts (Wendel Clark and Robert Lang come to mind), but most of the trades the last 20 years have been good and they have never been a team that will make a desperation trade.
Money is another factor, but that has been diminished after the lockout.
But one of the main factors in my eyes is that the Wings seem to be a team where players want to stay. Everyone, from the Illitches, through Kenny Holland and down to the role players, equipment guys and everyone else are part of the Wings family. They treat their players well, keep a consistent environment and everyone coming up through the system plays Red Wings hockey. Draft picks stay there their whole career and journeymen like Brad Stuart and Dan Cleary and outcasts like Todd Bertuzzi find a new home where they can get a role that fits them, adapt to the system and finally settle down. The players seem to be happy in Detroit, there is a winning culture and the team is usually the same from year to year, which is a huge factor in consistently winning. And they really take care of and value every player. They know how important role players are. Just look at Draper and Maltby.
Last of all, Nicklas Lidström. It is impossible to realize how good he is without watching the Wings every game and he has been a huge part in the last 20 years of success.
2. The Canadiens have lost Andrei Markov for the second straight season, essentially. Is there a single player on the Red Wings whose absence might lead to a significant dip in the standings?
The first player that comes to mind is Nick Lidström. As I said, even with his success I think he is underrated. He is so subtle and does all the little things right. You really need to watch them often to appreciate just how good he is at that. Teammates and fans call him the Perfect Human and it is fitting. When he makes a mistake it is shocking to us, cause usually he just doesn't make them. He is the team's leader, still one of the best, maybe the best defenseman in the NHL. He does a huge job shutting down the opponent's star players every night and is important offensively too. Zetterberg and Datsyuk are other guys that would be huge losses for the Wings.
3. Andrei Markov goes to free agency on a shaky knee. Would you want your GM to sign him?
That depends on the price. I wouldn't pay high money for an injury prone star defenseman, but if he came for a discount because he wanted to prove himself it would be interesting. Right now I don't think the Wings need a guy with his style, but if Nick retires he could be an interesting part of a solution to fill the hole that would leave.
4. Montreal has had amazing first periods thus far, and managed to impose their style on the opposition. From what I know, this is Detroit's M.O. Which team do you think will get to play their style tonight?
The Wings are terribly schizophrenic when it comes to starting games. Some days they are right no time and score one or two goals early, but other nights it seems like they need a period to get into the game. And it is very hard to predict which version will show up. Right now the team has lost three straight games (or, well, one was in OT) and in the two first they came out strong, but collapsed (end of road trip and first game back home, so I get it) and then on Wednesday they were terrible for the first 25 minutes against Nashville. I know Babcock goes insane over that, so hopefully he has whipped the team into shape so they come out strong, but I am very worried that the Habs can come out flying and roll over the Wings for some time before the Wings really wake up.
5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!
That is a difficult question. The Wings have not been good lately and the Habs are scary to me right now. And they have such a speedy group of forwards, so I am scared that they might be all over the Wings, rush them and make the Wings commit way too many turnovers. The Wings need to get into their groove a little and get their passing game going to be good and if the Habs can deny them that early, then that and Carey Price having a good game, can lead to this getting ugly.
However, I think the team and everyone around it are very disappointed in the last few games and I have to hope that they show up ready to go and out for blood. I think it will be a tight game, but I think that the Wings will win 4-2 with the fourth goal being an empty netter. I also think special teams might become the deciding factor, but it is hard to predict which way that will swing.
6. Finally. You live in Norway. How do you manage to follow the NHL. And why the Red Wings?
Following it is pretty easy these days. Back in the day, when it was just on TV, it was a pain and you couldn't see every game, but now I have something called ESPNPlayer, which is basically the European equivalent of GameCenter Live. Lets me watch every game live or on demand (I have the same for the MLB and NFL (shoot me, I'm a Lions fan)). And seeing as I'm a student and my part time job has evening shifts, I can have a semi-American sleep cycle and stay up to watch the games.
Why the Wings? The answer has two parts really. When I was three or four I got a Canucks jersey cause my dad had been in Vancouver. So I became a Canucks fan. However, when I got NHL on TV in 94-95 I realized that the Canucks bored me (aside from Bure) and my 6-7 year old fashion sense realized that the Canucks jerseys were ugly as sin. However I loved the Wings jerseys, I loved that they had a Russian line and some Swedes and I really loved Stevie Y, so I began rooting for them. Two straight years of playoff disappointment (horrifying finals loss and then a brutal conference final loss) only made me love them more. And then, in the summer of 96, I attended a hockey camp in Asker, right outside of Oslo and Scottie Bowman and Barry Smith came in and coached us for one afternoon and in the morning the next day. It was really cool and they were really nice to us and I remember that Scotty gave us stickers saying "Proud to be a Wings fan". That settled it and I've been a hardcore ever since. Used to fight my mom and dad to be allowed to see important games on school nights and everything.
Thanks to Fight Night at the Joe
Pretty cool to hear from a dedicated fan of a very special franchise. The answers to the questions above remind one about things that have been said about the Canadiens in the past, and things we hope might be said about them in the future.
Needless to say, we're a bit jealous about the Scotty Bowman meeting, all-time best coach and all. But then I've had Nicklas Lidstrom hold the door for me on my wedding day, so we'll call it even...
Showing posts with label Zetterberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Zetterberg. Show all posts
Friday, December 10, 2010
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Can Teams Bring Contracts Forward For Reneging?
A few sources today are reporting that the NHL is taking a hard line after Kovalchuk and may investigate a few contracts that they have previously approved.
Among those to be potentially investigated (if you believe any of the claims) would be those of Marian Hossa, Roberto Luongo, Chris Pronger and Marc Savard.
Never mind that the league won't be able to take away the Stanley Cup enabled by their previous soft stance. I prefer to see it in a different way.
If the league is dead set on killing all long-term front-end heavy contracts, let's get serious. What about making Gomez sign a new deal?
After all, he was one of the original new-era 7-year deal boys. His final season is paying him less than half of his first $10 million season.
And what about other teams who may want voided cap hits? Like Philly on Daniel Briere's $6.5 million? Maybe Detroit's rivals would want to investigate Franzen and Zetterberg.
Wouldn't seem fair otherwise, would it?
Among those to be potentially investigated (if you believe any of the claims) would be those of Marian Hossa, Roberto Luongo, Chris Pronger and Marc Savard.
Never mind that the league won't be able to take away the Stanley Cup enabled by their previous soft stance. I prefer to see it in a different way.
If the league is dead set on killing all long-term front-end heavy contracts, let's get serious. What about making Gomez sign a new deal?
After all, he was one of the original new-era 7-year deal boys. His final season is paying him less than half of his first $10 million season.
And what about other teams who may want voided cap hits? Like Philly on Daniel Briere's $6.5 million? Maybe Detroit's rivals would want to investigate Franzen and Zetterberg.
Wouldn't seem fair otherwise, would it?
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Playing The System
GMs That Are Ahead Of The Curve
Every time you hear that Saku Koivu is gone because he couldn't fit under the cap, think again.
Koivu, by virtue of celebrating his 35th birthday this November and not earlier was eligible to sign one of those brain-bustingly long salaries that could have been averaged out to a minimal cap hit.
You know the ones that Detroit and Scotty Bowman's Blackhawks are handing out?
Now, I fully believe that Gainey wanted the space on the team and not the space in the balance book when he waved goodbye to Saku, but what about some of his other signings? Where was the creativity when he signed up 30-year old Brian Gionta to a financially tying $5 million cap hit for the next 5 years?
It got me thinking about the better GMs in the NHL and what they have been doing to show up their slower peers.
The long contract
This summer has seen the advent of the extended contract beyond the age of 40 years old.
The idea behind the long contract has been a round a while now. The Islanders broke the ice with a 15-year deal to Rick DiPietro back in 2006. The Flyers gave out a few, most notably to Mike Richards.
But it was not until the Red Wings came along and signed Henrik Zetterberg that the manipulation of numbers really came into effect.
The DiPietro deal, you see was the same salary for every year of the contract. At the time, one could argue that it was an overpay for the player, an argument that only seems to take on more credence as time goes by. It was in effect, just a really bad long contract.
Ditto the Mike Richards deal. The Flyers handed out the deal to a 22-year old who'd had one decent year earlier in his breakout season. They ended up paying him a wad more than they could have been for the past year and by virtue of his age, the benefit of retirement is unlikely to help them. It opened the door for a trade later in the contract, but Holmgren just didn't have the same grasp on the possibilities as his sleeker peers. After all, a two-way forward like Mike Richards (if he's all we have to hear is from Flyers fans) will not be an untradeable asset by the age of 34. If he is, who would take on the $5.75 million cap hit anyway? Only teams covering the minimum...
The Zetterberg deal was different. It used term to reduce the average to a superstar player. Henrik will be paid a worthy salary of $7+ million for the next 9 seasons, then when he turns 37, he'll drop to half with 2 seasons at $1 million for the flourish. The drastic drop means the Wings pay the player over $7 million, but at a $6 million cap hit. Should he do the Forsberg and opt for cruising the Stockholm archipelago by his late 30s, the Wings have a minor cap coup and Zetterberg gets most of his money.
Always a team to push limits, the Wings went further with their next extension. Johan Franzen is tied to the team until the age of 39 as well, but at a bargain price just under $4 million a year on the cap. He will of course be paid well over $5 million a season (like Gionta) until his late 30s, but then opens the window to Scandinavian motor-boating with 4 final seasons where he'd only be collecting $7 million in all.
The Red Wings have set a revolution in place in this regard, but leave it to the master (and Holland's teacher) to show everyone that it can be done even better than that. The Marian Hossa contract is that masterpiece. In designing a contract that pays Hossa $3.5 million over the last 4 seasons, they were able to secure a $7.5 million dollar player at 2/3 the cap hit. Not only that, he stole Hossa from under the Wings' very noses.
While heralded in some quarters as madness, the reality is closer to genius. As this Ottawa Citizen article stated a few weeks ago:
Retirement is the key, and right now the possibilities to push this kind of salary are almost limitless. One blogger asks why stop at 12, 15 years; why not 30 years?
And he's right for asking, because although there are limits on contracts offered to players over the age of 35, there's no current limit as to the number of years a player of age 22 (like Carey Price for example) could be signed for. 30 seems ridiculous, but really why stop there?
Loophole will be closed
Upstanding NHL citizen, rarely jealous, spiteful or arrogant, Brian Burke is upset about the lack of fair play. And, he, along with other slowpokes, will probably see the loophole closed so that they can continue to get to grips with 1-year deals.
Funny how some loopholes seem more despicable than others to ole Brian.
Incidentally, as a Habs fan, I want this loophole closed and fast. It hardly seems fair that we be the only team still paying what the cap hit says to players whose performance is far from guaranteed. I think it's only fair that other teams, no matter how good their GMs should also be held to terrible contracts instead of being able to wriggle out, just because they are better at their jobs than their rivals.
"You're not thinking 4th dimensionally"
Gainey it seems is not in the same plane as his mosre successful rivals, at least not as a devious pursuer of vitory at all costs. After all, in addition to adding one of the worst value contracts in the whole league to his roster, he also gave out two of the most questionable deals of the summer to Cammalleri and Gionta.
I think he's failed us in this regard, he's not near the head of the class. And, just as Doc Brown scolded Marty for being such a simpleton (even after 2.5 movies worth of time travelling), I could see better GMs scolding Gainey for his summer:
Bob: "But I don't want Gionta for 22 years, I only want him for 5."
Doc Bowman: "Sign him for 22 years with every year after 40 at current league minimum. If he retires, you don't pay him."
Bob: "Still, that's almost 5 years of Gionta that I don't want."
Doc Bowman: "Bob, you're not thinking 4th dimensionally. Have you ever made a trade? Have you ever thought about how to become the best GM? Cap hits are important. By averaging salary over more time, you can reduce the cap hit for a future suitor. You make an untradeable asset tradeable, even within your ridiculous $5 million per year period..."
The man who tries so hard
Speaking of rivals, it's hard not to chuckle at poor Paul Holmgren who tries his very best to keep up with the Detroits and Chicagos of the world.
It started with Richards, whose contract we deem just expensive and unnecessarily unbalanced. It got even more comical with Briere and then Timonen. But this summer he really took the cake.
Taking his inspiration from Franzen and Hossa, Holmgren promptly signed newly acquired Chris Pronger to a long-term deal, well past the date where he'd be on the team. He even overpaid in a trade for the privilege.
At first glance what he did was OK. He signed a 34-year old defenceman to several years, the final ones (which he hopefully wouldn't play) at league minimum. What Paul didn't grasp was this – Chris Pronger had a contract already. His next contract will come into force next summer (and here's the tragedy) after he turn 35. If there was any doubt, it was cast aside when the league said that's how it would treat the deal.
Oops.
While trying to put together one of the best contracts in history, he has unwittingly added another chapter to the comedy of errors in the Flyers organization post-lockout. If Pronger retires instead of playing for $500 K, Holmgren's successor will be taking a $5 million cap hit for an empty locker – which would probably be up there for worst NHL contract ever. All's not lost though, he could force Pronger to play as he slows down and just have a really slow and ineffective defender for the very same cap hit.
Maybe Gainey missed saving a few million on Gionta, but at least he didn't Holmgren his team into a hole. Oh, it'll be fun to play those 2014-15 Flyers...
Koivu, by virtue of celebrating his 35th birthday this November and not earlier was eligible to sign one of those brain-bustingly long salaries that could have been averaged out to a minimal cap hit.
You know the ones that Detroit and Scotty Bowman's Blackhawks are handing out?
Now, I fully believe that Gainey wanted the space on the team and not the space in the balance book when he waved goodbye to Saku, but what about some of his other signings? Where was the creativity when he signed up 30-year old Brian Gionta to a financially tying $5 million cap hit for the next 5 years?
It got me thinking about the better GMs in the NHL and what they have been doing to show up their slower peers.
The long contract
This summer has seen the advent of the extended contract beyond the age of 40 years old.
The idea behind the long contract has been a round a while now. The Islanders broke the ice with a 15-year deal to Rick DiPietro back in 2006. The Flyers gave out a few, most notably to Mike Richards.
But it was not until the Red Wings came along and signed Henrik Zetterberg that the manipulation of numbers really came into effect.
The DiPietro deal, you see was the same salary for every year of the contract. At the time, one could argue that it was an overpay for the player, an argument that only seems to take on more credence as time goes by. It was in effect, just a really bad long contract.
Ditto the Mike Richards deal. The Flyers handed out the deal to a 22-year old who'd had one decent year earlier in his breakout season. They ended up paying him a wad more than they could have been for the past year and by virtue of his age, the benefit of retirement is unlikely to help them. It opened the door for a trade later in the contract, but Holmgren just didn't have the same grasp on the possibilities as his sleeker peers. After all, a two-way forward like Mike Richards (if he's all we have to hear is from Flyers fans) will not be an untradeable asset by the age of 34. If he is, who would take on the $5.75 million cap hit anyway? Only teams covering the minimum...
The Zetterberg deal was different. It used term to reduce the average to a superstar player. Henrik will be paid a worthy salary of $7+ million for the next 9 seasons, then when he turns 37, he'll drop to half with 2 seasons at $1 million for the flourish. The drastic drop means the Wings pay the player over $7 million, but at a $6 million cap hit. Should he do the Forsberg and opt for cruising the Stockholm archipelago by his late 30s, the Wings have a minor cap coup and Zetterberg gets most of his money.
Always a team to push limits, the Wings went further with their next extension. Johan Franzen is tied to the team until the age of 39 as well, but at a bargain price just under $4 million a year on the cap. He will of course be paid well over $5 million a season (like Gionta) until his late 30s, but then opens the window to Scandinavian motor-boating with 4 final seasons where he'd only be collecting $7 million in all.
The Red Wings have set a revolution in place in this regard, but leave it to the master (and Holland's teacher) to show everyone that it can be done even better than that. The Marian Hossa contract is that masterpiece. In designing a contract that pays Hossa $3.5 million over the last 4 seasons, they were able to secure a $7.5 million dollar player at 2/3 the cap hit. Not only that, he stole Hossa from under the Wings' very noses.
While heralded in some quarters as madness, the reality is closer to genius. As this Ottawa Citizen article stated a few weeks ago:
"The unspoken reality. GMs expect players to retire before those contracts are actually fulfilled -- but that seven- or 12-year term brings the average of the contract down to a very manageable level."
Retirement is the key, and right now the possibilities to push this kind of salary are almost limitless. One blogger asks why stop at 12, 15 years; why not 30 years?
And he's right for asking, because although there are limits on contracts offered to players over the age of 35, there's no current limit as to the number of years a player of age 22 (like Carey Price for example) could be signed for. 30 seems ridiculous, but really why stop there?
Loophole will be closed
Upstanding NHL citizen, rarely jealous, spiteful or arrogant, Brian Burke is upset about the lack of fair play. And, he, along with other slowpokes, will probably see the loophole closed so that they can continue to get to grips with 1-year deals.
Funny how some loopholes seem more despicable than others to ole Brian.
Incidentally, as a Habs fan, I want this loophole closed and fast. It hardly seems fair that we be the only team still paying what the cap hit says to players whose performance is far from guaranteed. I think it's only fair that other teams, no matter how good their GMs should also be held to terrible contracts instead of being able to wriggle out, just because they are better at their jobs than their rivals.
"You're not thinking 4th dimensionally"
Gainey it seems is not in the same plane as his mosre successful rivals, at least not as a devious pursuer of vitory at all costs. After all, in addition to adding one of the worst value contracts in the whole league to his roster, he also gave out two of the most questionable deals of the summer to Cammalleri and Gionta.
I think he's failed us in this regard, he's not near the head of the class. And, just as Doc Brown scolded Marty for being such a simpleton (even after 2.5 movies worth of time travelling), I could see better GMs scolding Gainey for his summer:
Bob: "But I don't want Gionta for 22 years, I only want him for 5."
Doc Bowman: "Sign him for 22 years with every year after 40 at current league minimum. If he retires, you don't pay him."
Bob: "Still, that's almost 5 years of Gionta that I don't want."
Doc Bowman: "Bob, you're not thinking 4th dimensionally. Have you ever made a trade? Have you ever thought about how to become the best GM? Cap hits are important. By averaging salary over more time, you can reduce the cap hit for a future suitor. You make an untradeable asset tradeable, even within your ridiculous $5 million per year period..."
The man who tries so hard
Speaking of rivals, it's hard not to chuckle at poor Paul Holmgren who tries his very best to keep up with the Detroits and Chicagos of the world.
It started with Richards, whose contract we deem just expensive and unnecessarily unbalanced. It got even more comical with Briere and then Timonen. But this summer he really took the cake.
Taking his inspiration from Franzen and Hossa, Holmgren promptly signed newly acquired Chris Pronger to a long-term deal, well past the date where he'd be on the team. He even overpaid in a trade for the privilege.
At first glance what he did was OK. He signed a 34-year old defenceman to several years, the final ones (which he hopefully wouldn't play) at league minimum. What Paul didn't grasp was this – Chris Pronger had a contract already. His next contract will come into force next summer (and here's the tragedy) after he turn 35. If there was any doubt, it was cast aside when the league said that's how it would treat the deal.
Oops.
While trying to put together one of the best contracts in history, he has unwittingly added another chapter to the comedy of errors in the Flyers organization post-lockout. If Pronger retires instead of playing for $500 K, Holmgren's successor will be taking a $5 million cap hit for an empty locker – which would probably be up there for worst NHL contract ever. All's not lost though, he could force Pronger to play as he slows down and just have a really slow and ineffective defender for the very same cap hit.
Maybe Gainey missed saving a few million on Gionta, but at least he didn't Holmgren his team into a hole. Oh, it'll be fun to play those 2014-15 Flyers...
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Dynasty Building
The Dream and The Reality
Dynasty Building
The Dream and The Reality
Thanks to Four Habs Fans attack on mediocre reporters, blogs and hockey management, I was lucky enough to fall onto this quote from Pierre Boivin:
Is this PR at its very finest, or what?
I'll tell you what Pierre, although it sounds nice, your notion that good management is enough to contend forever is a falsehood through and through. Ask the Ottawa Senators or the New jersey Devils fans if they believe that tripe. Both those teams are very well managed and both face the inevitable fall due to the cyclical nature of NHL player development. New Jersey are a goaltender retirement away from being the Islanders and Ottawa are a goaltender meltdown away from the pinnacle they reached.
The cycle of success
The cycle of success in the NHL is dependent on two very important and unchangeable facts (at least for the time being):
1) Players get older, and apart from Chelios can't play forever
2) The worst teams get first choice from the 10 sure shot young players coming through
It would be a mistake to think otherwise.
Now, I anticipate hearing a heck of a lot about Detroit in the case that anyone decides to respond. Probably because they represent the singular example of a team that has succeeded consistently over the past 15 years. I will cut that argument off at the pass.
While I truly believe Detroit has done a nice job at maintaining a contender over the years, it must not be overlooked that over the years they largely did so with sending power, money and some of the highest free agent offers in the history of the league.
No one would withhold that Detroit signed free agents more intelligently than did their peers in the overspending club (Philly, Toronto and NYR), but spend they did. History will show that Brett Hull, Luc Robitaille, Brendan Shanahan, Dominik Hasek and Chris Chelios all helped the Red Wings bridge the period when youngsters Datsyuk and Zetterberg were not yet ready to carry the team and Steve Yzerman was probably no longer up to hauling 20 guys on his back anymore.
We didn't notice the Wings cycle here because they buffered it with pure spending. Sure, it was good management, but a bit looser on the purse strings in Montreal and we could have seen the same. Take away the free agents and I don't think Detroit walks away with a Stanley Cup at all between 1999 and 2004.
Detroit's latest trick
Times have changed a lot in the New NHL, and Detroit can no longer rely on their pull to make teams of any 35 year-olds they choose. As far as I can glean, there is really only one trick to help a team overstay its time at the top: get your stars signed under their market value. This has been Detroit's latest boon.
In the world of salary cap hockey, Zetterberg at under $3 million a year seems like cheating. Even Datsyuk making less than both Mike and Brad Richards is a major coup.
If and when Zetterberg and Datsyuk actually ask to be paid what they're worth, even mighty Detroit will have troubles. But, for the time being their generosity has allowed Detroit to indulge in the Rafalskis and Hossas (both the premier signings of their respective years) of this league.
The problem is, and where I think Boivin's theory falls apart is that all players will eventually want a nice big nest egg to finish off their days of earning a living before fishing and golf happily ever after. Even the modest Zetterberg is rumoured to want his worth ($7 million +), the same goes for their young defence and forwards. Hoping to replace Filppula or Holmstrom from within is optimistic, Zetterberg and Datsyuk - improbable.
Our cycle of success
Our time at the top seems to be well orchestrated, probably because it happened just when Gainey said it should. But I'll remember that though we won the conference, we only made the playoffs by 12 points and owe that first place to Ray Emery as much as anyone. This year is a truer test actually, because the players groomed to take us to the top are actually coming of age now (Andrei K, Plekanec, Markov, Higgins, Komisarek, and Price to an extent). This year is really the beginning of what should be our peaking and time in the top tier. It makes the best of administrators very optimistic indeed.
Montreal owes a lot of its current flexibility to sensible signings and players looking like bargains at the end of the year. The bargain group is topped by Plekanec and Higgins, but also includes Andrei Kostitsyn, Komisarek and even Kovalev. Having these players locked in at reasonable numbers has allowed the flexibility to retool with Hamrlik, Lang and Tanguay. But as we all know the honeymoon only lasts so long, and some of these guys will want to be paid.
I believe that Montreal will do their best to make hay this year. But I hope the team can see beyond Boivin's hype because who really knows how long the sun will be shining on Montreal.
"Today, if you recruit and operate well, are well-managed and well-coached, and have strong fan support, there's no reason you can't have a team that's going to contend ... forever."
Is this PR at its very finest, or what?
I'll tell you what Pierre, although it sounds nice, your notion that good management is enough to contend forever is a falsehood through and through. Ask the Ottawa Senators or the New jersey Devils fans if they believe that tripe. Both those teams are very well managed and both face the inevitable fall due to the cyclical nature of NHL player development. New Jersey are a goaltender retirement away from being the Islanders and Ottawa are a goaltender meltdown away from the pinnacle they reached.
The cycle of success
The cycle of success in the NHL is dependent on two very important and unchangeable facts (at least for the time being):
1) Players get older, and apart from Chelios can't play forever
2) The worst teams get first choice from the 10 sure shot young players coming through
It would be a mistake to think otherwise.
Now, I anticipate hearing a heck of a lot about Detroit in the case that anyone decides to respond. Probably because they represent the singular example of a team that has succeeded consistently over the past 15 years. I will cut that argument off at the pass.
While I truly believe Detroit has done a nice job at maintaining a contender over the years, it must not be overlooked that over the years they largely did so with sending power, money and some of the highest free agent offers in the history of the league.
No one would withhold that Detroit signed free agents more intelligently than did their peers in the overspending club (Philly, Toronto and NYR), but spend they did. History will show that Brett Hull, Luc Robitaille, Brendan Shanahan, Dominik Hasek and Chris Chelios all helped the Red Wings bridge the period when youngsters Datsyuk and Zetterberg were not yet ready to carry the team and Steve Yzerman was probably no longer up to hauling 20 guys on his back anymore.
We didn't notice the Wings cycle here because they buffered it with pure spending. Sure, it was good management, but a bit looser on the purse strings in Montreal and we could have seen the same. Take away the free agents and I don't think Detroit walks away with a Stanley Cup at all between 1999 and 2004.
Detroit's latest trick
Times have changed a lot in the New NHL, and Detroit can no longer rely on their pull to make teams of any 35 year-olds they choose. As far as I can glean, there is really only one trick to help a team overstay its time at the top: get your stars signed under their market value. This has been Detroit's latest boon.
In the world of salary cap hockey, Zetterberg at under $3 million a year seems like cheating. Even Datsyuk making less than both Mike and Brad Richards is a major coup.
If and when Zetterberg and Datsyuk actually ask to be paid what they're worth, even mighty Detroit will have troubles. But, for the time being their generosity has allowed Detroit to indulge in the Rafalskis and Hossas (both the premier signings of their respective years) of this league.
The problem is, and where I think Boivin's theory falls apart is that all players will eventually want a nice big nest egg to finish off their days of earning a living before fishing and golf happily ever after. Even the modest Zetterberg is rumoured to want his worth ($7 million +), the same goes for their young defence and forwards. Hoping to replace Filppula or Holmstrom from within is optimistic, Zetterberg and Datsyuk - improbable.
Our cycle of success
Our time at the top seems to be well orchestrated, probably because it happened just when Gainey said it should. But I'll remember that though we won the conference, we only made the playoffs by 12 points and owe that first place to Ray Emery as much as anyone. This year is a truer test actually, because the players groomed to take us to the top are actually coming of age now (Andrei K, Plekanec, Markov, Higgins, Komisarek, and Price to an extent). This year is really the beginning of what should be our peaking and time in the top tier. It makes the best of administrators very optimistic indeed.
Montreal owes a lot of its current flexibility to sensible signings and players looking like bargains at the end of the year. The bargain group is topped by Plekanec and Higgins, but also includes Andrei Kostitsyn, Komisarek and even Kovalev. Having these players locked in at reasonable numbers has allowed the flexibility to retool with Hamrlik, Lang and Tanguay. But as we all know the honeymoon only lasts so long, and some of these guys will want to be paid.
I believe that Montreal will do their best to make hay this year. But I hope the team can see beyond Boivin's hype because who really knows how long the sun will be shining on Montreal.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Lidstrom Opens The Door
Niklas Lidstrom, the first European captain to win a Stanley Cup (congratulations), opened a door last night...
... for Don Cherry to disappear into the sunset.
Don Cherry and his peers have been selling the notion for years that Europeans don't make good captains, that they don't care as much about the Cup. Clearly an affront to any competitor who leaves his own home to play the sport he loves, his inane ramblings on the subject now have no place – a day long overdue.
I don't think I'm alone on the call for time on Cherry here. I'd say this blogger is with me. Probably the best player on the planet too.
Most interesting the top newspaper in the country thinks Cherry and his toady sidekick are now actually costing the CBC the battle in the coverage of the finals.
Funny really that a dinosaur like Cherry should still be getting air time at all. In what was hopefully his last time on national television, Cherry yet again embarrassed himself by trying to say he was responsible for Mario Lemieux's maturation and that he is doing the same thing for Crosby (Crosby, when interviewed, said he watches HNIC when he can – occasionally – maybe his lessons actually come from somewhere else). Cherry then went on to explain that he keys on players like Roberts and Malone because he (and insinuated he was among a few here) knew what was going on. His evidence for his all knowing was some shouting on the bench and then a goalmouth scramble goal.
Wow Don, well done. We're very impressed.
Worse for me than the buffoon himself, is that Cherry's ideals get air time from others. Take this quote from the NHL website this morning:
No acknowledgment that the idea never held water in the first place. Times must have changed. 20, 30 or 40 years ago Europeans were, as we all know from watching hockey, lesser leaders. Even Mike Babcock, who must surely now be an expert in the merits of European hockey and leadership, does not go far enough:
Living not in fairyland, but in the past?
Maybe we should hope to see Cherry back. If only to witness what he can come up with next. For example, as it became apparent more than a week before the inevitability of Cup victory was allowed to take place that Detroit would be victors, Don Cherry resorted recently to statistics to prove his stance:
Though starved for Cups in Eastern Canada, we have long known that Europeans make good captains. Koivu shines brightest of all Habs each and every time they make the playoffs. Sundin is the best Leaf by a few light years. And Daniel Alfredsson may have taken a couple of years to learn, but is the straw that stirs the drink for any Ottawa hopes. This article extols the virtues of Koivu and other Canadian captains. But what could the two reporters know about hockey today, they didn't coach in the NHL 30 years ago.
To the winners
Congratulations to The Red Wings on their Stanley Cup victory. In any case, Lidstrom and Zetterberg, Datsyuk and Franzen, Holmstrom and Kronwall laid this all to rest. They have proven that between the best scout in the league and the best defenceman you can win Cups other than by intimidation (Brian Burke style).
The Red Wings provide hope to people who prefer the passing and poise to the banging. And especially to Habs fans who choose to model on this intelligent franchise rather than their big bad Western rivals.
... for Don Cherry to disappear into the sunset.
Don Cherry and his peers have been selling the notion for years that Europeans don't make good captains, that they don't care as much about the Cup. Clearly an affront to any competitor who leaves his own home to play the sport he loves, his inane ramblings on the subject now have no place – a day long overdue.
I don't think I'm alone on the call for time on Cherry here. I'd say this blogger is with me. Probably the best player on the planet too.
Most interesting the top newspaper in the country thinks Cherry and his toady sidekick are now actually costing the CBC the battle in the coverage of the finals.
Funny really that a dinosaur like Cherry should still be getting air time at all. In what was hopefully his last time on national television, Cherry yet again embarrassed himself by trying to say he was responsible for Mario Lemieux's maturation and that he is doing the same thing for Crosby (Crosby, when interviewed, said he watches HNIC when he can – occasionally – maybe his lessons actually come from somewhere else). Cherry then went on to explain that he keys on players like Roberts and Malone because he (and insinuated he was among a few here) knew what was going on. His evidence for his all knowing was some shouting on the bench and then a goalmouth scramble goal.
Wow Don, well done. We're very impressed.
Worse for me than the buffoon himself, is that Cherry's ideals get air time from others. Take this quote from the NHL website this morning:
"Clearly, times have changed. North American players are not the only ones who are leaders - evidenced by Lidstrom's historic moment Wednesday night."
No acknowledgment that the idea never held water in the first place. Times must have changed. 20, 30 or 40 years ago Europeans were, as we all know from watching hockey, lesser leaders. Even Mike Babcock, who must surely now be an expert in the merits of European hockey and leadership, does not go far enough:
"I don't know who thinks they're not … that's ridiculous," Red Wings coach Mike Babcock said of European players. "You're living in the past if you believe that."
Living not in fairyland, but in the past?
Maybe we should hope to see Cherry back. If only to witness what he can come up with next. For example, as it became apparent more than a week before the inevitability of Cup victory was allowed to take place that Detroit would be victors, Don Cherry resorted recently to statistics to prove his stance:
"... (he) uses Nicklas Lidstrom's captaincy to question why Europeans have been in the NHL for 21 years, and there were 13 European captains this year, but Lidstrom was only the first European captain to lift the Cup."
Though starved for Cups in Eastern Canada, we have long known that Europeans make good captains. Koivu shines brightest of all Habs each and every time they make the playoffs. Sundin is the best Leaf by a few light years. And Daniel Alfredsson may have taken a couple of years to learn, but is the straw that stirs the drink for any Ottawa hopes. This article extols the virtues of Koivu and other Canadian captains. But what could the two reporters know about hockey today, they didn't coach in the NHL 30 years ago.
To the winners
Congratulations to The Red Wings on their Stanley Cup victory. In any case, Lidstrom and Zetterberg, Datsyuk and Franzen, Holmstrom and Kronwall laid this all to rest. They have proven that between the best scout in the league and the best defenceman you can win Cups other than by intimidation (Brian Burke style).
The Red Wings provide hope to people who prefer the passing and poise to the banging. And especially to Habs fans who choose to model on this intelligent franchise rather than their big bad Western rivals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)