Ranking the Capitals: #10
by J.P. on Aug 9, 2009 9:17 PM EDT
Email
PrintIn an effort to beat the summer doldrums, we're undertaking to rank - with your help - the Washington Capitals, from Ovechkin to, well, we'll see. The criteria is simple: who at this moment is the most valuable player in the organization who hasn't already been ranked? Put another way, if you could only keep one of the remaining players - because of what he brings on the ice or off it, his upside, what he could fetch in trade, and so on - who would it be? Consider age, potential, contract status, organizational depth, etc. - it's your call. And after you vote and defend your selection in the comments, help us out and suggest a name to add to the next poll. [Note: previous "Ranking the Capitals" posts can be found here."]
Welcome Tom Poti to the list, and Boyd Gordon to the poll...
If this FanPost is written by someone other than one of the blog's editors, the opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect those of this blog or SB Nation.
141 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Stecks does a lot, but as one who’s been clamoring for him as a regular 3rd line pivot, there’s not much room left in his ceiling. I’ll vote for Schultz over Carlson and plead heat exhaustion from today’s DCU game as a defense.
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
Couldn’t you argue that the presence of a comparable player, Boyd Gordon, makes Stecks less valuable than, say, Jeff Schultz?
With the playoffs still fresh in our minds, I think it’s easy for your emotions to side with Steckel over Schultz. Had it been done on April 11, it would probably be a much closer vote.
That being said, I’ve been voting for Steckel since #7 (or at least I thought I had been-must have not been signed in).
by thehoagster07 on Aug 9, 2009 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t understand how Steckel’s importance can be considered in the top-10 on this team, let alone top-7.
A lot of people here would disagree (as well as on the Oilers blog post).
by thehoagster07 on Aug 9, 2009 11:35 PM EDT up reply actions
i wouldn’t trade steckel for that load of crap, but i would certainly trade him straight up for schultz or carlson.
by Natty Bumppo on Aug 10, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
You could. Or you could argue that a top 4 D is more important than a 3 C. Or you could argue upside. Or age. Or trade value.
by Rob Parker on Aug 9, 2009 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t think boyd brings the same elements to the table. He may be just as feisty but steckel seems to get it done better.
I don’t disagree. But when discussing value and Steckel, the Caps have a player with comparable usability. Which, to me, makes Stecks a little less “valuable.”
Shaone Morrisonn and Brian Pothier and John Carlson and Milan Jurcina (and Alzner and Poti and Green) do that to Schultz for me. Just like you’re not saying Gordon’s actually better than Steckel, I’m not going to claim all of those guys are better than Schultz. But the Caps are OK with Schultz out because they have great depth at D.
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 8:36 AM EDT up reply actions
But ShaMo is only arguably in the Caps’ future. Potsy isn’t. Juice in all likelihood isn’t. Poti isn’t. Schultz is one of the few players that you don’t have to balance “future” v. “present” Caps performance.
It’s a fair point, since Steckel is a UFA. It’s just a different point than before. I don’t think you can say on the one hand that the presence of Boyd Gordon makes Steckel less valuable, but on the other hand say that the glut of NHL-capable defensemen doesn’t make Schultz less valuable. Schultz is less valuable for there being several good alternatives to him, same as Steckel.
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 8:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Gordon-Steckel are fighting for the 3C. Schultz is top 4 D. The “glut” of D around Schultz are either bottom pair guys, or guys at the end of bridge contracts that aren’t a part of the future. Even if Schultz is devalued a little by the depth he fills an inherently more valuable role than 3C. I agree that depth devalues all players, but I don’t think that can elevate Steckel above Schultz. (And I know you didn’t vote Steckel or Schultz so I don’t know what the argument is).
by Rob Parker on Aug 10, 2009 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m not arguing Steckel is better than Schultz. I don’t think that. Schultz plays a more important role and does it very well. I’ll probably vote for Schultz in the next one.
I’m saying that if anyone argues that Steckel is less valuable because the team has Boyd Gordon, then it needs to be acknowledged that Schultz is less valuable because the team has other players who can fill his role.
That’s all I’m saying.
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Sorry, that was more for Tyler. I get tired of the rules changing on everyone throughout comment threads.
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions
OK, I’ll bite (against my better judgment).
What do you see in DMG’s column that makes it not correct?
To be totally clear, I’m saying the following:
1) Jeff Schultz can play on one of the top two pairings.
2) The Caps have six players who have demonstrated that they can play on the top two pairings at least as well as Boyd Gordon can play third line center:
Mike Green (the last two seasons)
Tom Poti (the last 5+ years)
Shaone Morrisonn (intermittently, the last two years)
Brian Pothier (the ‘06-’07 season)
Milan Jurcina (the ‘09 playoffs)
Karl Alzner (his first call-up last year)
3) Therefore, if Boyd Gordon’s presence on the team reduces Dave Steckel’s value as a third line center, then the presence of six players for four slots at the top two defensive pairings must lower Schultz’s value as a top two pairing defender.
Which of these statements does the Schultz writeup contradict?
(Remember, the talent bar is “at least as well as Boyd Gordon can replace Dave Steckel as a third line center.” FYI, last year Gordon had 5 goals and 9 assists for 14 points.)
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions
I’d personally be more comfortable with Gordo centering my third-line than with Potsy or Juice in my Top 4. But your point is certainly well-taken.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Or Mo of most of 08-09 in the top four. And Alzner is behind where Schultz is now and should be eased in.
The Caps don’t need goals/assists from either/any 3C. They need a low cap hit, PK and faceoff wins, and both guys provide that.
What I’m really saying is that Schultz is more replaceable on this roster right now than Steckel is. But Schultz plays a tougher position, so he’s more valuable.
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
I voted Schultz, but could have gone for Carlson. I don’t understand how anybody is voting Steckel here. A third line C is not more valuable than a young 2nd pair D with shutdown potential, or a promising prospect with first pair ceiling.
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
Not all roles are created equal. If you need a faceoff won, you go to Steckel. If you need a penalty killed, you go to Steckel. He’s on top of his game in the playoffs (.33 PPG in NHL playoffs, .70 PPG in AHL playoffs as opposed to .20 PPG in the NHL regular season and .54 PPG in the AHL regular season). And as a lot of people in his Rink Wrap thread mentioned, he still does have some offensive potential to fill (61 points in 71 games in Hershey in 06-07). He’s never going to be a 60 point guy in the NHL, but it wouldn’t be totally outrageous to see him put up 30-35 next year, which would make him even more valuable.
I’m not going to go far into recent playoff success stories, but for every #71 on a championship team there is a #25 contributing something different, but similarly important. I think Stecks is a guy we can count on when it really matters, which goes beyond his role as just a 3rd line center.
And you get all of this at the low price of $725k.
by thehoagster07 on Aug 10, 2009 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions
not all roles are created equal, this is true, but role players are a LOT easier to come by than top pair D. I love Steckel for all the reasons you note above, but can’t fathom him being any higher than 12th on this list.
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
by Sombrero Guy on Aug 10, 2009 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions
Hmmm
I’m starting to wonder if it would have been a better idea to split this process between Caps prospects and Caps regulars – two different sets of polls. I suppose it would be a lot less controversial, but I personally feel I can’t properly judge the difference between a ‘decent’ career NHL player and a “top” prospect who hasn’t played a single game in the NHL.
Too much pressure!
This is what makes being a GM hard. When Expansion teams start, this is basically what they do – say “Hey, protect 10 players, and each round you get to protect one more during the draft”(if I recall correctly). Actually, I messed up and voted before reading the whole criterion saying “if you could only keep one of the remaining players – because of what he brings on the ice or off it, his upside, what he could fetch in trade, and so on – who would it be?”
My opinion changed, and I would have probably voted for Jose Theodore knowing that(Yay for reading posts!). With Johnny out of the fold, you have to have Theo. I really hope that Varlamov starts 60 games this year, and rips things up. The only problem is, along the way he may slump, or get nicked, or have a few issues. This is where having an experienced back up is wonderful. Also, Theodore is in a contract year – and his contract years have been stellar. The best part about Theodore we may not know yet – imagine things are going very well for Varlamov around March 1st – what value might Theodore bring to the team on a trading market.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
We don’t have to have Theo to be our backup. We could get another, cheaper, average NHL goalie to back up. Varlamov isn’t the only goalie we can give starts in the regular season. The only time we actually need a veteran back up is after the trade deadline, but you project Theo going out in a trade deadline deal. Theo has not been “stellar” in contract years, unless of course you mean “compared to his non-contract year self.” But in an objective, league-wide sense, he hasn’t been stellar since 2002.
Come on – I think you’re being a little harsh on Theodore. He’s obviously capable of being a starting goalie on several teams (clearly not all, but some). With the assumption that Varlamov will get a fairly even split with Theodore this season, there’s no reason he can’t put up quality numbers and be tempting to some teams.
The most tempting part of trading for him? He’s only around until the end of your season.
What was harsh? That I think he’s an average goalie with a 4.5 million cap hit? That I don’t think he’s even approached his 2002 numbers since then? That a cheaper guy could put up the same numbers as Theo? Exactly what kind of team do you envision wanting Theo?
Not that I disagree totally, but even mediocre goalies have a market at the trade deadline. If the Ray Emery experiment fails the Flyers might look at him favorably (although who knows if that’s a deal we’d ever make to that kind of competitor). His playoff experience, even if it’s not stellar, likely means there could still be a market for him.
I’d bet my turkey sandwich that you’ve called it on the money here. I just can’t imagine Ray Emery being a deep playoff run goalie for them this season and Theo might be just what they end up targeting well before the deadline if things go rough thru December…
"Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it."
- Ferris Bueller
by war_capitals on Aug 10, 2009 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Marty Biron is on a 1 yr deal at 1.4. If you are a team that needs a mediocre goalie at the deadline why are you looking for Theo over Biron? I’m sure I could find a handful of other mediocre goalies on cheaper expiring deals than Theo.
What if more than one team needs a goalie though? Biron is certainly the class of the UFA class (if you will), as long as he’s healthy, but if more than one team wants an upgrade…
Maybe I’ll scroll through capgeek when I get the chance but I can’t name that many off the top of my head. If you are a real contender why do you want Theo? Do you really think he’s going to carry you? For his cap hit you could probably find a better addition, and if all you need is a goalie I don’t see why a guy like Josh Harding isn’t a more tempting target.
Real contenders aren’t going to go for him, agreed. Bubble teams that need a boost in goaltending (perhaps due to injury), though, might.
If your goaltending isn’t settled at the trade deadline you’re probably not a contender, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be shopping for a possible playoff push.
I can probably think of examples of what I mean, too, besides just Philly.
Let’s use Atlanta. What if Lehtonen goes down as usual, Pavelec can’t quite keep up, but they’re still in the hunt for a low seed at the deadline. If they’ve got enough pressure to make the playoffs (last shot at keeping Kovy perhaps, just as an example) then they might be in the market. Would we trade Theo to them and possibly hurt our division chances? Maybe not, but then they’d just have more reason to go after Biron.
Then let’s say a team like St. Louis needs a more solid situation (maybe Mason goes down or has a bad year and Conklin/Bishop prove unreliable). If you’ve got two or more teams in the market that want an experienced goalie, Theo is movable. A hot commodity? Probably not, but likely movable nonetheless.
If trading Theo to ATL hurts our division chances in any way then we have a lot bigger problems than what to do about our backup goalie.
I was going to use ATL as another example of where to find a goalie if a team needs one. Either Pavelec or Letitin could probably be had, and they’d be a better short and long term solution than Theo.
Here you go (per CapGeek, next summer’s UFA Gs, sorted by 2009-10 salary):
Luongo, Roberto " $6,750,000
Turco, Marty " $5,700,000
Nabokov, Evgeni " $5,375,000
Theodore, Jose " $4,500,000
Toskala, Vesa " $4,000,000
Mason, Chris " $3,000,000
Ellis, Dan " $1,750,000
Emery, Ray " $1,500,000
Biron, Martin " $1,400,000
Hiller, Jonas " $1,300,000
Budaj, Peter " $1,250,000
Hedberg, Johan " $1,087,500
Auld, Alex " $1,000,000
Lalime, Patrick " $1,000,000
Backlund, Johan " $800,000
Rinne, Pekka " $725,000
Valiquette, Steve " $725,000
Dubielewicz, Wade " $600,000
Sanford, Curtis " $600,000
Leighton, Michael " $600,000
Niittymaki, Antero " $600,000
Sabourin, Dany " $600,000
Krahn, Brent " $550,000
Johnson, Brent " $525,000
Climie, Matt " $525,000
Brodeur, Mike " $520,000
Danis, Yann " $500,000
Munroe, Scott " $500,000
Raycroft, Andrew " $500,000
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
This is the problem – no team that is looking towards making a deep playoff run is going to want Theo for that reason. There may be teams that would take him on if they had different priorities.
That said, I can think of two scenarios under which Theo might have a market despite Biron. First, the Caps may ask for much, much less in return (depending on how things are going). Clearly the Isles signed Biron in part as potential trade bait. The second scenario is if the team in question is the Flyers, and have lost with Biron in net before. But obviously, there are other goalies out there.
I think there’s a problem with assuming anyone looking for a goalie at the deadline is looking for a deep playoff run. For many teams simply making the playoffs could be the issue, and an experienced goalie down the stretch may be what they need to get that done. Theo might end up being their target.
Keep in mind that GMGM at least claims to have looked at Theo at the deadline two years ago, before getting Huet. If there’s another team in a similar situation this season (and if he can put up decent numbers as he did that year) then his value would be far from nil. He’s probably not going to be any team’s first target, but then there might not be a ton of guys available either.
but what did huet fetch montreal at the deadline? there’s value in these kinds of deadline rental goalies, but it’s not on the same order as theo’s competition in this poll.
by Natty Bumppo on Aug 10, 2009 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure he’s average, but you can win with average.. Osgood, anyone?
Teams interested are going to be bubble teams who end up with poor goaltending or quality teams with an injured goaltender. Imagine Brodeur goes down again, but later in the season. Weekes is not capable of taking them beyond round 1.
brs03 posted it as I was typing- the Flyers are an obvious choice.
FTR, Weekes is gone as far as I know. Right now their backup is Yann Danis. Which should only bolster your point I imagine.
How many Cup contenders have cap space for a 4.5 million back up? The Flyers don’t. Osgood may have average numbers, but each of the last two playoffs he has come up with huge saves when DET needed them. When was the last time you remember Theo coming up with a huge timely save?
Cap space is much less of an issue at the deadline for most teams.
As for Theo and the big save, figure any time before the end of march and after Christmas and I’m sure you can come up with plenty. Regardless of how bad his showing was in that playoff game he was legitimately great for a few months there in the middle of the season. The problem is getting him to play that way consistently, but if he plays that well up to the deadline his value could be high enough where having another team see him as a worthwhile risk for the stretch isn’t so far-fetched.
Theodore made plenty of timely saves last season. Yes, not the playoffs, but if Varlamov hadn’t played out of his mind, Theo probably would have gotten another chance to shine. I am not a Theodore fan or apologist, but I can appreciate what brief glimmers of Vezina winning goalie he occasionally provides.
Cap space can be made. Again with the Brodeur example – his hit is $5.2M, and him on LTIR alone makes up for it.
Wouldn’t the more important question be (by that point) why Varlamov/Neuvirth isn’t the starter going into the playoffs?
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes that would be an important question. Where I was going with my question was that if you are not comfortable with Theo as the starter in the playoffs (which I’m not) then you are implicitly talking about Theo as the backup (which I am). Backup goalie is the least important position on a team (except for 7th D and 13-14th Fs), that alone means we shouldn’t be talking about him this high. His contract isn’t good so it’s not like we can say “but he’s so cheap his production per dollar makes him valuable.” His trade value is only high if teams think they can rely on him, i.e. they know what kind of netminding they will get. They don’t. For years now Theo has proven to be very streaky. He can’t just play mediocre all the time, that would be fine, even preferable. He plays very well and very poorly, and you never know what you’re going to get. That’s not an attractive option for a team looking to stabalize their goaltending.
I gotcha. I would suggest there’s no sense in making additional personnel moves until the situation calls for it (or if an offer is right). Let Theo and his contract come off the books next year and incorporate Holtby into the mix in the ’10 camp.
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with your point, but I also see why the votes for him are starting to get tossed around sooner than later.
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I personally feel I can’t properly judge the difference between a ‘decent’ career NHL player and a "top" prospect who hasn’t played a single game in the NHL
completely agreed – you can argue both sides forever, but i don’t feel like there’s ever an obvious conclusion.
If you were holding a lotto ticket and I offered you cash would you trade it? First you’d ask how much cash I was offering, then you’d compare it to your expected payout from the lotto ticket. You would only make the trade if the cash was more than your expected winnings, so say the economists. It’s the same analysis for prospects v. roster players. How much are the roster players contributing? How much do you expect from the prospect? This is where it gets trickier than a lotto hypo. A lotto ticket has a known chance of winning and known payout if you win. Prospects don’t come with a known chance of winning or a fixed ceiling. So all of us assign our own ceiling to the players based on what we’ve read/seen/heard and we assign our own probability. We are all assigning different values so we all disagree over the value of these prospects. It wouldn’t be any fun if it was all cut and dry.
You would only make the trade if the cash was more than your expected winnings, so say the economists
As someone who occasionally buys Mega Millions tickets for fun (and actually won $150 last summer) if someone offered me $1,000 for my ticket that could possibly win the $124 million jackpot, I’d take the $1,000. I guess that’s why you said “expected winnings” and not “potential winnings” because I don’t expect to win anything, and usually don’t.
That being said, I would trade Steckel straight up for Schultz and especially Carlson without a second thought.
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
by Sombrero Guy on Aug 10, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Ah, but Lotto is an all-or-nothing proposition. Either all the money or none. Whereas your prospect might give you a little, a lot, nothing, or everything you were looking for and then punch its cabbie in the face over 20 cents.
IS PAЯTY NOW
Ah, but Lotto is an all-or-nothing proposition. Either all the money or none.
There are many more, smaller prizes given out in addition to the jackpot.
yeah, like the $150 I once won for having 3 of the 5 and the mega ball.
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
by Sombrero Guy on Aug 10, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s official: David Steckel is the most over-rated player on the Washington Capitals.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Aug 10, 2009 7:50 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
Sorry about that.
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 7:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh, for furthering the exercise, I volunteer Clark or Erskine for next on the block.
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 8:15 AM EDT up reply actions
Clark? He hasn’t done anything substantial for either of the two teams that made the playoffs. I don’t see how he can be considered that valuable. Erskine is a 6/7 D. He played nicely in the playoffs but he’s pretty easily replaceable. I want to see Osala finally get up on this list. He fits a hole long term that we don’t have any other prospect capable of filling.
Calm down, I was just tossing out names.
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 8:22 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m calm. I just don’t think either of those guys are that valuable. If you posed the question “which three contracts would you like to get off the books?” I bet one or both of those guys shows up on the list.
Fair enough, but I’m simply “help(ing) us out and suggest a name to add to the next poll.”
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 8:38 AM EDT up reply actions
No worries brother. I’m a little slow today, I just switched to Sanka, so have a heart.
/Vargas’d
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 8:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Boyd Gordon’s still on the team, no?
Schultz isn’t underrated, he’s underappreciated.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on Aug 10, 2009 8:04 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Actually, I was suggesting you were a man without emotion =P
by thehoagster07 on Aug 10, 2009 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions
that’ll learn ya for getting those Botox treatments again.
from the house that Red Jesus built
by bigonetimer on Aug 10, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m going with Carlson. He’s the only guy left in the system (other than perhaps Neuvirth) who could be a preeminent star.
Schultz does defensive-D very well for a young player. Carlson has the potential to do both defensive and offensive D extremely well. He’s so far ahead of the curve that he’s probably the Caps’ most acclaimed prospect right now.
I could see the Caps trading Carlson for an established star defenseman with at least 500 games of experience. If a GM traded a player like Carlson for a player like Schultz, I’d think he was daft. They’re both unproven and inexperienced, but Carlson has higher upside. And if a GM traded a prospect like Carlson for a player like Steckel, he’d deserve some serious firing.
Agreed. My vote was for Carlson because he’s the one on the list that I would want to keep over all others. Basically, if I woke up this morning and heard that _ was traded, or suffered a career-ending injury in the off-season, or whatever, who would I be most upset about? JC.
by Scott in Shaw on Aug 10, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions
I guess I just look at the list and think, “I would only be flabbergasted by GMGM if he got rid of Steckel or Schultz.” The other guys I mostly think of as easily replaceable, particularly Flash and ShaMo.
I also don’t want to put a whole lot of value in the prospets who haven’t even played for the Caps yet. Alzner, Neuvy or Varly are recognized as the team’s future and that’s a pretty sure bet.
Also, for the record, I’ve been a big Steckel supporter since Bruce took over.
I don’t know how easily replaceable 20-25 goals from a 25-year-old making $725,000 is. Even with his many shortcomings, at some point soon, I think, Flash should start getting some votes.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
But wouldn’t you agree that Flash’s value is primarily as trade bait + good contract given that none of us think he’s a top-six forward for a deep-in-the-playoffs team?
I wouldn’t agree with that “none of us.”
And I’d say his real value is as insurance for Semin. If Semin has to be moved, Flash is so far the best candidate for filling his role as a secondary scorer. Not that he’s anywhere near the same level, but he’s still progressing towards becoming a possible 30 goal guy and that’s nothing to sneeze at if you’ve got to shed scoring elsewhere. I’m not sure how well that can translate into votes though, and I’m not sure where I’d rank him myself.
Is Flash significantly worse than the Penguins’ #4 winger last season?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Do you mean 2nd line? Sure. If he can get 20+ goals (and he’s probably trending towards 30 if things stay well for him) why not? He’s already shown an ability to step up and fill in for Semin (didn’t his production jump pretty nicely when Semin was out?) and that is partly what makes me think of him as the “spiritual successor” if you will.
I’d never consider him a guy you lean on for primary production, but it looks like he’s becoming a decent secondary scoring option, basically a good 2nd line winger.
So yeah, I have no issue seeing him as a 2nd liner on a Cup team, especially if said team has 1st line producers on the level of Ovie and Backstrom and someone like Green as well. He could end up being a team’s 4th or 5th leading goal scorer at worst and that still wouldn’t be an indictment of the team at all.
I meant second-highest goal-scoring forward. And I don’t think a team wins the Cup with Flash as their second-highest goal-scoring forward.
That said, I agree he’s a second-line winger… but he’s a decent second-line winger for an 8/9/10 team, not a 1/2 team.
Is Flash significantly worse than the Penguins’ #4 winger last season?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Is he even significantly worse than their #2? I guess it depends on whether you think that was Kunitz or Sykora, but goalwise he’s likely not a huge step down from either.
Yeah, but goals only get you so far. Flash is a huge step down from those guys in overall game and goalie neck cross-checking ability.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I don’t think that’s a real/fair/legit question. PIT knew that its forward depth was so horrid that it went out and got Kunitz and Guerin, who were effectively Nos. 4 and 5 for them. And yes, both are ‘better’ than Flash.
Guerin and Kunitz were effectively Nos. 1 and 2 for them, not 4 and 5.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Sure you don’t mean Winger?
"The passion of our supporters cannot be contained by clothing."
by Bald Pollack on Aug 10, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Is Flash a No. 2 forward scorer on a Cup-winning team?
Is Flash significantly worse than the Penguins’ #4 winger last season?
Is he even significantly worse than their #2?
I don’t think that’s a real/fair/legit question.
So why is it unfair to compare Flash to players in his actual role (second line wing) but it is fair to ask Flash to be a #2 goal scorer for a team, which is not his actual role?
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I think he has great value as trade bait precisely for the reasons I mentioned – he’s young(ish), cheap and has shown offensive upside.
But I think there’s also real (regular season) value in 25 goals at that price. Goals win games and winning games, even in the regular season, matters.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yeah, I agree that his value is as a guy who plays 55 games, scores 23 goals and who then gets traded.
If he could play himself into “the guy” who gets moved for “the missing piece” at the deadline, he’ll have proved himself more valuable than some of the players who will go before him on this list, that’s for sure.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
If only Flash had as much grit as Patrick Kane does when Kane is shortchanged by 20 cents.
(Amazing: Was that the first Patrick Kane ‘joke’ of the morning?)
Kane is American, therefore I shall give him the benefit of the doubt for the moment whilst the .ca media tars and feathers him.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Uh, the Chicago Tribune has no fewer than seven stories on this right now. (!!!) Including one with the headline: “Citizen Kane finally hits someone (allegedly).”
Ha.
I’ve just seen a lot of really irresponsible stuff already on this and I’d rather not partake.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
You know his new “20 Cent” moniker will last the rest of his career though.
"My face is my mask."
by Jake Shapiro on Aug 10, 2009 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I’m pretty sure everyone here likes Steckel, that’s not the question. From a team-building standpoint, I don’t see how you can argue that it’s more important to fill the 3C role before filling out your top 4 D or your 2C. Steckel is a nice guy, has grown up in the organization, but simply is not as valuable as at least two other guys on that list (Carlson and Schultz).
I voted for B-Mo
But Steckel also got some consideration for me. Both are key players for the Caps, but the Caps are a “Win Now” team, and B-Mo will contribute more to the offense than Steckel. The gap between B-Mo and Steck on offense is much wider than the gap between them on defense. Sure, three years from now, it’s more likely Steckel will be the only one on the Caps…
Let's go Caps!
Why do you say that a team with a 21-year-old goalie and a ridiculous foundation of sub-26-year-olds is a “win now” team?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Agreed. NJD is a “win now” team. WAS is not. WAS is built to win for a decade with the core we have. That’s why we should be focusing on finding players that will allow us to compete for a Cup for a decade, not for just 09-10.
At the same time, the pressure is going to be on for all of the high-salary teams with the looming cap drop (most likely). It’s going to hit some harder than others, and the Caps young talent should insulate them somewhat, but at the same time the pressure will be there.
If the Caps end up having to deal Semin, for example, well that may or may not make it harder to go for it next year (or the year after, etc.) depending on the return.
At the very least there will likely be some pressure for GMGM to make a smart, supporting addition at the deadline (not an “all in” move for a huge name, not selling the farm) that might push the team over the top. Now might end up being as good a time as any given who we’ve got now in terms of known quantites.
Of course it may end up that next year’s team is a huge step up from this year’s.
How about “win now and later”
If the “missing piece” (say, a player who doubles your odds of winning the championship) could be obtained without giving up Ovechkin, Semin, Backstrom, Green, Varlamov, Alzner, or Carlson, I think you’d have to do that.
by Gould Old Days on Aug 10, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I could live with that. But I’m not saying we shouldn’t try to win now, or that we shouldn’t trade any prospect. I’m saying the Caps aren’t in a “win now” mode so choosing a gap-filler on a 1 year deal when we still have guys that are going to contribute for a long time doesn’t make sense. I know we both agree on this because I know how you voted.
definitely. I could see GMGM giving up a couple nice pieces in March for that bad-ass S@H defender that this team still lacks.
from the house that Red Jesus built
by bigonetimer on Aug 10, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Wouldn’t be the first time a GM saw someone have a great playoff series or two, projected that performance out over 82 games, and decided they had a star on their hands.
Steckel is a fun player to watch and root for, and exactly the sort of player teams need to win in the playoffs. But there’s no way he’s more valuable than Neuvirth, Carlson, Schultz, or Flash.
Haven’t you heard? Schultz sucks because he never hits anyone.
Seriously, I voted for Steckel. This is basically an “upside” pick for me. I see Steckel as pretty close to turning into a legitimate shutdown centerman who will chip in 30+ points in a season, anchor a PK, win crucial draws and be one of those unheralded guys that fills a very important role.
Schultz looks like a legit top-pairing defender in the making to me, but I think he’s 3-4 years away from becoming that guy.
As for Flash, yeah, I hear you when you say there’s considerable value to a young, cheap guy who pots 25-30 goals a year. I agree. He’s just so soft, and does so little other than scoring, he drives me nuts. Additionally, given the talent he’s played with, anyone with some skills damn well ought to be collecting some goals. I fervently hope that he can be traded for the “final piece of the puzzle”, so to speak.
I reckon I’ll be voting for Schultz next, if that matters.
Upside? Schultz, Carlson and Flash all have more upside than Steckel. Steckel’s upside, in your characterization, is a 3C that can chip in. Carlson and Schultz have top pair upside (though they probably won’t be top pair based on who else is in the org.) and Flash has top 6 F upside even if he’s soft and inconsistent. Steckel is playing at or near his ceiling.
I don’t think picking Steckel here is indefensible, but I wouldn’t pick him based on upside. Steckel is 27. He is who he is at this point. He’s not in decline and will get craftier (playing a role where craftiness is a big asset), but you can’t reasonably predict a lot of upward trajectory for him from a player development perspective.
To put it another way, Steckel is older than virtually every other significant player for the Caps (only forwards that are older are BMo, Knuble, Clark, Bradley, Aucoin, and Nyls). Not all guys develop at the same rate, but Steckel is in what would normally be considered his prime right now.
I’m going to keep picking Schultz til he’s off the board. There aren’t that many 23-year old, top-4 defensemen out there that make less than $1m. And unlike Steckel, he won’t be a UFA after this year (right?).
its not indefensible, but it is certainly a questionable decision by many. I still stand by my original point that there is no way you select a 3rd line C over a 1st or 2nd pair D simply because there are occasional 3rd line players that score a big goal in the playoffs every now and then.
That being said, along the lines of Steckel becoming a craftier player, Knuble came out of nowhere to start scoring 30+ goals a season after bouncing around the lower two lines for the first 6 or so years of his NHL career.
//not advocating putting Steckel on the top lines, just saying stranger things have happened.
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
by Sombrero Guy on Aug 10, 2009 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Put Bradley on the Board Next
So we can see how many people over-value fourth-liners in addition to over-valuing third-liners.
by Scott in Shaw on Aug 10, 2009 5:41 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
I agree—voted for 55 once again—but I sure would be sorry to see him in another sweater next year.
Just for fun, assuming Stecks puts up even comparable numbers in all areas this year, what kind of deal do you think he’ll get?
from the house that Red Jesus built
Agreed (although obviously I’m a fan of Mr. Bradley) – I keep voting Schultz and thinking I should be voting Carlson and then realizing that this has become a popularity contest so it doesn’t matter anyway – Muffins will be likely get ranked more valuable than Carlson and Schultz as well – He also wins faceoffs and kills penalties after all…
And I’m guessing Stecks gets around 1.1-1.3 million next year if he puts up comparable numbers to this year – i.e. a slight bump over what Bradley is making to tie this all together.
hmm. I have a feeling he’s going to draw more than that as a UFA. I was looking at some comps (26 ish, C, 20-35 point range, 12-15 ATOI 3rd liner) and came up with Chad LaRose (1.7M) and Chris Higgins (2.25M) as maybe the high end of what Stecks fetches next year.
from the house that Red Jesus built
Have 3 goals ever propelled two mens’ career archs more than theirs in the playoffs last season? Granted, we were all pumped to get secondary scoring but these guys were hardly the reason the Caps amassed 108 points last season to get them into the postseason…
"Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it."
- Ferris Bueller
by war_capitals on Aug 11, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Florida
|
54 | 26 | 17 | 11 | 63 |
|
Washington
|
54 | 28 | 21 | 5 | 61 |
|
Winnipeg
|
57 | 26 | 25 | 6 | 58 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
54 | 24 | 24 | 6 | 54 |
|
Carolina
|
56 | 20 | 25 | 11 | 51 |
(updated 2.12.2012 at 8:46 AM EST)
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- The Phoenix Coyotes continue to complicate everything by winning
- As West playoff race gets tighter, Kings’ scoring woes far from disappearing
- Evan Trupp scores behind the net goal, stuns Las Vegas in ECHL (Video)
- Saturday’s Three Stars: Another Malkin 5-spot; Price spoils Sundin night
- The Chicago Blackhawks’ losing streak is bad for everybody
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
