NHL analysis

There has been much discussion recently about the NHL preferring to keep a team out of Hamilton, in part because the massive revenues such a team would bring in would drive both the maximum and minimum salary caps up, making life harder for basically all of Gary Bettman’s expansion era teams.
This question is really important not only in consideration of how long the NHL can continue on its present course but also when determining just how smart teams signing players to lengthy contracts ala Briere’s 7 year monster are concerned.

Long contracts handed out to players coming off of career years typically benefit the player over the team.  The New York Rangers give Chris Drury a long contract based on his production from last year despite the fact that he may never repeat and will almost certainly not surpass his goal and point totals (he’s not getting any younger).  With the salary cap, this sort of contract would initially seem particularly damaging, since Drury’s contract does more than merely cost the Rangers franchise money - it restricts what other players they can sign or acquire.

There is, however, another issue.  The salary cap has risen every single year since it was introduced.  If it continues to rise, the long term contracts can in fact benefit the team because every year, the salary cap hit, though a constant figure, takes up a lower percentage of the team’s available salary.

Look at the Tampa Bay Lightning, built around the trio of Brad Richards, Vincent Lecavalier and Marty St. Louis.  Those three eat up a combined $19.925 million per season of the salary cap.  A few years ago, that was a cool 51% of the $39 million salary cap.  With the salary cap rising to over $50 million this season, however, Tampa Bay has 60% of the salary cap remaining to surround its core trio with.  A substantial and welcome change.

There is, however, a problem.  The salary cap is far from guaranteed to rise - in fact, if Bettman has his way and the NHL expands and/or relocates to the Kansas City’s and the Las Vegas’ rather than the Hamilton’s of the world, the cap will in all likelihood begin shrinking sooner rather than later.  That’s bad, bad, bad news for teams signing players to 5, 6, 7 year contracts because most of these players are signed in their early 30’s.  When these contracts expire, they’re going to be less productive than they are today.

Bryan McCabe’s monster $5.75 million per year seemed disastrous when signed, frightening after his disappointing first year as a (by salary if not play) top-10 defenceman, but merely unreasonable now that it can be contrasted with the contracts signed by Sheldon Souray, Roman Hamrlik and even contracts signed at the same time as McCabe’s like Wade Redden or Zdeno Chara.  This is not to say that McCabe has played or will likely play like a $6 million defenceman, or that any of those other players are more overpaid - I will leave that distinction up to the reader - but merely to point out that McCabe’s contract is starting to look average after only a single season.

If - and this is a big IF - the salary cap continues to rise, the long term contracts of players like McCabe, Briere, Gomez and others continue to look better and better.  But the current CBA is going to expire before most of these contracts - perhaps as early as the summer before the 2009 season.  Owners signing off of these contracts may want to start thinking about how the NHL will look after the current CBA expires.  Lear the lessons of the New York Islanders, who will be paying for their costly mistake in signing Alexei Yashin to his monstrous deal for years to come, while Yashin plays in Russia or even another NHL team (haha).

This may seem like an odd time to chime in on the free agent market, but that’s alright.  I’d rather focus this blog post on discussing the purposes and goals of free agency than on who landed where.

Perusing James Mirtle’s list of Who’s Left shows us very quickly there are no top tier players left.  Teemu Selanne and Petr Forsberg could potentially be the central pillar you build a team around, but neither will be.  Forsberg comes with too many injury questions - not to mention whether he even wants to play in the NHL next year - while Selanne won’t sign anywhere but Anaheim, if he chooses not to retire.  The rest of the names on the list are a mix of spare parts, cast offs or holdouts of some variety or another.

So why does Danny Markov still lack a team while Sheldon Souray gets a shiny new 5 year deal?  Souray is much more of a risk than Markov; well known as a defensive liability and just starting to move beyond recurring injury problems.  While Markov may lack Souray’s off-ice leadership and cannon from the point, if I were putting a team together I’d take Markov over Souray any day of the week - even ignoring that Markov will sign for several million dollars per year less than Souray did.

But free agency is about more than just signing the best players.  It’s not even about just signing the best players willing to play for your team.  Different teams have different needs and they seek to fill them, on and off the ice, while keeping an eye to both long and short term success.

Edmonton signed Souray as much because they needed to sign someone - anyone - to a big, long term contract as because they had a hole to fill on the blueline.  They brought Souray in to prove to the fans in Edmonton they really were trying all along, not to fix their blueline.  If he happens to help them fill the net and improve their sagging power play, well, so much the better.

Off-ice considerations aside for a moment, each team still has to put together the best team, which doesn’t simply boil down to signing the best players.  If player X disturbs the dressing room chemistry, it doesn’t matter if he’s the best available player and willing to sign well below market value.

With all that in mind, there remain a few gems in the free agent bin, as long as you’re willing to look past their flaws and/or use them in ways that best suit their particular talents.  I’ve been very surprised that Alex Auld has remained unsigned for so long.  I know that not receiving a qualifying offer - from the lowly Panthers no less - is a mark against him, but such a young goalie, who showed at least some promise in Vancouver, even if his time in Florida was a bust, surely deserves a chance.

I’m even more surprised at a few of the names left in the list of blueliners.  No team interested in a deep playoff run can have enough experienced defencemen, and guys like Sopel, Sutton and Vaananen all left, there remains some choice.

The good news for teams is that these sorts of players don’t have any definite urgency attached to them.  The first few days of free agency work purely to the benefit of the players, particularly those coming off of career years, as teams clamour to “win” the Briere sweepstakes and make offers borne of desperation as much as common sense (honestly - 7 years?  Even if you like the dollars, it’s tough to understand the term).  The rest of the summer plays into the hands of the owners and GM’s.  Obviously there’s not too much interest in Danny Markov, at least at his current asking price.  If he wants to play in the NHL next year, that means that number has to start deflating.

We’ll continue to see players sign right into next season, as teams tinker and prices drop.  We’ll also undoubtedly see a number of the players on Mirtle’s list drop from sight, perhaps leaving for Europe or simply sitting at home as the months go on.  The fact is that for many of these players, they are only able to fill holes teams would rather fill with younger or cheaper options.

Just to let everyone know, I’m still here and will be blogging again for the upcoming season.  I’ll be starting with a team by team analysis of additions and changes over the summer - what to watch for, what to expect, what I think about each team’s moves over the past month or so.

I’ve also been working on improving my Power Rankings’ formulas and more, which will hopefully improve my game predictions and more for the upcoming year.

See you soon!