Friday Caps Clips: Development Camp Day Five
Your savory quakin' breakfast links:
- Today at Development Camp: Group A at 9:30, Group B at 11:15. Here's Camp coverage from the past 24 hours:
- Marcus Johansson being better in his second scrimmage than in his first and the Braden Holtby/Evgeny Kuznetsov incident were Thursday's top Camp stories. [CI]
- Speaking of Johansson, take time to read The Mackan Manifesto... and temper your expectations accordingly. [FanPost]
- More on the Holtby/Kuznetsov dust-up. [Caps Snaps, RMNB]
- Assistant coach Bob Woods' son Brendan is trying to make a name for himself at Camp. [Masisak]
- Chatting with Sam Carrier... [RtR]
- ... and Brett Flemming. [RtR, FFODC]
- This is Phil DeSimone's fourth Development Camp with the club, and is finding that his experience helps. [Caps Today]
- Kuznetsov and Stanislav Galiev meet with a University of Maryland Russian class. [RMNB]
- More on Galiev. [Caps Snaps]
- Bruce Boudreau on fighting... in Development Camp. [OFB]
- Speaking of Camp fights, here's more Joe Finley coverage for you. [OFB (Fins talks paintball), OFB, RtR, Jumping the Glass (don't miss this one)]
- Pictures! [Neil Greenberg (via RMNB), mike.rannell's Flickr, Caps Snaps (warm-ups,), Caps In Pictures (Wednesday's scrimmage), Red Line Station, A.L. Huber's Flickr]
- Additional coverage. [Peerless, RMNB, Red Line Station (and videos), Frankovic, CSN Washington, FFODC]
- A bit more on the five RFAs who signed with the Caps yesterday... [Dump 'n Chase]
- ... and one of the two who didn't (Tomas Fleischmann being the other, as his arbitration showdown with the team looms). [Patriot-News, PHT]
- Don't expect The Garbage Man to stop collecting trash any time soon. [Jumping the Glass]
- The NHL's Top Puckhandlers include a pair of Caps. Spoiler alert: named Alex. [FanHouse]
- Finally, happy 44th birthday to Mikhail Tatarinov.
317 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ah Tatarinov, ye of the booming slapshot and little else.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
An 11th-round-pick was Tatarinov. Related: thank god there aren’t 11 rounds of the draft any more.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Tatarinov aside, that ’84 Caps draft produced five guys that played in more than 500 games (in descending order, Hatcher in 1157, Kris King (849), Pivonka (825), Steve Leach (702) and Paul Cavallini (564)).
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 7:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Pretty good top 5
1 1 Pittsburgh Mario Lemieux F Laval Voisins [QMJHL]
1 2 New Jersey Kirk Muller C Guelph Platers [OHL]
1 3 Chicago Ed Olczyk C U.S. National Team [Intl]
1 4 Toronto Al Iafrate D Belleville Bulls [OHL] 799
1 5 Mtl. Canadiens Petr Svoboda D Czechoslovakia Jr.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 7:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Luc Robataille and Gary Suter both went in the 9th round. Brett Hull in the 6th.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 7:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Impressive class – that’s 700+ NHL games out of each of the first four picks. Wonder how many times that has happened.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
They got 3 out of 4 in ’89 (Trent Klatt 782, Kolzig 719 and Jason Woolley 718).
/pours one out for Jack Button
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 7:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Aye. But that quadfecta (?)… I mean League-wide… can’t be too common.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Cursorily looking through the lists with my bored doppelganger to the 81-ish classes:
Montreal’s 1987 draft (Mathieu Schneider 1289, Eric Desjardins 1143, Cassels 1015, John LeClair 967)
The Flyers’ 1990 draft comes close (Mike Ricci 1099, Simon 782, Chris Therien 764, Mikael Renberg 661).
Then there’s the ’89 Wings draft.
Boredom twins, unite!
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 7:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Interestingly, half of those ’87 Habs ended up playing with 3/4 of those ’90 Flyers for quite some time.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
that 1989 Wing class…must be nice to have two shoe-in HoF’ers in the same class. Damn.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Calgary’s 1984 Class
Gary Roberts (1224), Paul Ranheim (1013), Brett Hull (1269), Gary Suter (1145)
That’s 4 guys with over a thousand. In the same draft.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Jesus. That’s damn impressive.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
And in the next year’s draft, they got some guy named Nieuwendyk in the second round
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions
1984 Canadiens Draft:
Petr Svoboda (1028), Shayne Corson (1156), Stephane Richer (1054), Patrick Roy (1029).
And those were all in a row.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Oilers in 79 drafted Lowe, Messier, and Anderson back to back to back. Missed on their other 3 picks though.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions
… and those misses haunted them forever! Or not.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I think that’s your clubhouse leader for best draft class ever from a single team.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Their 80 Class isn’t bad either…Coffey, Kurri, Walt Poddubny, Andy Moog
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Here’s another good one
Whalers in 82 drafted Kevin Dineen, Ulfie, and Ray Ferarro back to back to back in the 3rd, 4th and 5th rounds.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions
Wow….is Dave Taylor the biggest draft bargain ever? The Kings drafted him in the 15th round of the 1975 draft.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions
I’d be willing to bet the 2000s have several drafts that see that. You have to figure Backstrom’s class hits it, Stamkos’ class will hit it, 2003 should hit it, off the top of my head.
Deo ac Fehritati.
Yeah, I meant any given team hitting on its first four picks in a draft.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yeah… way for me to jump in without knowing what’s going on. Fucking CBo. We were so close in 2004…
Deo ac Fehritati.
still, the 3 Caps first rounders from 2004? pretty nice.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Woolley played 718 games in the NHL? Wow… I don’t think I remember more than one of them (in 1998, when he broke the tie for Buffalo in Game 5 of the Eastern Final, staving off the Sabres elimination…)
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jul 16, 2010 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Starting from 1980:
1990 (Nolan, Nedved, Primeau, Ricci, and for a bonus, Jagr went 5th and Daryl Sydor and Derian Hatcher went 7th and 8th…the only bust was Scott Scissions at 6)
You can probably count 1997 techinically (Thornton, Marleau, Jokinen and Luongo) because those three guys have already, and Luongo has played 612, and he’s going to get to 700+.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 7:45 AM EDT up reply actions
1990 is the only other year I could find where it definitely happened. But 1997 will happen in the near future because of Luongo.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 7:45 AM EDT up reply actions
I meant each of one team’s first four picks.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
More useless trivia
Glavine actually suited up for a pro hockey game. Last season.

47 is Glavine … or Cory Clouston.
I believe in JC.
Was that an earthquake this morning, or are the Caps looking to fill their 2C with a free agent visit by Kyle Wellwood?
Boooom!
"Game's the same. Just got more fierce."
by Hooks Orpik on Jul 16, 2010 7:15 AM EDT via mobile reply actions 11 recs
It can only mean one thing…
Mike Green is at KCI a bit early today.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 7:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Or did he have dinner at Ben’s Chili Bowl last night?
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jul 16, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Let’s talk Mikko Koivu.
Minny gave him a ton of cheddar yesterday. Is he worth it?
My answer is yes and no – he’s worth it to the Wild, perhaps, but wouldn’t be for other teams, for example, the Caps.
Don’t get me wrong – I would trade this coming year of Alex Semin at $6m for this coming year of Koivu at $6.75m without blinking, based upon organizational needs (the drop-off from Koivu to the current 2C options is greater than the drop-off from Semin to other second-line wingers, not to mention the PKing, the depth at center of the East’s top teams, etc.)
But do I think that a $6.75m cap hit on Mikko Koivu in 2017-18 would be a good thing for the Caps? No. No I do not.
Those are my gut feelings on his deal – makes sense for Minny, but wouldn’t for the Caps (though I have much, much love for the player).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
he’s worth it to the Wild, perhaps, but wouldn’t be for other teams, for example, the Caps
Bingo.
A tad overpaid, yeah, but the guy is the Minnesota Wild. They probably weren’t left with a whole lot of choice, but paying him more and longer than Toews is a tough one.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 16, 2010 7:39 AM EDT up reply actions
But he’s a UFA and Toews wasn’t, so it’s not apples-to-apples.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Right; overlooked that, and my bad.
So do you pay Parise more or less than this?
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 16, 2010 7:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Tough call. I consider centers inherently more valuable than wings, and I think Minny needs Koivu slightly more than other teams might, and paid a slight premium as a result.
All that said, I think Parise can reasonably ask for $7m now.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Just FTR, when I saw the tweets coming across my heart sank a little. That was my deadline deal blockbuster I was hoping for… :(
Gotta pay Parise more, even given the C/W dynamic. Makes no sense that they are chasing Kovy with Parise on deck.
Deo ac Fehritati.
Parise has scoring ability Koivu only dreams of, so I agree on both counts.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 16, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
I think the fact that Koivu has the ‘C’ for Minnesota has a lot to do with why he’s getting paid this much, but I agree that Parise $$ will be > than Koivu $$.
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
That works both ways. A tertiary reason Weber was given the C in Nashville was to help convince him to stay here during negotiations. Obviously, he’s the right choice even considering the contract, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the management had that in the back of their mind.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 16, 2010 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I guess what I meant is that Koivu’s ‘C’ is representative of the fact that, after him, who’ve they got? NSH is much deeper behind Weber at his position than MIN is behind Koivu, if that makes any sense.
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
Also, everything I hear indicates that Koivu is a great leader, if a little quiet.
Weber’ll get there, but I think he got the C a little young
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 16, 2010 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe so, but there wasn’t a lot of choice. Suter’s a year older but not the leader Shea is. Sullivan would be great, but he’s on his career victory lap this year and we’d have been seeing the same problem in 11-12.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 16, 2010 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Makes sense. By the way, I think Ovi is C a little young too. Not that he was the wrong choice. But he has some growing to do to really have that C look right on him
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 16, 2010 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly. Same situation here. Neither are the wrong choices, but necessity pushed the envelope early.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 16, 2010 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m glad Ovi turned down the C back in 2005 when he was still only 20. He’s still a young Captain but we got plenty of other uber young captains, like Richards, Crosby, and Toews. I don’t think Ovi is any less ready for Captain than those people. I think Crosby was made the Captain at too young an age. I’ll admit I dislike Pittsburgh but regardless, I would still think Crosby was a bit too young to be captain. Captains need a certain amount of gravitas and, let’s face it, most guys don’t have enough of it prior to the age of 24-25, at least not for the NHL.
Rocking the Red since 1975
If it had been anyone but Pierre LeBrun channeling E.J. Hradek (ok, if it had been a blogger/tweeter whose name rhymes with “schmeerless”), I’d have discounted this right out of hand…
meanwhile owners quietly talking about a $48 M cap in next CBA… Yikes
But that would quite an opening bid by the owners for a new CBA, too. A $48M cap (which would be, what, about 50 percent of revenues?) ain’t gonna happen. It has about as much chance of happening as a lockout (gulp!). But if it did (or something in the neighborhood), contracts like the Koivu one aren’t going to quite as good. I like Koivu, but this contract is the sort that suggests he’s going to become an even better player. I suspect we’re just about at the top end of his curve.
If there is a good thing in it in the short term (other than making Mr. Koivu a rich young man), it is in pushing up the bidding for a guy like Zach Parise, who is an RFA next summer. Jersey… ah, screw ’em.
If you've read this far...seek help.
If the slash the cap that drastically, you’d think there’d have to be an across-the-board cut on existing contracts, no? The current CBA reduced existing contracts by ~25%, if I recall correctly.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
The only way I see the players accepting this is if they can bring down the escrow. Escrow payments have been well over double digits, correct?
Maybe the PA will eventually agree to take a step back (though 25% is pretty drastic) and reason that in time revenues will make the cap grow — just as it did from 2005-2010. But if they can guarantee what’s in their contracts is closer to what they’ll actually take home, perhaps it’ll be a manageable pill to swallow.
Easy for me to theorize though, not as if I’m going to cut my own paycheck by a quarter. That wouldn’t pay my dog food bill for a month!
"Game's the same. Just got more fierce."
Oh, I hear you, and it all gets back to the initial point on the unlikelihood of a drastic reduction in the cap. All I’m saying is that if there’s a huge drop in the cap in the next CBA, contracts will be slashed along with it – none of the owners is going to want to be stuck with a contract that was 14% of his cap and is now 18%.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I’m with you in this area because if nothing else, the PA is going to take something on the chin somewhere. Seems like the most logical place to do it from their perspective because they don’t have much else in the way of concessions.
And if Eric Don Fehr takes the ED job when it’s offered, I’d have to think that a strike/lockout becomes all the more likely, particularly if they think the piece of the pie is all milk and honey.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 8:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I just don’t see how the PA could possibly take another blow considering how badly they were stomped in the 04 lockout. I hope it doesn’t get as ugly as the NBA’s lockout is going to be (see yesterday’s article where the NBA is claiming they lost 300 million dollars and the Players are saying they’re full of it).
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 8:53 AM EDT up reply actions
That’s why Fehr’s possible hiring concerns me. The PA is in shambles; the quotes by guys like Montador, Stajan and Regehr seem to have this tone of “well, he knows his stuff, he can at least get us through the next CBA and maybe bring another guy with him who can help us longer.”
Now if Fehr lays out that the PA really doesn’t have anything to work with and they might have to breathe deeply and bite the bullet on this CBA and hope for a shorter term and brace for war on the next one, that’d be encouraging.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions
I dunno, if I were Cox and could put the dots together in a column, I’d do it, regardless of whether I was on vacation or not.
I’d love to see the details on the Hargrove-Penny-Lindros participation in Kelly’s ouster; all I know is pretty much based on old G&M articles right now.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions
I’d love to see the details on the Hargrove-Penny-Lindros participation in Kelly’s ouster; all I know is pretty much based on old G&M articles right now.
So would I. I would especially like to know more about this alleged misappropriation of all these funds they were supposed to have misappropriated.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s the best way to go I think, but he can make the case that they’re ALREADY biting the bullet with the current CBA.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions
with so many teams in dire financial situations, how can the players think the owners are pulling a fast one on them?
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 Jul 16, 2010 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions
They got destroyed in the last CBA. And the league made 2.7 billion last year. The top player salaries are LeCavalier and Luongo at 10 million apiece. Makes sense for them to want a bigger piece.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Also (from that article)
Hitting the $2.7 billion mark is significant for the league because of the way its collective-bargaining agreement is structured. The CBA, which was signed in 2005, was written so that the percentage of total revenue players were entitled to would increase from 54 percent to 57 percent as revenue rose until it hit $2.7 billion. The player share is capped at 57 percent for any revenue beyond $2.7 billion, so the NHL will keep more of what it earns if revenue rises in the future.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 9:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Rec’d for the pull and the knowledge.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions
“Made” isn’t the same as “profited”. Obviously there are some cash cow teams, but there are plenty in trouble as well. With the NHL finally making tangible progress, big ratings in the SCF (even if having CHi and PHI as two big markets helped), I hope the players aren’t dumb enough to rock the boat and set everything back a decade.
I have a hard time siding with the players in these labor disputes.
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 Jul 16, 2010 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m with you. Sure, it stinks when you don’t collect 100% of your contract income, but I’ll take 90% of $1 million anyday. It’s the ones getting league minimum who get hurt the most, and they still make a decent living. What the players need more than a contentious negotiation are the right people to give them the best financial advice, both individually and as a union. I don’t think they’ve ever gotten that.
"It's always good to have vikings."
Proud member of the Oxford dictionary police.
It’s the ones getting league minimum who get hurt the most, and they still make a decent living.
True, but their (all players’) years of being able to make that decent living are extremely limited, which is why…
What the players need … are the right people to give them the best financial advice, both individually and as a union.
Amen.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
True, but their (all players’) years of being able to make that decent living are extremely limited
Yeah, I thought about adding that part, but even at $500k per year, if you make that enough years you can put away some decent coin with the proper lifestyle and advice. The kids in the minors are a totally different matter.
"It's always good to have vikings."
Proud member of the Oxford dictionary police.
As much as we’d like to think that people will always support hockey for the sake of it being a great game, in today’s “ESPN” world, it’s the stars that generate the big revenue (ie – TV ratings) that fund the sport. Why else do you think Washington and Pittsburgh are guaranteed 2 Winter Classics in the next few years?
Ovi, Sid, and the rest of the big guns deserve the bigger piece of the pie for what they bring to the NHL.
"HISTORY DOESN’T MATTER!!! .... Who cares if it’s never been done? We aren’t those teams who failed before. We are in control of our own destiny, and we will make it happen our own way.." - A Gordon, June 2010
Problem is, the guys making $500K are the guys that have trouble sticking in the NHL for long periods of time. Those guys aren’t logging the 10-15 year careers in the NHL, so they may get a few years at $500K and then the rest of the time they are making an AHL salary.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 16, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
That is a little what I was alluding to. They get a few years at $500k. They’ll never get rich, but if you’re used to living on $70-$100k, if you’re smart enough to take the excess from a few years, you’ll have a nest egg to start you along after your playing days are over, as opposed to someone who never gets beyond the AHL.
"It's always good to have vikings."
Proud member of the Oxford dictionary police.
I have a hard time siding with the players in these labor disputes.
I feel the exact opposite way. The owners make so much money off these players, that its just unconscionable to me that the players don’t get a bigger share. Not to mention, these guys plead poverty at a moment’s notice when they want a new building and essentially hold municipalities hostage in order to build them one with public money.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Related, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if the NHL owners attempted to do something like this
Essentially, the NFL owners are trying to get a guarantee on their TV money for next season (the one after this one) and use that to make themselves virtually strike proof in terms of losing revenue.
The union, in its filing, argues that the NFL’s guaranteed $4 billion in television revenues combined with the elimination of $4.4 billion in player salaries would make 2011 a profitable season for the owners even if no football is played because of a lockout.
The league’s television contracts for the 2011 season provide for the networks to pay the league even though there would be no games during a lockout. The union argues that this agreement was made to the detriment of the players and is, in fact, a weapon to be used against the players in the lockout.
The union argues that the NFL didn’t maximize revenue from other seasons when the league would have had to share that income with players. The union says that violates a 17-year-old agreement between the two sides, which stipulates the league must make good-faith efforts to maximize revenue for players.
The union is asking Burbank to order the league to put all TV money in an escrow instead of distributing it to the owners during the lockout. This would, obviously, produce significant leverage for the union.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions
They might, but they don’t really get that much revenue as it is. They don’t have that kind of bargaining power with television.
"It's always good to have vikings."
Proud member of the Oxford dictionary police.
My siding with the owners is based upon belief that some (many??) teams really are in tough financial situations The players are guaranteed their salaries, regardless of performance, injury, whatever. Granted a player can be bought out at 2/3 the remaining value of the contract, but that’s still a lot of money.
The owners are the ones taking on financial risk.
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 Jul 16, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
If you don’t guarantee contracts, that just turns you into the NFL, where they can cut a guy tomorrow and not owe him a cent. The players NEED that kind of protection.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
It offends my lawyerly sensibilities that the NFL is even allowed to call those contracts. What a sham.
Deo ac Fehritati.
It offends mine and I’m not a lawyer. Those are basically guaranteed signing bonuses and the promise that if they like you then you might also get paid some what is written on those pieces of paper you signed.
The rookie deals are a complete joke. Some guy who never played a down makes more than an all-pro in many cases.
"You ever use smelling salts, every time you type a bad blog?" Brooks Laich
by Carl Putnam on Jul 16, 2010 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
You’re only allowed to release players at certain times, correct? And although I’m not familiar with the NFL CBA, I can’t imagine that you can release someone who was injured during a game or practice without paying them some sort of compensation.
The way I’ve always seen it is that an NFL team can release you for not performing to a certain standard, while an NHL team can only release you for straight nonperformance.
You can be released at any time by an NFL club. Injury settlements are normally nowhere near contract value.
"You ever use smelling salts, every time you type a bad blog?" Brooks Laich
by Carl Putnam on Jul 16, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, if both parties bargain for terms by which one party can unilaterally end the contract (as the League and the PA did in the CBA), why should it offend?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Lots of things offend me even when two parties agree.
Upshaw provided poor leadership for NFLPA for decades.
"You ever use smelling salts, every time you type a bad blog?" Brooks Laich
by Carl Putnam on Jul 16, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Upshaw provided poor leadership for NFLPA for decades.
I don’t disagree with that, but from a purely contractual point of view, there’s consideration given for the right of one party to terminate a player contract, so I don’t see it as offensive. Perhaps the PA shouldn’t have gone for it, but if they hadn’t, they’d have had to have given up something else elsewhere.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I understand the consideration and negotiating aspects (or I better at this point), but for both sides it is counterproductive to have terminable contracts. The owners feel like they are saving money, but the terminable contracts lead directly to a lot of the hold out problems, and in general make a mockery of the idea of signing players.
Deo ac Fehritati.
Its an absolute travesty what they’re able to get away with there. The NFLPA should be (rightly) ripped for how badly the players get jobbed, but in their defense, careers are so short and turnover is so high that they really don’t have much leverage. And the NFL does such a good job of manipulating the media that most of the flak falls on the players that hold out rather than the owners.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
They have short careers and high turnover, but that shouldn’t be the focus of leverage. The focus of leverage should be how much money the players create for everyone else. Sure, it’s not always the same players, but that’s why you have a union looking out for the players. I guess a lot of the onus, as J.P. intimated, is on the NFLPA for negotiating a horrible deal, I just despise the entire system. Sure, players can’t just opt out of a contract like owners can, but they see the injustice and instead they just hold out the year after signing a gigantic lucrative “contract.” I guess they could call them all contracts-at-will, but I’d rather they just settle for real, modern contracts. NFL owners would have to take more risk of injury (which is obviously foreseeable) and they’d end up signing shorter deals. Problem solved. Sure, there are injuries and turnover, but that’s why you don’t sign 7 year deals. Stick with a series of 2-3 year deals.
Deo ac Fehritati.
I always felt that MLBPA has as much leverage as it does because careers are so long.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
That’s part of it, but because they were so archaic for so long, the Union got a lot through the years with arbitration, challenging (and defeating) the reserve clause and free agency, not to mention losing a collusion case. Only in the last few years have owners starting fighting back, for lack of a better phrase.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
MLB has a pretty long history of collusion , real and imagined.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Really, really OT, but related to that, its a crime that Marvin Miller is not in the baseball HOF.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions
it does not offend my lawyerly sensitivies at all. If the player does not like his position vis a vis the workplace he is free to find other employment. I understand there is a shortage of baggers at the Giant.
A danger to myself and others on the ice
Where else are they gonna play professional football?
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Its just too simple of a suggestion. That’s what bothers me about the whole “Oh they make millions of dollars” argument. Doesn’t mean they don’t have rights and don’t have legitimate grievances.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
They make millions because they do something that’s pretty important to society. I’m not saying that athletes and actors are on the level of doctors and teachers (and that teachers aren’t way, way underpaid, but, different discussion), but how many people go a day without a) watching sports, movies or television, b)thinking/writing/blogging about sports, movies or television, or c) making a living watching/thinking/writing about sports, movies or television? I know my life would be less exciting without the NHL and NFL, and I think they should be compensated, especially since their careers don’t last until “retirement age”.
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
No matter what your occupation, the notion of a disposable workforce is antithetical to all of our notions of fair play and the implicit contract of employment. And, in fact, it’s banned by statute or regulation in most industries. If I treated my staff like the NFL treats its players, I would be subject to all sorts of unpleasant consequences, up to and including jail time.
The NFL’s employment practices ought to be extremely distasteful to everyone.
"You want to start being part of the Rink? Fine, but more’s expected of you than John/Jane Cap Fan. Carry the cause of informed discussion to the unwashed masses and don’t crap in the yards of other SBN sites if you decide to go over there. They’re passionate about their teams too, no need to troll elsewhere and/or be a sore winner." --BP
by fat_daddyo on Jul 16, 2010 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
FD, do you need an IP lawyer? Because I’d love to work for a client like you. Damn, that was well said.
Of course, people like you aren’t very profitable clients because don’t get sued all that often because you show good judgment and stuff.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 16, 2010 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
thats my point. If you don’t like it, too bad. Find other employment.
A danger to myself and others on the ice
If you start a discussion at least stay engaged in it.
So if you believe that they can find employment in their field elsewhere, make the argument—what are the players’ other options? We all have opinions. So are yours backed up by logical analysis or just an emotional reaction.
Philosophically, I think that there is an uneasy tension between owners and workers that varies depending on the quality of their relationship, whether we are talking about sports team owners/multimillionaire athletes or grocery store owners/baggers and checkers.
The best places to work are the ones where workers’ are valued for their contribution and the expectations are made clear. It’s amazing how much respect can be generated just by appreciating the value the other side can bring to the table—I mean this for both workers and owners of all types.
"I’m very happy to hear the news," Ovechkin said when he heard about Backstrom's longterm contract--"because he’s one of the top centers in the world, one of my best friends and we want to play together for a long time. He’s a guy who wants to stay in one place and be comfortable and win, just like me. We talk all the time about playing together, and we talked after the playoffs about how we can win in Washington."
by capsyoungguns on Jul 16, 2010 9:44 PM EDT up reply actions
and the NFL is the best run league in the US if not the world
The pro game values it’s players immensely, for what they are. Pro football players have an absurdly short career span and an amazingly high turnover rate. Any form of lengthy contract flies in the face of that reality. Of course certain teams treat their players better than others (your “value” concept) and generally those teams are more succesful. But the most succesful teams are the ones that not only value their current roster, but understand the requirements of keeping that roster flexible.
As for my point that an unhappy player seek other employment, I will follow up with this: To complain that an unhappy NFL player can’t play pro football anywhere else requires that he be guaranteed a job as a pro football player. The vast majority of jobs in the US are “at will” employment. Accordingly there are people who change careers, often multiple times, in thier adult lives. Employment, especially for pro players should never be seen as an entitlement. Part of wrk hard and you will succeed is understanding the marketplace of employment.
A danger to myself and others on the ice
I appreciate your making your argument. I have no personal feelings about the NFL, because I don’t follow football that much.
And I actually wasn’t making the argument that a football player had to be guaranteed employment by the NFL, that he was entitled to a job. Without re-reading the thread above, I vaguely recall that it was about contractual issues between NFL players and owners and under what circumstances can the owner break the player’s contract.
My point really was more about the philosophy of employment, that a business owner should value the worker’s specific talent for which he was hired (performance based of course). Likewise, I would argue that the worker should value the risks and responsibilities that an owner assumes.
In other words, I see the owner/worker relationship as a two-way street, and that respect begats respect.
Finally, although I agree with you that today’s employees are much more transient than has been traditional in the past, I’m not sure professional athletes have quite the same menu of options that a regular worker does. And as you note an athlete has a short shelf life with a scenario I imagine as thus: “I hope to make it to the pros, I will play professionally as long as possible, then I will figure out my second career while I am living on the money I saved (hopefully invested wisely).”
"I’m very happy to hear the news," Ovechkin said when he heard about Backstrom's longterm contract--"because he’s one of the top centers in the world, one of my best friends and we want to play together for a long time. He’s a guy who wants to stay in one place and be comfortable and win, just like me. We talk all the time about playing together, and we talked after the playoffs about how we can win in Washington."
by capsyoungguns on Jul 17, 2010 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Also the concepts of “value” and “at will” are not mutually exclusive.
"I’m very happy to hear the news," Ovechkin said when he heard about Backstrom's longterm contract--"because he’s one of the top centers in the world, one of my best friends and we want to play together for a long time. He’s a guy who wants to stay in one place and be comfortable and win, just like me. We talk all the time about playing together, and we talked after the playoffs about how we can win in Washington."
by capsyoungguns on Jul 17, 2010 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s silly. Baggers at Giant don’t provide entertainment for millions of people. Furthermore, if you tried to sue your employer for breach of contract and he said “Well if you don’t like it you should just get another job”, how would you feel?
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
Exactly. If the boss said “you can go bag groceries” can’t skate would say “fuck that I’m a lawyer and I want to be paid like a lawyer.”
Deo ac Fehritati.
F&B I respect your hockey analysis but I don’t agree with your point about pro players. They are grown men and should take a good long look at the how’s and why’s of their particular employment. The NFL contracts protect the team the sport and the integrity of that particular business model. Blame the NFLPA and the agents if you will, but any player who thinks he has a right to work should look at the long line of plyers who are ready to take that spot on the roster.
and as an aside just when does this become OT?
A danger to myself and others on the ice
The owners aren’t making all profit, several owners don’t see any profit from their NHL teams. They have serious overhead, like Gus Frings.
Deo ac Fehritati.
by Rob Parker on Jul 16, 2010 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
But they’re not starving at the same time. Which is why I agree with what JP said:
True, but their (all players’) years of being able to make that decent living are extremely limited…
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
And they can write off a portion of their losses (silverlining).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I found this post on Kukla’s Korner interesting today. Apparently, Peter Karmanos made about what Eric Staal did last year from his day job.
They have serious overhead, like Gus Frings.
Rec’ing Bad.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Frings also wiped out his entire competition.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
it's difficult to side with either players or owners considering
thier relative points of view:
Players getting paid millions (or at least a significant amount more than the average working stiff) to PLAY A GAME.
Owners making millions for essentially HOSTING A GAME.
Its difficult to accept poor mouthing from either side.
A danger to myself and others on the ice
That’s why Fehr’s possible hiring concerns me
Couldn’t agree with you more, and have been worried about this since the first time I saw his name associated with the NHL
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 Jul 16, 2010 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I was amazed by the across the board 24% reduction last round.
This cap figure does sound like a negotiating starting point not an ending point, but if they did place a max cap not just a tied to revenue figure as it has been, I would think there are some possibilities other than an across the board reduction that the NHLPA could attempt to get in return. Just thinking about this for the first time and haven’t thought through all the repercussions, but for example, instead of an across the board cut, existing contracts could be grandfathered where the player still receives the salary but there would be a max amount that counted against the cap? Or to make things more “fair” it would still somehow be proportional so Ovechkin wouldn’t count the same as Backstrom for example. Hmm, have to figure out how that would work. Still early, but it is intriguing in the context of the rumors about Kovalchuk and his new contract relative to a possible shortened or non-existent season and Koivu’s new deal structure, too.
Which is why it would take an awful lot for this to happen. As an opening salvo, fine, you have to start somewhere. Start with low-balling, and then compromise in the middle.
"It's always good to have vikings."
Proud member of the Oxford dictionary police.
I would think the state of the KHL at the time of the negotiations will play a big part in how the owner approach this. I know it’s teetering now, but in 2 years they may turn the corner, and if they can get into an agreement with some of the other big EU leagues, it becomes an attractive alternative for a lot of the players (European as well as North Americans) who feel they’re being screwed by the NHL.
"HISTORY DOESN’T MATTER!!! .... Who cares if it’s never been done? We aren’t those teams who failed before. We are in control of our own destiny, and we will make it happen our own way.." - A Gordon, June 2010
A $48M cap (which would be, what, about 50 percent of revenues?)
Just call it a $96M cap that already includes a 50% “escalator” that reduces the actual dollar value of every contracted dollar to 50 cents. I’m sure the players would vote for that.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 16, 2010 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I’m a big Mikko Koivu fan and I like what Fletcher has done overall since he took over. It’s high but I’m not surprised as they really needed him to stay, IMO, and it’s all UFA seasons. As I have said before, I’m not a big fan of long contracts but they exist and 7 years for Koivu seems right given the contracts handed out of late…the contract takes him to 35yo. Full NTC is not ideal, but it’s better than an NMC for the team. I just don’t see Fletcher having much leverage in this deal. Maybe I’ll look back at this post and laugh later, high yes, but necessary for the franchise.
As is being pointed out, by Russo an interesting contract structure in terms of the details likely with the current CBA expiring in 2012 as a factor.
I’m a big fan of the Backstrom contract, I don’t know anyone who isn’t but while I understand the comparison some are making in the fanpost and other boards, the comparison is limited by the fact that this contract is for 7 UFA years and he was negotiating 100% as an UFA; the last year on his current contract covers this season, his last RFA season. Koivu is an all-around player, top faceoff guy, good PKr, and from all reports a quality leader; add in the Gaborik departure a year ago as the org. was transitioning from Risebrough’s leadership to Fletcher’s.
While Parise is not a center and has one RFA season still to play under his next contract, he does seem to be the player that this contract is going to have an impact on the most.
FWIW, I’ll note that I believed at the time and still believe Ovechkin’s contract wasn’t a discounted contract when it was signed even with the likely increase in the cap and the 13 year contract. That’s not a complaint just a note about the contract at the time it was signed and situations and circumstances that an organization has to deal with when negotiating.
Plenty of factors go into these deals; it’s not all about on-ice production, the circumstances with the franchise and the player’s role on and off the ice are factors, too.
Ok, now I’ll read the other posts on this topic…
by sk84fun_dc on Jul 16, 2010 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I haven’t looked at the capgeek article explaining how his contract is structured, but I understand there are bonus targets in every season and that the total cap hit could be a lot less than the stated AAV. If that’s how it actually ends up working, it’s substantially different than a regular contract.
Given that, I would take the contract for the Caps as well. Koivu is an elite defensive player: that he hasn’t been nominated for a Selke in the last couple of years is absolutely criminal. He also produces as a reasonably high level on offense, though not at the level of the top-tier point producers.
It would be one thing if he did that against median level competition, but he actually does it against the best players from the other team every night, while badly outshooting them. He’s also an effective power-play producer, if not elite. However, where he really shines is on the PK – his numbers are right up at the top of the league for that in any coinceivable useful metric. Again, he’s not doing that against the second unit, he’s on the first PK pair against the opposition’s best unit. This is all playing in the Western Conference, which really is tougher than the East after the top few teams.
I don’t love that contract expiring at 35; why would he do that instead of 34, to take him to his last pre-35 contract?
I’d look at it this way for the Caps: with Backstrom and Koivu as the top two C spots for at least the next few years, the youngsters can learn at 3C, whether that’s Makkan, Perreault, Kuz, whoever, which leaves them in position to take the 2C reins right as their hitting their peaks as players. Also, can you think of better mentors for younger centers than Backis and Koivu?
For the game within the game, Koivu is the perfect answer for Crosby, a guy that can roll out there and lock down the opponent’s best player directly. Stamkos? Anoter great counter. Giroux, Richards, Carter, Seguin? Koivu’s your guy.
I’d take him on the Caps for that price, absolutely. He addresses all of their largest deficiencies (save coaching) and gives the younger guys behind him time to develop. In short, I don’t think he’s overpaid, either here or there.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jul 16, 2010 11:02 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
I haven’t looked at the capgeek article explaining how his contract is structured, but I understand there are bonus targets in every season and that the total cap hit could be a lot less than the stated AAV.
How can he have bonuses if he’s not on his ELC and is not a 35+ player on a one-year deal? Or am I mistaken as to who is eligible for bonuses?
I don’t like him for the Caps b/c with AO, Nick, Green and/or Carlson and a goalie (and whatever else may come), I don’t think there’s room for another huge contract down the road for a non-foundational player, much as I like him. Would you take him and bid adieu to Green or Carlson – b/c that’s likely what the choice would be.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Roger that – but signing bonuses don’t change the cap hit, as you note below.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Dumb of me, should have realized that they were signing bonuses and not performance-based. That cools me on the contract significantly, but I still like it.
As far as foundational pieces go, Koivu’d end up as one, sure as hell, so the non-foundational part doesn’t bother me. I could deal with a goalie carousel for that kind of quality up front, especially with the current lack of depth – we do have a goalie pipeline and there are goalies to be had for reasonable prices now.
Given Green’s offensive numbers, we may end up with a choice between him and Carlson regardless of another large contract on the team. He’s going to get some serious FA offers if he gets to market and evem if he doesn’t, extending him is going to be very, very expensive.
Someone who isn’t in a car driving through Delaware, or knows off te top of their head – are RAHJC and MG52 up for renewal at the same time? If so and Green gets a large extension before he hits the market, does that not open the door for a Hjalmersson-style offer sheet on Carlson, only more expensive?
I think the Caps are faced with some tough personnel decisions coming up, regardless of any additional contracts. Good problem to have, to be sure, but a problem none the less.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jul 16, 2010 11:36 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Someone who isn’t in a car driving through Delaware…
Should be prepared for brutal traffic and a piss-ant state to singlehandedly fuck all traffic on 95. Thanks dicks. (You do know that you don’t actually need to hire a person to work an EZ pass lane, right?)
Deo ac Fehritati.
Love me the DE beaches… but that’s OT.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I haven’t read your entire post, but signing bonuses are added in to calculate the avg resulting cap hit. It has to do with how/when the player receives his payments and how signing bonuses vs salary could be impacted by changes in a new CBA, but it doesn’t change the cap hit because some of the dollars are paid out as a signing bonus.
(Of note, many players receive signing bonuses, but they aren’t always reported and capgeek hasn’t posted information on them until recently, and still doesn’t for the older contracts. Heatley and Spezza both had big lumpsum signing bonuses, which were issues related to the trading of Heatley and more recently, Spezza reportedly no longer being on the block.)
by sk84fun_dc on Jul 16, 2010 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I can agree with that. We have other core players we need to lock up and so that contract wouldn’t be awesome for us. I don’t think it would kill us, but it wouldn’t be optimal. I think it’s a fine deal for MIN. You have to lock up your core and he’s definitely the core. He plays a great two-way game and I just don’t see them regretting that signing.
Deo ac Fehritati.
Russo’s latest on the contract (for those that don’t know, Russo is the Minny beat writer and well-worth following/reading, IMO)
Yeah, he’s fab – one of those guys who makes me interested in a team that really isn’t interesting. At all.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
2)The seven-year deal is specifically seven years because it can be insured in case of injury. Deals over seven years can’t be insured.
Is this true? So neither Ovechkin’s or Backstrom’s contracts are insured?
I don’t believe so. Rick DiPietro’s deal is insured (indeed, getting it “short enough” for insurance was the big stumbling block). Contracts even have to get insured for AO to go play international hockey.
Deo ac Fehritati.
Yes, it’s true, but to clarify this is the NHL/League insurance. A team can attempt to get insurance coverage for the other years.
Someone already mentioned DiPietro, but I read a lot about this when Eric Staal signed his new contract, too.
Since I knew about the insurance issues, the point that caught my eye and was interesting to read, even though it makes sense if you think about it, is the comment about his estate.
For those interested in the insurance issue, here’s an article on the topic that I had read before and fortunately wasn’t difficult to track down just now using Staal, DiPietro, insurance and seven.
In fact, if Brent Burns’ head wasn’t mushy, I might could have some more thoughts.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Brent Burns seems like the one they’d most like to move, but I’m not sure he’s a great fit here. I’d like to see him bounce back before committing to him (flip-side: he’ll never be cheaper to acquire than he is now, unless he totally tanks his career). In any event, I’d prefer to get Zanon back, but everything I’ve seen says MIN has zero interest in moving him.
Who is the second someone you are thinking of?
Deo ac Fehritati.
The one I would’ve moved for Koivu.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Right. I mean, I wouldn’t give away Semin, and it would’ve made more sense to free up that salary pre-free agency. I just consider him a) a scorer and b) tradeable.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
MIN wants a scorer to play with Koivu. I can think of someone…
But it doesn’t fit Russo’s narrative…
Fletcher’s got to figure out a way to find a scorer for Koivu. But unless there’s significant unloading of salaries, the Wild’s going to have to build this scorer from within.
He points to the players developed from within — Ovechkin, Malkin, Crosby, Datsyk, etc. If that’s your model, then at least one of three things is going to have to happen for Minnesota. First, they could find that scorer among propsects who have not yet displayed a slam-dunk promise to be that player (Latendresse (even if he came from outside)? Granlund?… neither appear yet to be such slam dunks). That player might be a year or two away from being a productive partner, and that fits in the sweet spot of Koivu’s contract when he will be in his prime.
Second, they could suck, hit the jackpot (i.e., win the lottery) and get the top-of-the-line talent that fits with an Ovechkin, a Malkin, a Datsyuk. If that was to happen in the next year or two, that player would be a productive partner for Koivu early in his career, again, with Koivu in the prime years of his contract.
Third, they could muddle along in the 10-20 draft slots and perhaps get and perhaps end up with a talent comparable to an Anze Kopitar (an 11th overall pick) or a Zach Parise (17th overall), or even an Alexander Semin (13th overall). There would likely be be some years before that player became a productive partner for Koivu (Granlund is a 9th overall pick).
And that where one gets to the problem with the indispensable player that (for that particular franchise) has to be signed. Koivu does not yet have that partner who can assume the goal scoring load or the more purely offensive perspective that he seems disinclined to assume. Unfortunately, time is linear here. If the Wild are to build this resource from within, and Granlund isn’t it, then that resource is going to have to come from some future draft while Koivu’s contract is running. The effect is to “waste” (as a lot of folks in Caps Nation thought of Ovechkin) the early years of his contract, and there is no certainty that the Wild will ever be able to develop that talent from within.
I don’t disagree with the argument that the draft should be the strongest leg of the player development platform. Unfortunately, the rarely spoken about rebar in that leg is a team sucking enough to get a really high pick to be the “elite” player that drives a contender. The players Russo noted, with the exception of the Red Wings Datsyuk and Zetterberg, and the Devils’ Parise, all were top-three picks. And if Minnesota is not going to suck — if they are going to muddle along in that 10-20 drafting area, consider this. No player taken in the 2008 or 2009 drafts by the Wild have yet played a game in the NHL, and only one player taken in 2007 has played in more than 10 games, none of them in the 2009-2010 season (Colton Gillies, taken 16th). That might be unexpected, considering that Minnesota had only one top-20 pick (a 16th overall in 2009 — Nick Leddy). But the point is that if you are drafting in that middle third area of the first round consistently — not getting that top five pick for an elite player — you are going to be looking at long lead times just to bring a player to the NHL, let alone have him be a productive partner for your top income player.
In the end, I don’t think Minnesota is going to be able to build enough around Koivu from within to justify this contract, not unless they really suck somewhere along the way (and sooner rather than later). That strategy will have to undergo some tweaking.
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Jul 16, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I agree with most of this, which is why MIN is going to have to look to trade or sign a scorer if they are serious about helping Koivu.
I don’t think it’s fair to judge the 07-10 drafts yet. Way too soon to know what players are going to become (and Leddy is an NCAA guy that lost almost a full season and then got traded for Cam Barker, so it’s not like they didn’t ultimately get a quality player from that pick).
Deo ac Fehritati.
I’m not judging them in terms of whether any of those players will be productive, only that given where the Wild draft, it will take years — plural — to get any to the NHL and perhaps another year or two to where they can be a reasonable complement to Koivu in a contending context. Meanwhile, that contract is ticking. What Minnesota might have bought with this contract is years 5-6-7 and the hope that Koivu has a team around him that can do some damage.
If you've read this far...seek help.
Zanon is the roster player I’d like, but I don’t think they’d part with him so I’ll settle for a 2nd.
Deo ac Fehritati.
Either one means we got something in return, so I’ll settle for either.
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
by SmallZ827 on Jul 16, 2010 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Zanon is indestructible. I still cry at night thinking we let him go.
Not really, but you get the picture.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 16, 2010 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Koivu!
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 16, 2010 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Can’t agree more. Koivu’s contract may have just put him in the same boat as Rick Nash — his own contract will be one of the reasons that his team won’t build a champion around him.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 16, 2010 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Ahh, Brooksie
But in Ironman you can keep playing until you’re tired of getting hit. The big winners of this game were Brooks and Mitchell for Team World and Spinell and Miele on the USA side thanks to their gunslinger mentalities. I recall watching Brooks run down the middle of the course with two guns taking fire from all sides and Miele making two or three full runs down the middle taking heavy fire.
John Carlson - Glory follows him.
Looking at the photo in today’s clips, if you put a goatee on Holtby you’ve got a young Kolzig. And with the one arm leaning on the crossbar, the cage on the top of the head, he’s got Olie down pat. And of course, the flash of temper and the slash to the leg of Kuznetsov was vintage Kolzig.
I noticed that yesterday. the similarities in body language are a little creepy.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
If Holtby can produce a ten-year career with a Vezina thrown in, I’ll buy him his own nameplate.
by b.orr4 on Jul 16, 2010 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
If Holtby can produce aten-year career with a Vezina thrown inhockey card of him holding a hotdog with his name written in mustard, I’ll buy him his own nameplate.
FTFY

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 16, 2010 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
Dammit… my bad on the subject line fail.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
That might be one of the greatest cards of all time. I’m ashamed to admit I didn’t know it existed.
Now I just need to track one down for myself.
Hard to find – rarely on eBay, almost never on Acme Hockey Cards (which is an utterly amazingly awesome site, btw – two Boudreaus for $1.40!).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Anyone with Lexis-Nexis access able to pull this article?
Some athletes are hot dogs, but this is ridiculous. Some are showoffs who make plays with lots of mustard, but none has gone so far as Capitals goaltender Olaf Kolzig.
Kolzig has been trying to make his mark in the NHL for years. Now, he appears to have done so — and he’s relishing the feeling.
It all started innocently enough last year in Tampa Bay’s ThunderDome, where Kolzig asked some card company photographers: “What’s the weirdest hockey card you every made? Have you caught a guy eating popcorn or a hot dog or something?”
The next thing Kolzig knew, …
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Figured this would be a good way to start my posting…
Frankly, Kolzig’s New Card Is a Wiener
BYLINE: Len Hochberg, Washington Post Staff Writer
SECTION: SPORTS; Pg. D06
LENGTH: 304 words
DATELINE: HARTFORD, Conn., Jan. 3
Some athletes are hot dogs, but this is ridiculous. Some are showoffs who make plays with lots of mustard, but none has gone so far as Capitals goaltender Olaf Kolzig.
Kolzig has been trying to make his mark in the NHL for years. Now, he appears to have done so — and he’s relishing the feeling.
It all started innocently enough last year in Tampa Bay’s ThunderDome, where Kolzig asked some card company photographers: “What’s the weirdest hockey card you every made? Have you caught a guy eating popcorn or a hot dog or something?”
The next thing Kolzig knew, “the guy handed me a hot dog with my name written in mustard on it.”
Kolzig forgot about the whole thing until "I was walking out of USAir Arena a month ago. This lady was just howling. I asked her what’s so funny. She said, ‘Have you seen your new hockey card?’ "
Every (hot) dog has his day, and now Kolzig is a hot commodity among card collectors and autograph hounds. “I guess that’s my legacy now in the NHL,” he lamented, “that I have the funniest card.”
Recently, on Long Island, Kolzig “had a record following for autographs. It was league high for me. It took me 15 minutes to walk from Marriott, which is about 500 feet from the Nassau Coliseum.” (Dog Day Afternoon?)
But there’s even more to this card. “On the back, to add insult to injury, they have an action shot of Tabby,” Kolzig said, referring to former Capitals goaltender Rick Tabaracci.
Kolzig vows that he never ate the hotdog. Still, the man known for years as “Olie the Goalie” could have himself a new nickname. “Well, the last three games I played, you really can’t call me a hotdog. So, until I start playing a little better, I won’t be getting that nickname anytime soon.”
Hey, at least the card is worth something. “Yeah,” he said, “maybe a quarter.”
by aparcan1 on Jul 16, 2010 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Sweet, thanks.
Oh and I’m not one to tell you that you need an avatar, I don’t have one, don’t plan to ever have one, but the hot dog hockey card pic would be unique I believe :)
It helps that you’ve been exempted from that grief by the boss.
Besides, you’re one of the few avatarless people that actually bring meat to the metaphoric discussion table. Your presence is a blessing here sir.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Uh… ma’am.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 16, 2010 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
And unlike any avatarless profiles, I will remember this.
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 16, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
You gotta bring the meat.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Awesome – thanks and welcome!
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
"I am a pretty big competitor and when I played the puck he kind of hit me and interfered with me, and in a real game that would have been a penalty. But it is kind of a heat of the moment type thing and I don’t know what exactly happened. It is kind of a blur."
No, no it wasn’t a PIM. If a ref had called that in a real game I would either be livid (against the Caps) or laughing at our good fortune (for the Caps). I hope both parties can just move on and have a healthy relationship going forward. I don’t expect it to be an issue.
Deo ac Fehritati.
I just hope the heat of the moment wasn’t telling you what his heart meant.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
...
Bless you

Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
69.1 “…Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.”
Yeah, no way that’s a penalty. Kuznetsov was leaning around him and Holtby jabbed at him with his blocker. He was the one who most initiated the contact.
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
Pretty much. Regardless of the rulebook (I can ignore if if NHL refs can, right?), you never see a play like that called a PIM.
Deo ac Fehritati.
"Actually, so far they really haven’t [given me grief]," Brendan Woods said. "[Braden] Holtby gave me a little. I guess my dad kicked [Stefan] Della Rovere off the ice last year at camp, so he was wondering if there would be any tension between us because of that but everyone has been awesome and made it a lot easier for me. I am really happy with it."
Anyone remember what happened with SDR and Woods last year?
Deo ac Fehritati.
I thought Delly was injured for almost all of camp last year. I can’t recall anything that stood out on the first day.
(Yes, I know about the avatar hounding - just pretend mine is invisible.)
Delly injured his shoulder at d-camp last year, and then got concussed in rookie camp.
and John Carlson was hogging all the spotlight in d-camp last year.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Did we need more evidence that Ryan Lambert is an idiot?
So why is his new cap hit, which doesn’t kick in until next year — just in time for that strike! — 21st in the league right now? Sure, 71 points is a lot, especially on the Wild, but statistically Alex freaking Burrows was a better player than this guy last year.
No, you are a moron.
I know Chuck Fletcher was all about the intangibles, but everything’s tangible in a post-Moneyball world. The good folks at Behind the Net have a way to quantify everything a hockey player does on the ice – i.e. the only place things matter – and that shows that calling Koivu one of the 25 best players in hockey is more than a little offbase.
False. BtN does great work, and can quantify a lot. But they can’t quantify everything, intangibles do exist, and even the stuff BtN does quantify is frequently called into question because of the circular nature of the data. If you ever make a case that Koivu isn’t a better player than Burrows, or that there is no such thing as intangibles, you are clearly an idiot.
Deo ac Fehritati.
There are just so many things that make me hate that article.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jul 16, 2010 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
but statistically Alex freaking Burrows was a better player than this guy last year.
Doesn’t he realize that Alex Freaking Burrows played with Henrik and Daniel Freaking Sedin?
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Or that Koivu is the superior defensive player. And specials teams player. And doesn’t take bad PIMs. And Koivu was more consistent.
The Sedin point is probably the most relevant, but there’s really no lens that makes Burrows look like the better player.
Deo ac Fehritati.
And he’s a Calgary fan. His team is in the same division as the Canucks and plays them a thousand times a year. Its just mind-boggling.
Money don't make my world go round...i'm reaching out to a higher ground
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jul 16, 2010 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think he actually realizes anything about hockey. Ever. Andy Sutton would be disgusted that he writes as an authority.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jul 16, 2010 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Not to mention:
The NHLPA has is on its second interim directors since Kelly got the ol’ heave-ho less than a year ago
How does the first half of that sentence even get typed in the first place, much less make it all the way through to a posting?
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
Lambert literally adds nothing good to the blogosphere.
His hockey analysis is terrible.
His attempts at humor are painfully unfunny.
And he is really an awful writer.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jul 16, 2010 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s just it. I can forgive slightly lesser hockey knowledge if you’re a really good writer and write really good pieces (that Ovechkin piece in the New York Times comes to mind), and I can forgive bad writing if you really really know your hockey.
But if you suck at hockey, and you suck at writing, AND you can’t even slip in a good dick joke, in what universe will you not suck at writing about hockey?
(On the flip side of this, JP and crew are great at hockey, great at writing, and I’ve seen a good dick joke here and there. Guess we really do have the best hockey blog on the internet.)
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
In fact, Gabe thinks Koivu may outperform this contract. If Lambert thinks that the stats don’t support Koivu, he’s not reading the BtN stats.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jul 16, 2010 2:26 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Or he’s a moron that doesn’t actually understand anything about hockey.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jul 16, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Man, that guy’s ugly. Who is he again?
Eat, drink, and be merry! And then drink some more.
by SmallZ827 on Jul 16, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
ah, so that must have been the media craziness that was going on with about 15 minutes left in session 2 today.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
I bet. Good Q&A with him over at CI, btw…and I’m guessing there will be some sort of video on the site since that picture is Vogs interviewing him.
A: I have a contract [for this season]. I don’t lose sleep at night because my salary is X amount of dollars when I think it should be Y amount of dollars. I lose sleep at night because I’ve been in the league five years and we still haven’t won a championship. I wake up in the middle night frustrated becausewe lost out in the first round and I want to see our players hoist the Stanley Cupi cant remember this girl’s name. That’s why I lose sleep. I don’t worry about 13 months from now not having a paycheck. That’s a long time from now.
Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...
by dcsportsfan1 on Jul 16, 2010 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Corey Tweets (for the Twitterless)
@cmasisak22 GMGM on MJ90: We could take our time and leave him in Sweden for another year or put him in the [AHL] but we really believe he belongs here.
@cmasisak22 Bruce Boudreau said MJ90 needs to make the team, but George McPhee’s comments made it seem like he’s very, very confident MJ90 will do so.
That’s a funny way to spell MP85!
Why wouldn't you play Perreault? He's a really talented young player.
Pft why play a small French guy when you have a Svensk viking.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't hate Marcus Johansson.
by Malin A on Jul 16, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Generally I go with the Swede every time, but I have to stick with my guy here!
Anyway, I think it’s kinda silly that these decisions are being “made” before pro camp has even started.
Why wouldn't you play Perreault? He's a really talented young player.
Well, no one’s making decisions yet – GMGM just thinks Mackan has a good shot at it, he’s not granting him a roster spot or anything. He can say they believe he belongs here but if Mackan doesn’t have a good training camp, he won’t be on the team.
Insane thought
Any chance GM is pumping MarJo’s tires so hard because he’s the centerpiece to an upcoming trade?
“Sure, Sharp is a fine player, but we’re quite happy with our young Swede, Johansson. In fact, we’ve got him pencilled in as our 2C. Hmm, okay, fine—straight up, one center for the other. Deal?”
by bilspacecadet on Jul 16, 2010 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions




