The Hockey Rabbi

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.    

Avery's Getting Emotional

Kudos to Larry Brooks and the New York Post for quenching our thirst for Rangers news!  The latest comes from the Sean Avery arbitration saga:

As part of the arbitration proceeding, both sides must submit briefs in support of their respective positions.  Avery's camp will be submitting a brief which seeks an arbitration award of $2.6m for the season.    According to Brooks, the Rangers are seeking an arbitration award of $1.3m.  The Rangers' brief reportedly labels Avery as "a reasonably effective player as well as a detriment to the team," (Emphasis added).  Avery is quoted as saying, "It's hard not to take something like that personally and not to be emotional about it...I know this is part of the business, I know this is part of the process, but it's extremely disappointing to read something like that coming from Slats [GM Glen Sather] and not to be offended by it."   

What exactly makes Avery a "detriment" to the team in the eyes of management is left unclear.  One thing is for sure, however, Brooks certainly disagrees with the Rangers' approach: "No one could possibly think Avery was a detriment to the Rangers. That's careless and inaccurate terminology Sather is employing in his bid to win the salary arbitration case. The fact is that after acquiring Avery from the Kings on Feb. 5, the Blueshirts went 17-6-6 with him in the lineup, adding a jagged edge to a team that had been way too smooth for its own good the first four months of the season."

I happen to agree with Brooks, sort of!  Unless there are behind the scenes issues with Avery that we are not aware of, it's hard to argue with Avery's value to the team.  The team underwent a positive metamorphosis after acquiring the hard nosed and pesky forward.  He brought an attitude and swagger to Broadway that was sorely lacking.  Additionally, his 20 points in 29 regular season games can not be overlooked.

On the other hand, he disappeared in the playoffs when it counted.  Against the Thrashers, the whole team looked invincible.  In round two, however, Avery was invisible.  In fact, Avery acknowledged as much after the Rangers were eliminated from the post season. 

To me, this is the bottom line:  throughout his career, Avery has struggled to find his place.  His big mouth and over the top antics have inevitably led his employers to feel that he is more trouble then he's worth.  Upon coming to Broadway he seems to have found a home.  But let's not get carried away with ourselves.  Avery has a lot to prove.  20 games do not a career make!  As far as I'm concerned, his disappearing act in the playoffs was as noteworthy as his regular season revival.   

In the article, Avery says "at the end of the season, my hope was to sign a long-term deal."   Sean, what makes you think you deserve a long term deal at this point in your career?  L.A. dumped the guy for nothing.  If the Rangers sign the kid to a long term deal and then he reverts to his old ways, what are we left with?  An untradeable cap charge. 

The Bottom Line:  The Rangers need Sean Avery.  Period.  Perhaps the teams approach in labeling him a "detriment" was misguided (Spector speculates that this unpleasant experience may lead Avery to test the UFA market next season).  I would have preferred to see Slats use arguments similar to those presented above.  However, I do not blame the Rangers for taking a tough approach here.  Avery has a lot to prove.  The good news is that Avery is still very much committed to the team, "The arbitration hasn't changed my opinion at all about wanting to be a Ranger and being excited about this season," Avery said. "I'm really high on the team. I just wish Slats hadn't said these things about me. That's hard to take."   

Perhaps Avery recognizes that New York is the ideal location for him at this point in his career.  Perhaps he recognizes that the solid veteran leadership found in the locker room will help him mature and grow as a player AND as a person.  Perhaps Sean Avery will prove what he has to prove in New York.  Nothing would make me happier.         

Shanny's Back!

As you've probably heard, the Rangers have resigned Shanny.  From a team/chemistry perspective, this was absolutely the right thing to do.  Shanny is a true leader who will help the team "come together" after the major signings of Gomez and Drury.  It's hard to develop chemistry after such a major shakeup to the lineup.  As Captain, Jagr would probably have a tough time steadying the ship on his own.  Shanny will definitely play a key role in that department.  With Nylander leaving and Jagr's feathers being potentially ruffled thereby, the resigning of Shanny and his calming influence in the locker became that much more of a necessity.

The NY Daily news reports that Shanny will receive a base salary of $2.5m with a bonus of $2m if he plays 10 games this season plus additional bonuses of up to $800,000 tied to playoff performance (I'm unclear if the playoff performance relates to Shanny's individual performance or the team performance or both).  Theoretically, Shanny can earn $5.3m this season.  That's a big raise over the $4m he earned last season.  For a guy who professed his singular desire to stay in NY thereby loosing what ever negotiating leverage he may have had, he didn't do too badly for himself!  For a team struggling under the cap this season, did the Rangers have to give him a raise (he's pretty much guaranteed to earn at least $4.5m  this season)? 

The bottom line is, The Rangers need Shanny's leadership (not to mention his on-ice contributions).  If we are going to challenge for the cup, Shanny will have to be a strong leader for this team.  Therefore, I applaud the signing (despite the fact that I think Sather overpaid).   

Gomez/Drury Analysis Part III: The Jagr Factor

I'm back with the third installment of my ongoing analysis of the Rangers big free agent signings!  Today I'm going to examine the effect these signings may have on Jaromir Jagr (The Jagr Factor).  The first two installments were definitely positive.  The Jagr factor is a little bit more complicated:

Jagr is the centerpiece of the NY Rangers.  Period.  Jagr re-emerged as a super star on the Rangers in large part because the team was built in his image.  A large number of European players (especially players from Jagr's homeland- the Czech Republic) were brought into the mix.  The European puck possession game that these players employed blended perfectly with Jagr.  The Rangers roster was so heavily dominated by European players that the team actually adopted the European custom of saluting the crowd after home ice victories!  Jagr was reborn and so were the Rangers.

Perhaps the most important member of Jagr's supporting cast was his centerman, Michael Nylander.  These two players had such great chemistry that it was literally beautiful to watch them work the ice together.  Apparently, they developed a personal friendship as well.  The big question is: will the departure of Nylander and the acquisition of two North American players (who were brought in to play key roles on the team) disrupt the chemistry (i.e. Jagr's happiness) in New York? 

No one knows the answer for sure.  One thing we do know is that history is the best teacher.  So let's take a look back at some of events that transpired throughout Jagr's career which may shed light on this issue and see what we can learn.

Jagr's Exodus From Pittsburgh:

The Pens were cash poor and unable to maintain their star players from the early 90's glory years.  As is the case with so any struggling franchises, the Pens lost their top players one at a time.  They did, however, hold onto Jagr.  Perhaps they hoped that he could be Mario Jr. and singlehandedly make the team competitive.  Guess what?  no one could do that, not even Mario Jr.  (which by the way, Jaromir was not).  Jagr wanted help in the lineup and he wanted more money.  The Pens could afford neither.  It didn't take long for Jagr to sour on the Pens and Pens to sour on Jagr.  All of a sudden, reports materialized that the once golden boy was now a chemistry killing gambloholic.  Ultimately Jagr was dealt to the Caps.  In the process, Jagr began to solidify his reputation as a temperamental superstar who could be more trouble then he's worth despite his incredible talent.  But was that a fair assessment of Jagr?

The way I see it, the truth is somewhere in the middle.  When guys like Messier, Coffey, Lowe, Anderson, etc.. left the Oilers because they wanted to make more money and win, no one vilified them.  Their characters were not called into question.  In fact, conventional wisdom said that it was their strong character and desire to win which prompted them to seek trades from a once formidable but currently floundering franchise.  Those guys were North American and Jagr is European.  In todays NHL, European players are slowly getting the respect they deserve.  Ten years ago was different.  At that point the NHL wasn't too far removed from Don Cherry's ridiculous rants.  I think that to a certain extent, Jagr suffered from the misconceptions that existed regarding European players.  Jagr's inability to say the right things at the right time didn't help his image much either.

On the other hand, the perception was that Jagr did seem to "quit" during his final months with the Pens.  The aforementioned players (Mess, Coffey, Lowe, etc..) didn't do that.  That certainly doesn't bode well for Jagr.  If he really is a temperamental player, the Rangers could have a problem on their hands!  At the end of the day, The Pittsburgh Exodus doesn't answer the question. 

The Disaster In Washington:

So Jagr escapes to the Caps from the Pens.  He signs a huge contract and then goes on to totally and completely flop!  Once again he's painted as a temperamental player who is more of a distraction than he's worth.  Yet, once again the truth is somewhere in the middle:  Washington's management was reportedly split on whether or not to acquire Jagr.  Supposedly, G.M. George McPhee was against the idea.  However, he was apparently over-ruled by the team owner.  That's not exactly the healthiest way for a team to make the biggest trade in its history.  Was the rift palpable?  Did Jagr get a sense that he wasn't fully wanted by all the members of his new employer?  How would that make you feel?  Remember when Gretzky got that same sense in St. Louis?  Gretzky refused to resign with the club despite the fact that they gave up some good young players to acquire him.  Was Gretzky vilified?  The other problem in Washington was that the team didn't "open up" its playing style to suit Jagr.  Some people are of the opinion that a player has to conform to the team, not vice versa.  But was Mark Messier vilified in the early 90's in New York when he chased Roger Nielson out of town for employing a defense first system when that system didn't jive with Messier's style of play? 

However, again we see a difference between Messier and Jagr:  Mess played hard for Nielson all season.  The perception in Washington is that Jagr quit.  Again, if that's true the Rangers could have a problem on their hands! 

Jagr's  Ranger Revival:

Ultimately Jagr came to New York and was reborn.  There are a bunch of points here so let's tackle them one at a time:

     The Captaincy:   

Jagr didn't want it at first.  He himself said that he felt that the team would be better served with a North American Captain. I do not believe that Jagr was shying away from the responsibility of being Captain (he ultimately accepted the role with open arms).  I believe that Jagr felt misunderstood as a European player.  He felt that he had been unfairly portrayed in the media and was not given the same benefit of the doubt as his North American Counterparts.  As such, it would only hurt him and the team were he to be captain.  Once he saw that New York embraced him and the New York media did not display any anti-euro sentiments, he took the job.  To me, this tends to show that some of the sting from the Pittsburgh and Washington fiascoes were the result of misperception. 

     The Shannahan Signing:    

When the Rangers brought in Shanny I was concerned about the chemistry of the team.  Shanny is the prototypical North American power forward and leader.  Could he and Jagr successfully coexist in the same locker room?  Would a rift be created? Would the team be split into two camps?  In hindsight those fears proved to be misplaced.  Shanny and Jagr thrived together.  At the end of this season, Jagr lobbied hard for the resigning of Shanny.  Jagr actually said that Shanny's presence takes a lot of the leadership burdens off of himself allowing him to focus more on the game.  Wow!  Who would have believed this!  If this is the real Jagr, that same attitude should help smoothen the transition into the Gomez/Drury era.

     Do As I Do , Not As I Say:

Unfortunately, Jagr has never mastered the skill of saying the right things at the right times.  Add to that his off beat sense of humor and you've got a guy who is often hard to read.  The one constant throughout his tenure as a Ranger, however, has been his commitment to excellence on the ice.  He may say things that sound negative but on the ice, it's all positive.  He's played through pain and injuries without complaining and he has looked very much like a dedicated winner here in New York. 

The Blueshirt Bulletin recently posted an article based on some jagr quotes regarding the signings of Gomez and Drury that don't sound too positive.  At this point, I'm not going to read to much into them.  Jagr basically says that if he can't click with either centerman, the Rangers will have problems.  Guess what? he's right!  Furthermore, that's Jagr's style: he calls it as he sees it.  He doesn't worry about saying the "right" things.  Perhaps he should, but he doesn't.  Don't forget that this is the same Jagr who declared that he will be spending this off season preparing to be the best player he can possible be. 

So which is the real Jagr?  Is he the guy that publicly questions the signings of Drury or Gomez?  Or is he the guy that is dedicated to being the best player he can be?  I don't know!  Neither does anyone in the hockey world.  What I do know is that Jagr now has an opportunity to prove his critics wrong:  If he goes out and does everything in his power to make things work for this team then he is unquestionably a team leader and star.  If he "quits" if and when the going gets tough, well you know how that ends.  I am hopeful that he will seize this opportunity to redifine his legacy. 

The bottom line for the Rangers is that if Jagr is the temperamental problem child some think he is, he would have never lead us to a cup anyway.  Therefore, signing Drury and Gomez were the right moves as they make the team less reliant on Jagr The Problem Child.  If, on the other hand, Jagr is the leader he can be, then the Rangers might be closer then some people would like to think to taking another victory march down the Canyon of Heroes.  Time will tell.   

         

The Oiler$ Did What?

You can file this one under "Stupid G.M. Tricks"!  Kevin Lowe and The Edmonton Oilers signed Thomas Vanek of the Buffalo Sabres to a seven year $50m+ Restricted Free Agent Offer Sheet!  Buffalo obviously matched the offer immediately.  I've got so many issues with this signing I don't even know where to start!  Let's narrow it down to a few items:

     I.  Vanek is an excellent young player but he's not worth the money:

Vanek was Buffalo's 1st selection (5th overall) in the 2003 NHL Entry Draft.  In 2004-05 he scored 42 goals in 74 games for Rochester of the A.H.L.  Definitely an impressive season for the then first year professional.  In 2005-06 he made his NHL debut for Buffalo and scored 25 goals and 23 assists for 48 points in 81 games.  He was, however, a -11 in his rookie NHL season.  All in all, it was a very promising debut for the young forward listed at 6'2" and 208 pounds.  In the playoffs that year he only dressed for 10 of Buffalo's games, scoring a whopping two goals (both on the power play) and going -1.  Then came his breakout season, 2006-07, he scored 43 goals and 41 assists in 82 games for Buffalo.  His +/- soared to a +47.  In the playoffs he appeared in 16 games for the Sabres notching 6 goals and 4 assists for 10 points, while going +1.  Not exactly overwhelming playoff numbers.  Those are his credentials.  2 seasons, that's it!  After years in the NHL compiling that lengthy resume (tongue firmly planted in my cheek!), Edmonton decides to pay the guy "Franchise Player" money.  Don't get me wrong, I like Vanek as a player.  Even though it's way too early to be sure, he definitely looks like the real deal.  But after putting together 1 forty goal season and zero impressive playoff performances, what the heck was Edmonton thinking?  What if the guy's numbers were inflated because he plays for the league's most offensively oriented club?  He's not the go to guy in Buffalo, he hasn't been around long enough to prove that he can actually play that role, why would anyone pay him "go to guy" money when he hasn't been around long enough to prove he's worth it?  He's not Sidney Crosby or Alex Ovechkin.  I just don't get it.  The next point is even worse:

     II.  The Oilers' predatory signing has upset the salary balance within the league: 

I know I'm a Ranger fan, so don't laugh at this point!  Even though conventional wisdom has it that the Rangers have driven salaries out of control over the years, that's simply doesn't paint the full picture.  The Rangers have traditionally targeted Unrestricted Free Agents.  The contracts they sign these players to do not count as comparables in salary arbitration.  When a young player goes to arbitration to try to land a bigger contract he can't point to the Bobby Hoilk contract as a comp.  Everyone knows that UFA contracts are inflated, it's supply and demand: only a few free agents with a lot of interested clubs.  A contract signed by a Restricted Free Agent however, can be used as a comparable in salary arbitrations (and regular contract negotiations for that matter).  What is Henrik Lundqvist worth now?  How about Sean Avery (his numbers don't come close, but he brings very important intangibles to the team)?  Zach Parise in Jersey?  The list goes on and on. 

The problem is compounded because of the salary cap.  If the salaries of young players are not kept at reasonable levels, it will be impossible to dress a deep well balanced lineup.  In today's NHL it's impossible to dress a lineup full of top shelf UFA's.  They're too expensive.  Teams must build with good young players still earning reasonable salaries and add the right mix of UFA talent.  Anything else is too expensive and unworkable.  If the young players (who do not yet have the leverage of UFA's) start getting paid UFA money, it will be impossible to dress a competitive well balanced team.    Make no mistake, Kevin Lowe and the Edmonton Oilers have assaulted this balance. 

     III.  Isn't it ironic?

The Oilers (or should we call them the Oiler$?!?) have been one of the small market franchises that have allegedly struggled to compete against the big boys.  Their payroll was always low.  They could never spend money on talent.  They constantly traded away developing young players once those players commanded higher salaries.  They couldn't even bridge the gap between themselves and Ryan Smyth leading to his tearful departure from Edmonton (so sad).  Now all of a sudden, they've got some money to spend.  The problem is that not only were they unable to spend it, they actually shot themselves in the foot trying.  What will the Oiler$ do when one of their Restricted Free Agents takes them to arbitration and gets awarded a huge pay day with the Vanek contract cited as a comparable?  They'll probably accept it.  Why?  Because maybe just maybe the lock out wasn't really about salaries and available funds, maybe just maybe it was really about increasing the values of each franchise.  All that bickering about the big market clubs like the Rangers was possibly nothing more than posturing.  It's even more ironic when you consider that Krazy Kevin Lowe a/k/a Kaptain Small Market Suffering Franchise, abandoned these same Oiler$ in order to sign for bigger bucks with the the Rangers.  Then he bemoans the fact that current players do the same thing.  THEN, he goes and attacks the balance of salaries in the NHL ENABLING players to do the same thing.  It's enough to make your head spin.

     IV.  Never act out of desperation:

I've said it once and I'll say it many more times, sports is a microcosm of life.  Just like in life, desperation moves rarely if ever pay, so too in sports.  As a transactional lawyer I do a lot of negotiating and "deal making".  I've seen people make desperate moves far too often.  Those moves almost always come back to bite you in the behind.  The bottom line here is that the Oiler$ probably acted out of desperation.  They were willing to spend money (surprise, surprise!) and they still came up empty.  For some reason, people don't want to play in Alberta.  Go figure.  To make matters worse this is only one year after Chris Pronger left town after a trip to the finals.  The guy didn't even want to stay on a successful Edmonton club!  To make matters even worse, Krazy Kevin thought he landed Nylander only to find out that he was left at the alter once Washington stepped in.  I even read a report (although I can't remember where and, therefore, can't verify the authenticity) that Nylander signed with the Caps for less than the Oiler$ were going to pay him.  Ouch!  So Krazy Kevin goes and sticks it to the hockey world by signing the battle tested superstar Thomas Vanek to a $50m contract.  I can't imagine that this move will be popular with the rest of the teams in the league.  Even Philly didn't pull a stunt of this magnitude!   Will Krazy Kevin suffer the ramifications of this move when the Oiler$ finally cut him loose?  Will owners hold this move against him the next time he's interviewing for a job?  Neil Smith is still looking for work as an NHL G.M. after being branded a salary inflating predator.  What goes around often comes around.  Stay tuned!