Mike Chen’s Hockey Blog

It’s hard to miss any Tampa Bay Lightning news lately since the Bolts seem to make at least one move a day. I think we all figured that Jay Feaster was going to be a lame-duck GM but you’d think they’d at least try to maintain some facade over what’s going on. Since the Koules/Barrie superteam took over, nearly all of the press releases regarding player movement have been announced by one of them or new executive something-or-other Brian Lawton.

Check it out:

PR for Mark Recchi

PR for the Dan Boyle trade

PR for Radim Vrbata

PR for Olaf Kolzig

PR for Vaclav Prospal

I’m not sure what Feaster is doing these days but there’s a good chance he’s collecting a nice check while sitting in an air-conditioned office watching reruns of The Surreal Life on Tivo rather than calling GMs and dealing with the league.

In the coming days, many critics of Gary Bettman will point to the skyrocketing price tags that free agents have commanded and say, “What was the lockout for?”

Bettman, Bill Daly, and others towing the company line will say, “The revenues allow this to happen.”

Me? I’m looking at the general managers and saying, “You’re pretty much all nuts. And stupid. And forgetful. And filled with wishful thinking.” But it’s not because I thought someone like Brian Campbell wouldn’t get 7-some million smackers per season. If you look at how free agency escalates every year, the top guys always get about 5-10% more than the previous year’s top guys. That’s happened before the CBA and that’s happened after the CBA. The top guys aren’t really the ones pushing the NHL further into financial insanity. It’s the mid-level and low-level players. And that’s the one thing I just can’t, for the life of me, figure out.

Unlike Brian Burke, I don’t blame Kevin Lowe for every atrocity known to humanity. In terms of awful hockey salaries, though, some weird stuff has really been happening over the past few seasons. When mediocre players — 3rd-line checkers, 5th or 6th defensemen — start getting multi-million dollar deals, something very, very wrong is happening. Sometimes, it’s so absurd that it’s funny. Case in point: last year, when Darryl Sutter wrote the wrong number in his checkbook and gave Cory Sarich a too-long deal with an average of $3.6 million per season, well, I had a good chuckle.

The problem is that every time one of these chuckle-inducing deals comes along, we may laugh but agents and players start drooling. If Cory Sarich is worth $3.6 million, then someone like Mike Commodore sure as hell is too — right?

No. Sweet jumping jebus, no. No offense to Sarich and Commodore — they’re both steady players and I’m sure they’re nice people that are kind to their families and good to their pets, but come on, that’s just stupid. And that’s the thing — the GMs know that it’s stupid, but they partake in it anyway. It’s like sticking a recovering alcoholic at a frat party and hoping that he’ll do the right thing.

If there’s one lesson the GMs need to learn, it’s that you don’t have to buy something just because it’s for sale. And that’s where I really don’t get things. It seems like free agency is always utterly insane over the first two days, but then it calms down and some reasonable deals are made. This season, after the stupidity of the first two days, Markus Naslund signed for $4 million and Miroslav Satan signed for $3.5 million. Considering that it’s fairly reasonable to believe that these two guys could still pop in at least 30 goals, it’s not a bad deal. On the other hand, you have Jeff Finger — Jeff Freakin’ Finger — pulling in the same amount even though he’s only got about a year and a half of NHL experience on the blueline. When did Bryce Salvadore — another 4/5/6-level d-man — become a $3 million guy? Mike Commodore might be a decent stay-at-home defenseman with a Stanley Cup ring but does he really bring more to the table than Joe Blueliner making $1.5 million?

It’s all about names and opportunity, really. The GMs see the names, they think about the opportunity, and they think that it’ll be a great idea, so mid-level players get stupid contracts. Then next year, more mid-level players point to those contracts and they get better stupid contracts and it becomes a self-perpetuating cycle.

It used to be you’d get either term or price but now it seems like even middle-of-the-road players get both, and there’s no logic to it. It’s not just young guys getting paid for potential, it’s older guys getting paid for what they’ve done. Some get more, some get less, but there’s no real sensibility to it all.

The theory going into this CBA was that with more players available due to lower free-agency ages, inflation would be kept down because there was more supply than demand. If a team didn’t get player A, they’d just move to player B, and this abundance of supply would keep prices down.

Well, the problem is you need a rational system in order to employ a model like that. Unfortunately, NHL GMs don’t work rationally. This supposedly idiot-proof system theoretically provided enough checks and balances to keep things sane, but when you have 25 or so GMs working stupidly, nothing — other than a gun to the head and a chastity belt on the wallet — will keep things sane.

It’s understandable to want to buy the best players out there but at what price? When does the absurd become the downright ass-backwards stupid?

Well, I guess the answer is now. My only hope is that this is all cyclical. GMs will hopefully see that spending whoppers on big-name and mid-name and little-name free agents isn’t really getting it done, so they’ll collectively take a deep breath and chill the hell out for a few summers. But that won’t happen because there will always be a desperate team willing to overpay a ridiculous amount of money (Ron Hainsey at nearly $5 million per season, anyone?), thus setting the marketplace.

I don’t know where this is going but it sure ain’t good. And you know what the really funny thing is? None of this would have ever happened if the Canadian dollar hadn’t gotten so strong against the US dollar, thus driving up revenues and artificially inflating the cap value. Don’t forget, it wasn’t too long ago that fans in Edmonton and Ottawa were bemoaning the weak Canadian dollar and worrying about how their small-market teams could afford a full roster. Oh, the irony of it all.

I’m reserving comments on the whole free-agent idiocy until the second day finishes so that we get the remaining chips (hopefully) off the table. So far, though, what a bunch of freakin’ morons (the GMs, not the players).

What a difference an afternoon makes.

This morning, SJ Mercury beat writer David Pollack posted that he had talked directly with Larry Kelly, agent to Brian Campbell. Kelly stated that the Sharks were still very much in the running but a family issue was tugging Campbell in two directions. This seemed to confirm earlier reports from various sources that Campbell had an ill family member, though nothing’s been mentioned officially. Cue the violins as sympathy and understanding comes from Sharks fandom.

Later this afternoon, word came down from Campbell himself:

ON THE FAMILY FACTOR: “I’m really close to my family and they were able to come to a lot of games when I was in Buffalo. I was a little spoiled.”

Now, it seems like Sharks fandom has reacted pretty negatively to this quote, in essence calling Campbell a mama’s boy and telling him to be a professional. Look, it could be the case where Campbell’s family just wants him on the east coast so they can go to more of his games, or it could be that there’s someone in the family who he’s close to that’s ill and Campbell wants said person to be able to see some of his games. We don’t know. To judge one quote like that without knowing someone’s complete private matters makes it all kinda harsh and silly.

Put it this way: Let’s pretend we found out that, say (and this is totally made up just to show an example), Campbell’s uncle who drove him to hockey practices when he was a kid had cancer and one of his joys is watching his favorite nephew skate live. Wouldn’t that fall in line with what Campbell said while also maintaining the privacy of his family’s situation? And then we’d all feel like a bunch of jerks for judging him, wouldn’t we?

We’ll all know in a few days, but the bottom line is that Campbell has publicly stated that he loved his Sharks teammates, the city, and the organization. The Sharks are in the running, he’s just gotta figure it out. And until it turns out that he really IS being a wussy mama’s boy, I’m not gonna judge the guy.

As the rumor mill continues to swirl around the usual suspects, there’s rumblings (for better or worse) that the Chicago Blackhawks will make mad dashes at Marian Hossa and Brian Campbell (should Campbell make it to UFA status). The number being thrown around is $8 million for each dude, which means that they’ll each be able to buy 16 million tacos at Jack in the Box per season.

Is this a wise move? Let’s consider the current Hawks cap status courtesy of NHLnumbers.com. Even though the Hawks have about $36 million in salary tied up for next season (and that’s without a few utility players signed), you have to remember that bonuses count in the NHL’s cap system. So while Patrick Kane is technically on the books for $875k, he’s actually producing a cap hit of close to $4 million.

Overall, the Hawks have a total cap hit of about $45 million, so they’ve got about $10 million to play with. It doesn’t sound like they’ll be buying out Robert Lang or Martin Havlat (both with one year left on their respective deals), and they’ve got no real goaltending option other than sticking with Nikolai Khabibulin.

In other words, it’ll pretty much be impossible without some movement to sign both Campbell and Hossa. Now, maybe they’re thinking that they’ll try their best to buy both of their services, but since each player will have so many suitors, they’re banking on getting on at best. If, by some miracle, they land both, I’m assuming they’d start a chain reaction of creative roster movement.

And contrary to the opinion of this Daily Herald writer, you can’t backload contracts to work around the cap under this CBA. Cap hits are calculated by an average salary over the life of the contract; the only thing affected by the way the contract is structured is the amount you have to pay to buy someone out.
If the Hawks do try to pull that off though, I’m questioning the logic behind it. Looking at a long-term perspective, you’ve got Kane, Toews, Cam Barker, and Duncan Keith all hitting RFA status in the next 1-2 years. By then, Havlat and Lang will be off the books (and who knows what will happen with Khabibulin), but the combined salary raises–we’re looking at cap increases of anywhere from $2 million to $5 million for each guy–plus potential salary for Hossa and/or Campbell over long-term deals and you’ve got a messy situation.

Personally, I don’t know why the Hawks would want to target either guy. They’re still rebuilding, and it could be another two seasons before they return to the playoffs. Why invest in players that are approaching the wrong side of 30 to big long-term deals when the core of the team is still in their early 20s? I’d think it’d make more sense to try and get mid-level support players this season, then look at making a bigger splash NEXT summer when Lang and Havlat are gone and the team’s gone through another year of maturation.

While many people out in the hockey world (including a bunch of the Bolts fans I know) think that Barry Melrose will be huge gigantic mega-disaster behind the Tampa Bay bench, I’m not totally convinced that it’s really as bad as some people think it is. Yes, he’s been out of the game for a very long time, but he at least has been in a place where he can objectively observe the game change.

There’s no doubt that the game is very different now than it was when Melrose was last behind the bench. However, I think he’s surrounded himself with an interesting crew to help him with the transition:

-Cap Raeder: Here’s an experienced guy that’s been involved with coaching and scouting for a long, long, long time now. He’s also a former assistant with Melrose in LA.
-Rick Tocchet: All gambling jokes aside, word out of Phoenix was that Tocchet was an excellent assistant coach for Wayne Gretzky. Tocchet’s hard-nosed playing style translated into a keen observation of the ice and a good rapport with players.
-Wes Walz: Getting someone straight out of their playing career might be good or bad, but I think it’s good in this case. Since Melrose is primarily considered a motivator rather than an X’s and O’s kind of guy, someone like Walz who’s just leaving the battlefield under an extremely tight Jacques Lemaire system might be a good liason between Melrose’s old NHL and the new NHL.

Let’s not forget that up front, the Lightning should still be one of the most talented squads up there. Assume that Steve Stamkos has a reasonable rookie season and puts up, say, 55-60 points as a second-line center. The top line of Vinnie Lecavalier, Martin St. Louis, and Vaclav Prospal will be reunited, and they were one of the top groups in the whole league last season.

Who will Stamkos play with? We won’t know until well into the free agency period as the Bolts plan to be “aggressive” during free agency. The real trouble spot will (again) be the Tampa defense and goaltending. I’d think it’d make sense to get a veteran like Olaf Kolzig to share the net with Mike Smith as Smith tries his hand at being a #1 (which, by all accounts, everyone in the Dallas organization thought he was). As for the defense, well, that’s where things could get really tricky. Dan Boyle and Paul Ranger aren’t exactly the second coming of Scott Stevens, and the Lightning had a tendency to make turnovers that led to bad goals.

Coaching can make a team defensive. However, I doubt that’ll be the case with this group of coaches. Some real steady anchors will have to come to Tampa Bay to help stabilize the defense.

Still, it’s not a recipe for total disaster. If they make a smart move and Melrose still has his motivational chops, this team may surprise. If they solve the defense/goaltending issue and get something that’s good, not spectacular, they should have enough up-front talent alone to at least compete for the 6/7/8 spot.

So I’m not setting any mullets on fire yet. Wait till you see what’s assembled in free agency, then see if the team appears to be gelling defensively over the first few weeks of the season before passing judgment.

As the pre-draft trade rumors swirl around the San Jose Sharks, I saw this little nugget from TSN. It’s the first I’ve heard about it:

San Jose, Florida and the Carolina Hurricanes are considered to be among the most likely to make a significant trade.

Sharks captain Patrick Marleau is a name making the rounds this week along with his teammate Jonathan Cheechoo.
Ok, I get the Marleau rumors. His salary, and last season’s performance, warrant rumors and speculation. But why in the world would the Sharks want to trade Cheechoo?

Look, I’m not so enamored with Cheech that I think he’s the second coming of Brett Hull or anything like that. But let’s put things in perspective — even if Cheech plateaus as a 25-goal 2nd liner for the rest of his career, his salary cap hit is $3 million for the next few years.

Think of it this way:  Ryan Malone has never had a 50-goal season and he’ll likely command somewhere between $4 million and $5 million. Considering the way salary inflation is going, why would the Sharks want to give up on such a reasonably priced player?

And here’s the other thing. GM Doug Wilson knows how Cheech’s double-sports hernia (try taking scissors to your groin, it won’t feel nice) impaired his abilities till about January. Considering his goal total this season, a healthy Cheechoo should be a lock for 40+ goals.

All that for a $3 million per-season cap hit. Why trade that value away?

My predictions for the awards show tonight:

Hart: Alexander Ovechkin (duh)
Vezina: Evgeni Nabokov (not just a homer pick)
Norris: Nicklas Lidstrom (next year, Dion)
Adams: Bruce Boudreau (did more with less)
Lady Byng: Martin St. Louis (just cause I like the guy)
Selke: Henrik Zetterberg (and that’s not including the playoffs)
Calder: Patrick Kane (future Team USA captain)

Other non-award predictions:

-Random b-list celebrities will go on stage and make jokes where no one laughs.
-Players will look awkward and uncomfortable during bad “comedy”
-Bands (including someone besides Barenaked Ladies) will play because, um, it’s “entertainment”
-Every single person will congratulate the Detroit Red Wings and they’ll say the same exact thing at the draft next weekend

Me, I won’t be watching it. I hate awards shows to begin with, but this one’s usually even more painful to watch. Instead, I’ll be spending quality time with an aging clone soldier on his final mission. Snake? Snake?!?!? SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE?!?!?!?

If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

That’s the first thing that many people will think when former Detroit assistant coach Todd McLellan steps up to the podium in San Jose as the Sharks’ new head coach. And why not join ‘em? While McLellan hasn’t been part of the Red Wings staff for too long (just the prior two seasons), he has been a key part of the team’s puck-possession style that dominated the league. Behind the bench, McLellan ran the deadly Detroit power play and the team’s offensive style.

But McLellan’s not merely being hired because of his association with the Red Wings. He coached for four years in the AHL, including one season where his Houston Aeros won the Calder Cup. Oh, it’s important to note that the Houston Aeros are the AHL affiliate for the Minnesota Wild. Why’s that? Because Wild coach Jacque Lemaire is often accused (half-jokingly) of being able to transform his players into robots executing his defensive style. And execution is where the Sharks’ biggest problems lie.

Does that mean that San Jose will be forcing Joe Thornton to perform the same type of suffocating defensive scheme that makes Marion Gaborik want out of Minnesota? Not necessarily, but having that Lemaire influence is probably one of the underlying factors in San Jose GM Doug Wilson’s decision.

A few weeks back, McLellan, already becoming a hot name among coaching rumors, was approached by a few media types looking for a little more information about his proposed head coaching style. McLellan was up-front in the influence of his current and previous organizations, citing what he learned in the Minnesota organization about defense and what he used in Detroit for offense.

It’s an interesting hybrid solution, especially when you factor in the size and speed of San Jose’s players. The issue of consistency is constantly harped upon in San Jose, and McLellan’s two organizations are models of consistency. Don’t expect McLellan to perform some sort of voodoo to hypnotize San Jose’s players into Jacque Lemaire automatons. McLellan’s his own man, after all, and any influence from Lemaire will be balanced out by influence from the always quotable and sometimes wacky Mike Babcock.

On paper, McLellan will probably look to instill a game of quick, simplified thinking for crisp passes and smart puck movement that worked so well in Detroit — especially if mobile puck mover Brian Campbell stays in San Jose. Defensively, the system will probably emphasize a notion similar to what Ron Wilson preached: five men up, five men back, everyone supporting each other.

In fact, if you looked at what worked in San Jose under Wilson, it was similar in strategy to the Detroit mold. When things were really clicking, San Jose brought a mix of speed, defensive awareness, and hard forechecking that stood with anyone else in the league. The problem was finding the right buttons to push for consistent execution.

That’s McLellan’s biggest challenge: to take what the previous San Jose regime did well, factor in his own experience with the Detroit and Minnesota organizations, and figure out a way to get every player on the Sharks roster to play with absolute commitment and passion. As for now, everything looks good in theory, but theory and reality are two completely different things.

Another year, another article crapping on the so-called non-traditional markets and their attendance revenue woes. This year’s version, or at least the first salvo fired across the bow, is an editorial from the National Post:

Professional hockey is still the only major sport without a lucrative TV contract in the United States. And without the kind of revenues that national TV advertising generates, many NHL franchises are unable to afford the salaries that top-and even middle-tier players demand. That’s why as many as eight franchises are reportedly in financial trouble. While some of the sport’s most profitable teams are in the United States — including Philadelphia, the New York Rangers, Detroit, Dallas, Boston and Colorado — its poorest are there as well: Phoenix, Florida, Nashville and Atlanta.

Hockey does not play well in these hot-weather locations. Except for the California clubs and Tampa Bay — which count on plenty of ex-pat and vacationing Canadians to fill seats — sunbelt NHL teams are largely a bust. The league should consider pulling most of these franchises. Indeed, the only reason it hasn’t already is that doing so would jeopardize the dream of a national TV contract.

Ok, I have a few issues with this. First off, the guy contradicts himself when he claims that the only strong sunny-state teams are in California and Tampa Bay when he cites Dallas as one of the league’s strong franchises. Apparently, Texas is no longer in the sun-belt, but ok, you don’t need a geography degree to make claims about the NHL.

Second, he presents the age-old argument that hockey fans in California and Florida are mostly ex-pat Canadians and vacationing Canadians. This argument was false ten years ago, and the fact that it’s still being bandied about north of the border is really kind of ridiculous. As a Sharks season-ticket holder, I can say with full confidence that my section is a huge cross-section of people in terms of race, background, career, but they almost all live in the Bay Area. Some are Canadian ex-pats, yeah, but a large majority of them are native Bay Area folk that just happened to like a Sharks team that’s been here close to 20 years now.

And the notion that a bulk of Sharks tickets go to vacationing Canadians…friend, just look at the percentage of season-ticket holders and you’ll know that it’s not just vacationing Canadians buying single tickets. Seriously, get a clue.

To defend Tampa Bay, I’m going to turn to Julie Manenti (born in Montreal, residing in Florida):

The article in the National Post has some fatal flaws that the columnist didn’t fully think through.

1.) I question anybody who calls Sid the Kid “the most famous player” in all of hockey.  Because the NHL is such a niche sport, and Crosby is still pretty young, I have to wonder if 95% of the world’s population has heard his name yet.  I agree that getting Detroit into the Finals was a coup. Pittsburgh made a great opponent because they’re a powerful team, not because Sid is a worldwide phenomenon on par with Gretzky or something.  (He’s rising, but give him another year or two.)
2.) This guy’s logic is badly confused.  The area where Canadians live–we refer to it as “Floribec”–is on the east coast, not even an hour from Sunrise, where the Florida Panthers play.  If it’s solely Canadian ex-pats who are filling Tampa Bay’s Gulf Coast arena, that doesn’t explain why the Panthers’ attendance has always sucked.  The city of Tampa, by contrast, actually doesn’t have as many Canadians.
3.) “Except for the California clubs and Tampa Bay…” Dude, you just excluded four teams. That only leaves three or four that he’s complaining about, anyway!  Why does he make it sound like the apocalypse?

Frankly, I think there is a lot of whining and crying from Canadian media because it’s so hard for their franchises to keep up with the rich Sunbelt teams.  If attendance is up, and the warm-weather teams are competitive (hello, San Jose!), then exactly what is the problem?  I fully agree that some teams down here are run badly, like the Panthers, but then I wouldn’t give you 10¢ for the Maple Leafs and they’re Original Six.  It’s OK if hockey isn’t AS popular in the South as everywhere else.  It’s still pretty popular.  I have a feeling Vinny and Marty get interrupted at dinner to sign autographs when they’re around home.

Ok, so that’s the first part of his argument. The second part is the fact that Phoenix, Florida, Nashville, and Atlanta don’t provide the support to sustain an NHL team.

I’ve said time and again that it is impossible to judge a marketplace when a team sucks. And Phoenix, Florida, and Atlanta have really been battling the suckage for several years now. You really can’t judge a market until its team gets a sustained string of playoff runs with recognizable stars.

Would the league make more money in Hamilton or Winnipeg? Probably, at least for the short term. Recent reports have shown that the Canadian teams are generating about 30-40% of league revenue–with 20% of the league in Canada, that’s overachieving on average by 75-100%. But remember folks, everything is cyclical, from the strength of the Canadian dollar to the performance on the ice. Some people may not believe this, but there was a time when a team like the Vancouver Canucks didn’t sell out every game. It’s based on performance, economy, and yes, local sports traditions. But the thing about local sports traditions is that it’s not an all-or-nothing thing; you’ve got to give areas time to grow and develop their own traditions. Take Columbus, for example. Their attendance was stronger than their performance dictated due to a long history of college hockey. However, their fans’ patience is finally starting to wear thin and the team suffered a drop this year.

On the other hand, look at the number of NHL players getting drafted out of California. It’s small, but it’s a growing number and the talent is high-quality. In San Jose, there are seven sheets of ice within 30 minutes of each other, five of which are run by the Sharks. President Greg Jamison has said that if they added a fifth rink to the four-rink Sharks Ice complex, they’d still be filling it every day with house-league hockey; he figured it would take a sixth rink for them to plateau in participation.

Performance, economy, and local sports traditions. The New Jersey Devils seemed to be the x-factor in this equation, but I was willing to give them a pass until they got established in their new building. This first season, the Devils averaged in the mid-15k mark at The Rock. In other words, they didn’t see a significant spike once they moved to their beautiful new facility. I’ll give them another season, but I’ve often said that if you’re going to move a team (and I don’t advocate moving any team unless the situation is absolutely dire), then you have to look at the attendance numbers of a team that has consistently gone deep into the playoffs.

Would the NHL be better if they just cut-and-pasted three franchises into Canada? Maybe, but maybe not. It’s impossible to predict short-term and long-term success because it goes far beyond whether or not kids can skate on frozen ponds. Obviously, that’s an element that helps, but we’ve seen that it’s not a pre-cursor or a guarantee of success. Put it this way: if the Thrashers somehow turned it around, won the Stanley Cup, and Ilya Kovalchuk became a large marketing presence in Atlanta (the eighth largest media market in the country, ahead of Seattle, Detroit, and Miami), it would provide a large boost to the league.

And just because a team’s in a non-traditional market doesn’t mean that that scenario can’t happen. Just look at Vincent Lecavalier — in a recent Tampa-area poll, Lecavalier was voted the area’s favorite pro athlete. Somehow, I don’t think a bunch of vacationing Canadians stacked the poll in Vinny’s favor.

On a final note, never trust the accounting from a sports team. Creative bookkeeping can make a team look better or worse than they actually are. For example, in San Jose suites are purchased by corporations for an entire entertainment season — Sharks games, arena football, concerts, pro wrestling, etc. How much of that shows up in the Sharks’ books and how much winds up in Silicon Valley Sports & Entertainment? Unless you’re the guy who creates the annual financial report, no one probably knows.