The Hockey Rabbi

You Can't Hurry Love

Did you ever try to set someone up on a date?  You have this buddy that's single and your wife or girlfriend has a friend that's also single and you think that they'd be perfect for each other.  You know the drill, you have your wife/girlfriend call her friend while you call your buddy.  You tell your buddy how perfect this girl is for him and your wife/girlfriend does the same on her end.  Everyone's all excited, your friends agree to exchange numbers and ultimately they go out on their date.  Nine out of ten times it just doesn't work!  Maybe their expectations were too high after getting hyped up about the "perfect" date.  Maybe there's a bit too much pressure knowing that all of their friends will be waiting to hear about how things went.  Maybe the atmosphere is just too artificial and too planned.  Maybe it's all of the above! 

Then there's this scenario: You've got a buddy that's single.  Your wife/girlfriend has a friend that's also single.  Once again, you think that they'd be perfect for each other.  So you plan a night out with a bunch of your friends.  You invite a bunch of friends including your single friend and your wife/girlfriend's single friend.  You might make casual reference to your single friends that there's going to be someone there that you'd like them to meet.  Or maybe you don't say anything at all.  You get the two of them together in a nice relaxed atmosphere with no preconceived notions or expectations.  They're each just part of a larger group that's gone out for a night of fun.  At some point in the night, they talk to each other.  No pressure, no expectations, just some conversation.  Maybe sparks fly, maybe they don't.  The bottom line is that you just let the chips fall where they may.  Even if sparks don't fly right off the bat, if they've made a pleasant impression on each other there's nothing stopping you from suggesting that they go out at some later date.  They've already met, they've already gotten to know each other a bit and all of a sudden it's not a "blind date" anymore.  Not surprisingly, this second scenario has a much higher success rate!  We probably all know of someone who has met their significant other on a group outing. 

By now you're probably wondering what the heck I'm talking about?!?!  Isn't it somewhat obvious?  I'm talking about the Rangers' line combinations!  Conventional wisdom says that Gomez will start with Jagr and Drury will start with Avery and Shanny.  Up until today, I've agreed with those combinations.  But over lunch today it hit me: you can't hurry love! 

Here's my proposal:  Let's not force Jagr and Gomez into a relationship!  Moreover, let's not even allow them to "date"right away!  Instead, let's start the season playing Jagr with some of his old running mates.  Here's what I propose:

Hossa- Straka- Jagr

Avery- Gomez- Shanny

Prucha- Drury- Callahan

We know from past experience that Jagr will be able to function with Straka and Hossa.  That line may not be as effective as the Jagr-Nylander combo was, but it will be functional.  More importantly, there will be no unnecessary pressure on the first line to try to manufacture instant chemistry. 

Starting Gomez on the second line will allow him to be the puck carrier and play maker he has always been.  More importantly, lining Gomez with Shanny and Avery will create much less pressure on Gomez to immediately manufacture chemistry.  He won't have the pressure and the expectations of having to immediately mesh with #68.  The guy will have enough on his plate early on as he adjusts to life in the Big Apple.

Drury with Prucha and Callahan could be a blessing in disguise.  On the one hand, you'd like to try to keep your top players on the top two lines in order to maximize each players ice time.  On the other hand, Drury's high energy and high intensity game might blend very well with young, hungry, gritty and skilled players (especially Prucha). 

By setting the lines this way, Renney would be taking a lot of the pressure off of his players to deliver instant success.  Ultimately, the best thing for the team would be for either Gomez or Drury to click with Jagr.  However, with so many early season adjustments in store for this team, is it really necessary to hurry things?  There will be plenty of opportunities as the season progresses to get Gomez and Jagr together.  Perhaps they can start their "relationship" on the power play.  Inevitably, the Rangers will have to juggle lines during the course of a game.  Maybe Drury and Straka will be exhausted after long penalty kills necessitating a quick shift for Jagr and Gomez.  Perhaps a player will go down with an injury and Jagr and Gomez will have to hit the ice together.  Eventually, they'll have a good shift together and progress as a line in a more natural and less forced manner.

The regular season is a funny thing.  On the one hand it sometimes seems unnecessarily long.  On the other hand it can get late very early with a bad start.  The line combinations that I propose minimize the "getting to know you" stage as much as possible.  The worst thing that can happen to this club would be for it to stumble badly out of the gate.  The Rangers have nothing to loose by bringing Jagr and Gomez together slowly.  On the other hand, a forced relationship that gets off to a rocky start could have more long lasting and disastrous consequences.

Make no mistake, this is not a reaction to the embarrassing Philly loss.  It's certainly not a case of pushing the "panic button".  It's simply a recognition that you can't hurry love!  Let me know how you'd like to see Renney line 'em up.                     

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.    

Gomez "Gets" It

Like it or not, as Jagr goes, so go the New York Rangers.  Sure Lundqvist has to be great.  Goalies always do.  However, in Jagr the Rangers have a "secret weapon" of sorts: an absolutely dominant offensive force who can singlehandedly determine the course of a game.  How many other players in the league deserve the kind of attention opponents are forced to pay Jagr?  The Rangers' allegedly temperamental super star gives New York something that few if any other true contenders in the league have.

It looks like newly signed center Scott Gomez gets it.  In the current edition of The Hockey News (which I recently bought and highly recommend), Gomez is quoted as saying, "The way Jagr played at the end of the year, you could tell he was back on top.  You're playing with one of the greatest players who ever played the game and it's going to be an honor to be in his presence.  I've seen what this guy can do and to have him as a teammate is amazing."

Let's face it.  Jagr was revitalized in New York in part because management gave him a vote of confidence by building the team in number 68's image.  Jagr was surrounded by the types of players who would help him play his game and succeed.  The most important piece of that puzzle was Nylander.  Now Nylander's gone.  Many Ranger fans (and hockey types in general) have wondered how this will effect Jagr.  Is the allegedly "Temperamental One" going to be offended?  Will he again become "disinterested"?  Will he feel as though the Rangers are going in a different direction by bringing in North American players to fill critical roles?  Have the Rangers decided to rely less on Jagr and his style of play because they don't think they can win a championship playing "European Hockey"? 

Gomez is no fool.  He knows that in all likelihood he will be the first player asked to try to skate in Nylander's spot.  That's why I applaud him for praising Jagr the way he has.  He's building good will.  More importantly, he's letting Jagr know that Jagr is still "The Man". 

When the Rangers signed Brendan Shanahan prior to last season, some wondered (myself included) whether or not an "old school" North American player like Shanny would fit in New York.  Shanny quickly embraced his role as assistant to Jagr.  There were no (known) clashes in the locker room between the two.  On the contrary, when playing the power play together, these two players showed so much deference (read "respect") to the other that neither of them would shoot the puck!  Choosing instead to pass to the other far too often!  The marriage has worked so well that Jagr was very vocal at seasons end about the need to resign Shanahan.

Gomez gets it.  He's following in Shanahan's footsteps.  He's actively trying to fit in by saying the right things regarding the right person.  Obviously it's still very early and it's always easier to talk the talk then it is to walk the walk.  So far, however, Gomez gets it.  That's good news for the Rangers and bad news for the rest of the league. 

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.

Time To Move Forward For Avery And The Rangers (UPDATED)

As you've probably heard by now, the Avery verdict has arrived: $1.9m for the season.  Now it's time for everyone to move on.  The Rangers roster is set (for now) and the focus can officially shift to getting ready for a serious run.  The business issues have been resolved, now it's about hockey.

The question of who was right and who was wrong in this little saga are no longer relevant.  The only thing that matters now is winning.  For the Rangers to have a real shot at winning, everyone has to give 110%.  There can be no room here for anger, resentment or hurt feelings on either side.  The team must be united, not polarized. 

It looks like the Rangers understand that: They immediately accepted the arbitrators award.  The immediacy of the team's acceptance speaks volumes.  By not delaying at all in accepting the award, the Rangers have essentially said "we know you're worth it, Sean.  We don't have to think about it or wonder, we know and we want you here".  But implications and inferences aren't enough.  Well, it looks like the Rangers understand that as well.  Which is why the team, through Glenn Sather, issued the following statement upon immediately accepting the award: "We are pleased to have Sean under contract and are looking forward to him returning with the same passion and enthusiasm he brought to our team last year," stated Sather. "He is a terrific competitor, who we expect to play a significant role in a successful season."  (Check out the entire release over here). 

Now it's Avery's turn.  It's time for him to prove that all the naysayers are wrong.  It's time for him to prove that the arbitrator was wrong.  Most importantly, it's time for him to prove that the Ranger's were wrong.  He's been called a detriment.  He's been called immature.  People around the hockey world have said that he's selfish and puts his own needs ahead of the team. 

What better way is there for Sean Avery to prove his worth than by moving forward in a mature and responsible manner.  He has two choices here: he can bear a grudge and harbor a resentment or he can accept the award put the past behind him and come out with a statement saying that he's happy to be back and he's looking forward to helping the Rangers, his teammates and the fans compete for a Stanley Cup.  The former would simply reinforce what his critics say: Sean Avery is a distraction and a detriment.  What would the latter approach accomplish?  Well, it would go a long way towards silencing his critics (myself included). 

The Rangers are trying to move forward.  It's time for Avery to do the same thing.

Check out a nice post on this topic from Stan Fischler over here.

UPDATE:  I was hoping to hear some positive quotes for Avery in this morning's (August 2, 2007) papers.  Unfortunately, that hasn't happened.  Avery's agent was, however, saying the right things.  As for Avery himself, he declined to comment to the New York Post.  You can check out Larry Brooks' article in the post here.  Hopefully, Avery just needs a little time.  Stay tuned!    
       

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!         

                        

      

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.