Yes, we can have Pronger.***
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 3:13 PM EST
73 comments
*** I think.
Per the below calculations, we can add just a tad over $3M in salary. If Morrisonn is included then it's just over $5M. If Brashear is also included, it's just over, and I do mean barely over, Pronger's $6.25M. And Lord knows, if I fudged anything on these numbers, this could all blow up.
So, and I'm using a best offer/final offer scenario here:
Morrisonn and Brashear, our #1 and our #3 for Pronger. This almost certainly means no Alzner on the post season roster unless a high salary gets injured. and it almost guarantees we have to buy out Nylander this summer (not a bad thing). So, do we do this? Would the Ducks do this? Who fills the role of Brashear? Does Brashear actually have a role to fill?
The daily calculations are kind of pointless because we haven't banked any space. They're just the annual numbers divided by 185 (10/9/08-4/12/09).
| Annual | Daily | ||
| 1 | Ovechkin | 9,538,462 | 51,559 |
| 2 | Nylander | 4,875,000 | 26,351 |
| 3 | Semin | 4,600,000 | 24,865 |
| 4 | Fedorov | 4,000,000 | 21,622 |
| 5 | Kozlov | 2,500,000 | 13,514 |
| 6 | Backstrom | 2,400,000 | 12,973 |
| 7 | Laich | 2,066,667 | 11,171 |
| 8 | Brashear | 1,250,000 | 6,757 |
| 9 | Bradley | 1,000,000 | 5,405 |
| 10 | Fehr | 735,000 | 3,973 |
| 11 | Fleischman | 725,000 | 3,919 |
| 12 | Gordon | 725,000 | 3,919 |
| 13 | Steckel | 512,500 | 2,770 |
| 1 | Green | 5,250,000 | 28,378 |
| 2 | Poti | 3,500,000 | 18,919 |
| 3 | Morrissonn | 1,975,000 | 10,676 |
| 4 | Jurcina | 881,250 | 4,764 |
| 5 | Erskine | 537,500 | 2,905 |
| 6 | Schultz | 763,889 | 4,129 |
| 7 | Kronwall | 243,750 | 1,318 |
| 1 | Theodore | 4,500,000 | 24,324 |
| 2 | Neu/Var | 821,667 | 4,441 |
| LTIR | Clark | 2,633,333 | 14,234 |
| LTIR | Pothier | 2,500,000 | 13,514 |
| LTIR | Johnson | 812,500 | 4,392 |
| Buyout | Clymer | 250,000 | 1,351 |
| Cap | 56,700,000 | 306,486 | |
| Cap + LTIR | 62,645,833 | 338,626 | |
| Total Salary | 59,596,518 | 322,143 | |
| Available | 3,049,315 | 16,483 |
If this FanPost is written by someone other than one of the blog's authors, the opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect those of this blog or SB Nation.
0 recs |
73 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
A couple of points:
1) Why would Anaheim want Brashear?
2) Cap doesn’t matter in the post-season – Alzner can come up as soon as the final buzzer sounds on game 82 if the Caps so desire.
3) Here’s my calculation on where the Caps stand, salary-wise.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 25, 2009 3:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
1) They wouldn’t. But they are FA at the end of the season, so they would suck it up and take them for a month to make this work. Clearly the enticement for ANA is the cap space plus draft picks.
2) Cool.
3) I think we have the same calculation, but I have BJ on LTIR. When is that eligible to happen?
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They can put him on LTIR at any point and take his salary off the books. Why they wouldn’t have at this point, I’m not sure, but I haven’t heard that they have.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 3:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To answer your question, though, I’d trade Mo, Brash, a 1st and a 3rd for Pronger in a hot second.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 25, 2009 3:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’d do that trade too, but I don’t think ANA would. I can’t see ANA moving Pronger and only getting spare parts and picks. I think they are going to demand a high quality prospect. Looking at their prospect pool they are weakest at goalie so we have to start considering whether we want to move Neuwirth and if so what else we are willing to move with him. Neuwirth and a first? That is a pretty steep price but Pronger is probably worth it. Still, it is nice to know that we can add an impact player without having to find someone else to relieve us of our albatross.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 3:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm thinking Bourque.
Remember that Anaheim is (a) looking to dump salary and (b) looking for offense. Bourque has the capability to play at an NHL level and by all rights should be a top-six forward, but we just do not have room for him right now.
So, Mo, Bourque, and a top pick for Pronger?
by gotsparkly on Feb 26, 2009 9:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think that’d be enough. Morrisonn and Bourque should wind up being solid depth in the NHL, and a late first round pick is no guarantee. Someone will offer them more than that.
by David M. Getz on Feb 26, 2009 10:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The movements you suggest would get Pronger under the cap, but I don’t think it’s enough for the Ducks to move Pronger for two reasons. One is that he has another year on his contract so the Ducks aren’t in a position where they have to sell. The other is that they’ll get a better offer than a first round pick and spare parts from someone.
If I’m the Ducks I’m looking for a roster player, a prospect, and a first round draft pick as a starting point. If I were looking at the Capitals and I were the Ducks, I’d ask for a first round pick, Morrisonn, Neuvirth/Bouchard/Osala, and either Fehr or Flash or something equivalent (i.e. two first round draft picks, Morrisonn, and an okay prospect).
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 3:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’ll admit it is hard to be objective on this, although many a team has waited for a player’s market value to rise only to see it fall.
The spare parts, that’s just cap space after the season.
A #1, Mo, Fehr/Flash/Bouchard (and Brashear if necessary to make it work). But I don’t think Bouchard and Fehr/Flash and certainly I don’t want to give up Neuvy or Osala.
I guess it comes down to how much Anaheim would like to get this done now versus take their chances over the summer.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 3:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
if you pulled my arm i would be willing to sweeten the deal with Sasha Pokulok. ;-)
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Even if Anaheim thinks they’re in a position where dealing Pronger is a necessity for cap reasons (I’m not familiar enough with their personnel and cap situation to say whether or not it is), they’re going to get more than a low first round pick, a serviceable depth defenseman and a promising wing/wing prospect.
Atlanta got a first rounder, one of Pittsburgh’s best prospects, and two decent roster players for Hossa last year and because of his position, dominance at his position, and the fact that there’s a year left on his contract I think Pronger fetches something analogous.
For a guy like Pronger, this season, the only untouchables in my eyes would be Carlson and Alzner.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that Carlson and Azlner can’t be touched. I am a little concerned about the goaltending situation though. Czarlamov appears to have more upside but he has had injury problems. That makes it hard to give up Neuwirth, but I can’t say that I think either are untouchable. Realistically ANA won’t ask for Czarlamov and Neuwirth so we will still have one of the two at the end of the season, I’m just not sure which one we want to keep. Also, does anyone know the rules for trading an AHL player? Can GMGM trade Bouchard but make the other team promise to leave him in Hershey unless they are bringing him to the NHL level? This would give Hershey a little protection from having their team blown up at the deadline.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. You can never have too many goalies but to get a player like Pronger on the team that Capitals have in place makes moving Neuvirth or even Varlamov a potential option.
McPhee could ask a team to loan Bouchard to Hershey after the trade, but it’s not going to happen. If someone picks up a prospect they’re going to want them playing in their system as soon as possible.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i understand your compassion but another team isn’t going to give two shits about the hershey team being blown up. really, i don’t either, if it’s for the cause.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 4:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's not compassion.
I want Hershey winning because I think it is important for OUR prospects to play big games. I understand GMGM can ask for a loan after a trade. I just don’t know if he is allowed to require a team to keep Bouch/MP/Osala in Hershey as a term of the trade. He obviously doesn’t have the leverage to do that if he is dealing for Pronger, but it will be an issue in any trade he potentially makes involving our current prospects. There is also another issue to consider. I don’t know when our relationship with Hershey is up for renewal but I am under the impression that a major reason Hershey likes working with the Caps is that the Caps keep talent coming through the pipeline and have generally been respectful of Hershey’s needs, i.e. not doing violence to the Hershey roster just to make short term gains for the Caps.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Whether or not it’s technically allowable under the CBA I don’t know, but I do know that it would diminish the attractiveness of the Capitals trade offer to the point where they’d probably have to throw in another prospect or draft pick.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know about that. Maybe if the team we are trading to has their AHL affiliate seriously in the playoff hunt it may be a concern to them but most teams are looking at our prospects for the future. Trying to teach a kid a new system this late in the year is going to set them back for this season anyway. I don’t think leaving him in Hershey is going to have any impact on their long term development, it just gives the kid a chance to make a championship run. It’s all going to depend on which player they want and whether their AHL team is in the playoff hunt. I don’t think it would require another prospect or pick, at least not one of value (maybe they get Pokulok or a 7th).
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 5:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
pokulok/7th/bucket o’ fried chicken
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Trying to teach a kid a new system this late in the year is going to set them back for this season anyway.
If the player is going to have to adjust to a new system, the teams are going to want the guy there this season so he can learn it and be ready to jump in at the start of next season. I’m just saying, if I were the other GM and the trading partner tried to sell me that, I wouldn’t be very happy with it and it would make me less interested in dealing with the team.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess there is just a fundamental disagreement on this one. I think playing in big games is more important than a head start on the system, you think otherwise. The Caps, and probably most other NHL teams, have their prospect camps all summer. There are at least two opportunities to get your kids into see your coaches and learn the system over the summer. I think that is the better way to weave new players into your system than to just throw them in down the stretch when they are facing the toughest competition of the year and unsure of where/how they are supposed to be playing. GMs have thick skin, I think it would take a truly ridiculous request to make a GM not deal with another team; and just as pulling a prospect out of Hershey won’t sour that relationship, neither will this kind of request kill a deal.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
like i said, i understand the sentiment, but placating hershey should not even be a consideration.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree. Hershey has been an important factor in our successful rebuild. That’s not to say that we couldn’t have done it otherwise but the fact that they are such a successful and stable AHL franchise and are close to DC has helped a lot. The Caps have not ignored Hershey’s concerns, leading me to believe GMGM doesn’t think that placating Hershey should not be a consideration. The Caps made a trade a couple years back to give Hershey some defensive depth when we had Nycholat up on the big club. With the Phantoms leaving PHI there has already been talk of PHI trying to make a relationship with Hershey if they can’t find a suitable place to put the Phantoms. We shouldn’t give any reason for Hershey to want to dissolve the relationship with us (not that I think trading one slumping rookie at the deadline is enough in itself to create ill will).
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i think you’ve got the tail wagging the dog bro. we are the NHL Capitals. they are an AHL team. they aren’t going to go big leaguing us.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 25, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nah bro. You are just misunderstanding me. I never said to put Hershey’s interests ahead of our own. What I am saying is that to be a successful organization it requires more than just looking at who you are putting on the VC ice. I have no idea how DET treats their AHL affiliate but I’d bet it is with respect and consideration for the fact that that team is trying to win and draw fans as well. The Caps didn’t just get good out of nowhere. Yeah, GMGM has drafted well and that is the first piece, but ignoring the impact of a move on Hershey is short sighted, and IMO, a bad a idea.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Having a stable relationship with a well-respected, well-run, and geographically close AHL team has its advantages to be sure but at the end of the day the majority of coaches and staff are guys under contract to the Capitals.
Still, I think that Washington’s done just about everything Hershey could have asked and more. I don’t think that the fact they’re not trying to force an unprecedented (to my knowledge) agreement in a trade would make Hershey decide they’ve had enough and leave the affiliation.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t see why ANA would wait until the summer to trade Pronger, if they want to trade him. If they want to move him to open up cap space (since they have to resign basically an entire team this summer) then it makes no sense to wait. A) If you trade him now you give a contender two runs at the cup with him. Simple math, 2 runs at the cup > 1 run at the cup. B) As Brian Burke has said, the trade deadline is when GMs make more mistakes than any other time of year. If you want to force a team to give a ton of value for him then pitting a bunch of contenders in a bidding war for him is the best way to do that. Imagine the leverage if ANA goes to NJD, BOS, WAS, PHI and tells them all that Pronger is available and being shopped to the other eastern favorites. I think if he moves he moves at the deadline.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 25, 2009 4:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I agree, and Anaheim would be smart to do it now (and I think they will). Pronger is enough of an impact player that they will get a serious bounty from one of the eastern contenders for him. He’s a more important player than Hossa and has a year left on his deal, and the top 4 Eastern teams (BOS, WSH, NJD, PHI) would all be terrified if he went to any of the others.
I love the Caps’ prospects but if Varlamov or Carlson became the difference between this deal happening and not (assuming the rest of the package is something like Mo + 1st + Brash for cap purposes), I would have a hard time walking away. Those guys have huge upside but this is one of those trades that gives you a serious shot at winning the Cup, this year. That is the ultimate goal and whether it’s this year or down the road, the Caps are probably going to have to make a trade along these lines to go all the way. It’s going to be a wild deadline if Pronger is truly in play.
by grapejoos on Feb 25, 2009 7:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dunno why Anaheim would want Brashear when they have George Parros. Also not sure the draft picks and the Cap room are enough of an incentive. I would also take this in a hot second.
Can't we get Chris Bourque a red jersey now? Thanks.
by Whiter Mage on Feb 25, 2009 6:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
they wouldn’t want brashear, but they’d have to take him (or comparable deadwood) to make the salaries fit. the benefit of brashear is that he’s a FA after this season and they don’t have a contract to keep.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 26, 2009 12:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I more meant that in a “I’d like to keep Brashear/can’t they take Jurcina?” kind of way.
Can't we get Chris Bourque a red jersey now? Thanks.
by Whiter Mage on Feb 26, 2009 9:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As I understand it we would only be responsible for the 17 games worth of salary when he's actually playing for us, so we can pick up anyone who costs less then around 7mil
by DC FURY on Feb 25, 2009 7:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The short version of how the cap fits into this is that the Capitals have been over and using injury exemptions all season. When that’s the case, you can replace the salary of the guy(s) who are hurt but no more. Ergo, the Caps, right now, can only take on guys with salaries of around three million or less (assuming Johnson is on or goes to LTIR)
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 8:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My old college buddy is a Ducks season ticket holder. He’s hearing it’s 75/25 Pronger is traded at the deadline. It makes no sense for the Ducks to wait until the summer. The best offers will come now. He also said that word is Philthy will trade Briere to LA (they have the cap space and need a scorer) freeing up space for them to get Pronger. I would love to see Pronger in a Caps uniform. The pairing of him and Green together would really be something to see. The Caps have the right combination of picks/prospects/players to make it work. On the other hand the thought of Pronger with Filthy is downright frightening. Can’t wait for next Wednesday. It’s like xmas again!
by johnnycap on Feb 25, 2009 7:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
LA would be insane to take that Briere contract on. They have so much young talent that they are about to have to resign (Johnson, Quincey, Doughty in each of the next three off seasons). Dean Lombardi has built this team from within and I can’t see him taking on a contract that could jeopardize his ability to keep the team together. Maybe they will, but I sure hope nobody rescues PHI from that Briere contract (probably like they hope we can’t get out from the Nyls contract).
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 26, 2009 8:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, thanks
Pronger is a great player, but I would avoid such a trade if I were GMGM, and here’s why: if the Caps need a #1 defenseman, then we’re not cup contenders. The reason that the massive blockbuster deals rarely work is because any team that needs a blockbuster that late in the season probably wasn’t well-constructed to begin with. I think this recent posting over at Puck Daddy sums it up pretty well.
This probably deserves a full FanPost, but I’ll try to make the point succinctly. If a team needs to upgrade/fill any of its top roster spots (by this, I mean first line forwards, top-pair defensemen or starting goalie), then your team probably doesn’t have what it takes to win the cup. Moreover, you never want one of your “core” positions to be held down by a rotating cast of rentals. Such a trade might get you a couple more wins in the playoffs, and it even might get you to the finals, but it won’t help you beat a team with a solid foundation like the Red Wings. Instead, it will leave your prospect and draft cupboard prematurely bare.
by D'ohboy on Feb 25, 2009 8:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand, Pronger went to Anaheim and that team won the Cup with basically the same roster they had the year before.
I can sort of see where you’re coming from but: if the Capitals aren’t Cup contenders because they need a number one defenseman and then they get one, doesn’t that make them Cup contenders?
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 8:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Different situation. They picked up Pronger in the off-season, giving him an entire year to acclimate to the team and its system. Slotting a role player into a system is one thing, but trying to fit an elite talent into a new system in the month between the deadline and the playoffs is something else entirely. Look at what happened when Colorado picked up Ray Bourque in 2000, for example.
My argument isn’t necessarily against picking up big free agents or acquiring them via trade. What I’m saying is that if, after 5 months of the season and 6 months after the start of training camp, a team is still searching for a MAJOR core player, that team is more than likely not Stanley Cup material. The track record of deadline deals bears this out. The only real recent exception I can think of is Rob Blake, and you have to recall that the Avs didn’t need him to be a #1 or #2, because they already had Adam Foote and Bourque.
by D'ohboy on Feb 25, 2009 9:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When Bourque went to Colorado he scored 14 points and was a +9 in their last 14 regular season games and had nine points and was a +4 in their 13 playoff games. They didn’t win the cup but he came in and performed well.
I think a player of Pronger’s skill would be able to come in and play well in the Capitals system without too much of a lag time, but I could be wrong. However, if it is the case that he needs a training camp to fully learn the system, he does have another year remaining on his contract and ergo, just like it might be in the best interest of the Ducks to move Pronger now with an eye on next year, it might be in the best interest of the Capitals to pick him up now with an eye on next year.
To touch on your comment below (two for one!) I would agree that the team definitely needs to be cautious about giving up too much in the way of young talent and picks but at the same time the team does have a very solid farm system and all its draft picks for the next several drafts, so they’re in a position where they won’t have to strip the system bare to make a big move.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 9:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I totally agree that Bourque and Hossa and some other trade deadline acquisitions perform well. Sure, some flame out like when the Sens acquired Bondra, but some really do succeed. In fact, the success of the individuals emphasizes the flaw in the strategy of “let’s grab the best guy we can.”
The point is, to put it in economic terms, what marginal benefit are you acquiring and for what marginal cost? Moreover, if a team NEEDS the huge marginal benefit, might that not be a sign that said team is not a real cup contender? In the case of the Avs, the Bourque trade was obviously justified. Sure, they gave up Rolston and Pahlsson, but at the time, those guys were throw-ins. Then he stuck around another year and won the cup. The Hossa deal? Not so much.
What I’m really trying to get at is that, rather than picking up the best player(s) available, the Caps should identify their needs and address those needs with an eye to the long-term implications. This team has a young core – there’s no need to go all-in this year.
I think that this Caps team has a few clear needs, and I think most of the readers here would agree. In order of priority, I think these are: 1) steady, playoff-tested depth defenseman to push Schultz-Jurcina-Erskine down the depth chart; 2) a gritty, playoff-tested banger who can preferably kill penalties, maybe score a little and bring consistent intensity to give the team cojones and allow them to sit Brash in the playoffs; 3) an experienced (preferably with a few rings) forward who can fill in on the PP in the event that someone gets injured or the youngsters go cold; and 4) and experienced backup goaltender in the likely event that Johnson is done for the year.
I fully realize that they won’t get all of these things, and they might not even get more than one, but I’d rather see them trade a second-round pick for a depth defenseman than see them trade off a couple prospects, a roster player and a draft pick for a big-name rental. I realize that Pronger is not a rental, but I wish GMGM luck in fitting his contract under the cap next year, even if he is willing to eat most of Nylander’s contract.
For the sake of argument, if I were going to fill out those four slots off the top of my head, I would do it like this:
1) Kuba, Ohlund (would require roster forward in return), Morris, Leopold or McKee; 2) Laperriere (by far and away the best available here), Neil, Hinote or Roberts; 3) Recchi (still playing well), maybe Ray Whitney; and 4) Legace?
by D'ohboy on Feb 25, 2009 10:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously a team has to be very careful about when to make a move and what to give up but I do that that given the kind of assets the Capitals posses and how well Pronger would fit on this team in terms of the team’s need to add grit, leadership, a defenseman who’s good in his own end, and someone who has had success in the playoffs.
I wouldn’t strip the cupboard bare, but I think the Capitals have enough in assets to make a move for Pronger, giving themselves very, very good chance at the Cup this season and next and still have enough to have talented youngsters coming in to avoid mortgaging the future.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 11:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I've read this argument somewhere before
Oh yeah, just a few posts above, where we hashed out whether it would makes to try to convince a GM to leave Bouchard in Hershey for a Calder Cup run.
I think the answer is always get a player into your system as soon as possible, but with elite players such as Pronger, I bet they learn a lot faster than rookies and prospects. For example, read some of the quotes about how Kronwall is still adjusting. I think Pronger could get up to speed in a game or two.
by Scott in Shaw on Feb 26, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you’re getting at, but look at an example from last year. The Penguins thought they were a scoring winger away from the Cup. They got the best scoring winger on the market in Hossa and he performed largely as advertised. Then they got beaten by a much better team in the finals, a team that didn’t need to go out and pick up a major piece at the deadline.
A year later, the Penguins have realized that they traded away their depth and part of their future for a fleeting glimpse of glory. They’ll be back at some point, but that trade and its aftermath really set that franchise back.
by D'ohboy on Feb 25, 2009 9:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One major difference with Pronger here, though, is that he is signed through next season. If the Caps somehow swung a trade for him and then crapped out in the playoffs, they’d still have Pronger for another shot at it.
And I don’t really buy that the Hossa deal sunk the Pens. They miss Armstrong, but they wouldn’t miss him as much if they’d been able or wanted to keep other grit/character/leadership guys like Malone and Roberts.
Erik Christensen? Meh. And the pick and Esposito wouldn’t be in Pittsburgh right now anyway, so they’re non-factors in the discussion of why the Pens are where they are now.
Point being, they traded away a couple of third-liners, a late first and a bust prospect and went to the Finals and lost the guy they traded for. If the Caps could trade a couple of third-liners, a late first and a bust prospect, go to the Finals and keep the guy they got in trade for a second shot, you wouldn’t be interested?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 25, 2009 10:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What you say about Pronger is true, but I don’t think the Caps could fit him into the cap structure for next year, especially if the cap goes down like it’s projected to.
I don’t think that the Hossa deal sunk the Pens, but it sure didn’t help. Christensen and Armstrong aren’t the greatest, but they’re better/cheaper than some of the slop that the pens have had playing on their 3rd and 4th lines this year.
The bigger point is that the Hossa deal was premature. In my opinion, Shero thought that the impending free agency of several key players meant that last year was a window of opportunity, and he jumped through it.
In response to your hypothetical, I suppose I would answer yes, but the problem, as I noted above, is that Pronger wouldn’t fit under the cap, necessitating further cuts. Moreover, let’s say that the Caps were to pull off a similar trade to that made by Pittsburgh last year. Some of the proposed trades here (Mo, Brash plus a first and a third for Pronger) are unrealistic. Atlanta was in a position of weakness – Hossa was leaving one way or the other. Anaheim is in a position of strength – Pronger wants to stay and has another year on his contract, so immediately, the asking price goes up. I would imagine that such a trade would require one good roster player (Flash/Fehr/Laich/Mo/Schultz), or maybe two of the above; one good prospect (Osala/Bouchard/Neuvirth/Varlamov) and maybe two depending on the roster player(s) involved, and at least a first and a third round pick.
So I guess I’d ask you a hypothetical in response. Would you trade Flash, Mo, Osala, Neuvirth a first and a third round pick for Pronger?
by D'ohboy on Feb 25, 2009 10:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s hard for me to imagine the asking price would be that high, but I’d pass on that package.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 25, 2009 11:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’d have to pass on that package, too, but I’m thinking it’s going to take a prospect, a roster player, and a first round pick to get Pronger with maybe a little more thrown in (a depth player, second/third tier prospect, or a mid round pick) and I think something like Fleischmann, Morrisonn, Neuvirth, and a first round pick for Pronger is an offer the Capitals would have to seriously consider…if they could find a way to get under the cap.
by David M. Getz on Feb 25, 2009 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the asking price for Pronger will be higher than Hossa, simply because Anaheim doesn’t face the prospect of losing him for nothing. Still, even if you take one of the pieces out of that package – say Flash – would you do that?
The cap issue is also pretty important, because by acquiring Pronger, you’d be waving goodbye to Fedorov (who might retire anyway) and/or Kozlov at the very least.
by D'ohboy on Feb 26, 2009 12:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that package is more than Atlanta got for Hossa. I think J.P.’s assessment that Atlanta got an underachieving prospect and two third liners in addition to their pick is accurate and I think Fleischmann and Morrisonn are more like second line/second pairing guys and Neuvirth is a good prospect at a position Anaheim supposedly wants someone.
by David M. Getz on Feb 26, 2009 10:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What defines a blockbuster trade? Or a Cup contender for that matter? Just because a team identifies a roster need and fills it via trade does not prove they aren’t capable of winning the Stanley Cup. A lot of trades happen every year but only one team can win it all – a lot of these trades appear not to have worked out because of the sheer improbability of becoming a champion.
Or taking it a step further, at what point in the season do you think it’s too late to add to the roster? Does adding a “blockbuster” player in the off-season mean that team will fail next year? I doubt you’d agree with that; thousands of shrewd off-season acquisitions have led to Cups. So is it because there’s just not enough time between March 4 and the playoffs to gel? Chemistry too disrupted in the locker room to recover?
I think we can all agree that, while a long Cup run is possible with the current roster, adding Chris Pronger and bumping one of Morrisson/Jurcina/Erskine to the bench/exile makes us that much better. It most definitely does not guarantee failure.
The keyboard is mightier.
by breed16 on Feb 25, 2009 11:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is probably why I should have collected my thoughts into a fanpost. Now all of my points are kinda strewn about a series of comments.
I would define a “blockbuster” as acquiring a #1 at any position. My theory (and the history of deadline deals backs this up) is that if a team needs to acquire a #1 at any position, that team is not really in a position to compete for the cup. I think you’re correct in identifying “chemistry” as the problem, although I think I’d rephrase that and call it “learning new systems.” 20 years ago, “systems” were non-existent to a large degree, but today, the players are coached relentlessly. Learning the ins and outs of a new system takes time, and the more ice time, particularly PP and PK time, that a player gets, the more important it is for him to understand and fit inside the system.
Permit me to get kinda cheesy, but do you remember the scene in “Miracle” where Herb Brooks is interviewing for the Team USA head coaching position? It’s kinda like that. Acquiring a top-level player at the deadline is akin to assembling an all-star team, when what you really need is a system and players that fit into it. Acquiring that kind of player in the offseason is less problematic, but it’s ultimately still not a great way of building a team, just ask the Rangers. Every few years, they go out and grab the “best players available,” and the guys on ESPN hail them as Stanley Cup favorites. And every time, they story line at the end of the year is how the Rangers underperformed. It’s not because they lack talent, nor is it because their coaches suck.
The answer to your second question “what is a Cup contender” is a little more difficult, but I think it follows from the answer to the first question. A Cup contender is a team that, PRIOR TO THE TRADE DEADLINE has no holes or weaknesses in its #1 players, whether due to lack of talent or serious injury. Those players don’t have to be perennial All-Stars, but they had better be well above average at their position, particularly the goaltender, the #1 defenseman and the #1 center (wings are less crucial). A good Cup contender should have no massive holes or glaring weakness at its #2 level. These players should be steady contributors, with at least some of them being capable of stepping up to the top level in the event of injuries. The remaining players are less important, and this, to me, is where good trade deadline deals occur. This is where you can do what Carolina did in ’06 and acquire canny veterans like Doug Weight and Mark Recchi that can fill in when injuries strike. (Carolina was one of the “flukiest” Cup winners in recent memory though – who knew that Cam Ward would channel Patrick Roy circa 1986?)
To give a more concrete example, the Red Wings and Devils are probably the two most successful franchises of our generation. Can you recall either team bringing in a #1 at any position at the trade deadline? If they did, did they win the Cup that year? The point is that both of those teams had solid cores that they rode deep into the playoffs year after year. They typically didn’t bring in “big names” because they didn’t need to. I realize that there is a bit of a “chicken and egg” argument that can arise here, but I think that Colorado provides a useful counterpoint. The Avs often tried to bring in “big name” players at the deadline, even though they arguably had just as strong a core group – and their approach was altogether less successful.
by D'ohboy on Feb 26, 2009 1:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good points, but to an extent the dynamic has changed due to the salary cap. You now are more pressed into taking advantage of ‘windows’. My premise was that in theory we could fit him in here under the cap, but my hypothetical trades are probably delusional because they involved mainly draft picks rather than prospects and I’m ok with that. I’m not in favor of going for broke just to get him, and doubt McPhee and Leonsis are either.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 26, 2009 2:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you’re right that bringing in a guy who you think is going to be a miracle worker isn’t a good situation to be in. But the Capitals have Green, Schultz, and Poti who can all play top four roles, so what if they asked Pronger to come in, and instead of playing 28 minutes a night, play 21? Does asking him to play less mean he has to learn less or is less likely to make mistakes? And does it mean it’s less likely to disrupt the way the team plays now?
I do think that Pronger would be a good fit for the Capitals in the sense that he provides a lot of what they’re looking for – grit, defense, penalty kill help, leadership – in one package, and he’s a pretty decent player to boot.
by David M. Getz on Feb 26, 2009 10:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s think of it this way: there are 120 minutes of ice time for defensemen in any given game, and the top pair will take at least 50 of those, the 2nd pair will take 45, leaving 35 minutes for the 3rd pair. Obviously, it doesn’t quite work out like that because Ovie and Fedorov usually play the points on the PP, and the Caps will occasionally run Steckel, Gordon and a single D-man out there for a 5-3 PK. In reality, these numbers would be slightly different, but it’s close enough for analysis.
If the team brought in Pronger, and you were Boudreau, would you play him behind Poti or Schultz? Clearly, the answer is no. Pronger would take ice time away from those two, particularly on special teams. The upside is that they would in turn take ice time from Mo, Jurcina and Erskine.
I would guess that if they brought Pronger (or someone similar) on board, that he would play about 25 minutes a night. Green would see his ice time drop from the occasional 30-minute game down to a more manageable 25. There are questions here, though. Would Green or Poti adjust well to less playing time and to not being THE primary starting point for the breakout? Would Schultz play as well with 17 minutes a night as he does with 22? Would Pronger be fast enough to keep up with the Caps’ top line? Would he be prepared to cover Green’s back? Would he be able to adapt to Boudreau’s system in time for the playoffs? Would he be effective against Eastern Conference players that he’s only seen once or twice a year? Here’s another big question: if you bring him in and he flops, can you easily unload him later?
If you bring in someone like Filip Kuba, the most pressing question will be what brand of suit John Erskine wears when he’s a healthy scratch.
by D'ohboy on Feb 26, 2009 3:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you bring in someone like Filip Kuba, the most pressing question will be what brand of suit John Erskine wears when he’s a healthy scratch.
+1
by David M. Getz on Feb 26, 2009 4:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Based on your criteria do you consider the Caps a cup contender? I understand that most deadline deals do not result in a Cup victory, but that doesn’t make the trades failures. The Pens probably don’t get to the finals without Hossa last season (and MAF pulling his game together). The Caps definitely don’t make the playoffs without Huet (and maybe Feds too). Neither team won the cup but I think both moves undoubtedly helped made the teams better. The problem with the Pens is that they don’t have a ton of prospect depth and they gave up a top prospect (even if under-performing) and a first round pick and two young roster players that they didn’t have replacements for. The Caps have an undeniably deeper farm pool than the Pens did, and we have at least a couple guys in Hershey that could come and play 3/4th line minutes for us. We also don’t have to resign half our team this off season. The east is so closely packed this year that I think Pronger makes any of the top teams in the east the immediate favorite to win the east. GMGM has to seriously consider making this trade if it is available. Two years with Pronger before we have to resign Baxter and Semin gives our team two chances to win the cup before our core is even completely mature and developed. Just to throw out a name that hasn’t been discussed: How does everyone feel about trading away Semin in a package for Pronger? That obviously means we don’t have to give up much more, maybe a first OR a top prospect.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 26, 2009 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think I’d do it, but I’d consider a deal with Semin involved. Chemistry concerns and the need for secondary scoring would be the major holdups for me (and memory of how good he was in the playoffs last year). If Anaheim wants him, nobody is going to offer a player anywhere near that good (as of right now, anyway). If it means the Caps could get Pronger without giving up additional picks or prospects, then that leaves some cap room and assets (if I’m not mistaken) to go out and add another piece.
Still, I’d rather find another package they’d consider. I would be very concerned about how that trade might affect Ovechkin or even Kozlov, Fedorov, or others. Semin has been a Cap longer than almost everyone else on the team.
Of course, if Anaheim is willing to send back a scoring winger, it may be a different story for me.
by grapejoos on Feb 26, 2009 12:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t worry about AO. He doesn’t seem like that stuff bothers him, he is a consummate professional as far as I can tell.
by Fehr and Balanced on Feb 26, 2009 6:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m still on the fence about the Caps as cup contenders. Theo is an inconsistent goaltender and in the playoffs, a stretch of just 2 or 3 bad games by your goalie and it’s curtains. The Caps still regularly fail to bring intense effort for 3 periods – usually they just dominate one or two periods and then hang on. We all saw how that worked on Tuesday. As we’ve discussed, they take too many dumb penalties. From a purely personnel standpoint, the Caps are damn close, but they clearly need more maturity. The question is, should they import their maturity or wait for it to develop from within?
I wouldn’t give up Semin. If it came to it, I’d rather see the Caps give away draft picks as opposed to bona fide roster players. The Caps will be drafting so low for the next few years that those first rounders won’t be all that valuable anyhow.
by D'ohboy on Feb 26, 2009 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Anything less than the conference finals this season is a major underachievement.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Feb 26, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would largely agree. After the first round, it’s going to come down to the usual factors: goaltending, health/depth and luck. Will Theo play well? Will the Caps’ big guns stay healthy? Who will they draw in the 2nd round? Will the refs miss a blatant goaltender interference call again?
by D'ohboy on Feb 26, 2009 3:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Will Theo play well? Will the Caps’ big guns stay healthy? Who will they draw in the 2nd round? Will the refs miss a blatant goaltender interference call again?
+2
by David M. Getz on Feb 26, 2009 4:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One other thing
Again, another reason I should’ve just written the damn Fanpost:
You make a great point that only one team can claim success if we define it as winning the Cup. I think a better way to approach the problem analytically is to determine the franchise’s goals and then to maximize the probability of achieving those goals while minimizing the negative impacts on the future. Viewed through that lens, GMGM had a simply brilliant trade deadline last year. The goal was clearly to make the playoffs in order to reinvigorate the fan base, while not mortgaging anything of value.
This year, I would argue that the Caps’ goal is to win the Cup, while also not denuding the franchise of the prospects that they will depend upon to provide Ovie with an affordable supporting cast over the next 10 years.
by D'ohboy on Feb 26, 2009 1:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You should’ve written a FanPost. :)
Still can, btw…
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 26, 2009 7:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sigh. I miss breed16.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 26, 2009 7:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
By the way...
Sorry for the long-ass posts. Like I said earlier, I had been thinking about this for a while and had meant to turn it into a fanpost.
by D'ohboy on Feb 25, 2009 10:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Brendan Witt
What about bringing Witt home?
by redpower! on Feb 26, 2009 9:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Er....
Wow. Like we need more dumb penalties.
by gotsparkly on Feb 26, 2009 9:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like the idea for this season but he has two more seasons at $3 mil, and that makes me wary.
by David M. Getz on Feb 26, 2009 10:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No thanks. I don’t think Witter is really an upgrade for the Caps blueline at this point. I wouldn’t mind someone like him, but I’d require more discipline and/or playoff experience.
by grapejoos on Feb 26, 2009 10:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a terrible idea. Didn’t Olie say something once like, “WITT?! I can play better defense than Witt!”
by zephyr on Feb 26, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If we bring back Brenda. . .
I will cry like a newly single woman watching “The Notebook.”
by D'ohboy on Feb 26, 2009 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
22 | 13 | 5 | 4 | 30 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
19 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 23 |
|
Atlanta
|
18 | 10 | 6 | 2 | 22 |
|
Florida
|
20 | 9 | 9 | 2 | 20 |
|
Carolina
|
21 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 13 |
(updated 11.21.2009 at 12:53 AM EST)
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
