The Hockey Rabbi

Lundqvist Holds Key To The City

Unfortunately, I didn't get to watch the Rangers' first two pre-season games as they fell out at the very beginning and the very end of one of Judaism's holiest days of the year: Yom Kippur.  From what I've read, however, it doesn't seem as though I missed much.  Especially not in the second game against Philly! 

Not surprisingly, whatever chemistry Gomez and Jagr seemed to develop at the practice rink didn't translate onto the ice during their exhibition match versus Philly.  Obviously it's extremely early in the season and their is absolutely no cause for concern...yet!  Expecting instant game chemistry between offensive minded skilled forwards is unrealistic.  That's especially true in the pre-season when players are still working through their off-season rust. 

That being said, there's also no denying that it may take some time for the Rangers' to develop chemistry and the all important team identity.  The Rangers' underwent a major overhaul this summer.  That's a lot for any team to adjust to.  How much more so for a team like the Rangers that is first learning how to win again after nearly a decade in the abyss. 

That's why Lundqvist may very well be the most important player heading into the season:  If he plays well he'll keep the team in  most games as they struggle to adjust to one another and their own individual roles.  With the amount of individual talent this team has, they'll be able to score some opportunistic goals here and there in order to win some games that they should have lost based on their play.  If Lundqvist plays well he can help "steal" some of these games for his teammates as they struggle through their adjustment phase.  Those "stolen" points will prove crucial down the stretch.

On the other hand, if Lundqvist starts slowly (as he did last season) the Rangers' may very well need to start playing playoff hockey in February just to qualify for the postseason. 

Goaltending has long been considered the most important position in hockey.  For this years Rangers that may surely hold true. Many people have felt that Lundqvist would have to stand on his head to mask the team's porous defense.  That's probably true.  Now, however, Lundqvist may have to stand on his head for another reason as well: to give his teammates some breathing room as they adjust to their new roles. 

Perhaps management was wise in not spending what little extra money the team has on Michael Peca.  Perhaps Slats & Co. should consider spending that money on a quality back-up to give Hank a little break here and there.  Let's not even talk about having an insurance policy in case of a .....(gulp!) injury to Lundqvist!                

The Kaspar Quandry (VERY IMPORTANT UPDATE AT THE BOTTOM)

So Darius Kasparitis shows up at camp some 20 pounds lighter and ready to blaze a comeback trail to New York.  That would be great news if it weren't for that little thing called the salary cap!  With almost no room left under the all important cap the Rangers can ill afford to retain Kaspar and his nearly $3 million annual salary.  So what's a team to do?  Trade him?  Send him to Hartford? 

OPTION #1:  TRADE HIM:

The easiest thing for Slats to do would be to trade Kaspar.  Move him for whatever the team could get.  However, this option is probably unlikely: Kaspar missed all of last season.  He reportedly came to camp out of shape which apparently had something to do with personal issues he was dealing with at the time.  Given his age and his salary, it's unlikely an NHL club would be willing to take a risk on him.  In today's day and age, $3m is too much money to spend on an old d-man who missed a season due to personal problems.

OPTION #2:  SEND HIM TO HARTFORD:

Many observers are predicting that this scenario is likely to materialize.  I'm not so sure!  After struggling to read through the relevant parts of the C.B.A. (which is no easy task!) it appears as though section 50.9(g)(ii) sets forth that if a player like Kaspar is sent to the minors he must first clear waivers.  Any NHL club may then claim him off of waivers.  The claiming club would only be responsible for 1/2 of his salary while the Rangers would be responsible for the other 1/2 (and, of course, the 1/2 that the Rangers would be responsible for would count against the teams cap charge this season). 

At almost $3m per season, Kaspar's probably not worth the risk to many NHL clubs.  However, at just under $1.5m per season, Kaspar may very well be worth it.  Let's not forget that Kaspar is in the final year of his contract.  Therefore, a claiming club would only be taking a short term and relatively "cheap" risk. 

Then there's the Oiler$ factor:  Krazy Kevin Lowe targeted Dustin Penner in Anaheim in part because he knew the Ducks had cap issues.  If the Ducks matched the offer sheet, Lowe would have successfully financially handcuffed one of his rivals.  If the Ducks failed to match (which is what actually happened) the Oiler$ would have successfully obtained their desired player.  A no lose situation for The Krazy One.  Guess what folks, the Rangers have cap issues of their own.  They passed on Peca because they felt that the $1-1.5m he would have cost was not worth the risk.  Would anyone be shocked to see a rival club like the Icelanders claim Kaspar just to stick it to the Rangers?  How about the Devils who are surely still feeling the sting from the Scott Gomez defection.  A rival GM with cap room could certainly see the Kaspar situation as a no lose situation:  if Kaspar rebounds he's well worth the $1.5m for just one season, if he doesn't rebound...well....it was just $1.5m for one season a worthwhile investment considering that it contributed to the hated Ranger$' cap concerns. 

Surely, Slats & Co. are aware of this possibility.  That's why it wouldn't surprise me at all to see Malik or Mara get traded if Kaspar looks ready to rejoin the big club.   

**UPDATE** Thanks to dimanyr for pointing out that the 50% cap charge would only apply if a team claimed Kaspar off of re-entry waivers (i.e. if the Rangers tried recalling kaspar from Hartford to the big club).  I e-mailed John Dellapina to ask him to clarify this point and, as usual, John kindly responded almost immediately.  According to John, the Rangers would only be on the hook for 1/2 of Kaspar's salary if he was claimed off of re-entry waivers.  Sorry for the confusion and thanks to dimanyr and John Dellapina (Rangers' beat writer for the NY Daily News.  Check out the link to John's blog in my blogroll!).    

Dear Glen: Sign Peca!

I've been getting a lot of complaints about my long hiatus.  I must say, it's pretty flattering!  Anyway, by now everyone has heard the growing speculation that the Rangers may be on the verge of signing Michael Peca.  According to John Dellapina, the hold up is that Slats & Co. are still deciding whether to go with Peca or one of the teams youngsters(Dubinsky or Anisimov).  Here's my open letter to Slats advocating the signing of Peca.  But first, a few ground rules:

1.  The contract must be for only 1 year;

2.  The salary must be $1.5m or less;

3.  The contract must not contain any form of "no trade" or "no movement" clauses; and

4.  Peca must pass his medical exams.

Assuming that those four points are met, here goes:

Dear Glen:

As a lifelong Ranger fan I feel compelled to thank you and your staff for turning things around on Broadway.  Enough with the pleasantries! SIGN MICHAEL PECA!  We're making a serious run for the Cup this season.  In order to do that, we need a legitimate third line centerman. 

The current roster does not have a player that can adequately fill that role:  (1) Martin Straka is not a natural centerman.  After last seasons playoff defeat it was plain for all to see that Straka was a weak link at center.  That's certainly not a knock against Marty, it simply is what it is.  The guy is an offensive minded (albeit defensively responsible) winger.  Additionally, he is certainly not a third line center (a role that is ideally filled by a defensive minded "energy" player).  (2)  Sean Avery is not an option either.  Avery thrived with the ice time and responsibility afforded to a top six forward.  Putting him on the third line will hinder his play.  Management is responsible for getting the most out of its assets (i.e., players), putting Avery on the third line runs counter to that responsibility.  (3)  Dubinsky and Anisimov look like excellent prospects.  Are either of them ready for the responsibility of anchoring the third line?  Playing in New York is tough.  Playing in New York when expectations are sky high is even tougher.  Does it make sense to throw either player into the fire when so much is at stake?  Will the development of either player be stunted by sending them to Hartford for another season?  If not, the risk reward ratio seems like a no brainer.  Besides, Peca will probably not play a full season which means either Dubinsky or Anisimov will get some playing time with the big club next season anyway. 

Let's not forget Prucha and Callahan.  Both players are heading into important seasons.  Prucha must regain his rookie form and prove that his weak play for much of last season was an aberration.  Callahan, on the other hand, must prove that his strong play down the stretch last season was not an aberration.  In all likelihood, Prucha and/or Callahan will be playing on the third line this season.  Is it fair to either of them to play with a rookie centerman at this critical juncture in their respective careers?  Both guys can and should play vital roles for our club for years to come.  Wouldn't it be wise to give them the greatest chance at succeeding by playing them with an experienced player like Peca? 

Peca will also add tremendous value as a penalty killer.  With the losses of Cullen and Ortmeyer, the team's penalty killing unit has taken a hit.  Sure Drury can kill penalties.  However, he's also going to be getting a lot of even strength ice time as well as power play ice time.  Why saddle him with primary PK responsibilities as well? 

Peca is a great face-off man as well.  Winning face-offs means greater puck possession.  For a team like New York with its questionable blue line, winning face offs is essential.  Loosing a defensive zone draw can cost us a game.  Lundqvist's weak puck control skills only exacerbates the problem.  Having a reliable face off man will take tremendous pressure off of our defense, don't underestimate this point.  Sure, Drury can take face-offs, but again, how much ice time can Drury be expected to handle?  If we have to use Drury for all of our defensive zone draws, will he be available for the offensive zone draws?  Will we be forced to disrupt our line changes in order to get Drury on the ice for every important draw (offensive and defensive?).

Finally, some people are saying that the money that the team would spend on Peca should be spent on a defenseman instead.  Granted, the blue line needs help.  However, where are you going to find a defenseman who can have the same potential impact as Michael Peca for $1.5m or less?  Adding another marginal d-man will not help this club and we don't have the cap space to add anything more than a marginal d-man.  Therefore, we are much better off spending a small sum for Peca (a guy who can add a lot to the team) as opposed to adding a marginal defenseman.

Glen, for whatever it's worth, I say go out and sign Peca!   

Gomez/Drury Analysis Part IV: Salary Cap Suicide?

So we've finally made it to the last installment of my four part analysis of the Gomez and Drury signings.  The last major issue to analyze is how the signings will effect the Rangers in light of the new salary cap system introduced in the NHL.  Some would have us believe that the teams' signings of Scott Gomez and Chris Drury have placed a noose around the team's financial neck for years to come.  We know that the team is up against the "cap wall"  for this season.  What about the future?  Will the Rangers be financially paralyzed for the 2008-09 season?  Take a look at this list:

1.  Brendan Shanahan:     $2.5m base.$2.8m bonuses:  $5.3m per season

2.  Martin Straka:            $3.3m per season

3.  Paul Mara:                  $3.0m per season

4.  Darius Kaspasraitis:    $2.989m per season

5.  Michal Rozsival:          $2.5m per season

6.  Jason Strudwick:         $500,000 per season

7.  Andrew Hutchinson:     $475,000 per season.

That's a list of players who's contracts are expiring after the upcoming season.  With the exception of Roszival (possibly), none of them will be back (unless they're willing to play for a steep discount).  What that means is that the Rangers will have over $18m of cap space just from these players. 

Sean Avery and his $1.9m contract will also expire at seasons end as does Marcel Hossa's $780,000 contract.  If the Rangers are unwilling or unable to resign either of these players, the cap picture looks even better.

Obviously, some of the teams core players will become RFA's looking for raises.  Most notably, Henrik Lundqvist and Fedor Tyutin. However, it appears as though signing these players shouldn't be a problem given the amount of money that will be freed up at seasons end.

Granted, the Rangers will have to fill the vacancies created by these players' departures.  Here's where the Rangers' critics jump in: they argue that since the team has committed nearly $15m per season for just two players, how can the Rangers possibly expect to have enough money left over to round out the rest of their roster?!?  They point to the Tampa Bay Lightning as an example of the dangers wrought by investing too much money into too few players.  These, critics, however, are missing one crucial point:  The Rangers have quality prospects who can be used to fill out roster spots, Tampa doesn't.  In fact, Hockey's Future ranked the Rangers sixth (6th) in the NHL in terms of the quality of its prospects while Tampa was ranked 29th!.   By filling roster spots with young players the Rangers will be able to keep their cap charge down since these players are still playing out their relatively cheap entry level contracts.  Here's a list (by position) of some notable prospects who should be ready to step in by 2008-09:

1.  Al Montoya- Goaltender.  This kid looks like the real deal and is probably ready to play in the NHL now.  The emergence of Lundqvist, however, makes Montoya the odd man out.  Look for the Rangers to trade him at some point.  He should be able to fetch a handsome return.

2.  Marc Staal- Defense.  All indications are that the Rangers have got themselves a gem.  Staal should definitely be able to take one of the roster spots that will become available with the departure of all of the aforementioned defenseman currently on the Rangers' roster.

3.  Bobby Sanguinetti- Defense.  Here's part of what Hockey's Future says, "Sanguinetti has the potential to be a member of an NHL first defensive pairing."   What I like most about the kid is that he's thrilled to be a Ranger having grown up idolizing Brian Leetch. 

The Rangers also have Thomas Pock and Dan Girardi who have already spent some time with the big club in promising stints.  These guys will presumably be able to fill some of the vacancies on the blue line in 2008-09.  The most important thing about them (in terms of salary cap analysis) is that they'll be relatively cheap.   

Up front, the Rangers have well known prospects Nigel Dawes,  Brandon Dubinsky, Artem Anisimov and Ryan Callahan battling for roster spots this season.  By 2008-09, some of these guys should be able to fill the spots vacated by Straka, Shannahan and perhaps Avery.  In addition, the Rangers also have a number of other quality prospects up front.  Most notably, Alex Bourret, Brodie Dupont and Lauri Korpikoski.  Last, but certainly not least is this seasons #1 draft pick Alexei Cherapanov who may very well turn into a special player for the New York Rangers. 

It would certainly appear that the Rangers have the young talent necessary to round out their roster.  If the team needed to look towards free agency to fill every roster spot then, perhaps, there would be cap trouble on the horizon.  Fortunately, however, that is not the case.  Some of these young players should be able to adequately fill roles that will be opened in the near future.  These players are still relatively cheap as they are playing under their entry level contracts.  Over-all, the cap outlook in New York looks pretty encouraging.

The beauty of the Gomez and Drury signings are that the Rangers have their core centerman locked up for years to come.  The incoming young talent will be asked to play supporting roles rather then primary ones.  That's a huge bonus for young players learning the ins and outs of the best league in all of hockey.  The presence of Gomez and Drury should help ease the transitions that these youngsters will face. 

The Blueshirt Bulletin recently ran a great feature praising the Rangers' ability to rebuild while dressing a competitive team.  With Gomez, Drury and Lunqvist in the fold and the impressive stable of young talent already in the system, the Rangers should be able to continue that trend into the foreseeable future.   

If the Rangers' youngsters do in fact realize their potential on Broadway, not only will the Rangers not be in cap trouble, on the contrary, New York fans may get to see the likes on Dany Heatley or Wade Redden  playing at The World's Most Famous Arena! 

It goes without saying that I give Slats & Co. two very enthusiastic thumbs up for the signings of Gomez and Drury.  The Rangers are unquestionably a better team today then they were at the end of last season.  Given the strength of the teams' prospects, I believe that the future cap outlook for the team is just fine.  The Rangers should be competitive for years to come with Gomez and Drury anchoring their top two lines. 

Don't forget to check out the first three parts of the analysis over here, here and here.    

SIGNING ALERT: DUCKS LET PENNER WALK! (UPDATED)

TSN .CA reports that the Ducks have decided not to match the ridiculous offer sheet the Oiler$ have given the power forward.  Click here for more info.

In New York Rangers news:  Sam Weinman reports that the Rangers have officially locked up 19 year old prospect and centerman Artem Anisimov.  Click here for Sam's post.

Same Old, Same Old From Avery?

Unfortunately it looks like a case of "the more things change, the more they stay the same" with Sean Avery.  Prior to arriving in the Big Apple, the old Sean Avery managed to wear out his welcome everywhere he went.  Inevitably, his on-ice contributions were outweighed by his selfish and uncontrollable need to act out.  Sometimes he hurt his team by not knowing when to shut up.  Other times he put his team down a man (or two) by taking foolish and unnecessary penalties.  For Avery, it seemed as though the song always remained the same.  At the end of the day, he was always deemed a detriment: more trouble then he was worth.

In New York, however, things seemed different.  The new Sean Avery seemed to be making a real effort to focus and channel his "energy" into positive channels.  Avery seemed to immediately recognize his value to the team.  More importantly, he immediately embraced his role.  Not surprisingly, New York fans immediately embraced him.  That's what makes this most recent "controversy" all the more disappointing.

I'm willing to overlook Avery's childish comments before the Buffalo series (when Avery was quoted as saying he was going to "hurt" the Sabres).   

I'm willing to forgive him for his total disappearing act in that series as well. 

I'm even willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for his decision to file for salary arbitration even though better and more valuable players were willing to negotiate with the team in order to ensure cap compliance and an opportunity to make a serious run for the cup.  Perhaps Sean didn't realize that an inflated arbitration award could disrupt the roster by forcing the Rangers to make a trade to accommodate his new salary.  I'm even willing to ignore the irony in the fact that the two Rangers (Avery and Hossa) who filed for arbitration share three very unflattering qualities:  (1) their characters have been questioned (for Hossa it's his overall commitment to excellence for Avery it his inability to control his self-centered childishness); (2) they both have unremarkable (to say the least!) track records (notwithstanding their late regular season production); and (3) they both have a heck of a lot to prove. 

What I can't overlook, however, is Avery's decision to "rock the boat" by negotiating/posturing through the media.  It creates a distraction.  The last thing a contender needs is a distraction.  Although it's still summer time, these things have a way of rippling into the season. 

Maybe I should be blaming the Rangers.  After all, they're the ones playing hard-ball.  Somehow, however, I can't blame management.  Arbitration is an adversarial proceeding.  What did Avery expect? a hug?!?  Avery chose to go this route.  Avery chose to ask for $2.6m despite having a very troubled past and only 20 solid regular season games on his resume.  Like it or not, everything the Rangers said about Avery is true. 

Maybe Avery didn't mean to "rock the boat".  Perhaps he's an emotional guy who wears his heart on his sleeve.  Maybe he just reflexively shot from the hip because of his shock and disappointment.  Well, if that were true it would just be more of the same from Avery.  Speak now, think later.  Unfortunately, however, I don't think that's true.  I think Avery is intentionally using the sympathy card for his own benefit.  He knows the fans love him.  He knows Slats will come under fire from the faithful for playing it tough.  Maybe management will fold and give him what he wants in order to avoid the negative publicity. 

What makes me think that Avery was "acting" rather than "re-acting"?  The Collective Bargaining Agreement, that's what.  The CBA outlines the rules and regulations of everything in the NHL.  Here's an interesting quote from Article 12 of the CBA which deals with salary arbitration proceedings:

"Publicity.

         The parties shall not publicize the substantive aspects
of any arbitration proceeding until the decision has been issued."

I'm not saying that Avery's comments to the New York Post violate the CBA.  The definitions section of the CBA does not define the term "substantive" as quoted above (although the Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition defines it as follows, "An essential part or constituent or relating to what is essential."   Did Avery leak an "essential part" of the Rangers argument?  That's a tough one (tongue firmly implanted in cheek!!).  What I am saying is that Avery knew or should have known about this rule.  His representatives must have prepared him for the do's and dont's of arbitration well in advance.  How else could he have made a well informed decision regarding whether or not to file for arbitration?  Avery must have thought about his comments before he made them.  He must have contemplated whether or not his comments would violate this provision of the CBA before he made them.  In all likelihood he consulted (on at least some level) with his agent(s) before crying to Larry Brooks. 

To me, this was not a case of an emotional guy reacting (without thought or premeditation) to the "shockingly" tough Ranger position.  I see it as a calculated and premeditated move:  Avery's trying to turn fan sympathy into dollars.  Totally unnecessary.  If the Rangers were willing to give Marcel Hossa a handsome raise they were certainly willing to do the same for Avery.  Slats is a lot of things, stupid is not one of them. 

In New York we want something new right now:  success.  Real Success.  In New York we want the Cup.  Right now the Rangers need the new Sean Avery, yet all we're getting at this point is the same old, same old from Mr. Avery.

For a great look at the Avery mess check out Dubi's article over at Blueshirt Bulletin. 

Last, but certainly not least, I want to thank my loyal and anonymous reader for sending me an e-mail this morning regarding the CBA provision quoted in this post.  Thanks for the angle!         

                        

      

The Capologist

According to my calculations (based on salary numbers provided by nhlnumbers.com), the Rangers are currently sitting at $46,880,000.00 for this coming season.  This figure factors in only $2.5m for Shanny (his base salary).  It does not include Kasparitis' salary.  It does include Marc Staal and newly acquired Andrew Hutchinson and it also includes Al Montoya's salary of $1.834m.  Most importantly, this figure does not include the salaries of Sean Avery or Marcel Hossa.  Basically, the Rangers have just under $3.5m left of cap space.  Here are some thoughts:

1.  Cullen's trade was without question a salary dump.  Some speculated that Cullen was traded as a precursor to some other move.  Others speculated that the Cullen trade was a gamble because the Rangers didn't necessarily have to move him to create cap space.  If the numbers listed by nhlnumbers.com are accurate, Larry Brooks was wrong.  The Rangers did have to move him (or at least someone).  The Rangers did have to create cap space to make room for Avery.  You can question why they decided to dump Cullen instead of Malik or Mara, but you can't question the need to dump a salary in that ball park.  To me, the question of who to move really boiled down to Mara or Cullen.  Malik makes less money than the other two and the coaching staff (and Jagr) like him.  In a perfect world I would have preferred to see Mara dumped, but this isn't a perfect world! 

2.  Kasparitis is not coming back.  Or is he?  There have been some reports that Kaspar has worked himself back into great shape and is focused on making it back to the big club.  Unfortunately for him, there doesn't seem to be any room for his salary on Broadway.  If the reports are true, it would be a bit of a shame:  the Rangers could use the snarl that Kaspar once brought to the blue line.  On the other hand, well.....:  if he's sent back down to Hartford he would presumably have to clear waivers.  If he is back in shape and some team decides to take a shot on him by claiming him (he is entering the last year of his contract), would the Rangers be forced to pick up half of his salary?  If so, would they be forced to take a cap hit for that?  If so, will that effect the Rangers' decision to send him back down? Do the Rangers want approximately $1.5m in dead cap charges this year in the event that he is claimed?  Would a rival GM with cap space claim Kaspar just to stick it to NY?   

3.  Who will be Lundqvist's back-up this season?  I haven't heard to much discussion on this issue, but to me this is a huge question.  The Rangers defense is clearly inadequate for a team that's looking to seriously compete for the cup.  The only way it can work is if the goaltending is solid enough to mask as many of the team's defensive deficiencies as possible.  If any team looses their #1 goalie they'd be in trouble.  How much more so for the Rangers!  Is Montoya ready for the job?  Probably.  The real question, however, is can the Rangers afford a cap charge of close to $2m annually for a rookie backup who doesn't have much of a future with the club (barring an unforeseen career threatening injury to Lundqvist)?  If, on the other hand, the Rangers send him back down to Hartford, who will be the team's backup goalie?    Valiquette is cheap ( a cap charge of just over $600,000.00), but do you trust him with the job?  I certainly do not.  Kevin Weekes signed with Jersey for under $700,000.00 per year, I hope we don't end up regretting that! 

I expect Montoya to be traded sooner rather than later.  The problem is how the Rangers will be able to fit the return under the cap?  There's a part of me that's happy about this problem because it almost insures that the Rangers will have to get young (read: "inexpensive") players in return for Montoya.  I don't mean bad players, I simply mean young players who are either still playing out their entry level contracts or who are still a few years off from unrestricted free agency and, therefore, don't have that leverage in negotiating new and expensive contracts.  I would hate to see the kid get moved for a guy like Jovanovski. 

4.  Here's an interesting question:  if not for Jagr, wouldn't you rather have seen Martin Straka's $3.3m salary dumped over that of Cullen?  Cullen filled an important role as the third line center who played a good high energy game that seemed to mesh very well with Prucha and Callahan.  Straka's role with the team, on the other hand, is limited primarily to his relationship with Jagr.  Straka could play on Jagr's left side, however, that causes some issues: (1) where do you put Hossa? and (2) Jagr is better off with a big player on his line, someone who can effectively work the corners so that Jagr doesn't have to.  Straka, theoretically could play center, but on which line?  Straka is certainly a better offensive player than Cullen.  However, Straka doesn't have a clearly defined role on this team.  Cullen did.  Chemistry, chemistry!

Check out the fan poll below and get me your comments!