Playoffs

On Sunday, when Los Angeles dropped a 2-0 decision to the Coyotes, Kings head coach Darryl Sutter wasn’t happy. He was especially upset with his power play.

In postgame comments, Sutter called out his point men for not getting shots on goal. Sutter didn’t pull any punches, which is his way for the most part, and mentioned his players need to avoid getting their shots blocked.

Keep in my mind, at that time the Kings were ahead three games to one in the series, but Sutter still went out of his way to call out some players.

I wonder how many defensemen last season had more of their own shots blocked than Duncan Keith?

If memory serves me correctly, Joel Quenneville never publicly put the onus on Keith to get his shot through to the net. Different strokes for different coaches but players who are given the privilege of playing on the power play have to perform. Sutter certainly realizes the same.

By winning every playoff series so efficiently, the Kings should have a big advantage over whomever they play from the East.

Not to split hairs but…

Although the Blackhawks are at the top of the NHL in average attendance, which is close to 21,500 per game, this seemed a bit odd.

When the Hawks faced the Blues at the United Center on February 19 the attendance was 22,077, one of the larger crowds of the season.

Facing elimination in Game 6 the UC crowd was 21,636, which at the time struck me as being a little low. Maybe it is only matter of playoff tickets being more expensive and Coyote fans not traveling very well.

Possibly fan interest dropped off after the Hawks fell behind three games to one. Or maybe there is no significance in having a larger crowd in February than for a playoff elimination game. Either way, the attendance for next season will be interesting to keep an eye on.

Hossa

Adding to an anxious off summer for the Blackhawks is the real concern regarding Marian Hossa’s condition. It has been speculated Hossa suffered a serious concussion after the vicious cheap shot be Phoenix forward Raffie Torres.

Even if Hossa returns 100 percent healthy for training camp, which is not a given, there is no telling what lingering psychological effects will remain. Hossa is 33-years-old and commented he has never had the same type of head injury before. Not only might Hossa’s long-term health be in question but it will be interesting to see if he can be the same dominant player once again.

Kane

Many were waiting for the Blackhawks to make an official statement in regards to the off season antics of Patrick Kane. Unless Kane is charged with a crime or requires some sort of treatment, most likely the Hawks won’t be issuing any statement. There is a school of thought which is used in politics and applies here. Never try to defend what doesn’t need to be defended.

Apparently because Kane wasn’t arrested and charged with a crime the Blackhawks probably think it is best to not say anything. There will be fans who look at not issuing a comment as trying to ignore the situation and in some ways that would be correct. Others who die out political fires and handle such awkward public situations for a living would concur with Hawks management.

To continue reading click here.

To follow me on Twitter@AlCimaglia

Comments can be posted on My Fox Chicago.com.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

What if the NHL, NHLPA, KHL and other European leagues negotiated a compensation fee scale that resembles fair market value for talented prospects?  Like the salary cap, the midpoint between the minimum and maximum level of this compensation range should be at the level that would allow all NHL teams to make an affordable offer.  Each subsequent season, the range, minimum and maximum would be adjusted based on statistics such as operating income of the NHL, KHL and other European leagues plus general economic conditions, much like the determination of the salary cap and floor.

Then, to prevent large market NHL clubs from always offering compensation fees at the maximum level, how about implementing a “luxury tax” threshold at, for example, 65% of the compensation fee range, beyond which the excess would be subject to a luxury tax tacked on to the NHL club’s salary cap in the player’s first season.

Example: Compensation minimum and maximum are $250,000 and $2-million, respectively.  65% level = $1.3875-million. Luxury tax set at 130% of excess compensation over the 65% level. Drafting NHL club negotiates $1.8-million compensation fee to KHL club for immensely-talented Russian player ‘X’.  The excess of $412,500 would result in a $536,250 luxury tax (130% x $412,500) added into the NHL club’s total salaries for salary cap purposes in the year that player ‘X’ debuts.

That hypothetical $536,250 may not seem like much but it would be the equivalent of a replacement level player – an enforcer, a journeyman checking line forward or a frequently recalled injury fill-in from the AHL – that most teams need to have on standby to fill out a roster.  From another perspective, that $536,250 might be the pro-rated salary of a potential trade deadline acquisition.

Thus a lot of the decision-making on whether to draft Russian and other European prospects would have to be done well before the actual Entry Draft.  Capologists on each NHL team would have to reason not only if their club should draft a certain player based on scouting reports and projecting his skills to the NHL but they would have to analyse affordability.  If player ‘X’ is drafted, can the club reasonably go all out and pay what the KHL or European club is demanding for compensation given the maximum limit on compensation and the possible luxury tax penalty against a future season’s salary cap?

Nashville right wing Alexander Radulov abruptly signed a contract with Russian KHL club Salavat Yulayev Ufa in the summer of 2008 even though he had one year remaining on his entry-level NHL deal.

Note that presently, many consistent contenders have already tied up some franchise players to long-term contracts and attempts to stockpile more talent via drafting Europeans and paying compensation fees would be a more difficult task if the excess of the compensation fee affects future cap hits.  Therefore, this would allow rebuliding or small market teams with fewer long-term contracts to have a more fair chance at European talent in the Entry Draft.  Since inferior teams tend to draft earlier in the first round, they could select boldly knowing they might be able to offer maximum compensation fee money and not worry about future cap hits as they may presently be near the salary floor and thus could go “all-in” when negotiating with the European or KHL club.

Natural factors would discourage KHL or European clubs from being overly demanding or staunchly asking for the upper limit of the compensation scale.  If the drafting NHL club refuses to meet the asking price and the player returns to play in the KHL or other European league, there is a risk to his incumbent club that his skills will decline or he will suffer a serious injury, thus decreasing the potential compensation fee his club could reasonably expect during a second round of post-Entry Draft negotiations.

Clearly, this modest proposal is a very, very basic framework that seeks to introduce fairness to the currently flawed system. It would give European clubs currently bound by Player Transfer Agreements a shot at receiving more than a flat amount of $225,000 while acknowledging the correct logic of the KHL that obvious budding superstars should yield their clubs a fair market price, unlike the mere $150,000 that brought the exceptionally-gifted Russian centre Pavel Datsyuk to Detroit.

For the NHL, teams would have to continue to be prudent and mindful of the salary cap from the implications of offering compensation fees that would trigger luxury tax in future years.  Small market clubs would have a reasonable chance at garnering top European talent in such a system that would simply not be there in a totally open market.

Ultimately, any player transfer agreement in the future between the NHL, Russia and other European nations must specify fair compensation for selling clubs while giving all NHL teams, regardless of market size, an even shot at acquiring these players.  By doing so, hockey’s leaders will be able to reduce the international turf wars, multiple contracts and mistrust that damage worldwide promotion of the sport.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

Thus player transfer agreements help to reduce or eliminate trans-Atlantic contract disputes, threats of legal action, strained international hockey relations and anxiety for players.  Compensation funds have the effect of softening the blow to the club losing a player, allowing it to recoup and reinvest money into training new players (assuming the selling club is the original team who trained the departing player).

Yet controversy exists in this area because Russia has continued to refuse to enter into a player transfer agreement with the NHL arguing that flat fees grossly undervalue potential superstars,.  With no formal framework for compensation amounts, it is unsurprising that Russia and the NHL have wrangled over contracts and rights to several high-profile players.  Pittsburgh centre Evgeni Malkin joined the Penguins five summers ago only after weeks of brinksmanship which saw him sign a contract extension with Russian Super League club Metallurg Magnitogorsk under pressure, file for annulment of the contract under Russian labour law before fleeing to the United States via Finland.  The enraged Magnitogorsk owners sued the Penguins and the NHL on the grounds that Malkin was already under contract but the lawsuit was eventually dismissed.  Significantly, the Magnitogorsk club received no compensation after originally demanding $2-million for Malkin’s rights.

The chronology of star centre Evgeni Malkin's departure from Russia and arrival in the United States in 2006 to play in the NHL was filled with acrimony partly due to the lack of a binding Player Transfer Agreement between the NHL and the Russian Hockey Federation.

The man who was drafted thirteen spots after Malkin, right wing Alexander Radulov, played two seasons for Nashville before abruptly signing a second contract with Salavat Yulayev Ufa of the new Russian Kontinental Hockey League (KHL) in 2008 despite one year remaining on his NHL entry-level deal.  Days later, with rumours swirling that some KHL teams were looking to lure Malkin back to Russia, the NHL and KHL came to a loose agreement on “respecting everyone’s contracts” – not a formal player transfer agreement, but an informal burying of the poaching hatchet.

But despite this “Respect Accord”, the May 2010 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and the updated MOU enacted this July which calls for mutual recognition of contracts, contract information sharing, exchange of free agent lists and conflict resolution procedures, there is still no comprehensive NHL – KHL Player Transfer Agreement on monetary compensation.  What will happen when the next Evgeni Malkin, under contract to a KHL team, wishes to join the NHL team who drafts him?

The relatively low compensation amounts typically paid by NHL clubs to European teams has always puzzled me.  Does it really make sense that first-round calibre players trained in Europe can be purchased for $225,000 when the annual compensation on an NHL entry-level deal is $925,000?  It begs the question: isn’t Russia correct in advocating for a full free market system with compensation based on supply and demand?  Perhaps Sweden and other countries bound by player transfer agreements are being swindled by arbitrary fixed compensation fees.

Unfortunately, if a truly unrestricted open market existed, in other words, if Russian and other European players were no longer subject to the annual NHL Entry Draft, then bidding for services of these players would become like the posting system in Major League Baseball (MLB) where teams must pay ”negotiating” fees to Japanese clubs to earn the right to talk to a player.  In the non-salary capped world of MLB, wealthy teams always win out or dissuade small-market teams from even bidding on Japanese players.  Similarly, rich MLB teams generally have the inside track on signing young Latin American stars who like the Japanese, are also not subject to the MLB Draft.

Applied to the salary-capped NHL, tiny Winnipeg, Minnesota or Carolina for example, would not even bother drafting a talented Russian or European as they know they would not be able to afford an exorbitant posting fee.

In part 2 of this article, a new Player Transfer Agreement between the NHL and KHL and all European leagues is proposed to promote fairness for all parties and international hockey peace.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

One topic debated at the Summit that continues to be a polarizing subject within North America and Europe is the future of NHL player participation in Winter Olympic hockey.  The dream of most fans and players became reality in February, 1998 when the NHL took a scheduled two-week break while many of its members wore national colours to compete for Olympic medals in the Nagano, Japan Winter Olympics. Anyone who watched that tournament and the subsequent three Olympics likely witnessed some of the highest quality hockey played in the last quarter-century.

Yet there is another side to the Olympic coin.  While the IIHF, most of Europe and most NHL players are in favour of further participation in the Olympics, Toronto Maple Leafs’ and Team U.S. GM Brian Burke noted at the Summit that many NHL teams are uneasy about shutting down for two weeks in the middle of the season every four years.  Burke cited the Anaheim Ducks as a club that suffered lost momentum and a decrease in ticket sales after the Olympic break.  He also did not like the cramped schedule that gave national clubs virtually no preparation time between the end of pre-Olympic NHL games and the start of the tournament.

“We played games in the NHL on Sunday afternoon, 5 o’clock or 3 o’clock at the latest, then had to fly to Vancouver, practice Monday and play Tuesday … it wasn’t ideal, so let’s do it right …  Let’s have a training camp; let’s get the team together, work on special teams and put the best product on the ice,” Burke said, suggesting the resurrection of the summertime quadrennial Canada/World Cup to replace NHL participation in the Olympics if a week of preparatory training is not feasible in February.

There is also the real risk to NHL clubs that participating players could suffer serious injuries that could have considerable impact on a team’s playoff chances.  In 2002, centres Mario Lemieux and Steve Yzerman won gold for Canada then missed almost all of the second half of the NHL schedule due to injuries suffered during, or exacerbated by the Olympic tournament (though Yzerman did return for the playoffs before undergoing off-season knee surgery). In the Torino Games of 2006, Czech Republic goalie Dominik Hasek hurt his legs just nine minutes into his first Olympic game and was unable to play for Ottawa for the remainder of the season including the Stanley Cup playoffs. The Senators were forced to use rookie Ray Emery in goal and the team lost in the second round.

The famous 1987 Canada Cup winning goal scored by Mario Lemieux, assisted by Wayne Gretzky, occurred late in the summer. Future best-on-best hockey tournaments should be held at a similar time, perhaps during the Summer Olympics, to preserve NHL player participation, negating the schedule interruption, while giving players adequate time to recover.

Detroit GM Ken Holland also chimed in on the risks and benefits. “As a fan, I want to go back to the Olympics … I think the Vancouver Olympics were an incredible display of what’s good about our sport.  The games were played with incredible speed, incredible skill.  It was exciting … [However] there are major issues that need to be taken care of,” Holland continued, citing Red Wing forward Tomas Holmstrom’s difficult decision to sit out the 2010 Olympics due to injury concerns.

Since participation in the Sochi, Russia Winter Olympics of 2014 and beyond must be collectively bargained into a new agreement between the NHL and NHLPA, what can be done to maintain the status quo?

One idea from the Summit suggested by Burke at first sounds absurd, but actually is sensible on further review: hold the hockey tournament in the Summer Olympics.  Preposterous?  Not really; it’s been done before.  At the 1920 Summer Games in Belgium, seven countries competed in the first Olympic ice hockey tournament.  True, the NHL was only in its third season at the time and the gold medal winners, Canada, were represented by non-NHL players from the Winnipeg Falcons, the national senior men’s amateur champions.  Clearly, as odd as it seems, there is precedent for Summer Olympic hockey and it would preserve NHL players’ participation, negate the densely packed NHL regular season schedule in Winter Olympic years and diminish the fatigue factor of players, many of them of all-star calibre, returning for the playoff push.

Don’t forget that the best-on-best Canada Cup and World Cup tournaments were typically contested late in the summer.  Like Burke, I believe the greatest display of international hockey ever played was at the 1987 Canada Cup, capped by the famous Gretzky to Lemieux winning goal that gave Canada the championship over the Soviet Union.  Burke recalled that players from most competing nations assembled in the summer for proper orientation, training camps and full practices.  That tournament began in late August and concluded in mid-September giving players a head start on conditioning for the NHL regular season and time to recuperate before the start of league games in October.

The Canada Cups of 1976, 1981, 1984, 1991 and the 1996 World Cup of Hockey followed a similar August – September schedule.  It can be done.  Fans and players certainly want to see NHL stars continue to shine for their countries at the Olympics while many owners and clubs have legitimate reservations about interruptions in the schedule, financial losses and injury risks.  A summer of hockey may not be a perfect solution but it may be the best way to satisfy all parties.

If a player clears waivers, the team has the right to send the waived player to a minor league affiliate within 30 days (generally its AHL affiliate), or it can elect to keep that player with their club. That’s what happened recently when the New Jersey Devils put Brian Rolston on waivers in order to shed some salary. No team claimed due to his big contract; therefore, the Devils kept him with the parent club. If a player refuses to report to the minors, the team can suspend and/or release the player (i.e. not pay them). That’s what happened last season when the Minnesota Wild assigned Petr Sykora to its AHL affiliate. Sykora refused the assignment and was released by the Wild. He signed to play in Europe thereafter.

Once a player has been waived to the AHL, in order to get a player back in the NHL, he will have to clear “re-entry waivers”. If another NHL team claims the player on re-entry waivers, the team that acquired the player and the team that placed that player on re-entry waivers will pay half of the remainder of the player’s current contract and salary cap hit. It happened last season when the New York Rangers claimed goalie Alex Auld from the Dallas Stars. However, if the re-entry claim occurs after the NHL trading deadline, the claiming team cannot play the player until the following campaign.

Also, please note that according to Section 13.2 of the CBA: “The “Playing Season Waiver Period” shall begin on the twelfth (12th) day prior to the start of the Regular Season and end on the day following the last day of a Club’s Playing Season”. That’s what happened to Jeff Finger earlier this season, as the Toronto Maple Leafs had to wait twelve days before demoting him to their AHL affiliate.

A player loaned to a minor league team on a one-contract will receive his full NHL salary.

Below, you will find the exemptions from regular waivers.
The following NHL players can be assigned to the AHL as many times as a club wishes without needing to clear waivers.

Now, the exemptions from re-entry waivers only.
The following players are exempt from re-entry waivers. Such players, however, may not be exempt from regular waivers, depending on the number of games played.

1. Any player on an NHL contract whose AHL salary is no more than $105,000.
2. Any player on an AHL contract salary is no more than $105,000, who is then signed to an NHL contract with that club’s affiliated team during that season.
3. So-called “Veteran Minor League Players”, defined as:
1. For goaltenders, at least 180 games played in the NHL, AHL, and ECHL combined, AND
1. Who have not been on an NHL roster for at least 80 games over the past two seasons, AND
2. Who have not been on an NHL roster for at least 40 games in the previous season.
2. For forwards and defensemen, at least 320 games played in the NHL, AHL, and ECHL combined, AND
1. Who have not been on an NHL roster for at least 80 games over the past two seasons, AND
2. Who have not been on an NHL roster for at least 40 games in the previous season.

A player can also be loaned to a minor league affiliate for conditioning by the NHL club. Such a conditioning lone cannot extend for more than fourteen (14) consecutive days and the player must consent to the loan. A player loaned to a farm team will still receive his full NHL salary. Earlier this season, the Anaheim Ducks sent forward Joffrey Lupul to their AHL affiliate on a conditioning stint after activating him from the injury reserve. Lupul missed several months of action after developing an infection following his back surgery.

Now let’s have a look at the most recent situation regarding the NHL waivers. Marc-Andre Bergeron, who signed a one-year two-way contract yesterday with the Tampa Bay Lightning has been sent to the AHL to regain his game shape. Bergeron, who has been out with a knee injury since the 2010 playoffs, will make $1 million in the NHL and $105,000 if he plays in the AHL. The Lightning had the option of adding him to the active roster and sending him to the minors on a conditioning assignment like Joffrey Lupul. However, GM Steve Yzerman decided to gamble and put him on waivers so the team can pay him his AHL salary and keep him there for more than 14 days, if necessary. Bergeron will not be subject to re-entry waivers as his AHL contract is not more than $105,000 as stated above.

Another waiver situation occurred recently when the St. Louis Blues signed Marek Svatos to an NHL contract. However, because Svatos was playing outside of North America in the KHL earlier this season, Svatos had to be placed on waivers for 24 hours after being signed by the Blues. As a result the Nashville Predators claimed him on waivers and will be responsible for the contract his signed with St. Louis. A one year, two-way deal worth $800,000 in NHL and $105,000 in minors. it’s one of the reason goalie Evgeny Nabokov, who was released from his KHL contract in December has yet to sign with an NHL team, as he would also need to be put on waivers.

A player on loan to an affiliate club (AHL, ECHL) may be recalled by an NHL team under emergency conditions at any time for the duration of the emergency. But, the player must be immediately returned to the loaning club when the emergency condition ends.

An emergency condition occurs when the loaning club’s roster is reduced (by reasons of injury, illness or suspension) below 2 goalies, 6 defensemen or 12 forwards. The Devils used this rule to recall several players due to salary cap issues without having to put them on re-entry waivers, including Mike McKenna, Mark Fayne and Matthew Corrente.

Finally, the waiver order is determined as follow:
Before November 1st of the NHL season, the reverse standings of the previous year determine the order. For example, the Edmonton Oilers had the first chance to pick any player waived prior to November 1st, 2010 because they finished last in the standings in 2009-10.

After November 1st, the order is determined by reverse standings of the current year (at the time the player is placed on waivers). The lowest team in the standings putting a claim on a player is guaranteed to get that player. Therefore, the Devils have a much better chance of claiming a waived player than the Penguins…

If you have any questions regarding the NHL waivers, don’t hesitate to ask them in the comments section below as the CBA can be quite complicated sometimes.

Sources: Wikipedia and the 2005 NHL CBA.

You can also follow me on Twitter for more info on the NHL and the Montreal Canadiens.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

For their game against the Penguins, the Devils dressed just fifteen skaters – nine forwards and six defencemen – as three players suddenly became unavailable after Saturday’s blowout loss at Washington.  Blueliner Anton Volchenkov suffered a broken nose when he took a slapshot from Nicklas Backstrom off the face.  Right wing Brian Rolston suffered an upper-body injury and enforcer Pierre-Luc Letourneau-Leblond received an automatic one-game suspension for instigating a fight during the last five minutes of the game.  Although New Jersey has three open spots on its 23-man active roster, their hands are tied in terms of making transactions since they have spent right up to the 2010-11 NHL salary cap of $59.4-million.

When rosters were required to be set at 3 p.m. EDT last Wednesday, New Jersey made use of Article 50.10 (d) (iv) in the CBA, “Bona-Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception to the Upper Limit“, to bring the club in compliance with the salary cap by placing defencemen Bryce Salvador and Anssi Salmela on the injured reserve and injured, non-roster lists, respectively.  Even so, the Devils are still in an uncomfortable position with little wiggle room and the worst possible scenario for the Devils is the one which has befallen them presently.

Volchenkov and Rolston are both clearly hurt, but for an unknown period of time.  New Jersey could elect to place them on long-term injured reserve and replace them with players whose aggregate salaries do not exceed the combined salaries of Volchenkov ($4.25-million) and Rolston ($5.062-million), but that would require the injured pair, in accordance with the CBA, to each miss at least ten NHL games and 24 calendar days before being allowed to suit up again for the Devils.  Is New Jersey willing to take that risk?  More relevant however, is the fact that replacements remotely equal in quality to Volchenkov and Rolston simply cannot be acquired through trade nor do such types exist in the AHL, waiting to be called up.

As a stop-gap measure, the Devils made a minor transaction this afternoon, waiving Letourneau-Leblond and signing veteran forward Adam Mair.  Their salaries are essentially the same.  New Jersey GM Lou Lamoriello said, “I feel the team played well with the roster.  There was, in my opinion, a burden on the coach and players, and it’s my responsibility to get this straightened out.”  It will be interesting to see if Lamoriello can somehow engineer a transaction in the coming weeks that will give his club more breathing room under the salary cap framework so that New Jersey can sustain injuries and properly replace the sidelined players.  Will we see drastic trades along the lines of what Chicago did during the summer?  Time will tell.

It was an amusing irony yesterday when new Pens’ defenceman Paul Martin skated in on an empty New Jersey net and scored late in the third period to ice a 3-1 victory over the Devils.  Martin played six seasons in New Jersey but jumped to Pittsburgh as a free agent this past off-season.  He was a player the Devils could not re-sign due to the financial burden of retaining Kovalchuk.  One of the players who came with Kovalchuk at the trade deadline, Salmela, is out with a knee injury and Volchenkov, one of the new blueliners replacing Martin, is now out indefinitely.

Irony can be cruel, but the salary cap is even more harsh.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

NHLPA chief of business affairs Mike Ouellet called published reports that the players' union had selected Donald Fehr as their new head, "premature".

Speaking at the conclusion of the four-day World Hockey Summit in Toronto, Ouellet said, “the process is still ongoing.  The search committee made up of five players: Jamie Langenbrunner, Brian Rolston, Ryan Getzlaf, Mathieu Schneider and Brian Rafalski, are reviewing the material that has been sent in, the material they’ve received from the potential candidates.  They’ve been doing it for months.  They’re coming close to the end of the process, but the process isn’t completed yet.”

He added, “They would be making a recommendation to the executive board which hasn’t happened yet.  The executive board is the body that has the authority to make that decision.  So for the reports to come out to say that ‘an offer has been accepted’ is, to say the least, a little premature given the process.”

Ouellet, however, did praise Fehr for his work with the union in an advisory capacity.  “He’s got a tremendous wealth of experience in this area.  I don’t think there’s anyone on this planet that has the type of experience he has working for a professional sports union and that’s been very valuable for the players.”  He stated it would be difficult to give an exact timeline on when the NHLPA will be able to officially confirm its new head saying, “We’ll have to see when the recommendation is made and when the process is completed.”

Ouellet went on to clarify that the NHLPA constitution, which was heavily revised this past summer with advice and assistance from Fehr is not yet an officially-approved document.  “The constitution was recommended, but it still needs ratification by the membership and that’s a process that will also unfold over the beginning of the season,” and said it is “probably a fair assessment” to describe the provisional constitution as consolidating more power in the hands of the eventual leader, away from sub-committees and ombudsmen.

GARY BETTMAN 10 mins 56 sec NHL commissioner answers media questions following Q and A session.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

As the habitual NHL apologists continue to defend the poorly written CBA…. 

What if the CBA actually was written as if it took a year to put together rather than a long a weekend? 

Certainly the latest Ilya Kovalchuk saga would never have happened. Also the contracts for other long term, front end loaded signings would not be in jeopardy today. 

If there would have been a couple of additional sentences added to the CBA the NHL might not appear as if its rule book was written in water color.

Let’s keep this simple and move past any age stipulations and only add a couple of sentences to the CBA.

If there was a clause which stated a certain percentage of a player’s salary had to be dispersed to him in the last years of a contract, this shameful mess could have been avoided.

How about this for an added clause? 

During the last 40% of a player’s contract term, at least 20% of his salary must be paid out.  

For example, in a 10 year $100 million contract, at least $20 million would have to be paid out in the final four years of the agreement. The payout percentage in the final years possibly could be different, maybe it should be 25% or 30%, but at least there would be an exact guideline in place.

The Kovalchuk contract, which was revoked had the Devils paying him on average about $7 million in the final seven years of the proposed 17 year agreement. That amount happens to represent only about 7% of the $100 million contract value.

The additional money due in the later portion of a long term contract would make a big difference for a possible buyout.  It would also make an aging player less attractive on the trade market.  In essence the economics would make the mega long term, front end loaded contracts less likely to occur. 

As it stands now the NHL just continues to stumble along appearing as if they are re-interpreting rules whenever they must. 

What if the Marian Hossa contract is now considered a circumvention of the CBA? 

Anything can happen in the NHL but it would be hard to believe the league will mess with the Hossa contract. They already blessed the deal, but even more important he has fulfilled one year of the contract. There would be a multitude of lawsuits coming at the NHL if they tried to void the Hossa deal. 

If somehow the league did rescind the Hossa contract the Hawks might be screwed.

Most likely Hossa’s next contract would have to be shortened, which would mean a higher cap hit unless he signed for less money. Hossa’s options are limited too, so he probably would be driven to make it work in Chicago. 

If Gary Bettman made waves about the Hossa contact immediately following the Stanley Cup Finals, maybe things would be a lot different.  

Certainly Hawk management would wince at the thought of losing Hossa, but they might not have been too upset. With Hossa gone a few younger Hawks who had to be traded away would still be able to play in Chicago. 

Maybe the Blackhawks would have taken one on the chin…For the good of the league, don’t you know. 

Hossa is the most talented Blackhawk and couldn’t be replaced with only one player. Two months ago his loss would have been much easier to bear. Maybe given the choice Hawk management would rather have had some combination of Dustin Byfuglien, Kris Versteeg and Andrew Ladd instead of Hossa. 

What if Hawk fans would have chosen to believe what was written concerning Niemi’s likely arbitration award? 

There were some who wrote Niemi would really strike it rich and earn close to $4 million next season. To add to the lunacy some thought Stan Bowman would have enough cap space available to re-sign Niemi for as much as $3.5 million. 

Those which can tell the difference between a hard salary cap and a hard boiled egg knew the Hawks were going to be facing many roster changes this summer. The high alerts on the changing of personnel kicked in December 3, 2009, when the big three (Kane, Keith and Toews) were all re-signed. 

The reality is the Blackhawks salary cap dilemma was far worse than many thought. 

What if Blackhawk fans choose to blame the NHL salary cap for the break-up of a young, talented championship team? 

My thinking is the rules are the rules, no matter how misguided they might be. 

The NHL needs a salary cap and a properly written CBA. Hopefully neither today’s salary cap nor the CBA will resemble the new agreement in place a few years from now. In a perfect world the CBA would be worked on today, and polished up sooner than later. 

If the purpose of the NHL salary cap was to provide financial parity, it has failed. Many of the same franchises which lost money before the lockout are still deeply in the red today.   

As far as the Hawks are concerned, the first signal of future cap trouble started with the Brian Campbell and Cristobal Huet free agent signings. The qualifying offer screw up from last summer contributed with some unnecessary spending as well. The other contributing factor came with the overpayment of a few talented, inexperienced players. Too many young promising Blackhawks went from earning close to the NHL minimum to a $3 million payday.

Until there is a way to take back salary when attempting to trade off big contracts or some sort of a luxury tax is put in place it will be difficult to keep a young talented team together. Especially, as in the Hawks’ case, when a bunch of young players become very good all at once.

Hawk fans should be thankful management put the team in position to win the grand prize. Spending a fortune on player salaries doesn’t guarantee a Stanley Cup. Hawk faithful should realize loading up for one big swing at any championship doesn’t often work.  

The NY Yankees spend to the hilt every year and have won five World Series since 1996, which is a high success ratio. But there have been many more seasons since 1996 in which the Yanks have failed to win the World Series, some years they haven’t come close. It is also far easier to keep a baseball team together as long as management is willing to spend excessively for every campaign.

If Blackhawk fans want to lament about the summer of 2010…Just imagine what it would feel like if the Cup wasn’t in Chicago. 

There has been speculation concerning disunity among NHL players over the current CBA. It is no wonder considering there are so many players signing league minimum deals or reduced two-way contracts than those striking it rich.  

The current economic environment has helped the Blackhawks re-sign players to skinny contracts. But the salary cap and current CBA isn’t working out great for all involved. 

That’s what happens when there are more players looking for jobs around the league than available cap space. 

Al’s Shots 

I really wanted to let the Antti Niemi, Bill Zito, Stan Bowman saga rest, but not yet….

So sometime next week I will take one last look as to why Niemi isn’t a Blackhawk.

Not sure where Niemi will end up, but I still find it curious Carey Price wasn’t re-signed before the Jaroslav Halak trade. 

It has been reported the Hawks have signed Fernando Pisani to a one year, $500,000 contract. Pisani suffers from colitis and has had other health issues. 

If healthy he could add some skill and needed experience to the line-up. Last season Pisani  played in only 40 games.

It might not be etched in stone but odds are Kyle Beach will start the year Rockford.

Maybe if he has a great camp things could be different. But from what I can tell Beach does his best work in games…not practices. Beach will learn in Rockford how important  practice and preparation really is, and he will have more time to figure things out. 

blackhawskwin@comcast.net

The 17-year contract, the longest in NHL history, was structured similar to many mega-year deals signed in recent years by stars where the majority of money would be earned in the early years of the contract followed by a sharp drop in salary for the final years.  This tactic has the effect of lowering a player’s annual salary cap hit as under the current terms of the CBA, the NHL calculates cap hit based on average annual value of the entire contract.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

In the case of Kovalchuk, while his cap hit worked out to $6-million per year, he was slated to earn $80-million in the first 8 years of the deal (a $10-million average) but just $550,000 for each of the last five seasons of the contract, almost the NHL minimum wage.  The NHL rejected the contract two days after it was finalized when the league deemed it was crafted to “circumvent the provisions of the salary cap”.  Five days later, the NHLPA grieved, prompting Bloch to hold hearings last Wednesday and Thursday in Boston.

In today’s ruling, Bloch agreed with the league’s position, noting that, “… the record strongly supports the claim this contract is ‘intended to, or has the effect’ of defeating or circumventing the Salary Cap provisions of the CBA. The overall structure of this SPC (standard player contract) reflects not so much the hope that Mr. Kovalchuk will be playing in those advanced years, but rather the expectation that he will not.”  He went on to explain that while the record 17-year length “poses no contractual problem”, he realistically stated that there is virtually no precedent for any player playing until he is 44 years old, the age Kovalchuk would be if he fulfilled the entire contract.

Bloch also honed in on the “no-movement” and “no-trade” clauses attached to the contract.  While the first eleven years of the contract would have prevented New Jersey from trading, waiving or demoting Kovalchuk, the sole clause for the remaining six years would be a “no-trade” only.  Bloch deduced that “this additional flexibility will allow the Club to, for example, place the Player on waivers or send him to the minors.”  Such actions would take Kovalchuk’s cap hit off New Jersey’s hands.  Bloch also noted that it would be just as likely that a player at that point in his career would simply retire which would equally strike Kovalchuk’s salary from the Devils’ books.

New Jersey GM Lou Lamoriello accepted Bloch’s ruling and held out hope of restarting negotiations with Kovalchuk on a contract that will pass muster with the NHL.  Importantly, while there was the potential in a worst-case scenario for multi-million dollar fines and draft-pick penalties to be imposed on the club and player, Lamoriello’s comments “that nothing in [Bloch's] opinion should be read as suggesting that either the club or Kovalchuk operated in bad faith“ imply that none will be forthcoming.  Meanwhile, the NHLPA released a statement expressing their disappointment, stating they are “currently reviewing the decision, and will have no further comment at this time.”

As I asked previously on July 20, the night the news first broke that the NHL would reject the contract, why did the league not include more precise, quantifiable language in the CBA to establish firm and clear parameters on what constitutes a valid or invalid contract?  Maximum term lengths and maximum percentage drops in salaries from year to year could have prevented not only the events surrounding Kovalchuk’s signing, but also the drawn-out, front-ended deals signed by Hossa, Luongo, Pronger, Henrik Zetterberg, Vincent Lecavalier and more recently, Marc Savard.

Instead, the NHL suddenly has entered an era of subjective “pick and choose” decisions on contracts.  James Mirtle of the Globe and Mail reported that as promised, the now-victorious NHL will likely use the Bloch ruling on Kovalchuk as a precedent to re-open investigation into similar deals that sought to circumvent the salary cap.  Under Article 11.6 (b) iii of the CBA, “Subsequent Challenge and/or De-Registration of SPCs“, the NHL has the right to take such retroactive measures.

“An approved and registered SPC may be subject to subsequent challenge and/or de-registration by the League: (i) in the case of a Circumvention relating to either the Club Upper Limit … within 60 days from the date upon which the facts of the Circumvention became known or reasonably should have been known to the NHL.”

Doubtlessly, the emboldened NHL will now move to build on today’s success by using the system arbitration process to close off the CBA loophole that allowed teams to sign franchise players to unrealistically long, cap-friendly contracts that would be jettisoned toward the final seasons of the deals.  Yet the NHL is treading on dangerous, shaky ground.  Clubs have carefully and meticulously planned the composition of their rosters around the salary cap not only for each season but often far into the future.  When clubs like Vancouver, Chicago, Detroit and Philadelphia filed contracts for their respective players, they certainly and plainly followed the same template for salary cap circumvention, but the league registered all those contracts at the time as fully valid (even after an investigation into the deals for Hossa and Pronger) according to the language of the CBA.

While the De-Registration clause exists, the NHL should think hard before invoking it for it would severely disrupt the business of several member clubs on short notice if they follow through with their stated intention of revisiting the validity of previously signed deals.  The potential sudden nullification of several contracts and the sudden freeing of several star players into the free agency market with less than one month to go before the opening of training camps would create an unprecedented state of chaos in the NHL.  Whole rosters could potentially be thrown off kilter if a star is arbitrarily removed from the constellation of peripheral players assembled around him.  Even if that star hurriedly renegotiated a new deal on terms acceptable to the league, the salary cap hit for the star would likely be significantly higher resulting in mandatory changes to the rest of the roster including waiving or trades of integral parts.  Better to let those contracts stand, but use the Bloch decision on Kovalchuk as a beacon of warning for all future situations where a player and club attempt to circumvent the CBA.

The relevant parts of Article 26.3 state that “No Club may enter into any SPC (standard player contract) if [it] is intended to or has the effect of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of this Agreement, including provisions with repsect to Team Payroll Range and/or Free Agency.”

Clearly, the NHL took umbrage with the structure of Kovalchuk’s new contract, the latest in a growing line of mega-year deals signed by stars with the intent of maximizing the actual dollars earned by a player in the early years of the contract while minimizing the yearly salary cap hit, (calculated as the average annual value), to the player’s club.  Kovalchuk was to earn $6-million in each of the first 2 years of the deal then $11.5-million for the next 5 seasons.  Then in 2017-18 his salary would start to decline, to $10.5-million and continue going down until 2022-23 when his stipend would be just $550,000 for the last five seasons of the deal, the NHL minimum wage.  Yet the yearly cap hit for New Jersey would have been just $6-million based on the average annual value despite Kovalchuk standing to receive $80-million over the first 8 years of the contract.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

Of course by the expiration of the deal in 2027, Kovalchuk would be 44 years old.  Considering that only 4 non-goalies in NHL history have skated in a league game past their 44th birthday, it is not surprising that the league finally drew a line in the sand and called out this contract for what it really is: 1) the most open, obvious and egregious mockery of the salary cap to date and 2) exhibit “A” to add to the next agenda of CBA negotiations as a reminder of what needs to be stamped out of the NHL to truly preserve the equitable spirit and intent of the salary cap.

Plain and simple, the structure of Kovalchuk’s contract was meant to front-load earnings to the player and to stretch out the term of the deal to an impossibly long duration to minimize New Jersey’s salary cap hit.  If Kovalchuk retires or is no longer on New Jersey’s roster before the end of the deal, then under the current CBA, his salary would come off the Devils’ books.

It will be interesting to see how the Devils and the NHLPA react.  Will the players’ union cry foul and scream “Why now?“  After seeing cap-friendly contracts similarly structured being signed by stars such as Roberto Luongo, Duncan Keith, Marian Hossa and Henrik Zetterberg, the NHLPA assuredly must be asking why the league decided to put its foot down now.  The aforementioned four players signed contracts that progressively peter out to yearly salaries much less than the cap hit – Hossa’s deal ($63.3-million over 12 years; cap hit of $5.275-million) calls for $1-million per year over its last four seasons.  However, Kovalchuk’s contract structure was probably too obvious to ignore.  Minimum wage for the last five seasons?

As for the Devils, GM Lou Lamoriello surprisingly voiced his displeasure at these types of deals, alluding that the ultimate decision was an ownership decision according to Tom Gulitti in Fire & Ice blog.  At a press conference re-introducing Kovalchuk hours before the NHL bombshell, Lamoriello said, “This is within the rules.  This is in the CBA.  There are precedents that have been set but I would agree we shouldn’t have these.  But I’m also saying that because it’s legal and this is something that ownership felt comfortable doing … As far as what the financial commitment is and that aspect of it, that was out of my hands.”

If a grievance is filed and arbitration is used to determine the contract’s validity, hockey loses regardless of whether an arbiter finds for the NHL or for the NHLPA.  If the league’s decision is overturned and Kovalchuk’s new contract is allowed to stand, then hockey’s larger market teams will continue to generally use this type of contract tactic, until the next CBA possibly outlaws it, to subtly outbid smaller market clubs for star free agents.  Financially stable franchises that spend up to the cap ceiling tend to have the resources to offer deals heavily weighted with up-front dollars and will likely snatch up players looking to cash in quickly rather than financially-strapped teams that spend closer to the salary floor and cannot commit as much money in the initial seasons of a contract.

Even in the wee hours of Wednesday morning, the Devils' official website still featured this message and picture on its front page despite the NHL rejecting Kovalchuk's 17-year, $102-million contract on the grounds that the deal's structure was not in keeping with the spirit of the salary cap's intent.

However, if an arbiter finds for the NHL, then the integrity of the current CBA can be called into question.  The NHL will have to answer many questions.  By what stipulation in the language of the Circumventions clause did it decide to reject Kovalchuk’s contract but not Hossa’s or Keith’s or Luongo’s?  Did the league circulate any internal memoranda to its 30 clubs outlining player contract parameters that could put them in violation of the Circumventions clause?  Why was the current CBA drafted without specfic quantifiable restrictions on term-length of multi-year contracts to avoid cap-evading deals?  (After all, there is a percentage restriction on the maximum salary a player can earn relative to the salary cap ceiling).  Will the next CBA incorporate less subjective, vague, open-to-interpretation “Circumvention” clauses and more objective, numerical-based clauses to better quantify contract rules?  (Specific clauses such as Article 50.7, the “100 percent rule” explicitly state the maximum pay-raise and pay-cut amounts year-to-year on multi-year contracts).

Potentially most damagingly, Commissioner Gary Bettman will have to answer whether he is “acting in the best interests of hockey” by the NHL intervening to nullify the contract.  Sports fans of a certain age who recognize such “best interests” jargon will surely remember 1976 when Major League Baseball Commissioner Bowie Kuhn overturned the sale of three Oakland Athletics players in the middle of the season by maverick owner Charles O. Finley.  The cash-starved, small market Oakland club had fallen on hard times after the era of free agency took hold in baseball and it was only a matter of time before the stars of the Athletics, three-time World Series winners in the early 1970s, would leave the team.  When Finley tried to sell Joe Rudi and Rollie Fingers to Boston for $2-million and Vida Blue to the Yankees for $1.5-million, Kuhn stepped in and said the transactions were “inconsistent with the best interests of baseball [and] the integrity of the game.”

Finley turned around and slapped Kuhn with a lawsuit, alleging that Kuhn “acted beyond the scope of his authority … arbitrarily, discriminatorily and unreasonably.”  In the spring of 1978, a U.S. Court of Appeals concluded that the Commissioner “acted in good faith, after investigation, consultation and deliberation, in a manner which he determined to be in the best interests of baseball … and in any event the broad authority given to the Commissioner by the Major League Agreement placed any party to it on notice that such authority could be used.”

While the court sided with Kuhn, one can’t help but think the commissioner overstepped his bounds by interfering in a perfectly legal, though crass, transaction made between three clubs.  The NHL head office likely considered this historical precedent before announcing its decision yesterday.  Yet the league may be treading in dangerous waters too.  New Jersey and Kovalchuk acted within the framework of the CBA just like other clubs and players who came to terms on mega-year deals.  Did they follow the spirit of the CBA?  Absolutely not.  Most people in the hockey world find contracts like the Kovalchuk deal eminently distasteful, but singling it out for rejection on a subjective interpretation of the Circumventions clause while ignoring other similar contracts smacks of unnecessary interference in the daily affairs of a club and its players.  Negotiating for the implementation of clearer language into the next CBA would be the proper thing to do.

The One Hundred Million Dollar Man

Today’s signing of Ilya Kovalchuk by the New Jersey Devils to a rumored 17 year deal worth more that $100 million is the latest example of an NHL team utilizing a nice little loophole in the CBA to their advantage. Other deals that have taken advantage of the same loophole include the Luongo, Hossa, and Zetterberg contract. If you aren’t a salary cap nerd and this loophole isn’t familiar to you, allow me to explain.

Contracts that take advantage of this loophole are for a term longer than the player will likely play, are heavily front end loaded, and are worth almost nothing in the final years of the deal; years when the player is often over 40 and very unlikely to still be playing. Here comes the good part, because the deal was signed before the player turned 35 there is no cap hit for the final years should (in reality when) the player retires.

Numbers are always easier to understand than wordy explanations so let’s take Hossa’s contract as an example. Last year at age 30 he signed a 12 year, $63.3 million deal with the Hawks; the cap hit for the deal is $5.275 annually. In the first eight years of the deal Hossa will be paid $59.3 million of the total contract value, or on average $7.4125 million a season. If Hossa decided to retire after turning 38 he’d leave just $4 million on the table and the Hawks will have saved over $2.1 million against the cap every year.

The benefit for the player and the team when it comes to contracts like this is obvious; the team reduces their cap hit and the player gets his money. And this is exactly why there is no rush to close the loophole because both sides love it. If the deal is good for both sides then there’s no harm, right?

Well not exactly. If I’m a middle of the pack NHLers – say in the 20 goal, 40 point range – this deal would drive me insane because it costs me money. When my agent sits down to negotiate my next contract he’ll pump up all my good traits and find comparable players that I deserve to be paid like. But if the NHLs elite players are signing contracts worth less on average than what they’re actually worth then that brings down the value of all other players as well. I know we’re talking about guys getting paid millions to play hockey but who wouldn’t want every penny that they can get, after all a career ending injury is always a possibility.

I’ll go on record as saying that I think that contracts like the one Kovalchuk signed today and ridiculous and are a bad idea for the NHL. If Kovalchuk’s contract is in fact a 17 year deal it’ll expire when he’s 44, am I really supposed to believe he’ll still be playing at 44? What about the next contract that expires when the players is 46? Or 48? Teams are going to keep pushing this until finally the NHL has to say no to a deal because the term is just unbelievable and then all hell will break loose.

But what I think doesn’t matter when it comes to CBA issues. And there is no reason for the owners to close this loophole since it’s helping them from a cap perspective. When push comes to shove, if this loophole is going to be closed it’s going to have to come from the NHL rank and file because they’re the ones that are getting hurt by this; the elite are still getting their money and the 4th line grinders and rookies are going to get under a million dollars a year regardless, so it’s only the middle class that suffer. In this case it’s getting them right in the pocket books so they might actually pay attention for a change.

Fourteen nights later, after all Major League Baseball games of August 11 were played, the players went on strike, never to return to complete what was turning out to be a compelling 1994 season.  The official pronouncement of death came in mid-September when then-interim commissioner Bud Selig sombrely declared that with negotiations at a stalemate and no reasonable hope of salvaging the pennant races and post-season, the unthinkable would have to be done.  The World Series would not be played for the first time in 90 years.  A shocked and outraged public bemoaned Selig’s decision, heaping criticism on out-of-touch millionaire players and out-of-touch billionaire owners.

Scorn and venom was also directed at the executive director of the Major League Baseball Players’ Association (MLBPA), Fehr, whose unwavering, rock-solid determination to rebuff any attempt by the owners to impose a salary cap, was seen by many as a stance too costly for the good of the game.  His ability to keep the baseball players’ union united on this central issue of the 1994-95 strike earned him accolades in organized labour circles and put the MLBPA near the unofficial top of America’s strongest union list.  However, to owners and fans, he would forever be a villain – a brainwashing, greedy, cold, heartless business suit, more concerned about convincing players that rocketing their salaries ever higher into the stratosphere was a more important goal than negotiating a settlement to preserve the season.

twitter.com/PenguinsMarchHockey Independent on Facebook

Fast forward to 2010 and the same Donald Fehr is poised to become head of the National Hockey League Players’ Association (NHLPA).  For those who lived through the twin disasters of the playoff-cancelling baseball strike sixteen years ago and the season-cancelling hockey lockout six years ago, it goes without saying that the first thought on anyone’s mind is: “Could labour-management history repeat itself?”  After suffering through that cancelled NHL season, divisiveness within its ranks and a smashing rout of their union at the hands of commissioner Gary Bettman and the 30 team owners, it comes as no surprise that the battered NHLPA would look to a proven union leader like Fehr, whose impressive resume on behalf of baseball players would make him a sensible choice to lead players during the next round of collective bargaining.

Who could be better to go toe-to-toe with Bettman than Fehr?  After meekly acquiescing to a salary cap and an immediate across-the-board 24% pay cut on all player contracts back in the summer of 2005, the NHLPA desperately needs a strong leader after having gone through three executive directors since Bob Goodenow was shown the exit door at the conclusion of the 2005 dispute.  Near the end of June, the NHLPA exercised their right to extend the current CBA to a seventh season, meaning it will be valid through 2011-12 and buys the union some time to select a leader and prepare their negotiating strategy.

With Fehr at the helm, history suggests the upcoming negotiations will not be cordial and the implications – a prolonged lockout or strike – could shock hockey fans.  Even before the infamous strike of 1994, Fehr was already a veteran of the always-rancorous disputes between the MLBPA and MLB owners.  Fehr officially joined the MLBPA as general counsel in 1977 and succeeded legendary executive director Marvin Miler in 1986.  In those nine years, Fehr and Miller shepherded baseball players through strikes in 1980, 1981 and 1985, each time decisively and victoriously maintaining the core rights that players had won in earlier rounds of collective bargaining including salary arbitration and free agency.  The 1981 strike lasted 50 days, ”coincidentally” ending when the owners’ strike insurance ran out.

Under Fehr’s direction in the late 1980s, baseball players grieved and won damages totalling $280-million (U.S.) when it was revealed that owners secretly colluded with each other to not pursue free agents for a period of three off-seasons.  The 1994 strike, which ended the following spring only through a court-ordered injunction, concluded without a salary cap imposed or any change in the existing working conditions, yet another victory for the MLBPA, despite the public relations disaster.  Finally, when Fehr stepped down this past winter as MLBPA head after 23 years, the average salary for a baseball player had increased more than seven-fold during that time while the minimum salary had increased more than six-fold.

With Donald Fehr set to assume a leadership position within the NHLPA, could we see another cancelled season due to a stalemate in future CBA negotiations or just as unthinkable, an unfinished season like Major League Baseball's incomplete 1994?

With credentials like these, it is no surprise to see Fehr working presently in an advisory role with the NHLPA since last November and to hear many hockey players speak glowingly about him.  As reported by TSN, Max Talbot, a winger from the Pittsburgh Penguins said, ”It’s interesting to hear what he has to say.  I feel like he’s really taken [the job] to heart.  He talked to us a month ago in Chicago and he was definitely really confident, a big leader.  You could tell that he’s experienced.”  Already, Fehr has helped the NHLPA draft a new provisional constitution and its key points allude to the consolidation of more power for the executive director and less power for fewer peripheral employees.

According to The Hockey News, like the MLBPA, there will be a new clause which states that the general counsel will report directly to the executive director.  Further, the division player representatives and advisory board will all be abolished.  The ombudsman’s position will either be abolished or have its influence and power over the executive director greatly reduced.  This is a clear shift in direction and philosophy for the NHLPA.  There were rumblings of dissent and some players breaking rank and voicing opinions of settling quickly to get back on the ice during the last lockout.  This was followed by five years of near-laughable in-fighting that cast suspicion or disrepute on such varied personalities like former Canadian Autoworkers union head Buzz Hargrove, ex-player Eric Lindros and former Ontario chief justice Roy McMurtry(!), who were all involved with the NHLPA at one time or another.  Now, the players’ association is clearly moving to a belief that fewer personnel equals less civil war and that fewer personnel also equals more unity and collective strength.

While it may be surprising that the NHLPA is prepared to give one man, likely Fehr, great power to direct the affairs of the players, it really should not be.  Yes, the spectre of former disgraced NHLPA leader Alan Eagleson, who ruled (and defrauded) the union for years with near totalitarian power that ended up being his downfall, still gives pause to hockey players when considering how much power to give to the executive director.  However, no player who suffered through the 2004-05 lockout will ever forget slinking back to his club with his tail between his legs, in utter defeat.  This is why the rank and file of the NHLPA are more than ready to hand the reins of union reign to Fehr – a stubbornly tough, unifying leader whose lucrative accompishments on behalf of baseball players simply cannot be ignored.

Bettman and the owners will meet their match in Fehr during the next round of CBA negotiations.  Management will dig in and fight to protect the cost-certainty that comes with the existing salary cap.  Fehr will lead the players to dig in and fight just as hard to either repeal the salary cap or greatly increase the floor and ceiling.  Expect Fehr to not budge a micrometre off his position with full, undivided support from players.

Should the hockey world fear Fehr if he becomes the next leader of the NHLPA?  If you are not a player but a fan of the game who wants to see the playoff races reach a normal 82-game conclusion and who wants to see the Stanley Cup raised before August 2012 (if at all), then yes, fear Fehr.  In the same way that many baseball fans still shake their heads at the thought of the great milestones that might have been accompished in the interrupted 1994 season, hockey fans should ponder this unthinkable scenario:  Around March, 2012, Alex Ovechkin scores his 80th goal and Sidney Crosby notches an assist for a 44-game consecutive point scoring streak, both players within shouting distance of two of Wayne Gretzky’s unbreakable records.  Up north, Taylor Hall and Jordan Eberle are leading the Edmonton Oilers back into playoff contention as they wage a torrid race for the Western Conference’s eighth seed against the Ilya Kovalchuk-led Los Angeles Kings.  In Buffalo, Ryan Miller has posted his 13th shutout, just 2 away from Tony Esposito’s modern single-season record.

Yet during your local station’s broadcast of tonight’s hockey game, there will be a news conference during the first intermission.  Something about a deadlock in CBA negotiations, you mumble to your worried six-year old son, who fidgets with the tag on his replica hockey sweater.  Donald Fehr is stepping up to a podium in New York … “A strike is a last resort.  I want to emphasize that.  No one wants to play more than the players do.”

Further reading: From The Point, the Penguins-related blog by Brian Metzer, also published an article earlier today analyzing what Fehr’s involvement in the NHLPA will mean to hockey fans.  Do yourself a favour and read it.

Shea Weber Hardest Shot Competition, Pittsburgh Post Gazette

Yesterday, I read a Twitter discussion between Lyle Richardson (Spector), Dirk Hoag (The Forechecker), James Mirtle, and Greg Wyshynski (Puck Daddy) regarding the current CBA and potential changes for the new CBA.  Lyle opined that the salary cap has not helped the Nashville Predators.  He expressed the opinion that they are the same today as they were in 2004, 2006 and 2007 due to the inability of the salary cap to help.  Regardless of his opinion of the Predator’s financial situation, basing that opinion solely on the salary cap is a flawed premise.

Putting all the PR statements made by Gary Bettman aside, the salary cap (including aspects like the cap floor) was meant to ensure cost certainty (combined with escrow).  That cost certainty was the single most important aspect of the CBA for the League and the owners.  Beyond cost certainty in and of itself however, there’s nothing about the salary cap that’s designed to help small market franchises from a financial standpoint.  Where it does help the small market franchise is on the ice.  The aspect of both a cap floor and cap ceiling means every team in the league will have a roster that’s roughly within $16 million of every other team.  Prior to the lockout, there were several teams that had a payroll more than $50 million higher than the Predators.  It’s now easier for the Predators to both ice a competitive team and to keep most of the players that they want to keep.

Before continuing down the CBA path, I feel compelled to spend a few sentences explaining that last statement.  In trying to prove their point that the cap/CBA doesn’t work, many try to point to the Nashville talent purge after the 2006 season that saw Hartnell, Timmonen, and Vokoun traded as well as little effort to re-sign Kariya and Forsberg.  To point to that event in one’s list of “CBA failures” is being ignorant or forgetful of the situation in Nashville at best and intellectually dishonest at worst (on which I’m definitely not accusing Lyle to be very clear).  In that offseason, Craig Leipold had decided to sell the team due to his inability to make money.  As such, he ordered David Poile to cut salary to make the sale more palatable for a potential buyer.  What most didn’t realize at the time was that much of Leipold’s troubles stemmed from his alienating the local corporate sector.  After the sale to local ownership, that situation has been publicized.  The local ownership group has done a great job of turning things around which has allowed Nashville to keep their core players (David Legwand, Martin Erat, Shea Weber, Ryan Suter, Pekka Rinne, etc.).  Of course Nashville still has to have an internal budget, which leads us back to the aspect of the CBA that provides the most financial benefit to Nashville beyond cost certainty- revenue sharing.

While the salary cap, along with escrow, provided the cost certainty, it did nothing to help account for the revenue advantages one market has over another due to size, history, etc.  Enter revenue sharing.  Revenue sharing was essentially designed to increase the revenues of those disadvantaged clubs in order to allow a payroll near the midpoint of the salary cap.  Why not the cap ceiling?  The cost certainty percentage the CBA targets each season is actually represented by the midpoint of the salary cap.  In other words, the goal of the CBA is for every team to spend exactly to the midpoint.  If that were to happen, the players would receive all of their escrowed money back.  On the other hand, if every team were to spend to the cap ceiling, the players would lose all of their escrowed money back to the league in order to bring overall payroll costs back into line.  (Please note that this is very much a simplification of the CBA and ignores certain nuances like the 5% kicker voted on by the players in the past offseasons, among others.)  I feel that this is especially important so I’ll reiterate that it is not a goal of the CBA that every team spends to the cap ceiling, otherwise revenue sharing would target the cap ceiling.  As such, there’s nothing wrong with some teams having a budget somewhere south of the cap ceiling.

So what we have is a CBA that is designed to provide cost certainty in terms of overall payroll and provide revenue sharing to allow all teams to have a payroll between the cap floor and the midpoint.  Those two factors combined produce the desired side effect of increasing the likelihood of parity in narrowing the range between the “haves” and “have nots”.  It’s still up to the individual GM’s, coaches, and players to take advantage of that increased financial parity on the ice.

With that understanding in place, we can now answer Lyle’s question.  Are the Nashville Predators better under this CBA than the prior CBA?  The answer is an unequivocal yes.  Not only was Nashville able to endure a hostile takeover attempt, they’ve been able to re-up their core players at market rate.  Their budget has been within a couple of million of the midpoint (leaving necessary contingency room in the event of injuries or trade deadline activity) each season.  While Nashville continues to rely on revenue sharing, which means they can’t cross the cap midpoint, that reliance is within the rules of the current CBA (which expects roughly ten teams to receive revenue sharing each season).  Sure they haven’t advanced in the playoffs, but their odds to do so have increased (not to mention that they should have beaten Chicago last year, in my opinion).  What hasn’t happened was Nashville losing most of their talent.  It didn’t prevent Nashville from paying over $5 million to David Legwand and Martin Erat, $4 million or more to Jason Arnott, J.P. Dumont, and Shea Weber.  Nor will it prevent them from paying $6 million to Erat in the 2011-12 season and about that amount to Weber or about that amount the following season to Ryan Suter (all numbers courtesy of CapGeek).  Even so, spending to the max only brings you so far (as the Rangers have proved).

Is the CBA perfect?  No.  Can the CBA be improved?  I believe so.  With the expiration of this CBA coming soon, discussion of potential changes among fans has already started.  What won’t happen, in my opinion, is any type of soft cap with a luxury tax.  The problem with those options is that it destroys the cost certainty that was achieved in the last CBA.  It makes no sense to give back the most important item for all the owners achieved in the last CBA.

Next time, I’ll look at some things I’d like to see to provide additional stability to the smaller markets and to the League.

I really enjoyed reading the discussion you guys had Lyle, Dirk, James and Greg.  Thanks.

Before you fling your arms forward in a somewhat awkward way of agreeing with me (I’m not the only one who does this, right?), know that my cap frustration probably differs from yours a little. For the record, I actually like the NHL having a salary cap.

My beef has more to do with those in the media (and fans to a lesser extent) who blame the salary cap (and only the salary cap) for Chicago losing nearly a third of their roster this summer.

Like most of you, I shutter when TSN – a fine sports network – gives Dave Hodge an opportunity to voice a hockey opinion. I find Hodge’s stance on the salary cap half-baked to say the least. I’m paraphrasing here, but during TSN’s Free Agent Frenzy coverage on Thursday, Hodge basically gave his condolences to Hawks fans  saying “… the salary cap really screwed you, Hawks fans.”

Please.

That made me hit my boiling point on the matter. It’s not the cap’s fault several key RFAs – Kris Versteeg, Cam Barker, Ben Eager, Troy Brouwer and others – weren’t qualified on time last summer. Do you think Versteeg would have gotten $3 Million per season if qualified properly? It’s also not fair to blame the cap for Dale Tallon signing Dustin Byfuglien to a pretty rich $3 Million per year contract early on in his career. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge supporter of Tallon’s. But to blame the Hawks financial situation (and subsequent trades) on the cap isn’t entirely accurate.

The salary cap shouldn’t be the sole focus within the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Another important element in the CBA is the Entry Draft and lottery pick rules that were established some time ago. In 2007, Chicago were fortunate enough to move from the Draft’s 5th overall pick to 1st overall thanks to that lottery. I’m not sure but I think that 1st overall pick played a significant role in the Hawks Stanley Cup win last month.

For as much as the CBA/salary cap has hurt Chicago, it’s helped them too. I don’t see how Hodge and others can blame the salary cap for the Hawks “demise” (let’s face it, they’re still a strong team) without making so much as an acknowledgement of how and what has gotten Chicago out of the NHL’s basement. The same thing goes for Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, Washington and others.

Unfortunately Hodge and many others in the media forget to mention this. Luckily most hockey fans are smarter than that. If you still blame the salary cap for some of Chicago’s transactions, you obviously haven’t been paying attention. I for one don’t blame the salary cap for some of the Hawks recent transactions.

Stay classy, NHL salary cap.


Admit it. You have no clue what you're looking at. Within the next decade, all NHL GMs interested in staying competitive in the salary cap era will need to know how to read such tables and apply this information to acquire undervalued talent. (Chart excerpt used with permission of Tom Awad, puckprospectus.com)

A revolution swept through the NHL in 2004-05 – a financial revolution.  Instead of “Workers of the world, unite!”, the victorious battle cry ended up being “Owners of the world, unite … behind Gary!” and the NHLPA was nearly smashed.  A new CBA was signed ensuring player salary-expense certainty through capped payrolls.  However, it is harder than ever for teams to retain all of their top talent.  Front offices now have to make difficult choices on which players to retain on long-term contracts versus short-term deals and which players to simply waive good-bye.

What revolutionary ideas are currently roiling the hockey world?  Very subtly, a statistical revolution is circulating online and within the next decade, should find itself gaining legitimacy and respect in front offices of NHL teams.  Stat-minded baseball fans who glance at the above chart will immediately understand the winds of change.

In the past thirty years, much of the esoteric language, numbers and statistics of fantasy baseball participants and outside-the-box thinkers like Bill James, have become lingua franca for casual and stat-minded baseball fans.  Instead of a small number of limited “traditional” metrics, there are now numerous formulas and statistics used to analyze a player’s performance in isolation, independent of his teammates’ influence.  Advanced statistical analysis is now used in many MLB front offices to evaluate and analyze major league players and amateur prospects in the hopes of acquiring undervalued talent.

The same revolution is coming to the NHL in lockstep with the limitations of the salary cap.  After signing star players for premium dollars, every team must hunt for the most effective lower-line players who cost a minimal amount of money.  But who are these “effective players”?  Are there more descriptive stats than just G, A, PTS, +/-, shots, ice time, PIM, GAA and SV% or per-game ratios?  Does player X rack up points because he plays mostly on a line with Sidney Crosby?  Does player Y’s horrid +/- really reflect his play or is it because he plays in Edmonton?  How do we isolate their individual performance?  Can we come up with a stat to compare the overall value of forwards against defencemen and goalies?

Such questions have probably always been asked by teams and fans alike, but only in recent years have revolutionary individuals decided to objectively find detailed, quantitative answers.  Within these statistics, future front offices will find novel tools to assess professional and junior talent and find undervalued players who are essential in making a positive difference for their club whether by reducing turnovers and dumb penalties or by blocking high-risk opposing shots and taking high percentage shots.

It would be redundant on my part to explain some of the new hockey stats as the individuals below have already done an excellent job.  I am referencing some of the most interesting advanced statistical blogs and websites below.

behindthenet.ca and Behind the Net Hockey both by Gabriel Desjardins.  The former is a thorough, detailed and comprehensive statistical warehouse, while the latter is a blog of stats and noteworthy hockey items.

Puck Prospectus the baby brother of Baseball Prospectus, whose annual statistical guides are known to be purchased by MLB teams.  Tom Awad, who courteously allowed me to use the chart above, writes for PP.

Hockey Analytics by computer and actuarial scientist Alan Ryder.  His “Research” link contains scholarly articles covering everything from shot quality to puck possession location.  His “year-in-reviews” read like annual reports of publicly-traded corporations (and I mean that in a complimentary way).  For a real treat, read his 2009 NHL Review (.pdf file) for fascinating projections on the careers of Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin.

Hockey Numbers by Chris Boersma.  An enjoyable, easy-to-read blog of advanced statistics and general hockey happenings.

NHL.com Hockey’s own official website contains a very easy-to-navigate central database with sortable up-to-the-minute numbers on detailed player, team and all-time statistics.  On game days, individual team websites provide real-time scoresheets and play-by-play data.

It is inevitable that in the next decade, NHL teams will begin to openly incorporate advanced statistical analysis into player personnel decision-making.  With a scarce pool of talented players and a mandatory limit on annual spending that imposes a high cost – present and future on-ice mediocrity plus a bath of off-ice red ink – for spending resources on the incorrect players, teams will eventually realize the need for revolutionary ideas to keep one step ahead of their rivals.  At the same time, scouting will continue to be an integral part of talent evaluation.  My hope is that scoffers do not create a “traditional scouts” vs. “stat-heads” war in hockey like the still-smoldering conflict in baseball that erupted after publication of the groundbreaking baseball economics book, Moneyball, in 2003.  Methodological wrangling must never supersede the common goal of creating a winning hockey team.

Chart excerpt: behindthenet.ca Used with permission of Tom Awad, Puck Prospectus

According to TSN, Kane and Toews will be rewarded with five year, $30 million contracts. My thinking was they would be signed for longer, but at their age a five year deal is really the right term for them. In five years they will be in their late twenty’s with a chance to sign another big ticket.  It remains to be seen what type of long term contracts will be permitted then.

Duncan Keith reportedly will sign a 13 year contract extension which could keep him a Blackhawk until he is 39 years old. TSN reported Keith will earn less than $6 million a year, but my thinking is his contract could still be worth well over $60 million.

The structure of NHL collective bargaining agreement could be much different in five years. Although long term contracts signed now will be honored, it is only a matter of time before the NHL will try to shift the financial burden off of some franchises. Mr. Bettman and company could try to accomplish more financial parity through long term contract restrictions.

Parity may exist in the standings but the Sabres, Hurricanes, Predators, Panthers, Thrashers and Coyotes were all struggling financially before the lockout. Unfortunately many of those franchises are still in the red today. NHL teams don’t benefit from a huge revenue sharing pool so often the financially weak continue to flounder. At some point soon salary cap limitations will need to focus more on team profitability.

League revenues may continue to increase although the gap between profitable and unprofitable teams could also widen. Increased league revenues are great for some clubs but profitability continues to not be in the cards for others, which is not a good recipe for a healthy NHL.

Blackhawk management should be applauded for doing what many doubted. The organization has now appeared to secure its three best young stars.  They needed to retain their services as they really couldn’t be replaced for any less. Hawk fans had a part in this too, as the financial commitment was easier for Hawk management because of surging ticket revenues.

General manager Stan Bowman, as well as the players, must be breathing a huge sigh of relief.  Mr. Bowman should take a deep breath as his work is just getting started.

There was little doubt in my mind all three would re-sign. Although once Marian Hossa was inked to a long term deal the handwriting was on the wall that next year’s Hawk roster will be significantly different.

The question is…..Will being different equate to being a lot worse?

A fair estimate is the Hawks will have to create about $9 million in salary cap space if the ceiling stays at $56.8 million for the 2010-2011 campaign. It also has to be noted the Hawks could play with 21 man roster instead of 23, but let’s assume they carry at least 22 players for next season. That would mean one player’s salary from this year can disappear and then every other player traded, released or demoted would have to be replaced. So the salaries of those replacing the higher priced players leaving have to be added into the salary cap calculations also.

Bowman’s big job for next year is to find a way to shed salary without depleting the roster of so much talent as to make it unlikely to reach the playoffs. That task is going to be far more difficult than working out the contract extensions for Kane, Keith and Toews.

Players being shipped out of Chicago will be dealt for draft picks or younger prospects. Next fall is when a few recent Hawk draftees as well as some Rockford Ice Hogs will get a solid opportunity to hit the ice at the United Center.

From a simplistic standpoint the easiest path to salary cap salvation for Bowman would be to eliminate two players with large contracts.

For example, over $12.7 million could be knocked off next year’s payroll by not having Brian Campbell and Cristobel Huet on the roster.

Replacing a defenseman who plays about 24 or 25 minutes a night is a challenge. The starting goalie is the most important position on a hockey team and that could be tricky move too.

Maybe Blackhawk management will choose to cast off a few three to four million dollar players. Most likely the younger cheaper replacements won’t be as talented, but there are always tradeoffs in life.

Hawk fans should rejoice but also realize the team they are watching today should be one they remember.

All of this talent can’t stay together. But now is the moment to celebrate, there’s always time to worry….

blackhawkswin@comcast.net

Nobody knows anybody. Not that well.  – Tom Reagan, Miller’s Crossing

Check this blog out on The Huffington Post!

In a large woods of tall trees, another poor soul is on his knees, crying for his life. A dark figure stands in the killing posture, poised.

No, this isn’t the Coen Brothers gem of a movie, Miller’s Crossing. This is what has been happening to heads of the NHL’s Player Association ever since Bob Goodenow stepped down after the NHLPA bowed to the pressure of a NHL owner run lockout that canceled the 2004 and 2005 hockey season.

Ever since then, player solidarity and vision has been splintered as the head of the NHLPA has become like the drummer to Spinal Tap.

And beneath the surface lies a Dashiell Hammet-like caper that is vying to hammer out a battle to different gangs… The old guard and the new class of players. Behind both are player agents who are tied to player rights and contract values like Ahab to the White Whale.

So the lay of the land is tremendously unsettled, and games are played by both sides in what is a tug of war that seems to get top brass of the NHLPA effectively shot in the woods.

Perhaps the only thing missing in all this is the troublesome dame who has emeshed them all deep within a woven web.

Our tale begins as all do, noir style, as bodies fall without much clarity as to why. Those following these goings on the usual mainstream of blog venues are getting their information in drips and drabs, but nothing seems very clear.

In fact the more we seem to know, the more confusing it seems to get.

Is this the new NHLPA  designated meeting place these days?

There was a complaint that ran through the din the other day of why was all this NHLPA rumpus important or even a main news story. This is like asking the same of the Lighthouse Project. Both are important issues and the battles within have great effect on the future. One for a team. This for an entire league, as there are severe undercurrents that will portend either a bloody work stoppage, or just a scattered mess of players under the NHL owner’s foot.

You say you don’t care?

You will when there is another canceled season, ladies and gents.

This is why many journalists and bloggers have been following these goings on with some concern.

For yhose who aren’t privy to the shenanigans,basically, the NHLPA has been about as steady as Michael J. Fox using a jackhammer. Or for those squeamish, Andre Agassi after a few cans of ‘special’ JOLT. Or for even more squeamish, how about any of the Toronto Maple Leaf goalies? There ya go.

Basically, the inmates have done more than just run the asylum. The players have taken out the heads of the NHLPA as if this is Survivor, but with Don Cherry instead of Jeff Probst.

Infighting, politicking, backstabbing, tattling, you name it…it has happened with the NHLPA in the last few years, ever since they bowed to the NHL in the last CBA. So, one would think they rallied and reorganized? Far from it. The politics underneath and subsequent drama mean quite a bit to what amounts to several car wrecks before a looming CBA where two sides must hash out differences under that bargaining agreement. Add in it might be very likely that a recession is still affecting things, make the future even more murky.

Thus, the ripples of what is a floundering NHLPA will have effects to their own strength and positioning when it is high noon. Just as a NHL who had a fiasco in Phoenix as a rogue came in and tried to move them and showed flaws in their own armor which has a few more dents like a non-espn agreement, US clubs in trouble, last few expansion teams in the red, and a few fiascoes like Boots and other embarrassments.

To act like these aren’t important or have effect on what might transpire is almost being willingly obtuse.

Furthermore, the politics beneath the mechanics might be more than even it seems to the naked eye. There might be a battle going on of new players and old with a few agents thrown in pivoting and entrenched on either side.

If there is one person smack dab in the middle of things of all the goings on, it is a player who is not even paying union dues this year as he sits in the AHL hoping a team signs him at the ripe age of 47 years old. Chris Chelios made it his business to topple Ted Saskin back in 2007. He accused player agent Don Meehan of undermining the NHLPA back then as well. Chelios, in fact, has a large part to play in the propping up Paul Kelly as NHLPA head when he had an executive search firm headed by his old buddy, former Flyer’s Captain, Dave Poulin.

Then out went Kelly, taken out by the very rules that Chelios and others ratified, but by a new class of players. Those who helped topple Kelly were of the new school of players who took exception at Kelly’s attempt to find out what players were saying about him in meetings.

Then, suddenly, post-coup, Chelios and others were front and center. Ian Penny, who was someone who had blood on his hands getting Kelly removed, was now in charge as players began to try to investigate on what exactly transpired.

Chelios was part of a committee of vets that were mandated to look into it. Instead, they, led by Chelios and per sources and even Steve Larmer, his former teammate, “exceeded their mandate”.

Exceeding the mandate seems almost an understatement as Chelios, per Ian Penny’s letter of resignation, describing the AHL defenseman as almost a cloddish overwrought Phillip Marlowe on steroids. Chelios was purposely strong arming his way, using someone from the NHLPA’s offices to feed him information, to make the current structure implode on it’s own volition. Either way, wreckage has ensued, because in either case or in-between, Chelios rode in with some leeway to investigate, seemed to carry a Bazooka and an axe to grind, and never seemed to investigate anything at all.

His actions attempted to hamstring the current actions of the NHLPA brass, trying to make them not talk to one another, but nowhere through all this did this committee seem to actually do what it was created to do in the first place. Instead, Mike Ouellet will be acting Executive Director, and the old guard now leads again. Sources cite that Ouellet was the person feeding Chelios piecemeal of every NHLPA email, phone call and meetinginformation, as Chelios was cowboying his way to clean house.

Some say this ‘cleaning of house’ needed to happen. Yet this is the third sweeping post-CBA. The old guard is now back in charge. What is becoming clearer and clearer is the dynamics of old school vs new school. To say that somehow things are solved or cleaned-up are far from accurate. If anything things might be as unsettled as they were earlier this summer. Players and agents seem split on the goings-on, and solidarity seems hard to find, despite overblown words of some thinking that anything is one whit solved. Some feel that Chelios needs to get out of the way, besides retire, so that newer players can put forth their own identity and create some balance. The fact that several agents sit on different sides of all this might be the most dangerous thing of all, as they speak in many a players ear.

Hell, and I am sure it’s far from over, as many cooks seem to have a spoon in the stew.

Chelios, you know the commissioner...

Email me: BD@hockeyindependent.com

Twitter: twitter.com/bdgallof

Facebook: facebook/gallof

Leave a comment below

]]> http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/bdgallof/4584/feed/ 6 http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/penguinsmarch/3872/ http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/penguinsmarch/3872/#comments Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:47:04 +0000 Adrian Fung http://hockeyindependent.com/blog/?p=3872

Will Tyler Kennedy be joined in Pittsburgh by Baby Penguin blueliners such as rugged Robert Bortuzzo or Jon D'Aversa? Not likely. Injured Sergei Gonchar's roster spot will probably be filled by Nate Guenin, if at all.

For a second straight season, defenceman Sergei Gonchar will be sidelined for an extended time when he broke a bone in his left wrist during Tuesday evening’s 5-1 Pittsburgh victory over visiting St. Louis.  Gonchar is expected to miss the next four to six weeks of play.  If an injury can ever be considered “good” in relative terms, then fans must be breathing a sigh of relief to hear that Gonchar will miss “just” four to six weeks (approximately twenty games) as opposed to the fifty-seven regular season games he missed last year due to a pre-season shoulder separation.

The Penguins have announced that Martin Skoula will step in and join the Penguins defence corps, pairing up with Jay McKee.  Alex Goligoski will move up to take Gonchar’s spot, skating with Brooks Orpik.  The Kris Letang-Mark Eaton pairing will remain untouched.

Naturally, the Penguins will place Gonchar on injured reserve and call up a replacement blueliner from Wilkes-Barre Scranton, right?

Not necessarily.

In the world of professional hockey, money matters and roster-procedural matters matter just as much as on-ice matters.  Unquestionably, Gonchar will likely go on the injured reserve list (defined as being medically certifiably unable to play for at least seven days from the time of the injury), thus opening up a spot on the Pittsburgh active roster.  Including Gonchar, the Penguins have twenty-two of the maximum twenty-three spots filled.  Logically, now that it appears Skoula will see regular playing time – in fact, his debut as a Penguin will be his next game – then a conservative roster move would be to add a seventh defenceman.

Who will it be?  Thinking back to the end of training camp, the last two cuts on defence were Deryk Engelland and Pittsburgh native Nate Guenin.  Engelland’s game is based on physical play, certainly useful, but he has no NHL experience.  Guenin, while playing mostly for the Philadelphia Phantoms of the AHL over the past three seasons, has appeared in twelve career NHL games (0G, 2A, 2P,+2), all with the Flyers.

If a player from Wilkes-Barre is called up, expect Guenin to be the one.  Obviously, his role will be limited to watching the action from the pressbox unless another Penguin defender also suffers an injury.  As Guenin is over twenty-five years of age and has played at least one professional game this season, he will not be subject to re-entry waivers if he is called up to the NHL.  The Penguins have $576,000 in salary cap room for this season and signed Guenin in the summer to a two-way contract, with the NHL portion valued at $500,000, the league minimum.  If the estimates concerning Gonchar’s timetable to recover are correct, then the pro-rated salary cap hit from promoting Guenin is sustainable.  If we use a conservative estimate of six weeks of service, this translates to forty-two days on the NHL roster, equalling just under $109,000 in remitted salary.

Affordable indeed assuming a full six weeks of being on the roster, but more likely, the Penguins will hold their roster “as is” for now, until a new defenceman is actually needed due to another injury.  Obviously, fans of the Penguins are crossing their fingers against that possibility, but if a new blueliner is called up, don’t be surprised if it is Nate Guenin.

Sources: nhlnumbers.com, penguins.nhl.com, NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement

Photo: PenguinsMarch personal collection