SBN Mock Expansion Draft
by PPP on Aug 30, 2010 12:00 PM EDT
Email
PrintAs some of you noted, and was linked last week, SBN's hockey megaverse decided that rather than pursue an original suggestion to run a hypothetical contracting teams that we'd do what the league was more likely to do and expand to thirty-two teams. Of course, whenever you do a hypothetical you should block out the boring suggestions. Otherwise, the predictable ends up becoming reality. So the two expansion franchises are set: The Quebec Nordiques and the Winnipeg Jets have been raised from the dead for another kick at the can in the NHL.
Obviously, we're suspending belief and didn't restrict the votes to cities where the NHL might actually expand so there's no need to debate the selections. Definitely check out the post with the suggested nicknames as there were some real gems including Vichy Quebec that made me do a spit-take. Would love to see what you guys can come up with for them. Derek Zona is winning the Winnipeg race with "Winnipeg Really Crappy Markets".
Anyway, what do we have to do? Well, the other part of the exercise is that two celebrity bloggers will be drafting rosters for these two teams. Each team will be putting together a protected list except for a couple of bloggers who were vociferously against fake expanding the NHL. Go figure.
The guidelines are after the jump. Toss your lists in the comments and then you can all get mad on Thursday when I protect my favourites.
First up, the gound rules on who can be on the protected lists:
- Teams can protect either "1 goalie, 5 defensemen and 9 forwards" OR "2 goalies, 3 defensemen and 7 forwards."
- If you go the two goalie route, at least one goalie left unprotected must have played in at least 10 games last season OR 25 games in the last two seasons combined. One game = at least 31 minutes.
- Each team must leave unprotected at least one defenseman who appeared in 40 games last season OR 70 games in the last two seasons combined.
- Each team must leave unprotected at least two forwards who appeared in 40 games last season OR 70 games in the last two seasons combined.
- Players who have played in 49 or fewer games are automatically exempt and do not need to be protected.
As for the rules for the drafters (and no, I don't know for sure who they are going to be yet), they are as follows:
- Each expansion team selects 30 players. A total of 60 players will be selected.
- The first 26 picks are to be used on three goaltenders, eight defensemen and thirteen forwards.
- The final four picks can be used to pick a player at any position.
- Only one goalie or one defenseman can be selected from each existing team.
- Team must be compliant with the salary cap.
Ok folks, have at it.
631 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Anyone on our SPC limit would likely be available, only the majority of those not on the NHL roster would be exempt.
The only guys we’d probably be in danger of losing are guys like Zigomanis, Brent, and Ryan Hamilton
Resident Capologist
NOOOOOOOOO
we can’t afford to lose any of those guys!
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Gustavsson
Schenn
Phaneuf
Gunnarsson
Beauchemin
Komisarek
Kessel
Bozak
Kulemin
Versteeg
Grabovski
Armstrong
Orr
MacArthur
Mitchell
Kaberle, Sjostrom, and Brown unprotected
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
That’s dumb, no one would claim Giguere at $6M.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
I think that when the dust settles you’re going to see a lot of bad salary on the expansion draft. Finger, Campbell, Giguere, Redden, etc.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Yup. Hitting salary floor wouldn’t be a problem for an expansion team. It’s like waivers without having to worry about re-entry.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
They’ll probably be very top heavy with bad contracts. You can bet the Rangers would spend a lot of time figuring out how to make sure Redden ends up in Hamilton.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
why though if we have the slot space?
is there another goalie that we have in the system that would work well as a 1A with gustavsson?
I mean his contract expires next year, its not like it is a boat anchor for years to come
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
gustavsson doesnt need to be protected i thought?
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
If you go the two goalie route, at least one goalie left unprotected must have played in at least 10 games last season OR 25 games in the last two seasons combined. One game = at least 31 minutes.
I assume that to mean if Giguere is protected, then Gustavsson meets the requirements regarding games played, and can be claimed by the expansion teams.
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
eh, i dunno, but yeah, if gus is auto protected, protect giggy, if he isnt, dont protect giggy
meh
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
49 games for goalies pretty much ensures that only one goalie would have to be protected; if one of your goalies has 50 games (and needs to be protected), then the other one has no more than 32, and doesn’t need to be protected. There is no way that the 49 game req applies to goalies.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Making a brief assumption
that every team in the expansion would choose to protect only 1 goalie (just as a thought experiment), that would leave every team’s backup unprotected:
ANA: McElhinny
ATL: Pavelec (or C. Mason)
BOS: Thomas
BUF: Lalime
CGY: Karlsson?
CAR: Justin Peters?
CHI: Turco? Their backup hasn’t played much (if at all)
COL: Budaj
CBJ: Garon
DAL: Raycroft
DET: Osgood
EDM: One of those D named goalies
FLA: Clemmenson
LAK: Ersberg
MIN: Harding
MON: Auld
NSH: Do these guys even have a backup? Pickard?
NJ: Hedberg
NYI: Roloson
NYR: Biron
OTT: Elliott
PHI: Boucher/Leighton
PHX: Lebarbara
SJ: Greiss
STL: Ty Conklin
TBL: Ellis/Smith
TOR: Giggy
VAN: Schneider? I don’t think he can be exposed
WSH: Varlamov/Neuvirth? I don’t think Neuvirth can be exposed.
From all those names, if you were an expansion team which 2 goalies would you take?
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Harding and Roloson.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd definitely take Harding.
I’d consider Thomas as well if salary/term weren’t any hinderence to the cap situation.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Thomas certainly, plus Greiss, Ersberg, Harding, Biron, Philly’s guy.
The Islanders decided they’re protecting ROloson and exposing DiPietro.
Resident Capologist
That makes a lot of sense.
Then Harding and Thomas would be my choices.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Seriously though
there’s not a ton of quality names on that list.
BOS having Thomas as a backup/tandem is a pretty damn sweet situation to be in.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I really disagree. There are a lot of good looking prospects on that list. The wave of young kids coming in to their own is part of the reason that this was such a buyer’s market for goalies. Harding, Peters, Greiss, Varlamov/Neuvirth, Deslauries/Dubnyk (does EDM take the two-goalie setup? I think they do.) are all young ( <25, I believe) players that look like they should grow into legitimate #1s. Take them, sign or take a veteran (Theodore still needs a job. Sign Niemi?), and you’re set for the short and medium term in goal. It should NOT be a problem coming up with 4 goaltenders off that list and UFA list.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
The problem with the list is that I think a number of the goalies i put a ? next to would be automatically protected and wouldn’t be obtainable.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
With how many different teams I’ve mentioned, you’re either getting decent/good goaltending or good defense/forwards. Could you imagine SJS taking the 2 goalie setup? Only protecting 3 defense and 7 forwards? It wouldn’t happen. Nor Boston.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Boston it might
Boston doesn’t have 4 great D men.
Chara, Seidenberg, and …?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Andrew Ference?
Mark Stuart? I mean… really?
I’d protect Thomas and Rask if I was them.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Ouch
Johnny Boychuck has played 51 NHL games… 2 past the limit for not needing to protect him.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Ya
I think Boston would welcome a team taking Thomas off their hands if for nothing else but cap considerations.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok so there's your 3
Chara, Seidenberg, and Boychuck.
Up front they have some overpaid guys… leave Recchi and Ryder unprotected… protect Krejci, Bergeron, Lucic, Savard, Wheeler, Sturm and Horton…
Seguin is unavailable.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
they probably want to protect wheeler too
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Wheeler
is on my list.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok so If I'm Boston
I protect Thomas, Rask, Chara, Seidenberg, Boychuck, Krejci, Bergeron, Lucic, Savard, Wheeler, Sturm, and Horton… done.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Heh
The leafs one is too easy… we should just come up with our lists for all the other teams.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
The rules thing says that if you’re protecting two goalies, you have to leave a goalie who’s played 10 games last year or 25 over the past two years exposed.
I don’t think Boston has a goalie that meets that criteria.
They may not be allowed to protect Thomas and Rask
Resident Capologist
Don't see why they wouldn't
in the real world that is…
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok then
they’re leaving Thomas exposed and protecting even more of their contracted players…
not a big deal.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I was just going to head over to Stanley Cup of Chowder to see their take on it… but nothing has been posted about it.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Funny thing about that. I bet that would garner some discussion but alas…
Join me on the Hockey Blog Adventure! (or Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)
by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Aug 30, 2010 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I was thinking more on the forwards side, but you’re right, they may just take the two-goalie route. Ryder and Lucic are both overpaid. Add in a couple Bottom Sixers and they’re there… I think it comes down to which cap-hits they think they can get rid of.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
they would protect Lucic mos def
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Not if they were smart.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Why?
do you really think Daniel Paille or Shawn Thornton are worth protecting?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Greg Campbell?
I mean… these are the guys that would be unprotected.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
If you're exposing Lucic
then you’re using that spot to protect someone else… who are you protecting?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
If the Bruins are trying to use the expansion to get out from their cap troubles, then they need to put someone out there that they’re sure will go. Lucic is slightly overpaid (a fan favorite, though), so I think putting Lucic, Ryder, and / or Thomas wouldn’t be a bad way to get out of the cap issue.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Because he’s grossly overpaid. I’d rather shed his contract than be forced to move Savard, Bergeron, Wheeler, or Ryder.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
I’d rather shed Ryder than Lucic.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
same.
or Savard… considering how many C they have coming through the system.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Fire Ryder into the sun.
Join me on the Hockey Blog Adventure! (or Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)
by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Aug 30, 2010 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Lucic is expensive, yes, but he is still a pretty damned useful hockey player and currently brings something that no other player on the Bruins does
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Assuming Washington doesn’t take the 2 goalie route (and I think they would, since Alzner and Carlson are both ineligible), Neuvirth and C. Mason or Nittymaki. I would also consider M. Brodeur from Ottawa instead of Neuvirth (more of a gamble, but he looked good last year), and Harding would be a legit option too.
I think SJS protects Greiss, as he’s younger. They would just be gambling that he can step up his game asap.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
If SJ protected Greiss
Niitty would get snapped up for sure.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I think one of those two is being snapped up. Greiss is a very strong prospect. He looked quite good during the Olympics.
Total gone from that list, if Washington goes 2 goalie system: Harding, Thomas, Greiss, Mason. Maybe Peters goes in lieu of Greiss, but I have to think he’s up there.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
We don’t really have a backup.
OtF: our captain can beat up your captain.
Bitter and Blue: if you can't beat 'em; buy 'em.
by Chris Burton on Aug 30, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I was kind of wondering about that one.
Niemi and Theo are still available… I’m sure you’ve already thought about it.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I won’t take this post off topic, but to answer your question – I’m on the Theodore bandwagon.
OtF: our captain can beat up your captain.
Bitter and Blue: if you can't beat 'em; buy 'em.
by Chris Burton on Aug 30, 2010 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
The Goalie Guild is doing a writeup of Preds’ goaltending sometime soon (he mentioned it on twitter). If anyone can do a good rundown of your could-be callups, it’s him.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
I’ll have to check it out, thanks. Of the callup options, Lindback is the most NHL ready.
OtF: our captain can beat up your captain.
Bitter and Blue: if you can't beat 'em; buy 'em.
by Chris Burton on Aug 30, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Niemi’s too expensive. ;)
OtF: our captain can beat up your captain.
Bitter and Blue: if you can't beat 'em; buy 'em.
by Chris Burton on Aug 30, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
it was an experience all right……
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d leave Komi unprotected, despite my irrational love for him. I think I’d keep everyone else you have the same, and just replace Komi with Kaberle.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
:P
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Gustavsson
Schenn
Gunnar
Phaneuf
Beauchemin
Kaberle
Kessel
Bozak
Kulemin
Grabbo
Armstrong
Orr
Versteeg
mitchell
Sjostrom
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:10 PM EDT reply actions
here’s a question. If a player has a NMC or NTC, can they be left unprotected in an Expansion Draft?
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
Pretty sure they can. There was vague talk back when Phoenix was in trouble that in the event of contraction, players with NMCs like Shane Doan would try to delcare themselves ineligible for a dispersal draft and become UFAs. I think the idea was shot down.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Aug 30, 2010 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Players who have played in 49 or fewer games are automatically exempt and do not need to be protected.
BOZAK: 37 GP. No need to protect him as one of the fwds as he’s exempt.
20 miles to Legoland!
Gunnarsson played 43
so him too!
Blue and White has been alive and well in Ottawa since waaaaay before 1992.
and Caputi with only 28 in the last two season…
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
in that case I add Komi and MacArthur to me list
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
also Giggy cause Gus is unattainable due to games played
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions
THe goalie requirement for games played is likely lower than 49.
Also, if Gustavsson IS eligible, we don’t have a single other goalie that meets the exposure requirement other than Giguere.
Resident Capologist
Gustavsson
Phaneuf
Kaberle
Gunnarsson
Schenn
Beauchemin
Kessel
Kulemin
Versteeg
Grabovski
Armstrong
Sjostrom
MacArthur
Orr
Mitchell
In other words, nearly identical to both birky’s and Jared’s, as I imagine most of these will be. On Komi, I’m thinking that maybe the big contract dissuades one of the new teams from taking from (unlikely) and unfortunately, Beauch’s good season and Komi’s injury just makes Beauch more valuable. BOZAK only playing for half of last year really helps us out.
And if Gunnar's not available
Clearly we protect Komi instead. God save that games-played requirement.
This is fun...
Goalies:
None.
(If Gustavsson is eligible, him, but it says players who have played fewer than 49 games, and he’s played 42)
Defensemen:
Phaneuf
Kaberle
Schenn
Komisarek
None (Gunnarsson isn’t eligible)
Forwards:
Kessel
Kulemin
Armstrong
Versteeg
Orr
MacArthur
Sjostrom
Mitchell
(Bozak, Kadri, Caputi, Hanson etc not eligible)
1 goalie, 5 defensemen and 9 forwards
grabbo? really?
/shakes head
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
He and Beauch would be gone for sure.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
you have to leave 2 fwds and 1 d that played at least 40 games last season or 70 over the past 2 available. Which forwards in your list fit that criteria?
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
Exposing Grabovski at the expense of anyone but Kessel, Kulemin and Versteeg is insanity.
Resident Capologist
Pssht…you should expose players that will get taken. Grabovski and Beauchemin will likely be taken, freeing up cap space to make the team better. We’re already loaded on D and grabovski has not lived up to his contract, so the money can be better spent elsewhere.
loosing players like grabbo and beauch with nothing coming back to make the team better makes the team significantly worse
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Right now…maybe. Grabovski wasn’t impressive last year, neither was Beauch aside from eating minutes.
We’d have an extra 6.7 mill in cap space to use for trades and for next year.
and boston gets another lotto pick, and the leafs are terrible because they have no depth at center and their defenseman who played the hardest minuites against the best players in the NHL has been lost for naught
Grabovski was pretty good last year, and then he got hurt for 30 games. I don’t know what you expect out of a 2.9 million dollar player with meh line mates but it is clearly too much
also, when cap space is spent on useful players, it is a good thing
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
But really Grabbo over Mitchell? You have 8 fwds protected, might as well throw Grabs in their
BS
by MapleLeafMole on Aug 30, 2010 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Grabovski
was INJURED last year… how can a guy be impressive… or unimpressive when he isn’t playing?
P.S. while he was injured we weren’t paying his salary against the cap so the cap hit was irrelevant.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Grabovski's
ppg production rate dropped from 0.62 ppg in 08-09 to 0.59 in 09-10… SHOCKHORROROMFG!
He was not significantly worse last season than he was the year before… this is an illogical argument.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
24-24-11
With Grabbo in the line up.
6-14-3 without.
by general borschevsky on Aug 30, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
That’s a rec’n.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m wavering
"Hockey captures the essence of Canadian experience... hockey is the chance of life, and an affirmation that despite the deathly chill of winter we are alive." - Stephen Leacock.
I wish Finger would follow your lead.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Mikhail Grabovski
GVT 2008-2009 7.9 in 78 games
GVT 2009-2010 5.7 in 59 games
…and his DGVT was up significantly. He’s a very useful player. I don’t have any rational basis for this statement, but in watching a good deal of hockey it appears offensive skills are particularly hard to maintain through and following injury.
It was a broken wrist
that can’t help with shooting, passing touch, or stick handling at all… his three primary skills that don’t require skating or physical contact.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions
GVT is a piece of a picture, not the whole thing…
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions
and grabovski HAS lived up to his contract, he makes right about what a 50ish point 2nd line center makes, your argument is without logic
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Everything about this comment makes my head hurt.
You should expose players that aren’t essential to your team.
How hasn’t Grabovski lived up to his contract? First off, he’s one year into it. Second off, his ppg was essentially the same as his rookie season; so if he hadn’t been hurt he’d have put up high 40s/low 50s in points. That’s perfectly acceptable for a second line centre, and so is a $2.9M cap hit.
Third, you can leave any of our two fourth-line pluggers exposed and protect every single other forward on the roster. WHy you’re leaving a top six forward exposed on a team desperately short on top six forwards, in order to save fourth liners is simply moronic.
Resident Capologist
it’s not even about being essential. Grabbo is still an asset, as is Beauchemin. Regardless of your personal feelings, we shouldn’t be hoping they disappear. Jesus, trade them for something at least.
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
so you tihnk the leafs would have to take a salary dump to get rid of these players in a trade or something?
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
even so, what are we going to do with that money? put it in the teacher’s coffers?
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
yes please
since the pension is underfunded already… I’m ok with that.
Huge misleading notion out there that the pension is rolling in dough… they increased our pension deductions from our salaries last year to meet up the shortfall they’re expecting when the baby boomers retire… we don’t have a shitload of money to be spending frivolously… sorry.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I would say that Grabovski and Beauchemin have two of the best contracts on the team relative to what they bring. Losing them for capspace would be fool hearty because you’d never get back that kind of value in free agency.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
by SkinnyFish on Aug 30, 2010 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
THIS
Oh man I love Komi but there’s no way I’d protect him over Beauch, who has a more reasonable contract and isn’t coming back from major surgery.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
for the sake of it, let’s say you’re right.
who do the Leafs sign from the overwhelming crap pile that is the current free agent market to “make themselves better”…?
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Right now…no one, though Jersey may be looking for a trade partner soon.
Next summer…who knows, I’d have to look through the list of FAs.
you sound a whole lot like JFJ.
this was his master plan coming out of the lockout…
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought JFJs master plan was to trade draft picks and sign people no one had ever heard of to ridiculous contracts. =P
no
seriously, coming out of the lockout he assumed if he held bags of money out there, UFAs would line up to be Leafs. Turns out the good ones all resigned with their then current teams and the Leafs got nothing.
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I totally forgot about that. God, you’re right, that was the plan.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Thornton!
Iginla! WOOOOO
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
wait, you mean we can get some of the over priced aging crap that jersey is trying to unload so they can keep their talented youthful core players?
WHERE DO I SIGN UP?
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
If your hypothetical plan is “who knows,” it’s not a very good one.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
by Bower Power on Aug 30, 2010 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well…the UFA list could change. So I could name off names like Semin, Bergeron etc., but who knows if they’ll still be available in 2011. That being said, there will be players better than Grabovski available…that’s for sure.
Beauchemin is only expendable because we have too much money tied up on D, we have too many D-men, and I’m not sure if teams would take Komi.
again, you are asuming those players will still be available
I doubt very much Bergeron will be for one.
UFAs often sign before free agency, look at Rick Nash and patrick Marleau
hedging your bets on players like that being available is both short sighted and stupid
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not making that assumption at all. In fact I explicitly stated that the list would change.
But I’m willing to take a risk, and Grabovski isn’t so good, that I’ll cry if the risk doesn’t work out. It’s not like Burke gambling with picks on the Kessel deal.
it isnt that grabbo is fantastic or anything, it is that THE LEAFS NEED NON EXPENSIVE EFFECTIVE TOP SIX OFFENSE.
If you were starving would you trade your peanut butter just to make room on your shelf because chocolate cake might go on sale next week?
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
More importantly if we want cap space we have dead weight to trim. Grabovski isn’t dead weight. This isn’t a “Grabovski or Cap room” argument: we can have both.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Except the Leafs aren’t starving.
They sell out regardless of how the team performs. So I don’t really care if they suck a little more this year, but open up money for next year, given that they seem unwilling to bury their mistakes.
Burke doesn’t care about the bottom line, Burke cares about winning. Losing Grabbo for nothing doesn’t help us win.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Grabbo is a mistake?
in what world?
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
So your rationale for giving away another lottery pick because you gave away Beauchemin and Grabovski in an expansion draft is that MLSE won’t send Jeff Finger to the minors.
Wow.
Resident Capologist
As someone who doesn’t want to watch a lousy team stink all year and then not get to draft Sean Couturier I care.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
yup, it wasnt so much that Boston got to draft Tyler Seguin last year, just that we didn’t get to
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
And I don’t want to watch a lousy team year after year after year.
This team only has 11 million coming off the books after this year and Schenn, MacArthur, and Gunnarsson and maybe Bozak (depending on this year) will need raises, we’ll need another goalie and we’ll need to re-sign Kaberle (if we go that route).
We lack top 3 forwards, and the only ways we can improve are trade and free agency. And I’d rather gamble on free agency and free up some money via Grabbo for an expensive top 3 wallet, than give up Kulemin or other assets I consider essential in a trade for a top 3 wallet.
If the team were willing to bury money, I’d bury Finger, Armstrong and Beauchemin at the end of this year, and I wouldn’t see a need to dump Grabbo then….but thus far, they don’t seem to want to.
you really think the leafs are going to resign Clarke MacArthur to any salary of significance?
Also, it is highly unlikely that either Schenn or Bozak play so that they deserve a higher salary than their current cap hit of 3 mill
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
If the team were willing to bury money, I’d bury Finger, Armstrong and Beauchemin at the end of this year,
You lost me.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
because beauchemin is terrible and over paid….oh wait, no he isnt
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Schenn and Bozak aren’t going to get huge bonuses. Bozak’s already earning $3M.
Gunnarsson is going to have a rough season when his PDO falls back to earth and who gives a shit about MacArthur?
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Replacing Giguere is going to be hella-easy, because we just promote whoever wins the Rynnas/Reimer/Scrivens cage match going on down in the AHL to be the backup.
Oh and that frees up 5M to re-sign Schenn, Gunnarsson and Bozak.
Resident Capologist
That’s $5M + their current salaries.
Plenty of room to re-sign people, but not a ton to make a huge UFA splash unless some one gets moved.
What the hell is going to happen to Kabby….
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
which, at most means about 4 mill to resign Gunnar after schenn and Bozak sign for at the most 3.5 each
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Schenn will be an RFA shut down d-man. He earns $2.975 and I can’t see him getting much more than $3.5.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Because if nothing else, it’s a sign that your team has made no improvement over the course of a year. And that the year’s draft isn’t going to be much help in that regard.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
the leafs ARE starving, they are starving for goals, for assists, for bleeding offense
I don’t know if you have looked at the roster lately but it is pretty anemic from a put the puck in the net standpoint
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
You know what having $3M in caphit buys you in free agency?
30pts from Colby Armstrong
Brett Lebda + Lee “I only perform in contract years” Stempniak.
It doesn’t buy you a player as good as Grabovski.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Starving doesn’t refer to money thought
Starving refers to wins.
Also, yeah good analogy
BS
by MapleLeafMole on Aug 30, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
They are starving
from an offensive perspective… not financially.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
rec’d for penut butter and cake
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E"
by Matt_Roberts on Aug 30, 2010 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Semin and Bergeron are probably the only players objectively better than Grabovski.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
There will not be 50 point players available for less than 3 million dollars in free agency. There. Will. Not.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
I don’t want to replace Grabovski with a 50 point player in free agency….that would just be a lateral move.
So who do you want to replace him with? A 60pt player for $5M?
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Sure. But I’m saying you won’t even find a 50 point player for 3M, let alone an “upward” move. I don’t just mean in this free agency, I don’t think you would find that in any free agency.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
If you consider that our roster is pretty well set (since the free agent market is thin), what do we need that money for? kaberle walks next summer….
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
I do think cap flexibility is always a good thing—a good (but expensive) player always falls out of the sky at least once per year. But I don’t think Beauch and Grabbo are the way to get it.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
a good (but expensive) player always falls out of the sky
Captain Phaneuf FTW!
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I mean we shed a lot of salary to get him but you know what I mean.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Here it is: http://www.capgeek.com/free_agents.php?Year=2011&Team=All&Position=All&FAType=2
Here are the notable players on that list (under 29, good forwards)
Alex Semin, Patrice Bergeron, Tomas Fleischmann, David Backes, Scottie Upshall, Brooks Laich, Nik Zherdev, Jussi Jokinen, Tomas Kopecky, Max Talbot, Ville Leino…
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
players that have a 99% chance of being resigned by the trade deadline
Bergeron, Fleischmann, Hacbeks, Upshall, Laich, Talbot and Leino
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think Backes is going anywhere either.
by scrambles the death dealer on Aug 30, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Hacbeks = Backes
now THAT is a typo
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Fleischmann
might get moved… he’s not a certainty. Neither is Backes… St. Louis has a lot of good young forwards… they may need to move him if he doesn’t put up big numbers again this season. Last year he was off.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
moved, sure, but resigned (by someone) I think it is all but inevitable
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok
but he could be moved to the Leafs… so that part is what’s relevant to me.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah, the point was “Don’t count on talented useful players being UFA’s a year from now”
The Leafs have a MUCH higher chance at attaining them through a trade and sign
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Which you need capspace for…since teams like Washington aren’t taking salary back. And again, the Leafs haven’t shown a willingness to dump people in the minors. Or else, we wouldn’t be having this ridiculous argument.
Actually the best argument would have been that this is a simulation and thus has no real world indications and as a result, all our best players, top to bottom, should be protected.
We take things too seriously here sometimes. ;)
Actually the best argument would have been that this is a simulation and thus has no real world indications and as a result, all our best players, top to bottom, should be protected.
So, naturally, you exposed Grabovski at the expense of Mike Brown and Colton Orr
Resident Capologist
Goalie – Jonas Gustavsson
Exposed – JS Giguere
No brainer
Defence – Dion Phaneuf, Luke Schenn, Tomas Kaberle, Mike Komisarek, Francois Beauchemin
Exempt – Carl Gunnarsson
Exposed – Jeff Finger, Brett Lebda, Matt Lashoff
Not really a surprise. Finger and Lebda meet the 40 game requirement.
Forwards – Phil Kessel, MIkhail Grabovski, Nikolai Kulemin, Kris Versteeg, Colby Armstrong, John Mitchell, Frederik Sjostrom, Colton Orr, blank
Exempt – Tyler Bozak, Christian Hanson, Luca Caputi
Exposed – Mike Brown, Clarke MacArthur
I could only come up with 8 forwards to protect, because Bozak, Hanson and Caputi are all exempt, Brown and MacArthur are the two forwards with 40 games that he had to expose, and looking through the Capgeek roster we don’t have another eligible forward.
Resident Capologist
Heh
almost our entire roster would be protected.
Based on those rules we’d come out okay in an expansion draft. Probably only lose Giggy.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d expose Komi and Armstrong too, but I’m sure that will surprise no one.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
So for the record:
Exempt: Gunnarsson, Bozak, Hanson, Caputi
Protected: Gustavsson, Phaneuf, Schenn, Kaberle, Beauchemin, Kessel, Kulemin, Grabovski, Versteeg, Mitchell, Sjostrom, MacArthur
Exposed: Komisarek, Armstrong, Orr, Brown, Finger, Lebda, Lashoff
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Your protected list is one defence and two forwards short.
So basically, add one more D, and then one of the forwards.
Resident Capologist
I didn’t think you had to protect that many, I thought you could.
Basically, I exposed everyone I think is on a bad contract. I guess by that criteria Orr, Brown and Lashoff could stay. I just don’t really care about them one way or another.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Unprotected
Finger
Giguere
Protected
Gustavsson
Komisarek
Schenn
Phaneuf
Kaberle
Beauchemin
Kulemin
Versteeg
Kessel
Grabovski
Armstrong
Orr
Sjostrom
MacArthur
Mitchell
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 12:34 PM EDT reply actions
Read on...
BOZAK is protected.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Protect Komisarek, then trade his rights to one of the expansion teams on draft day for a prospect.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Aug 30, 2010 12:43 PM EDT reply actions
I think Komisarek currently has negative value with that contract and his injury history. I know people disagree but I still think he’d go unclaimed if put on waivers.
Hopefully he rebounds to ‘07-’08 form this year.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
waivers, maybe, but he would be snapped up by an expansion team in the blink of an eye
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s my assumption too. Expansion teams have a lot more cap space than existing teams.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Holy crap I agree with you?!?!?!
END OF DAYS
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think so. I think Komisarek would get claimed in an expansion draft for $4.5
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Considering most other defensemen left exposed would likely be also “bad” contracts, Komi is not as bad as Finger, Redden, etc.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree he’d have a good chance to go in an expansion draft; I just don’t think he would go on waivers to existing teams.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I misunderstood your position. You’re trying to lose Komisarek.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Yup.
As far as I can tell, we agree on about 99% of things (including that new Les Savy Fav album—awesome).
Komisarek is the 1%.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure we disagree. I’m withholding judgement on Komisarek until this season. If December rolls around and he’s still crap I’ll revise my opinion.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Fair enough. I should withhold judgment too.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
He was pretty crummy last season, I’ll admit it.
He was also chased pretty hard on the UFA market by more than just us. After we signed him Gainey said he would have liked to have kept Komisarek.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Yeah, I’ll concede there was clearly competition for him to a degree that didn’t seem to exist for Armstrong (I recall competing accounts for him).
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Two years ago
his last in Montreal… he was quite useful.
Weird thing is, Wilson was playing him on the 1st pairing, in a not so defensive role. He should have been playing way tougher minutes than he was… and sheltering our younger guys.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
IIRC, his last year in Montreal wasn’t so good. Wasn’t playing tough minutes, or big minutes. Lucic messed him up. ‘07-’08 was his big year.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I was unaware
that Les Savy Fav put out a new album… now to go get it.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
It ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuules
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
If you ever get a chance to see them live go. One time we had a conga line over the top of the bar.
Another time their lead singer stole articles of clothing from people in the crowd and swung from a hanging light fixture. Every time we got fucking blitzed and partied like the world ended in six hours.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Their music makes me expect such insanity live. Lets me pretend I’m still young.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
First time I saw them this fat roadie dude with a boombox comes out, taps on a few mics.
“Test. Test test test.”
Then he turns the boombox on and it’s a loop of Khia’s “My neck, my back, my [vagina] and my crack”. Just that chorus over and over and over.
“We’re not starting until everyone sings along. And claps. I like clapping. Seriously.”
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
album title?
helps with searching.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
found it
thanks
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Komisarek doesn’t really have an injury history. the 40 games he missed with the shoulder was far and away his longest time on IR. shoulder surgery isn’t really a big deal anymore and is actually fairly common for athletes
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
He missed time in ‘08-’09 after Lucic messed him up.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
same injury im pretty sure, but he didn’t have surgery till last season
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
he’s no Sean O’Donnell…
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
or Hal Gill
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Serious Question
Are people not fully understanding the rules?
So far I’ve seen comments saying that we’re leaving Beauchemin, Kaberle or Komisarek unprotected. I can’t for the life of me figure out why.
Since we’re undoubtedly going the 1-5-9 route, 5 D need to be protected. ONE OF THEM IS NOT CARL GUNARSSON. He’s played 44 games, so he is exempt for the draft.
Ignoring Gunnarsson, Phaneuf, SChenn, Kaberle, Beauchemin and Komisarek are undeniably the 5 best D on our team. So why are any of them being exposed? Lebda and Finger are exposed, both of which could meet that 40 game cirtiera.
Basically, if you’re leaving one of Kaberle, Beauchemin, or Komisarek exposed in favour of one of Lashoff, Lebda or Finger, please let me know why you think this is a prudent move and then ask someone to drive you to the hospital because you clearly have a brain injury.
Resident Capologist
most of the coments suggesting leaving one of those players unprotected came before the “oh, duh, games played for gunnar means we dont need to protect him” realization
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
seems like an easy choice
if you have to leave 1 D and 2 F definitely:
The Finger
Brown
this one is a little more debatable but Macarthur is who i’d put out there.
Kool as KuKumbers Kulemin.... and hopefully Kadri.
how amazing would it be if the finger was magically removed from our team…. one can only dream though.
Kool as KuKumbers Kulemin.... and hopefully Kadri.
Remember that Finger can actually be a decent #4 defenseman, and that the contract he’s on is in line with that.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
For 2009-2010, the range of salaries for defensemen ranked between #91-120 in salaries (“#4 defense”) was $2.9-1.7 million. Finger is grossly overpaid.
I’m not really thinking this through.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Teams can protect either “1 goalie, 5 defensemen and 9 forwards” OR “2 goalies, 3 defensemen and 7 forwards.”
Can protect. Not must protect.
I expose Komisarek (and Armstrong) because I think they’re bad contracts I’d like to be rid of. If I opposed their signings at the time (which I did) why wouldn’t I want to be rid of them?
I am pretty sure I don’t have a brain injury, just a different view of Komisarek’s value than you.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
It just seems crazy to me not to make use of all the exemptions that you’re being given.
Why make things easier on your new competition?
DGB’s idea was brilliant; protect Komi, then trade him to one of the expansion teams.
Resident Capologist
I don’t think he has any trade value right now (if he kicks ass this year, that’s different—but no guarantee he will). Maybe I’m wrong, that’s just how I see it.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s a defensible viewpoint.
I had more issue with Kaberle and Beauchemin. And of course, Grabovski.
Resident Capologist
Yeah, it goes back to an old idea of mine about “anchors vs. assets” based on value vs. contract. Kaberle, Beauch and Grabbo are all assets, so I’d keep them.
Armstrong and Komisarek, in the long-run, I think are anchors. We’d definitely suffer this year without them because they make the team better but our cap is looking tight next year and they are the main reason.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions
To be honest (not that I blame you) but you’re judging Komisarek on a very, very small sample size.
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
100 games over two years? Look at his ‘08-’09. It ain’t terribly pretty.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Right. And 34 last year. So sample size is decent.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, I’m just saying I’m judging him on his last 100 games. I remember Habs fans saying before he went UFA that he was not the same player that last year and the same was true last year.
Let’s hope it was a health thing and he’s back on track this year.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Does anyone remember
making this mistake about Toskala (I did for sure).
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t, no.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
by Chemmy on Aug 30, 2010 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You’re not as smug about this as I would think you’d be.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m trying to be optimistic… but yeah, if I were a betting man I’d bet against this contract working out well.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
His 08-09
Really wasn’t that bad from a number of perspectives.
He was an even player in 66 games with 121 PIMs. He finished 4th in the NHL in blocked shots with 165, despite playing at least 10 fewer games than all of the guys ahead of him in the rankings. He finished 6th in the NHL in Blocked Shots per 60 minutes.3rd amongst defenders.
His Corsi Rel QoC wasn’t actually that difficult… it was easier than Andre Markov. and his Corsi Rel QoT was the highest on Montreal for any D man other than Mathieu Schneider. So he wasn’t facing the toughest minutes… but he was having an impact in the minutes he DID play.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
This is one of those cases where for reasons I don’t understand Corsi rel QoC and Corsi QoC give very different rankings (I understand why numerical values would be different). Komi was worst among Habs D in Corsi QoC but 2nd in Corsi rel. QoC. Maybe they played a string of really tough opponents while he was out?
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Woops
155 blocked shots not 165. (at 5on5)
Luke Schenn’s minutes were harder and he had worse teammates. He had more hits and fewer blocked shots.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
I will say though, that the Komisarek angle is defensible.
Kaberle seems silly, and Beauchemin is ridiculous.
Resident Capologist
Eating tough minutes is, to me, highly undervalued among NHL fans.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Protected
Versteeg
Kulemin
Bozak
Kessel
Armstrong
Sjostrom
Orr
MacArthur
Brown
Komisarek
Beauchemin
Phaneuf
Kaberle
Schenn
Gustavvson
UnprotectedGrabovski
Mitchell
Finger
Lebda
Giguere
ExemptKadri
Mueller
Caputi
Hanson
Gunnarsson
brown over grabbo?
jesus…….
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s like they’re members of the Pineapple Defence League or something.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
WHY DO PEOPLE HAVE SO MUCH HATE FOR GRABOVSKI???
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
GRABBO IS TERRIBLE
HE MAKES THE TEAM SUFFER BY BATTLING HABS PLAYERS
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
HE HAS A BAD ATTITUDE AND IS A TERRIBLE TEAM MATE, HE FOUGHT IN PRACTICE TWICE AND COSTS TOO MUCH MONEY BUT I CANNOT JUSTIFY THAT ARGUMENT WITH FACTS
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
who whoa whoa….I was the one claiming him to be a bad team mate, based on the arguements you highlighted in Caps Lock. Not LT67 (unless I missed something)
He would still be on my protected list, 100%
BS
by MapleLeafMole on Aug 30, 2010 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions
BALL OF YARN
UNRAVELING
LEAVE THE BALL OF YARN ALONE!
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
People hate Grabovski
because he’s small and a soviet product.
He’s Toronto’s Stanislav Chistov… I’m no longer shocked by it… there is no justifiable excuse for the hatred… in essence… idiocy.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I will fight people on this till death
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
i disliked Grabbo his first year despite his awesome showdown with the tits and the habs fans but since then ive been swayed to the good side.
I almost want to rock a grabbo jersey around town….. and I only say almost because ive already decided on a schenn jersey
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E"
by Matt_Roberts on Aug 30, 2010 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Chistov is the best name ever.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t like Grabo’s contract…If someone will take him…they can have him. I’d like to have the $2.9M for someone else. I could be wrong but I don’t see Grabo becoming more than he is….a bad teammate and very average player.
2.9 mill will on average, buy you a lesser offensively talented players.
grabbo getting claimed leaves a gaping hole at center for the Leafs that they have NO replacement for AND KADRI IS NOT AN AUTOMATIC FILL IN SINCE HE HAS YET TO PROVE HE IS READY
The bad team mate label is over blown, especially since when Burke cleared house last year he seemed to specifically target players with bad attitudes, and instead signed grabbo to a three year deal, to be frank I trust his judgement on character than a bunch of internet speculation
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Players Grabovski had better value than on a ppg basis last year
David Krejci, Blake Wheeler, Corey Perry, Ryan Getzlaf, Tim Connolly, Niklas Hagman, Olli Jokinen, Erik Cole, Sergei Samsonov, RJ Umberger, Kristian Huselius, Mike Ribeiro, Brendan Morrow, Johan Franzen, Dan Cleary, Jarret Stoll, Justin Williams, Andrei Kostitsyn, Steve Sullivan, JP Dumont, John Tavares, Chris Kelly, Mike Fisher, Jeff Carter, Scott Hartnell, Ray Whitney, Radim Vrbata, Chris Kunitz, Jordan Staal, Ryan Clowe, Andy MacDonald, Brad Boyes, Ryan Malone, Pavol Demitra
That’s a pretty solid group of forwards for a guy to outperform and then have people say he’s “too expensive”. I was picking guys with comparable deals that are making under $5 million a year… in roughly comparable top 6 roles.
He might have had fewer points, or lower points per game, but on a per dollar basis, he did better for his production at his cost than any of the aforementioned players.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Bozak
is exempt. no need to protect him.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
BOZAK!
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
<3
"Our bottom six should be nicknamed The Intangibles." -Plea From A Cat Named Felix
Leafs fan till the end!
by whyevenbother on Aug 30, 2010 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Welcome
Thanks for joining.
No Grabbo? That’s crazy talk to be honest.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Like reading thoughts confined to 140 characters? I'm on Twitter too.
Funny thing
Here are the Leafs forwards with over 49 NHL games played:
Kessel, Kulemin, Grabovski, Mitchell, Armstrong, Orr, Brown, Sjostrom, MacArthur, Versteeg…
You can protect 9 of those, and I’m pretty sure leaving MacArthur available means very few teams would bite on any of them.
Defense is a bigger problem.
Over 49 games you’ve got Phaneuf, Schenn, Komisarek, Kaberle, Finger, Beauchemin, and Lebda. You can protect 5 of them, and I’d let Finger, and Lebda hang out to dry on the basis of their crap deals and lack of consequence.
As for goalie, protect Gustavsson… expose Giguere… done.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
Yeah there’s not much here to rationally argue about.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Yeah
our team is too young for this to be difficult.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
We're virtually
an expansion team ourselves… scary.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
HOWEVER
We should set up some sort of fantasy competition: once the full expansion list hits we should all assemble a team and see who ends up with the highest GVT or something.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
We can do that ...
create some sort of GVT fantasy pool.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Awesome! Will there be prizes?
Brain: The irony of it all, Pinky. Years of trying to take over the world, and all I had to do was say "truculence".
Follow me I'm Boring!
by blindfolded tank driver on Aug 30, 2010 1:26 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
We never mail prizes out because we’re lazy so can I just answer “technically yes”?
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
I got a prize in the mail!
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d leave Armstrong unprotected because he’s overpaid, but you’re right. This is basically all a no brainer.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Agreed
but he has more value to us than MacArthur and his -16, GVT of +1.2, for over $1 million.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions
not to nitpick
but where do you get 1.2? Awad’s spreadsheet shows 1.8 GVT in 81 games for 09-10. Doesn’t change the argument really.
It’s worth noting that both Colby Armstrong and Clarke MacArthur had much stronger seasons in this respect the year before. Makes me really wonder why we had to overpay for Armstrong, but I’m still a teeny bit hopeful that Colby is a net positive despite his salary.
One issue could be that GVT from behindthenet.ca is an unadjusted figure—the stuff from his global spreadsheet is normalized to account for eras.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d protect MacArthur before Armstrong, that’s for sure.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
I wouldn't
Armstrong is overpaid… but MacArthur is going to be despised by Leafdom (or perhaps just by me).
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
I am very very bothered
by the fact that he has a solid chance of cracking our top 6. The only value he has to me is he protects a year of Kadri before he becomes UFA down the line.
That’s it.
I suppose the money is worth it in that case…. if Kadri makes the team and MacArthur is playing a regular role, then I hate him.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
MacArthur is insulation
he is irritatingly itchy, but useful
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Sounds like an uncomfortable
pair of socks.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
a shitty pair of wool socks
that scored 3 goals in the last 3 months of last season… crapppppppy.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah, but they keep your feet warm, and prevent frostbite….for a year
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
For MacArthur’s salary if Kadri’s ready in December we fire Clark into the sun and move on with our lives.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
I want to write his name in Caps all the time.
CLARKE MACARTHUR
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ll add that ‘e’ when the commenters on this blog stop writing ‘rediculous’
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
SBN should install a spell check for the comments.
Then we could take bets on how long it’d take for me and Jared to break it.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
fire fox has spell check
=3
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah but I can’t use firefox at work
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Dunno if it’ll work on your computer but I installed Firefox in the “My Documents” folder and it works fine, even without administrator rights.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Lunchtime task acquired.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
If that happens
fine… I’m just extremely annoyed if they BOTH play on this team.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
MacArthur is a signing that makes sense for one year but would put me in a murderous rage for two.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Kinda like
LebdaLebda?
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
No it doesn't.
Not unless Kadri is spending a year in the AHL…. along with D’Amigo, Stefanovich, and Mitchell making magical chemistry together that they will unleash on the NHL in 2 years.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
If Kadri makes the team this year, I agree with Chemmy, fire Clarke into the sun (aka Ricoh Coliseum). I can see MLSE eating some portion of $1.1MM.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes but
I don’t foresee Burke and his mythical “virtues” around free agent signings and giving guys a “fair shake” suddenly turning around and jettisoning a player like MacArthur in good faith.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
What concerns me is
The only good months MacArthur had were October and April last season. He was a combined 6G, 3A, 9Pts, and a +3 in 16 games during those two months.
Rest of the season? 65GP, 10G, 15A, -19.
SCARY.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
i think he scored as many points in october last year as the whole leafs team did
I wouldnt mind that
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Nikolai Kulemin
was like his polar opposite.
Shitty October and April: 2G, 0A, -4 rating in 13 games.
Every other month? 65GP, 14G, 20A, +4 rating.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
If we could combine MacArthur and Kulemin's seasons
we’d have ended up with a 20G, 23A player with a +7 rating… not bad for a younger forward.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe
Burke is diversifying his goal scoring. We need goalscoring in EVERY month.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
MacArthur has shown that he can outperform his contract; about 15G and 15A.
I do not think that Armstrong has it in him to outperform his $3M contract.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Based on goals/assists purely
perhaps… but he’s a huge defensive liability, and he is amazingly streaky as a scorer… which means for long stretches he’s worse than useless.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm happy
if Armstrong works out to be worth about $2.25 mill… which is a 750K overpay.
If MacArthur turns out to be worth anything above $0 to our team, I am also ok… but I don’t foresee that happening.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I do not think that Armstrong has it in him to outperform his $3M contract.
But you’re not factoring in his IQ (Intangibles Quotient)
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Worth noting
In 2008-2009, Mikhail Grabovski’s GVT was 7.9; Colby Armstrong’s was 7.7. If Armstrong proves to be as valuable as Grabovski like he was in ‘09 (at least by this measure), he could be worth $3 mil’. Never mind intangibles, he’s not that bad a hockey player, it appears.
am I the only guy that is warming to the idea of armstrong in a leaf sweater? That anaheim fan post really gave me enough reason to give him a chance next year. The contract is just one year to long otherwise i have no problem at this point.
Kool as KuKumbers Kulemin.... and hopefully Kadri.
Why are we reading Ducks
fanposts on a Thrashers player? They saw him all of what… once last year? or any of the previous years?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh the roles top 9 bottom 3
Yeah … I see his value… but he isn’t worth $3 mill.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
i agree
his contract is not good, but hes definitely more useful than macarthur I dont see where he fits on this team at all. At least armstrong will have a defined role next year that no other leaf can really replace right now.
Kool as KuKumbers Kulemin.... and hopefully Kadri.
That’s only if Armstrong can actually play the Niedermayer role. I’m not really aware of evidence he can, but it makes sense that is Burke’s intention so I at least have some grounds for hope.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
He also isnt' a C
he’s a Winger… which makes playing such a role more difficult.
If he turns into Travis Moen with the Ducks I’ll be fine… he’ll be horribly overpaid, but whatever.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. Look, I’m no fan of the Armstrong signing, just trying to figure out what Burke was thinking and coming up with a best case scenario.
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually
now that I look at their numbers, Armstrong is a lot better than Moen… so forget that idea.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
His
point totals are better, his Corsi Rel QoC was 6 times harder, his Corsi Rel QoT was twice as bad, and he had a better +/- rating by 8.
If Armstrong gets better linemates he might improve a hell of a lot. He was a former first rounder.
The more I look at the numbers behind Armstrong and Versteeg the more I realize how difficult their situations were and how amazingly they outperformed them. They’re both solid hockey players.
We’ll see how they do with a full year and a larger role on a team.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Think of it this way
Armstrong’s career high in points came when he was a rookie and he put up 40 points in 47 games. Yes he was playing with Crosby… but he CAN put the puck in the net on occasion.
We’ll see how he does with a full season, but he’s been pigeonholed as a checker in Atlanta for a few years, and we haven’t seen how his skills play out in other roles. For all we know, he turns out to be the Leafs equivalent to Ryan Clowe in San Jose… Ron Wilson has turned that kind of improvement out in the past.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions
ARMSTRONG = RYAN CLOWE
YOU READ IT HERE FIRST!!!
In all seriousness, I am super excited to see how this season plays out. Our forwards look NOTHING like they did last year and while I’m not sold on most of them, at least there’s some new people to watch and some hope they could be good.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh and
he had by far the best /- on that crappy Penguins team in his rookie year (15) to Crosby’s (-1), Leclair’s (-24), Recchi’s (-28), etc.
He could be a great signing… suspending judgement is an effort.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
his shooting % is pretty wicked too. Which is a serious breath of fresh air on our team. Hopefully it stays that way..
Kool as KuKumbers Kulemin.... and hopefully Kadri.
He's never
taken over 145 shots in a season… and he’s gotten 40 points twice.
MacArthur also has a very good shooting percentage… I’d like to see him shoot more.
If MacArthur is going to be one of our go to guys on offense, then I’ll forgive his defensive lapses but he needs more than 129 shots on goal.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Welcome
to the Army fanclub!!!
Although since I’m not a guy, I don’t know if you are the only guy in the club
"Hockey captures the essence of Canadian experience... hockey is the chance of life, and an affirmation that despite the deathly chill of winter we are alive." - Stephen Leacock.
so, how pissed off will we all be when MacArthur outscores Armstrong this year?
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
I will be
if it happens and both play 75+ games.
If Armstrong is injured I won’t care.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions
honestly, I think it will be close
thing is Armstrong can play defense and has the potential to straight up murder someone on another team with a hit or two
Case 1- Armstrong pots 15-15 and Clarke outscores him = fantastic value for Clarke
Case 2- Armstrong pots 5-15 and Clarke outscores him = Cheese fail
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah the main distinction between the two is
Armstrong is pretty damn great defensively from what I can see…. MacArthur has been straight up horrible.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Well
if one scores 15 and the other scores 20, I don’t really care which one does which.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Is anyone else
having problems with hockey-reference.com?
Every page on the site loads for me normally and then I suddenly get kicked to a 404 error page AFTER it loads… strange.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
G: Gus
D: Schenn, Komi, Phaneuf, Gunnar, Kaberle
F: Kessel, Bozak, Kulimen, Versteeg, Orr, Grabs, Caputi, Sjostrom, Mitchell
Toronto Maple Leafs: Nowhere to go but up!
Good but...
Gunnar, Bozak, and Caputi are already protected because they don’t meet the 49 game minimum requirement.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah the Leafs have zero problem with this whole deal
most of our players are way too young/fresh to worry about.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
This would be nuts if it left teams’ prospects open. We’d be fine too. Protect Kadri, move on with life
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
Nice……then Beauch in place of Gunnar and Armstrong+McArthur for forwards
Toronto Maple Leafs: Nowhere to go but up!
Why are you protecting MacArthur?
You really see a need for a guy that might get us 30 points while not playing D or providing any physical edge?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok then
it’s a tossup really.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Serious Request
Can we please put Grabbo on our Mount Puckmore?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:19 PM EDT reply actions
nah, maybe mout mulletmore tho
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Serious Response
No.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
No, but he will be on our Mt. Pineappleless
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
He needs some sort of monument, all this Grabbo hate is getting ridiculous.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
It's irrational
and it’s being tossed about by a vocal minority… don’t worry about it so much.
One of my friends is a Grabbo hater… it makes no sense… and I tell him he’s an idiot for it to his face.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I converted two of my friends from grabbo haters to supporters in the past month
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
This is unlikely
with my friend… he’s into rigidly sticking to whatever he believes in the face of overwhelming evidence. He has an MBA … what can I say.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
ah, MBA, or as I call it a Majorly Bitchy Attitude
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Can you convert me? I don’t like him, I just don’t know why.
None of the pictures and stats and stuff that’s been flying around has done anything to change my view
"Hockey captures the essence of Canadian experience... hockey is the chance of life, and an affirmation that despite the deathly chill of winter we are alive." - Stephen Leacock.
I’m not really that worried about it. Just passionate about Grabbo.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Bodies have to move to free up cash if we want a top 3 forward…and Grabbo is the most likely forward to go who earns big bucks. That’s why I wanted to dump him anyway. Grabbo is a cap casualty. I can’t talk for the others though.
ok, lets try this from a different angle
if the Leafs leave Finger unprotected, one of the two teams will probably take a chance on him in their top 4
there you go an EXTRA 600K savings over grabbo
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
if the Leafs leave Finger unprotected, one of the two teams will probably take a chance on him in their top 4
You sure about that?
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
it is at least as logical as leaving Grabbo unprotected for cap reasons
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I think so. Many of the other defenseman available will probably be cap dumps. Campbell, Redden? Finger can play 4th D minutes, and doesn’t cost an arm and a leg while doing it. He’s only overpaid if he’s your #6 D man.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
considering that all teams have to leave one d that has played at least 70 games over the last season, you could do better than Finger.
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
Cap casualties aren’t a product of their raw number, they’re a product of their performance relative to their cap hit. Finger, who could be a decent #4 defenseman, may be put in the minors because he’s a 6th defenseman making 3.5M. THAT is a cap casualty. He is being pushed out because he cannot perform relative to his cap hit.
50 points to 3M should NEVER. BE. A CAP CASUALTY. Now, if you want to talk about Grabbo because of his trade value, that’s different. But there’s no reason we give him up for free. Especially not for the “maybe” of a UFA or something that “might” come up.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
by Bower Power on Aug 30, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
He doesn't make big bucks
wtf do you think you’ll get for $2.9 million???
You’ll get another Grabbo.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions
probably less actually, offensively at least
Grabbo is on the high side offensively for players in that price range
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
So you’d give up the 2nd line center who has a great contract relative to his output to overpay for a guy to play on the 1st line and score 15 points more?
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
or 20…or 30…or 40 points more. =P Yeah, I’d overpay for that. I’d rather have one 90 point player at 7-8 mill than 3 50 point players at 3 mill each.
Uhhhh…. what?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Except
To compensate for your one 90 point player not scoring 150 points you’d have to find 2 players to produce a combined 60 points for $0 dollars to come out in the same spot. Unfortunately reality doesn’t allow you to find NHL players who can put up 30 points and make NO money.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Or I should say
two 30 point players who make $500 K… since that was the difference in your totals.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
You're looking for bargains
on the par with 1 point for every $16,666 in salary for your other two players… guess how many guys were that cheap in the NHL last season?
10 in the entire NHL. So you somehow think we’ll find 2 of these players, and play them on the same team as your 90 point $8 million dollar guy.
That’s not at all reasonable.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
No really. There are only a limited number of positions on a hockey team.
So sure you have your first line composed of three 50 points players for 9 million and I have 1/3 of my first line who scores 90 points, at 7-8 million.
Yeah…I have you beat easily there.
so if you add 50 points to that top line but remove that 50 points from the 2nd or third line you get……50 points
math is hard
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Uh… no, you actually just got Carkner’d to Steve’s Orr.
If Steve pays $9 million for 3 guys each scoring 50 points, he spends $9 million for 150 points.
If you pay $8 million for one guy scoring 90 points, to match that production you need to find 2 guys each making $500K that can score 30 points. Which as Steve pointed out, there are only 10 guys in the entire league (or one for every 3 teams) available.
Resident Capologist
Not really
because or equivalent cost, you can’t find that many guys that fit your plan.
9 guys produced over 90+ points for $7+ million… a few of those (Malkin, Ovechkin, Crosby) actually made over $8 million.
There were only 10 players who produced close to 30 points while costing league minimum dollars… they’re exceedingly rare also… and a bunch of them were on ELC deals, so they’ll be more expensive in less than 3 years when they become RFAs…. so your plan works for maybe 1 or two years at most… and that’s only because you found these exceedingly rare players that will sign for you and nobody else..
Your concepts are completely divorced from reality on this one in terms of the odds of finding players to make it work… sorry.
It’s far easier and more likely to find players that produce 50ish points for around $3 million… far more common… and less difficult to track down.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
How so? He’s not scoring 90 unassisted goals, the guys putting up 15-20 goals on his wing are going to want cash money.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm more interested in hearing
how we go about realistically getting a 90 point top line player.
B. Richards is the only possibility via UFA next summer that I can see getting. Beyond that we’d have to trade our prospects and high-end picks to get one.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Semin. Bergeron.
Bergeron is an heroic two way player. We should pray to god we can get him.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
I don’t see him going anywhere.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
That doesn’t sound like prayer.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
God is dead.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
You sure about that?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Sean Connery is still alive.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
What about Abe Vigoda?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
http://www.deadoraliveinfo.com/dead.nsf/vnames-nf/Vigoda+Abe
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
I prefer this one.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh I'd pray we get him
or Krejci… I’d take 4 of Boston’s 5 Centres… Bergeron, Krejci, Horton, or Seguin… unfortunately I think we’re getting none of them.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
psssst
Horton’s a winger
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Apparently Clarke MacArthur can play center too, according to wikipedia at least. Doesn’t mean he won’t have another season of 43% faceoff wins.
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
all the wingers on buffalo played center they have no actual centers.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon.
Everything wrong with the Sabres is Drew Stafford's fault.
The anti-boston.
Join me on the Hockey Blog Adventure! (or Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)
by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Aug 30, 2010 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm unclear about why you'd say Horton
is a poor centre. Aside from his +/- and faceoff numbers.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Semin has the talent, but I’d pass. Fact is, 90 point players are even less likely to become available now than before the lockout. I’d also argue you don’t need a 90 pt player to win the cup. But if that’s what we really need, you have to develop one.
Negative. I am a meat popsicle.
BOZAK!
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
there it is
i’ts like Attica all over again
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I felt the rains down in africa
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
oh I know
I just wanted to throw out a Toto reference
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
and a good one it was
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E"
by Matt_Roberts on Aug 30, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you might be underestimating how expensive, saught after and hard to get 90 point players are.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought Thornton promised he would sign here?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
last year 7 players in the NHL scored 90 or more points
the only one who might be available is Brad Richards
Joe Thorton scored 89 points, but probably wont be available, the only other player close to 90 that might be available is Semin who scored 84 points on the offensive juggernaught that is the Caps
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Had no idea Richards put up that many points, what do you think he gets as a UFA next summer?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
6.5-7ish on a long term retirement type deal
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Less than his current $7.8M, but more than we can probably afford.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Aug 30, 2010 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions
90 point players
Sedin
Crosby
Ovechkin
Backstrom
St. Louis
Stamkos
B. Richards
Go get ’em Tiger!
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Ok so
9 guys fall in your 90+ point category.
10 guys fall in your 30 point for $500 K or less category.
Wow this is looking like alchemy more and more.
How about we find more 50 point guys that make $2.5-$3 mill eh?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions
My limited understanding of ice time?
wtf was that? lol.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Your brain cannot comprehend the full dimensions of ice time.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
straws, grasping at them mostly
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Your talking
total point production for 3 spots on your team constrained by a salary cap. You’re spending $9 million for 3 spots, you get to split it however you want.
You want to split it by spending $7-$8 million on a player that produces 90+ points… there’s only like 6 guys in the NHL in that category in reality.
Then you’ve got $1 or $2 mill at most to find the other 60 points… that’s where my “limited understanding of ice time” apparently bites you in the ass… how do you fill 60 points with $1.5 million? Even if you make it $25,000 per point, there were only 43 players in a 30 team league to produce at that rate last year… how do you logically think you’ll get 2 of them on YOUR team… there’s less than 2 for every team in the NHL.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Except I never claimed I was spending 9 million for 3 spots. I just said I’d rather have one 90 point player at 7-8 million than 3 50 point players at 9 million. I gave no other limitations as to who would play with that 90 point player and at what salary.
You're freeing up 2 spots
in your original position… those spots are now vacant… what are you doing? feeding chimps bananas to skate for your team?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I imagine I’m spending more money on my first line and you’re spending your money elsewhere since you have 3 50 point players there? :P
Maybe you have a really good 4th line…I don’t know?
Who else is on your 1st line is what he’s asking.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Salary Cap
isn’t broken down by line.
Do you have a limited understanding of how that works? like my limited understanding of ice time? with the multiple skaters out there at the same time? all producing? rather than your 1 guy? Who is apparently the only guy you’re paying?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s spending 9M to get 150 points. You’re spending 8M to get 90, and have yet to fill in two slots. This is only the first line we’re talking about.
Finish off your first line in a way that gets you more efficient point production than Steve (and we’re assuming that you can find an elusive 90 point player).
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Care to define what ppm is and how you calculated that? Cause that looks like gibberish to me.
Resident Capologist
point per minute
90 points divided by 1600 minutes of ice time.
Of course this is on his team of 1 skater.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Umm
except that there’s 23 roster spots… For your 1 player (90 points, 1600 minutes on the ice?) I’m getting 3 players? 150 points? same 1600 minutes? that’s not 0.03, that’s 0.09375…
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
reply fail
3 players, 150 points, 1600 minutes in ice time is 0.09375 ppm… not 0.033.
But hey… you can take on my team of 3 guys with your team of 1.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions
There are essentially
3 players 20 minutes each a game = 60 minutes a game
1 player 20 minutes a game = 20 minutes a game
(you’d obviously add his linemates’ total, but since the hypothetical situation does not exist so we have to do it like this)
Multiply by 82 and then factor in the points
Yes but you're not paying anyone anything
you didn’t say anything about other players… remember?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
and on what planet
does a 2nd line centre play 20 minutes a game?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Here you go: http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm?fetchKey=20102ALLFAFAll&sort=avgTOIPerGame&viewName=timeOnIce
There’s only 29 of them in the whole league.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Beat me to it.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
We could totally trade for any of those guys.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions
No, we’re talking about how we’d rather spend available money under the cap.
You want to pay one guy 8 mil to score 90 points and then use your little remaining money (because it’s not infinite) to get minimum-salary players.
Steve wants to pay three guys $3M each to score 50 points.
People are trying to explain why it’s unlikely you’ll be able to make up the shortfall of points using the same amount of money available, but you keep changing the rules of this strange little game.
Resident Capologist
I never stated any of that.
I did state I’d rather have a 90 point first line player for 7-8 million than Grabovski. Steve disagreed and stated he’d rather have three Grabovskis (presumably to play on his first line)
Else his claim makes no real sense and he should have said, “I don’t disagree that we need a 90 point player on the first line, but I’d rather keep Grabovski since he is an efficient 2nd liner and free up cash by doing X, Y, or Z.”
Grabovski isnt going to prevent the Leafs from getting a 90 point player
about a zillion other things, however, will
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure…Phaneuf will, and Komisarek and Finger etc. but they’re going nowhere. I don’t think Kulemin, Kessel, Bozak or Steeger are going either. So that leave Beauch and Grabbo as the odd men out who actually make a significant salary.
yup, but (coming back to the original point) losing them for nothing is fucking bone sick stupid no matter how you slice it
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
That depends on what you can get for them.
I don’t know the market for Beauch for instance, but if I have to take back a low pick and some mediocre player who makes a couple of million for a few years to get rid of Beauch….would I really want to? This team has enough mediocre players. I’d definitely consider just dumping him for free for the full 3.8 million space if I could instead of just getting 1.8 with the trade.
Presumably as well, his first liners are the best forwards on his team. I guess Steve has an epic defense.
Probably because he has money to afford it, because he doesn’t have 7-8 million tied up in one first line forward
Resident Capologist
They're actually
closer to 2nd liners… if you read what I’ve said about the Sharks below.
And I think that makes sense since Grabo is our 2nd line C.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
There were 7 players in the NHL who put up 90 points and played 20 minutes a night, 7. The only one who will ever be available is Brad Richards. There is no way to have what you want.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
20 mins was just for rounding purposes. I didn’t feel like calculating for 19 or 18 or whatever the average first liner plays.
Ice time doesn’t matter only 7 centers put up more than 90 points.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I plan to surgically graft three crummy players together into one mediocre player.
Once that works I will repeat the process until we end up with a 4,000 pound monstrosity capable of “single handedly (note: I expect it to have up to forty hands)” scoring 200 points per season.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
40 hands eh?
But what about the 1 stick per player rule?
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
This creature will hand the stick around itself as necessary.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
BOZAKENSTEIN
it’s alive! IT’S ALIVE!!!!!
This is my BOZAK!!!1
by blurr1974 on Aug 30, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
You didn't say 90 point player for Grabo
you said 90+ point player for 3 Grabos.
That’s also irrelevant to a line perspective, because I’m talking about how I’d like to spend $9 million dollars… and I’m refuting a specific case… there are better cases, but your choice is a poor one. That’s all I’m saying.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d rather have one 90 point player at 7-8 mill than 3 50 point players at 3 mill each.
That was your original quote that started this thread.
Meaning, that you want a single player at 7-8 mil as opposed to 3 players making a combined 9 million scoring a combined 150 points.
The only way to objectively compare which method is better is if you spend the same amount on the same number of players.
In the scenario you think is worse, a team pays $9 million for 3 players. So to compare, you have to play $9 million for 3 players as well, or else this whole thing makes no sense. Understand?
And as Steve pointed out, if you spend $7-8 mil on one player, that only leaves $1-2 mil to sign two players. And if the one player scores 90 points, that means that for your three players to match Steve’s three players, then the two extra players need to combine for 60 points. (150-90=60)
This isn’t about putting words in your mouth. It’s about comparing apples to apples.
Resident Capologist
Yes
we’re giving it… not sure what part of the context is missing from where you’re sitting.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Otherwise this entire argument is pointless!
I want Sidney Crosby for 8.5 million on my first line!!
I want 3 50 points players for 9 million on my second line!
If that’s what you were talking about…then I say:
I want both. =P
That’s exactly what we’re not saying, because we understand how the salary cap works.
We’re saying that the cap requires you to make choices. Our choice is to spread out offence throughout our lineup as opposed to spending all our money on one line (that will play every night against the other teams’ best players, with little offensive support).
Resident Capologist
See, that’s what we’re saying: No, you can’t. You dropped 8M on your superstar alone, not counting the other two first liners. And you think you’re getting a good enough second line for 1 mil?
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Okay, you have one supestar making 7 mil, and 3 second liners making 3 mil.
That’s 16 million. Using this year’s cap, that gives you roughly 43 million to fill out the rest of your team.
Two more first line wingers
An entire third line
An entire fourth line
Six D
Two goalies
Plus 2 or 3 spares.
43 million / 19 players = about 2.25M/player.
Resident Capologist
I'd like to know
where you’re finding a superstar and 3 effective 2nd liners for under $9 million…
that’s frankly not at all true, and I can assure you that I’ve looked at the numbers in a lot more detail than you probably have.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions
San Jose
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
spent a combined
$28 million on their top 2 lines last year, and this year it’s going up to $32 million.
That’s an effective two top lines… probably the two most effective at this point in the NHL… and it’s over 3 times the price of your effective 2nd line + superstar plan.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Philly
had a combined cost of $22,250,000 for their top two lines, and that was with Leino making only $800 K… I left Van Reimsdyk, and Giroux out… and now they’ve added Zherdev… they’re going to get more pricey also.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmmm
That I’m talking about firstliners?LINER
And last I checked Grabovski and the other $3 million dollar players on our team are NOT first line players… nor would any of the players being discussed around the NHL in that price range.
So you’re NOT talking about first liners. You’re talking about adding 1 first liner and removing 3 2nd liners.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
You're not going to get
the $9 million guy on the open market.. you’ll need to develop him yourself.
If you want that, then hope Kadri or Kessel becomes that guy… because that’s the only way we find him easily.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, but I was dumping Grabbo for a first liner. You said you’d rather have 3 Grabbos. =P
As I stated earlier:
“Else his claim makes no real sense and he should have said, "I don’t disagree that we need a 90 point player on the first line, but I’d like keep Grabovski since he is an efficient 2nd liner and free up cash by doing X, Y, or Z."”
You were the one
that said 3 $3 million dollar players vs. 1 $7-8 mill guy putting up 90+ points.
That was what I was responding to. You said it… not I.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
This
I’d rather have one 90 point player at 7-8 mill than 3 50 point players at 3 mill each.
was your typing.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions
And that in essence is your problem. Instead of reading the entire discussion and understanding that I was talking about a lack of first liners on this team and how we needed to free up money and then talking about dumping Grabovski to get room to acquire a top 3 forward, you decided to pull a quotation out of context.
As a result, you’ve wasted all of our time. =P
This is frustrating
1) Dumping Grabovski doesn’t free up space for a 1st liner.
2) Dropping your 2nd line centre creates the need for another 2nd line centre.
3) You should be dropping guys that are ineffective in the role they are placed in.
Grabovski is an effective 2nd line centre, who makes what a 2nd line centre should make…
If you want to drop someone, drop someone like MacArthur, or Mitchell… or better yet, Jeff Finger, or JS Giguere… the guys that are hugely overpaid for what they AREN’T doing.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Finger and Giguere are untradeable.
Phaneuf and Komisarek are likewise untradeable and are overpaid for what they bring, but are going nowhere.
Beauchemin and Grabbo are the two likeliest targets.
Really again…this was all talked about earlier.
But the discussion started from not protecting grabbo.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
you arn’t talking about trading them, you are talking about letting two assets go for free, on the chance something that is a statistic anomaly might happen in being able to snag someone worth losing those assets for nothing
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Well if you had actually read the entire conversation in context, maybe you would have understood and we wouldn’t have spent all this time talking past each other. =P
I'm IN the conversation
responding to what you say… I’m making the exact same point as the one clraitken is making below.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Then simply admit you misunderstood the point and that we’ve been talking about completely separate things, and voila…you can move on to something else. =P Easy peasy.
Except I do.
I’d love 3 50 point 3 million dollar players…..on my second line.
But I’d also love a 7-8 million dollar star on my first line who makes everyone better and creates more opportunities for the second line by drawing pressure.
Both assets are manageable in today’s cap world.
Okay, you have one supestar making 7 mil, and 3 second liners making 3 mil.
That’s 16 million. Using this year’s cap, that gives you roughly 43 million to fill out the rest of your team.
Two more first line wingers
An entire third line
An entire fourth line
Six D
Two goalies
Plus 2 or 3 spares.
43 million / 19 players = about 2.25M/player.
Steve’s team has 3 players making $9 million. He has $50 million left to sign 20 players
Three more forward lines
6 D
2 goalies
Depth
50/20 = 2.5 million per player
Steve can acquire better players to accomodate other areas (like defence, goaltending and scoring depth) because he has more money available
Resident Capologist
See
right here… you’re goalpost moving.
You’ve stopped talking about dropping a $3 million 50 point player now, and suddenly it’s just adding a superstar.
Well that’s great but it wasn’t your original point.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions
No, I’m not.
I’m arguing that the Leafs should drop Grabbo and Beauchemin because they have thus far demonstrated an unwillingness to bury mistakes (e.g. Finger) in the minors and they need cap space to sign a top 3 forward. Due to contract length, value and player skill, Grabovski and Beauchemin are the two likeliest players to go.
Hey, random expansion draft…we can get rid of them for free to free up the space we need instead of having to take back salary in a trade.
It was really more along the lines of that. I certainly wasn’t talking about some random team.
In a fantasy
expansion draft….
none of this is real.
And even if it was… dropping the guys who come off the books a year from now makes way more sense than dropping guys you have under contract and still control the rights to.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions
They don't need
any more cap space than they’ll have next year.
It won’t cost them $13 mill to sign a player since that would contravene the CBA.
They don’t need to do it… mistakes or not.
There is NO reason to drop them for nothing.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh yes, then I figured Komisarek and Phaneuf wouldn’t get picked in the expansion draft (or else obviously I’d rather dump Phaneuf than Beauchemin).
Wait, you would want to get rid of Phaneuf, for nothing?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Now…mmm…I’d definitely think of it. I don’t think you can just dump your Captain though.
Before July 1st hell yes.
You’re JFJ aren’t you?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
You keep reiterating your point, but it remains terrible. You’ve picked two of the last players we should be giving away for free. You’ve actually picked the two non-prospects who probably have the highest trade value on our team.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Yes the irony here is
the guys you say WON’T move are the ones that we can’t move via trade… because they’re “untradeable” and yet we’re going to GIVE AWAY guys you COULD see us moving because I suppose they ARE tradeable?
how does this make ANY Sense.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions
There are consequences to spending an extra 6 million dollars upgrading from Grabbo to your first line 90 point guy.
The main consequence is you have much less money available to improve the rest of your team.
With the money he saved from not upgrading over Grabbo, he adds two guys similar to Grabbo. Because you’re spending 8 million on one guy, you don’t have that money available.
I really can’t make it any more clear than that
Resident Capologist
Yeah but his top line is Grabbo-Grabbo- Grabbo
and his other lines are even worse. That’s not very inspiring.
You keep saying
my top line is 3 Grabovski’s when I keep saying that’s my 2nd line…
what are you not reading?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Because our conversation make no sense if we’re talkign about 2nd lines, only 1st lines…since that’s what I was talking about and what you disagreed with.
I’ve pointed that out numerous times. Just admit you were mistaken and misinterpreted what I was talking about. =P
No
you started with dropping grabo by not protecting him and somehow magically adding an $8 million dollar superstar…
there was never any logic in this to begin with.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Also
if you think I’m going to admit that I don’t understand ice time, or that I misread some bizarre context framing you’ve made as an attempt at goal post moving then feel free to hold your breath.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Mmm…actually I started by dropping Grabbo AND Beauchemin to get the cap space required to either make a trade for a top talent or add a top forward at free agency.
That conversation went on for a while. Then a new conversation was started about the exact same topic. =P
Sure but I still don’t see why dropping Grabbo and Beauch for nothing in return is smart asset management.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
We need capspace, and they’re really the only candidates to be moved.
So either I can take this shiny offer today to dump them for free….or I can hold on to them and gamble that I’ll be able to trade them while freeing up most of their salary.
Trading them is an entirely different issue.
Leaving them unprotected in an expansion draft is what I and most others, it seems, have an issue with.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
If you want to “dump them for free” why not dump players with little to no trade value like Komisarek, etc.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Disagree
Both are top 2 defensemen and if left unprotected I think they’d be gone.
"The only way out is in a body bag. Go Leafs Go." - Blinky
by Karina on Aug 30, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Yea, Phaneuf would be gone, and probably named Captain, did we all forget how shitty expansion teams usually are?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I can’t believe you can sit there with a straight face saying that you won’t gamble on getting a return for them at a later date, when you’re advocating giving them away so you can gamble on being able to sign a better player in free agency (or give up more assets through trade)
Elite players rarely go to free agency anymore
Resident Capologist
one question
What good is cap space when there aren’t any players out there worth freeing up cap space for?
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
by Say *plan the parade one more time*... on Aug 30, 2010 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh ok
so I’m not replacing JUST Grabo… I’m replacing Beauchemin also.
That argument makes even less sense by the way.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Now we're replacing
a 60 point $2.9 million forward AND a 25 point top 4 D man who is making $3.8 million so you can add 1 player that provides 90+ points. Unfortunately you are replacing 2 players with 1… so you need to find a 90+ point player for under $6.7 million a year, AND a top 4 D man. Good luck with that.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Here's a better idea
let our $6 mill goalie walk at the end of the year (or re-sign him for something closer to $1 mill) and then use THAT money to find a top 3 forward.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions
And then when Kaberle leaves
and frees up another $4.25 mill use THAT money to get another top 3 forward… or increase the salaries of your developing youth.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Key RFAs for next year
Gunnarsson, Schenn, and Bozak… beyond that we’re looking at Free Agents with whatever extra we’ve got.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
We've got
$19+ million coming off the books at years end.
About $6-10 of that will end up going to Schenn, Gunnarsson, and Bozak… depending on how they play this year.
That means we’ll have between $9 and $13 mill to spend on higher priced players.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Nope
don’t care either particularly.
Not sure how what I’m saying requires dropping Grabo or Beauchemin.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Grabovski
averages 16:30 or so the past 2 years.
Versteeg is around 16 minutes, and Armstrong is around the same.
That’s three times 16 which is closer to 48 minutes per game. Your 1 guy is skating for 20 minutes a game, but there’s 600 minutes to go around in regulation, assuming you don’t play OT regularly.
48/600 = that’s 8% of my total forward ice time… for 150 points… versus 3.33% of your total ice time for 90 points. If you doubled your number you’d be up to almost 7% of your ice time with TWO of your players, for 10 more points, and an extra $7 or 8 million worth of your cap… why not keep doing that?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Whatevers. It's all for moot.
Ain’t no 90 point player that’s going to fall into Toronto’s lap anytime soon.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Stick to the first line. Assume both your and Steve’s first lines are playing equal minutes. You’ve got a 90 point 8M player, he has three 3M 50 point players. Find a realistic point per dollar setup that gives you a more efficient (read: higher line production for cheaper line cost) than Steve has.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
I'm sure
if you went with a $5 million guy, and two $2 million guys you might do better.
That’d get you around 70ish points and probably closer to 40-45 points from the other two… that’s 155-160 points.
This is just an optimization problem really.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
P.S.
see Kessel, Kulemin, Bozak in 2 years.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Better yet
$4.5 million guy who produces 65 points, and two $2.25 million guys that get you 45… 160 points. We’re reaching an understanding of the threshold limit of a $9 million dollar line at this point.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Even
Stamkos, Downie, and St. Louis will cost over $9 mill next year… and Stamkos is still on his ELC.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Alright, steve. If we haven’t already slid into “totally esoteric” territory yet, we’re really, really close.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
I don't think this is esoteric
it’s just the philosophy behind building a team in the cap era.
Look at the top line of San Jose… that’s a $21.6 million dollar line right there… and they only potted 254 points (that’s $85,039.37 per point).
If we want to maximize things here we need to be closer to two scoring lines providing us 200ish points for around $15 million… that’d be better.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions
San Jose's
2nd line of Pavelski, Clowe, and Setoguchi is closer to what I’m talking about here… they made a combined $9.425 mill last year and produced a combined 144 points, while Pavelski missed about a quarter of the season due to injury.
If the Leafs second line can get to that level, we’re doing quite well.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
versteeg, grabbo cheese
that roughs out to about 130-140 for 8.9 mill
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions
If Versteeg
plays how I think he’s capable, he could get 70 points this year.
Grabo could get 60 if he plays a full year…
if Armstrong gets 45 or so, then that’s 175… which would be ridiculously awesome.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
If we get
150+ points from our 2nd line, we’re doing fine in that regard.
The problem we have is we don’t really have a #1 line right now. We have Kessel and two other 2nd line guys in Bozak and Kulemin…
If they develop into 1st line guys in the next 2 years, great… but that needs to happen for all of this to work out.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I could see Bozak putting up 1st liner numbers (but i wouldnt bet on it) and Kessel, well he’s Kessel so no worries there
Kulemin is the only one I don’t see having much chance at producing even a minimum of a 1st liner rate for points
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
60 points
would be the minimum… but in that case, the other two need to put up 75+ points for it to be a good NHL first line.
It’s possible… but pretty far from likely I agree.
I think if he gets 50+ points this season, I’m happy with his progress.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
The other thing is
right now we’re only spending $11.475 mill on our top line… which is a HELL of a lot less than a lot of the NHL teams out there.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
oh i’d definitely be happy with a 50 point development season.
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Kulemin will be a question of “is he helping Kessel and Bozak do better?”
I mean, Kessel just isn’t a “get the puck out of the corners” kind of guy yet. And Bozak isn’t going to be stationary long enough to set up a screen, I don’t think. If Kulemin is “helpful,” making good decisions, and decent in his own zone, I don’t mind what his counting stats are. (Yes, that’s ludicrously subjective)
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Yes but
even if he’s helpful in getting the other two to 75+ points, if he only produces 40 again… he isn’t pulling his own weight.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I disagree completely. If he is responsible for Kessel having another goal, that’s no different from an assist in my mind, it’s just harder to count.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
Kulemin also makes a lot less than Kessel and Bozak, so if his production is proportionate I don’t see a big issue
Resident Capologist
It isn't an issue right now
it will be when his contract comes up for negotiations again.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually
His totals will probably improve, and he’s cheap, so he’s great right now.. don’t get me wrong.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know if I could have handled someone talking cuss about Kulemin in this thread.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess what I meant is that if Kulemin helps Kessel and Bozak score 75, and he only scores 40, I don’t know if I’d say he’s not “pulling his weight”, because he’s scoring at half the rate of the other two but he’s also making only half the salary.
Resident Capologist
Yeah that makes sense to me
right now they’re dirt cheap… so it’s fine.
I’m thinking about 2 or 3 years from now.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
thing is
based on his stretch with them for last season… he should be able to post 60+ points if they can keep that level of play up for most of the year.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Post-Deadline to end of March
14 games when K-B-K consistently played together
Kulemin: 5 G, 9 A, 14 P
Kessel: 9 G, 4, A, 13 P
Bozak: 4G, 9A, 13 P
After March, IIRC, Irwin entered the lineup, Kessel was playing hurt and the lines got mixed up. So that’s my justification for cutting it off.
The rationale part of my brain says “small sample size”. The fan part of my brain says “WOOOO! 105 G, 129A, 234 P First Line! WOOOO!”
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions
The 2nd part of that
is what leads me to think they won’t be together and injury free all season long.
If they can top 185 points I’m happy with the progress generally speaking.
Bozak is in year 2, Kulemin is in year 3… they’re quite young still.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Except
a good NHL 1st line has 3 guys combining for 200+ points.
If they get 75-80 each and he gets 40… that’s BARELY 200.
If they get 75-80 each and he can approach 60, then we’re a good first line team.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
wait
they’re making that combined amount this coming season…
last year they made $6.5 million combined… it’s going up to $9.425 this season, but I don’t see their production jumping up significantly given their ice time and expectations not changing a whole hell of a lot.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think you’ve been piled on enough…
BS
by MapleLeafMole on Aug 30, 2010 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
GRABBO IS A GOOD TEAM MATE YOU ARE WROOOOONG LIKE YOUR FACE!
Rule #20
by JaredFromLondon on Aug 30, 2010 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I think I might be one of the celebrities. Although I’m not sure now that I think about it.
Hmmmm.
Blogging on hockey at Globe on Hockey
If you don’t draft Jeff Finger we’ll find you.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
It's Mirtle!
/sorry for the seizures
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
You're unsure
that you’re a celebrity? or unsure that you’re doing the expansion draft?
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
If Bozak, Kessel, and Kulemin
have over 100 points combined by the mid-season point, I think the team is in playoff contention.
If they have under 80 combined points at the mid-season point, then the team is in serious trouble.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
that's goals and assists.
just to be clear.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
That seems fair.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Just by way of comparison
at the 41 game mark last season, Hagman, Stajan, and Ponikarovsky had combined for 40 goals and 42 assists… 82 points.
Not enough.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
What do Kessel, BOZAK, and Kule-Aids numbers for the last 20 games over a whole year look like?
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
That would be 90.4938333 over 41 games, with no growth from last year.
If I'm losing an argument, I ask myself "What would a real journalist do?"
Then I cower behind: "You still don't get it. Deal with it." Thanks, James Wallace.
/Tents Fingers
Excellent.
PPP ain't nothin to cuss with
The Guess Who sucked, the Jets were lousy anyway
by Plea From A Cat Named Felix on Aug 30, 2010 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
See above. I did a 14 game sample from deadline to end of March (after that they were broken up).
by The '67 Sound on Aug 30, 2010 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
If you use that 14 game sample
it jumps to 114 points in the first 41 games of the season with a combination of 52 goals and 62 assists.
Of course that’s assuming they play ridiculously well for 41 games straight, which is unrealistic.
I’d ratchet expectations back to 42 goals and 55 assists… to be more reasonable, since I doubt Kulemin will average over a point per game for 41 straight games. If he’s closer to 0.65 ppg for the 41 games and Kessel is around 0.75 ppg, and Bozak is around 0.7 ppg, then we’re at only 86.1 points. If Kulemin can push it up to 0.7 and Kessel can get closer to 0.8 or 0.85 ppg, then we’re up to 92 points.
Basically a lot of this hinges on made up numbers… but who knows what amounts to a realistic projection.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Assuming
Kessel maintains his 0.821 average from the past two years, and Bozak can sustain 0.73 ppg they’ll combine for around 64 points. For Kulemin to push them up to 100 he needs to score 36 points in 41 games… which is a 0.87… more realistic ways of getting to 100 points would be Kessel improving to 0.875, Bozak jumping up to 0.80, and Kulemin contributing 0.75 or so.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Interesting because in the NHL there is an average of 1.72 assists awarded per goal. So with 40 goals between the three of them at a normal assist rate, that would be 69 assists for 109 points total which is over your 100 combined points mark.
When I read the nickname Testicula, the first thing that popped into my head was a vampiristic scrotum that can only be killed with a silver cross driven through the vas deferens.
Yes
but you’re forgetting D men.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
who predominantly
register assists… far more than goals.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Contraction is the only way to go.
FOLD Atlanta, Florida, Tampa, Nashville today. Then put move Phoenix to Winnipeg. Then put Columbus in Quebec City.
As to the players from the four extinct teams, have a draft like the Amateur one but only 3 rounds, anyone left gets to be a RFA or UFA.
Unfortunately, that’s not what we are talking about.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Like reading thoughts confined to 140 characters? I'm on Twitter too.
by PPP on Aug 30, 2010 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Even if contraction were to happen
Do you really think 4 teams would be folded at once? That’s a bit much.
Also… I’m not sure moving Columbus makes a lot of sense. At first I thought you were basing this on their non-playoff record… but then I saw you included Tampa Bay… so I’m confused.
Either way… Atlanta and Florida are the only markets other than Phoenix that I think can legitimately be considered approaching failure status, and both of them have reason to be optimistic going forward.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm."
- Sir Winston Churchill
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Leafs.
by Steve Burtch on Aug 30, 2010 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Saturday’s Three Stars: Another Malkin 5-spot; Price spoils Sundin night
- The Chicago Blackhawks’ losing streak is bad for everybody
- According to NHL, here’s why Dominic Moore escaped suspension for Fedotenko hit
- How Mats Sundin’s no-trade clause controversy made fans reconsider loyalty in NHL
- Nordiques Nation invades Hockey Day in Canada
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Tulupov's first lifts Oklahoma City Barons to 2-1 win over Abbotsford Heat
- Brossoit 24 saves, Rachinski three goals as the Oil Kings blank the Cougars 5-0
- OHL Roundup: A look at Saturday's games
- Mckechnie scores twice as the Hurricanes defeat the Raiders 4-1
- Czerwonka scores two goals to lead the Ice over the Blades 5-2
SBNation.com Recent Stories
StatCounter
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
