mc79hockey.com

Way back when I first started writing this site, the Oilers traded for Dwayne Roloson. While this was initially a good thing that subsequently went bad, it also gave me an interesting post about whether or not the CBA permitted the Wild to make the type of trade that they made. The objection that I had to the deal, from a CBA perspective, was that the Wild were getting something that they didn’t have the right to. Specifically, the deal gave the Wild a pick that was conditional on the Oilers resigning Dwayne Roloson. My take was as follows:

Roloson is supposed to be unrestricted free agent but he’s effectively had a restraint put on that status by the deal made by the Wild and Oilers. Minnesota managed to do what the CBA otherwise prohibits and will collect compensation in certain circumstances. They had no interest in Roloson’s rights following this season but somehow managed to create a compensable interest, albeit a limited one. Theoretically, this will depress the market for those players services. To take Dwayne Roloson as an example, the Oilers are presumably now willing to pay slightly less than they otherwise would have been. This affects not only Roloson’s value but the value of every other goalie on the market.

A second post on the topic was here. Vic Ferrari made what I think was the best counter-argument to my position but it was one based on practicalities rather than the terms of the CBA: in Roloson’s specific case, it made sense to roll the dice on altering the market with going to Edmonton, so that he could get a chance to start instead of backup. Tough to argue with that, particularly with how it’s played out.

The Wild have just done another of these trades, as reported by Michael Russo of the Star-Tribune. Brian Rolston has been traded to Tampa Bay and if he signs, at any time, with the Lightning, the Wild get a pick from them. I don’t know how this can possibly comply with the CBA. Rolston’s supposed to be unrestricted and the Wild and Lightning have come to an agreement whereby he isn’t. I’m puzzled by the NHLPA’s refusal to address this, particularly with the increasing popularity of these types of move.

I was going to use the whole saying but then wasn’t sure if it’s applicable if you went there the year before. Ryan Malone has apparently signed in Tampa Bay to a “…long-term deal that will exceed $30 million.”

The HF jackals appear to be of the view that this somehow validates the Oilers signing of Dustin Penner. I don’t quite see it that way, given the picks and that the price might be pretty close to equivalent once inflation is factored in (depends on term, really). Even if the Penner signing was better, they’re both awfully stupid; Lowe just happened to do a little better than the TB guys. That shouldn’t be THAT big of a surprise - as aggravating as the “Glory Boys” hiring criteria employed in Edmonton is from a fan’s perspective, it probably tops the “FOLB” hiring approach that Tampa is apparently employing.

I’ve always thought that deciding whether to buy a player out is a very simple decision, assuming you have the ability to put an accurate price tag on the value of his contribution. In order for it to make sense, you have to be able to replace the player with an equal or better player with the money saved. There are a couple of fairly interesting buyouts taking place right now.

Andrew Raycroft’s buyout might be the cheapest buyout ever that can be justified by that standard. He’s scheduled to make $2.2MM next year. The Leafs will have to pay him $1.474MM over the next two years. Can they get an equal or better goalie for $726K? I think that they probably can. Over his last 3,264 shots, Raycroft has a .887 save percentage, which is below any definition of replacement level. I think that there’s a reasonable argument to be made that he’s the reason that John Ferguson Jr. is no longer employed because with a respectable effort from Raycroft, the Leafs could well be coming off a pair of playoff appearances. There’s a great argument to be made that the Leafs could do better than that spending $450K; releasing him is a solid move.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m just going to use this to throw in my thoughts as this unfolds. I’m told that there’s some fantastic content coming in the days ahead; if any of it warrants its own post, it will get one.

Part One: Th e Impossible Dream

The asking price for the Oilers was $100 million, and it is worth exploring for a moment just how bizarrely over-inflated, in economic terms, that price was.

When any normal business is to be sold, the interested parties examine how much revenue the business generates and what the expenses are. If there is a profit — if revenues are greater than expenses — the general rule of transactions is that the profit is multiplied by four, and that should be the selling price of the business. So a business that makes $3 million a year should generally be worth about $12 million, says Brian Hyrniuk, a chartered accountant and EIG partner. In some exceptional cases, if there is the prospect of tremendous growth for a business, the profit might be multiplied by five or even six to find a reasonable selling price.

In a good year, a well-run NHL team in an average-sized market might hope to make $3 million to $5 million, so the asking price for such a business would be, at most, $30 million, a number not remotely close to the $100-million asking price of the Oilers.

There’s some discussion in the comments on a previous post I did on the topic of Oiler finances that there’s a significant disparity between the meaning of the terms “profit” and “net revenue”. The idea there is that while “profit” is something that’s subject to the rules of GAAP, “net revenue” is more something that captures the real financial benefit of owning a team. I would have been interested in seeing Staples take this point to the logical next step with Hyrniuk - if a team is worth at most $30MM, why does every NHL team sell for multiples of that price? Are all of these multi-millionaries suddenly stupid? Or does the real financial benefit, in conjunction with the fun of owning an NHL team, dictate a much higher price? I’d bet that it’s the latter.

Read the rest of this entry »

My standard reaction on reading a Dan Barnes column is to nod, think “Yep, that sounds right” and move on with my day. I largely agree with his latest column on the latest twist in the long running Mats Sundin story, and particularly his characterization of Toronto’s media as ravenous and self-centered. I would have used more vulgar epithets but reasonable people can differ and he is writing for a family publication.

The part that I can’t agree with is this:

Sundin won’t be the most desirable unrestricted free agent on July 1, assuming he doesn’t sign with Montreal in advance of the deadline. He doesn’t really belong in the top three spots, which ought to be occupied by Marian Hossa, Brian Campbell and Ryan Malone, given the benefits of their age and upside.

Read the rest of this entry »

Given that Kevin Lowe and the boys didn’t make any moves over the course of the weekend, I think it’s reasonable to look south and see what the Flames accomplished. They effectively traded Alex Tanguay and the 17th pick for Mike Cammalleri and the 25th pick. It’s an awfully interesting move. A few months back, a wise man (albeit one whose Willie McGee Helmet have accumulated some 250 fewer points than my own Pete Munro Doctrine in the Alberta Baseball Confederacy) listed a number of reasons for the Flames to hold off on moving Tanguay this year:

1. His counting numbers (G-A-Pts) sucked this year. He will certainly have some value based on his career numbers and age (potential), and some of the teams that look closer at EV play (and correct for the fact that he “performed” on the #2 PP unit) will be interested. But trading a guy coming off his worst season in years doesn’t exactly maximize return (see post header).

2. They’re limited in what they can seek in return: they almost have to get a quality LW in return. Not sure if you noticed, but the Flames’ depth chart at LW sans Tanguay and Huselius is virtually non-existent. Who would the #1 LW be? The right-shooting Moss, I suppose? He, or some centreman playing out of position.

3. Per 1 and 2, he’s almost a mortal lock to be better next season. Huselius is gone, so he’ll almost certainly be the LW on the #1 PP unit, and his numbers will go up. He just scored essentially 20 points less than his career average, and his shooting % was 5% lower than his career average. These are things that are extremely likely to bounce back.

4. If he is reunited with Iginla on the #1 line — i.e. if the Flames can cobble together a #2 line that doesn’t get torched without Tanguay on it — their performance ceiling is unbelievably high. In 2006/07 (a mere one season ago), those two were the most productive EV players in the entire conference. They really were! Forsaking the possibility of that repeating in order to fish for “depth and energy” (esp. given Sutter’s non-success at doing so to date) seems like a bad bet to me.

Read the rest of this entry »

Browsing the stories on the internets, I see that rumours that the Penguins are shopping Evgeni Malkin are all over the place. I listened to Stauffer’s show today and heard him going over the various points. What baffles me about this is the idea that the need to pay Jordan Staal somehow will have an impact on whether or not Malkin stays. Here are the numbers for the Pens’ three centres over the past two years:

Read the rest of this entry »

Ryan Malone is apparently a hot commodity. Most of this, if I’m understanding this correctly, is due to his spectacular ability to get hit in the face with a puck. The numbers certainly aren’t impressive.

Those are not particularly impressive rates. A quick scan of his linemates for this year shows lots of Crosby and Malkin. His PP numbers aren’t impressive in any event. He plays in the more offensive conference and his numbers would be expected to drop in the Western Conference. He will apparently cost north of $4.5MM. I didn’t particularly like this player the first time I saw him when he was named Dustin Penner; I’m not sure why I’d like a sequel that costs more and, statistically, probably isn’t as good.

Update: I see the name Daymond Langkow being tossed around in the comments as a reasonable comparator for Ryan Malone in terms of offence. I don’t really buy it. Langkow wasn’t a good PP player in his last few years before Calgary and his numbers there probably top out at OK on the PP but that’s a massive gap in terms of ES scoring. At Malone’s rates, he’d still be just under 40 points behind Langkow (154-118) over the past four years at ES. Sure, Malone is younger but I see a large difference between these players in terms of ES offence.

Update: I don’t think that Malone compares particularly favourably to Raffi Torres either. All things being equal, I’d probably prefer Raffi. At a $3MM difference in price, I’d definitely prefer him.

James Mirtle has a fine series of posts up that shows all of the voting for all of the NHL awards. I quite appreciate him doing this - it’d be nice if the league published every writer’s ballot, so that we all knew the name of the Montreal writer who didn’t think that Jarome Iginla had earned an MVP vote in 2001-02, amongst other things. Anyway, I was scanning the voting for the Selke trophy and happened to notice that Jarret Stoll got a fifth place vote for the Selke out of someone.

I’m assuming that this was a local reporter voting for Stoll - if someone knows who, feel free to out him (or her) in the comments. I’d like to understand the criteria applied by that reporter in casting their ballot because on its surface, it’s unfathomable.

One of the things that I think would be the most interesting part of any general manager’s job is the struggle to understand where your team is now, in terms of performance and the challenge of getting your team to where you want it to be - presumably, a lengthy spell amongst the NHL elite.

This topic came to my mind a week or so ago, as I had Stauffer’s show on for some background noise while doing some work. They were talking about the Oiler and, if I recall correctly, Stauffer was expressing the opinion that an Oilers playoff miss next year should jeopardize the careers of Kevin Lowe and Craig MacTavish. It might have had something to do with Darryl Katz; I don’t quite recall. Anyway, it was interesting to me because I kind of think that the playoffs are further away than they appear. You can’t really get a solid handle on that though without having some sort of a handle on what really happened this year.

Read the rest of this entry »