With the Devils about to visit the Buffalo Sabres on Tuesday, I thought it would be a good time to examine some of their players as potential trade deadline acquisitions. The Sabres, despite high expectations coming into the season, sit 14th in the conference as of this date and will likely be sellers two weeks from now. Yes, they're only 8 pts out of 8th place, but they have an awful lot of teams to leapfrog and as Devils fans we remember how hard it was to make up those last 8 points last year, especially with the extra-time charity point.

From the Devils' perspective, I expect Lou Lamoriello to have a pretty quiet deadline. This is a young team that doesn't really give you that Stanley Cup contender feeling nor does it give you the "last kick at the can" feeling despite the impending expiration of Martin Brodeur and Zach Parise's contracts. Yet, the Devils do have cap space and could really use a playoff round win to boost revenue and give Parise another reason to stay.

Ideally, I'd love for the Devils to acquire a bona-fide top-pairing defenseman or a top-6 scoring right winger. But that's wishful thinking and the price for such players would be too high to pay in a year where our young players aren't quite ready to contend. On the other hand, we've seen what a difference 3rd and 4th line depth can make as the trade for Alexei Ponikarovsky and signing of Steve Bernier have made an immediate impact. And defensive depth is ALWAYS in demand at the deadline.

So here's the Sabres' CapGeek chart - let's look at who might be available. Among forwards, Thomas Vanek, Drew Stafford, and Nathan Gerbe are young core forwards on this team and probably unavailable. For better or for worse, the Sabres are stuck with Ville Leino for now. Jason Pominville and Derek Roy are productive prime-age veterans whose price would be high - probably a high-end prospect and a 1st round pick. They'd only be available if the Sabres really wanted to tear it all down and rebuild, but I doubt that very much.

On defense, the Sabres are undoubtedly going forward with Tyler Myers and Christian Ehrhoff for many years to come, and aren't likely to part with promising point-producer Marc-Andre Gragnani. They're committed to a solid but forgettable Andrej Sekera for a few years.

That leaves us with Brad Boyes, Jochen Hecht, and Paul Gaustad among fowards (all veterans with expiring contracts, making them natural deadline day rentals), and Robyn Regehr and Jordan Leopold (both with another year left on their contracts after this one - not naturals to be traded this season but candidates for a salary dump in preparation for the offseason).

Jochen Hecht

I'm going to nix this one right off the bat. Hecht was never a big scorer to begin with, topping out at 56 points even in the Sabres' post-lockout heyday, but at age 34 has been in decline. More importantly, he's played just 22 games this year, missing over 20 games with concussions.

Verdict on Hecht: A bottom-six forward with big-time injury problems this year. Don't bother.

Brad Boyes

The Sabres acquired Brad Boyes from St Louis to be a top-6 RW and perhaps regain the form that saw him notch 43 goals in 07-08 and 72 points in 08-09 and earned him a $4M/yr contract in 2008. And if the Devils were to acquire him that's what they would be hoping as well as in theory he would be filling a need for the team. Unfortunately for the Sabres, his slip in production in his final two years as a Blue was a harbinger of things to come - he has struggled mightily this year, notching just 3g and 10a in 42 games. Granted, he is shooting just 4% (his career mark is 12%) and he missed most of December with injury, but even when dressed he has played just 13:48 per game, suggesting he is getting 3rd line minutes.

Examining a bit further, we see that Boyes is a modestly positive Corsi player, and has consistently been so since his breakout 2007-08 season. In St Louis, even when he struggled, he wasn't playing weak competition nor was he starting in the offensive zone much more than the defensive zone. In Buffalo this season, however, he has benefited from playing weaker competition and starting more often in the offensive zone.

We can make a fair comparison between Boyes and Alexei Ponikarovsky. Ponikarovsky, also once touted as a solid second-line winger, struggled to score with the Penguins, Kings, and Hurricanes after several modestly successful years with the Maple Leafs. The big difference, however, is in Corsi - Ponikarovsky has been a big-time positive Corsi player for much of the past 5 years where Boyes has not. Boyes may have the better goal-scoring touch but he doesn't possess and control the puck as well and probably isn't as likely to benefit from a change in scenery as Ponikarovsky has.

Verdict on Boyes: Boyes has the hands to score and at age 29 he isn't over the hill just yet, but his confidence has to be at an all-time low. The underlying stats suggest he's more likely to continue being a 20g-20a guy with average defensive ability than a 35-35 top-6 scorer. But putting him on a third-line with strong two-way players like Ponikarovsky and Henrique could make that line a real offensive threat. He'd be an interesting, risky pickup for any team and the Sabres will likely find someone willing to give up a 2nd round pick for him.

Paul Gaustad

Where Boyes would be a risky pickup, you know what you're going to get with Paul Gaustad - an big (6'5") unspectacular checking forward who is a faceoff ace (55.6, 59.8, and 57.4% in the past 3 seasons). The Devils have a great history with checking centers who are good in the faceoff circle (John Madden, Bobby Holik) but the last time they acquired such a player (David Steckel) he wasn't very good for them. Yet Gaustad was a key component of the Sabres' post-lockout success and was on the American squad at last year's World Championships, along with Travis Zajac.

There's nothing spectacular about Gaustad's basic stats. He's a pretty consistent 9-12 goal guy that chips in another 15 or so assists. That's better than Steckel, who's more of a 5-8 goals and 9 assists kind of guy, but only marginally so. More impressive, though, is that Gaustad leads Sabres' forwards in PK time per game with 2:48 per game - something Steckel was clearly not capable of during his stay in NJ.

Gaustad's advanced statistics are something of a mixed picture. Until this year, he's generally been an even Corsi player but hasn't definitely been playing against the opposition's top line. His Corsi this season is ugly at -9.96 despite the rest of his team being positive on average. But Gaustad's been utilized in an ultra-defensive role this season - he starts his shift in the offensive zone just 40% of the time. Moreover, he's playing far tougher competition than he ever has before. The faceoff numbers included with the advanced stats show you just how good he's been over the past few years, and how often he wins defensive zone draws.

Comparing those statistics to Steckel's advanced stats at once highlights both the similarities and the diffferences between the two players. Steckel starts in the defensive zone even more than Gaustad does, and with the Leafs has started in the O-zone an astoundingly low 38.8% of the time. The faceoff numbers look even better for Steckel than they do for Gaustad. Yet Steckel has never been used against the opposition's top players and has always had a negative Corsi in relation to his teammates (though his team in Washington was so good for a few years he ended up positive in Corsi - just not looking nearly as good as his teammates). The overall picture suggests that Gaustad is a more complete player than Steckel, though Steckel is the ultimate faceoff specialist.

Verdict on Gaustad: Gaustad would make an expensive ($2.5M salary translates to about $600,000 in real money after the deadline) but useful 4th line center. He doesn't have enough offensive ability to take our 3rd line to the level we want - that is, a consistent scoring threat. But he's a solid defensive center who can win defensive zone draws come playoff time and come out even against all but the top lines. He can also kill penalties and give some of our top players a rest. The Devils have struggled a lot with faceoffs with Elias being notably bad while none of Henrique, Josefson, and Carter are able to crack the 50% mark. We can't send Zajac out for every important draw, so Gaustad would help a lot in this regard while still being an upgrade for the 4th line in general. Steckel was evidently worth a 4th round pick for his full season - I say Gaustad is worth a 3rd rounder as a deadline day rental in spite of being far overpaid to be a 4th liner because he's a significantly more complete player than Steckel is, and Buffalo may even find a suitor to throw in a 5th on top of that 3rd rounder.

Robyn Regehr

Regehr is a big defensive defenseman, and like Gaustad, won't be measured by his goals and assists. He pots about 2g and 15a per year, but has seen his offensive contribution really suffer this season, with just 2 assists and 36 shots to his credit in 50 games of work. Moreover, though he's been a plus player for most of his career, he sports an ugly -12 this season.

His advanced statistics back it up, too, with evidence of his poor play this season. Regehr's Corsi is also -12 and looks even worse in relation to his teammates. Yes, he's still playing against tough competition and leads his team in PK time, as he always has, but his stats last year weren't particularly inspiring either.

In addition, the Devils have a slew of veteran left-shooting defensive defensemen in Henrik Tallinder, Anton Volchenkov, and Bryce Salvador, so the big question would be, how does Regehr compare? Tallinder generates a similar number of points and also was a modestly negative Corsi player during his Buffalo days, though he has been employed less frequently against the toughs by the Devils and come out positive. Volchenkov has been about even in Corsi but modestly negative relative to the team, and like Tallinder has not been as consistently matched against top lines as he had with his former employer. Salvador, however, has been more of a negative Corsi player even when not deployed against tough competition.

Verdict on Regehr: Regehr is similar in quality to Tallinder and Volchenkov and is priced accordingly at a $4M cap hit, though he's having a pretty bad year right now. And with another year left on his contract, Regehr would not just be a rental. The Devils are not only stocked with similar veterans, but also have young players like Larsson and Fayne who need big minutes right now and also will have Taormina, Urbom, and potentially Merrill challenging for a roster spot next year. Though the likely departure of Bryce Salvador this summer would leave the Devils thin on gritty defensemen, I doubt Regehr would be the right fit here - at the deadline or even in the offseason. I'd rather see the Devils try to acquire an offensive right-shooting defenseman that's better than Kurtis Foster.

Jordan Leopold

Leopold is a guy with less grit and size but more offensive skill. He's generally been notching better than 10 goals and 15 assists a season, gets some PP time (though Ehrhoff takes the bulk of it) but also plays the PK, tied for second on the Sabres in PK time per game with Tyler Myers, behind Regehr though that might be borne of necessity given their other highly-paid veteran, Christian Ehrhoff, isn't exactly great in his own zone.

His advanced statistics show a defenseman generally even in Corsi but not employed against the opposition's top line. He's not so protected as to play weak competition, but he does start more often in the offensive zone than in the defensive zone. In this regard, he's much like Andy Greene, though Greene sports a better Corsi. He scores twice as many goals as Greene, but doesn't pick up as many assists.

Verdict on Leopold: At $3M, Leopold is fairly priced for an average defenseman who is average at both ends of the rink. He wouldn't particularly hurt or help the Devils' blueline. Again, with the stable of defensively sound veteran Dmen that the Devils already possess and the offensively talented youngsters they are grooming for bigger roles, I don't see a fit here for Leopold. His strong shot would be a useful asset, but if anything he'd be a depth pickup at next year's deadline rather than now.

I'm looking forward to the Devils' game on Tuesday, not only with the expectation that we bounce back after the disappointing loss to Florida, but also to see some of these players, particularly Boyes and Gaustad, in action. Leave your thoughts on these players and other potential trade deadline targets below!

Lou Lamoriello recognized that this team needed right-shooting defensemen at both the NHL and AHL level, and made a point this summer of acquiring them.  Even before the draft, he signed Joe Sova as a free agent out of college, and traded C David McIntyre for Minnesota's Maxim Noreau.  Though Adam Larsson was the no-brainer choice when he fell to us at #4 overall, the fact that he was a righty shot made his direct transition into the NHL all the more likely.  Then, Lou signed Peter Harrold out of LA and invited Anton Stralman for a tryout.  Larsson, Harrold, and Stralman all got good looks in preseason action to see who fit best in the NHL lineup.  And to top it all off, Lou jettisoned a couple of the team's excess left-shooting defensemen in stalwart Colin White and spare part Anssi Salmela.

The overall change to the Devils' NHL defense is subtle - five of the six players in the lineup every night are holdovers from last season.  But the effect these moves have had on the organizational depth chart is drastic:

"NHL scratch" is for players who are on the NHL roster but often healthy scratches.  Any player who was injured but was never a healthy scratch (Salvador and Taormina) were considered "full-time" NHLers.  I also considered Fayne a full-timer since once he stepped into the lineup he never left it. 

The Devils are much closer to a 50/50 balance of righties and lefties at both the NHL and AHL level this year.  This means fewer defensemen are playing out of position on the right side, and should help both teams generate more offense from the blueline as well as get the puck out of their own end more quickly.

Now, suppose the team needs a left-shooting defenseman to fill in.  Who will step into the lineup?  Will it really be Fraser, who was just okay in preseason, or will it be Urbom, who impressed coach Pete DeBoer in the last two games of preseason?  My guess is Urbom will get the nod unless there's an emergency and Urbom can't be flown in on time.  And personally I think if Taormina plays well in Albany, he may warrant consideration over Fraser as well.

Moreover, if Stralman is signed, he would step in for ANY defenseman injured - lefty or righty.  Subbing Stralman in for a lefty, in fact, would allow all six defensemen to play on their natural side.  So IF Lou were to sign Stralman, I believe it would take injuries to THREE out of the six NHL defensemen for Fraser to get into the lineup - and even if half the D corps were decimated by injury at the same time, I'm not sure that Fraser would be better than Taormina, Harrold, or Corrente.

Suppose Stralman isn't signed.  If Larsson or Fayne were to go down with an injury, the Devils would either be forced to shift another lefty Dman to play out of play on the right side, or to call up Harrold or Corrente.  Also, the Devils' powerplay would have to be adjusted to accomodate a left-shooting defenseman.

The fact is that Stralman is much more useful as a 7th defenseman than Fraser is.  Not only is he a far better substitute should a righty Dman go down, he is a better sub in place of a left Dman and can also chip in on the power play.

My hope is that Lou bundles Fraser with another of the AHL defensemen to acquire an AHL/prospect forward.  The Albany forward corps is woefully thin on scoring ability, and there's already an excess of Dmen in the system even without signing Stralman.  I would even be willing to part with decent prospects like Burlon and Gelinas for a decent forward prospect.  The fact is with Greene, Volchenkov, and Tallinder signed for 2-5 more years, Urbom ahead of them both on the depth chart, and Merrill on the way, there is no room for Burlon or Gelinas at the NHL level in the next 4 years.  Might as well deal a position of strength to bolster some of the organization's weaknesses.

ast year, John used an interesting method called WOWY (With Or Without You) analysis to discuss best linemates for Parise (link), Zajac (link), and Kovalchuk (link).  See his work for an explanation of how the analysis is performed.  I performed my own WOWY analysis on the most controversial of all Devils forwards - David Clarkson.  Some believe Clarkson is on the cusp of breakthrough to becoming a pugilistic 20-goal scorer and a gritty foil to our top scorers.  Others believe Clarkson will never develop into a top-6 player, and some believe he should be given nothing more than 4th line duty.  (Full disclosure: count me among those with little faith in Clarkson).

The following analyzes the 2008-09 (his highest scoring output) and 2009-10 seasons.  The 09-10 season, you will recall, was cut short by a leg fracture, but it constitutes the season where he was scoring at the fastest rate of his career.  Let me get some limitations out of the way.

(1) Data was not available for the 2010-11 season, as the scripts to isolate Corsi events when both player X and Clarkson were on the ice were not working.  The biggest downside to this is that we can't really assess how he played with youngsters like Josefson and Tedenby, and we have limited data with Zharkov and Palmieri.  We also can't say anything about his play with Steckel.

(2) I did not analyze his play with defensemen, as John did.  This was not only less work for me, but I felt it was irrelevant to determining what line combination might be best for Clarkson.

(3) I divided players into tiers: Tier 1 first-line players, Tier 2 secondary scorers, Tier 3 Veteran checkers, and Tier 4 Rookies.  Feel free to disagree with my system.

2008-09 Season

The 2008-09 season showed Clarkson to be an even possession player - his personal Corsi was 50.1% and his Fenwick was 49.4%.  He was healthy, playing in 81 games, and notched  17g and 15a - both are career highs to this point.

His primary linemates on the third line, Brian Rolston and John Madden, suffered however when playing with Clarkson.  While Rolston was barely a positive-possession player away from Clarkson, possession was going significantly in the wrong direction while playing with Clarkson.  Madden was negative-possession whether he was with Clarkson or not. 

With fourth-liners Pandolfo, Holik, Rupp, and Shanahan, however, Clarkson was a positive influence, pushing play in the right direction.  He had a positive effect on Brian Gionta and Travis Zajac the few times that he played with them, but a negative effect on other top-tier scorers. 

2009-2010 Season

Though 2009-10 marked the first time in Clarkson's career where he notched better than 0.5 ppg (11g, 13a, 24p in 46 games), the Corsi numbers suggest he wasn't playing very well.  His Corsi for the season was just 46.3% and his Fenwick wasn't much better at 47.0%.  Perhaps he notched most of his points early in the season, before he got injured, and his play after he returned dragged his Corsi down.  Nonetheless, though the scoring rate might suggest he could be the 20g-20a man some hope for, the possession numbers put him in the company of noted non-scorers Jay Pandolfo, Rob Niedermayer, and Rod Pelley.  All other Devils forwards, other than woeful Tim Sestito, were in positive possession territory.

Note that almost every player had a worse Corsi when they were on the ice with Clarkson - Zubrus, Pelley, and Sestito are the lone exceptions.  Even Rob Niedermayer, his primary linemate, went from bad to worse when he was put out there with Clarkson.  As I'll show in a bit, Clarkson's Corsi also took a hit with Niedermayer on the ice - they were just plain a bad combination.  So there's a lot of blame to go around.

Clarkson again played a lot with Brian Rolston, and that combination was an even worse idea in 09-10 than it was in 08-09.  A 9% drop for Rolston over a large total number of Corsi events is VERY bad.  Clarkson also had a big negative impact for Vladimir Zharkov's stellar Corsi numbers (going from otherworldly positive possession to solidly negative possession), and a smaller impact on young scorer Niclas Bergfors (who probably saw his Corsi inflated when he wasn't in Lemaire's doghouse by playing time with top-liners like Parise and Elias).  Again, curiously, Clarkson and Zubrus worked well together and the results were robust over a large number of Corsi events (not so much when it came to Fenwick).

Combined Data with Tiering

Let's look at Clarkson's impact over the two years combined on each of the tiers I mentioned earlier - does he work well with any particular group?

First, a look at the top-line scorers.  Clarkson clearly benefits from playing with these players - who wouldn't from playing with an intelligent Corsi machine like Patrik Elias?  Clarkson actually has a small positive impact on Travis Zajac's Corsi, though it's clear he and Zach Parise shouldn't ever be put together - both suffer when that happens.  An interesting outlier is Brian Gionta - who in limited experience with Clarkson (they're both right wingers) had a mutually beneficial relationship.  Take away Gionta's data and it's very clear that while Clarkson benefits from playing with top-line players, he's a drag on their Corsi.

Among the secondary scorers, Clarkson hardly ever shared the ice with Langenbrunner, but the data for Rolston, his most consistent linemate, is very, very bad.  They both negatively influenced each other in a very significant way, and probably never should have been together in the first place.  That Jacques Lemaire failed to observe this surprises me, but maybe he had no choice.  With Zubrus, on the other hand, Clarkson had an on-again, off-again romance that was mutually beneficial.

With the veteran checkers, it's a mixed bag.  Clarkson was more hurt by playing with Madden, Pandolfo, Shanahan, and Niedermayer than they were hurt by playing with him (Pandolfo and Shanahan, in fact, were helped).  He evidently worked well with Bobby Holik and Mike Rupp, another mutually beneficial relationship a la Zubrus.  In net, Clarkson helped these veteran checkers and was hurt slightly himself by playing with them - but both effects are relatively small.  Most of these players were shuffled back and forth between the third line and fourth line - they saw virtually no time in the top-6.

With the young players, it's harder to pick out a trend.  Zharkov the Corsi master really could not have liked playing with Clarkson.  Ditto for defensively-challenged young scorer Niclas Bergfors.  Palmieri really didn't have much experience with Clarkson to draw any conclusions.  Pelley and Clarkson mutually benefited each other, and Tim Sestito is just a sad case.  The total numbers show Clarkson to have a net negative influence on the youngsters, but that is largely driven by the suffering Zharkov endured by playing with Clarkson.

Conclusions

I'll try to not let my dislike of Clarkson skew my conclusions too much...

(1) Clarkson's Corsi consistently ranks just above surefire fourth liners.  Presumptive second/third-line types like Langenbrunner, Zubrus, and even Rolston are leagues ahead of him in generating positive possession.  I'd say he sits about average for the bottom-6 type players.

(2) Clarkson improved the Corsi of fourth line players, but only slightly.  His own Corsi was improved when playing with the team's top players, but lesser caliber scorers failed to have a positive effect.  Up-and-comers like Zharkov and Palmieri were not good fits for Clarkson either.  I'd definitely question any decision to put Clarkson with Josefson and Tedenby - players who may be hurt by playing with Clarkson, and whose own skill and experience are not sufficient to make a positive impact on his game.

(3) Do Zubrus, Zajac, Holik, and Rupp have anything in common?  They sure do - they're big veteran centers who had mutually beneficial relationships while playing with Clarkson (OK well, Zajac has good size, I guess he's not that big).  Not only were they better with Clarkson (only slightly so for Zajac), but Clarkie was also better with them.  Do the Devils have another BIG veteran center?  Yup, his name is David Steckel.

(4) The notion that Clarkson should play the power forward role with a couple of skilled, smaller forwards doesn't hold up since it seems he plays best with a big-bodied center.  Smallish wingers like Parise, Bergfors, and Zharkov certainly haven't played better with Clarkson on their opposite wing.

Based on this evidence, I think a fourth-line role with Steckel at center and Pelley at LW may be the best option for Clarkson - though I'd have to see the numbers with both Steckel and Clarkson on the ice to verify, it seems Steckel could be the big-bodied center than Clarkson seems to need, and he already appears to have at least a decent relationship with Pelley, though the sample size is limited.

There could be a third-line role for Clarkson if Zubrus is his center.  The track record doesn't suggest that Josefson or Sykora (if he makes the team) would be, though - neither is a large presence at center nor do they have an overwhelming offensive presence to pull Clarkson into positive territory.  Another possibility is that Josefson plays well enough to justify keeping him with Kovalchuk - then, when Zajac returns, either Zajac or Elias would drop down to the third line, bringing with them top-line credentials.  A Zubrus-Zajac-Clarkson or Zubrus-Elias-Clarkson line could potentially be extremely beneficial for Clarky without being a drag on his linemates.

I doubt anyone really read this far, but I hope the data presented here provides good fodder for discussion on one of the Devils' most controversial/confounding young players.  Thanks to John for making his work easy to replicate!

I think most of us were expecting the cap to rise around $3M, but TSN is reporting that the cap ceiling will increase to $64 M this year, a rise of almost $5M from the current ceiling.

This may allow the Devils to not only keep Parise, but Greene and Hedberg as well.  Or it may spur Lou on to making a bigger splash in a free agent market particularly rich this year in puck-moving defensemen.  However, with all teams having increased cap flexibility, cap hits for free agents may go up across the board.  Hot commodities like Bieksa, Wisniewski, and Pitkanen will probably out of our price range.  Ehrhoff and Kaberle will be less pricey, but come with question marks about their defensive play.  I, for one, would like to see Lou explore a deal with Ian White, who performed well for San Jose in the playoffs and is a sorely needed right-handed shot from the point.

If Lou plans to explore the high-end free agent market, I hope he has Parise's signature on a contract before July 1st, or it may hamper his ability to sign players.

The NHL's Central Scouting Service provides the best-known and most often cited rankings of draft-eligible prospects, but the International Scouting Service and other organizations/draft pundits provide alternatives in the imprecise art and science of draft rankings.

Direct comparison of the rankings is difficult because the CSS always publishes separate lists for North American skaters and European skaters.  But beyond agreeing that Ryan Nugent-Hopkins is the top North American skater and that Adam Larsson is the top European skater, the CSS and ISS lists differ significantly.  The ISS ranks Sean Couturier #3 overall behind those two, while the CSS ranks Gabriel Landeskog, Jonathan Huberdeau, Dougie Hamilton, and Nathan Beaulieu ahead of him.  And though the ISS also ranks Landeskog and Hamilton highly, they rank Huberdeau at 8th overall and Beaulieu at 13th overall.

So I set out to find answers for the following questions:

(1) How predictive are the CSS and ISS rankings for the actual draft order at the top of the draft (the top 10 picks)?  By inference, how much do NHL GMs and scouts agree with these rankings?

(2) How good are the two at actually predicting which players will have the most NHL success?

I'll analyze the ISS top 10 and the CSS top 10 in North America and the CSS top 3 in Europe each year from 2004-2008.  Also, out of curiosity, I'm including the draft list that TSN's Bob McKenzie publishes every year.  McKenzie doesn't claim to prognosticate the players' talent - he states it represents the opinions of a sample of scouts he has connections with.  He also doesn't really consider it to be a mock draft as he doesn't take into consideration the "needs" of individual organizations, but it would be a mock draft if every team drafted the "best player available".

First, 2008:

I start with 2008 as the most recent draft I'll analyze.  First, props to McKenzie for doing a pretty good job of predicting the draft order.  He got the top 4 right and got 5-10 mostly right minus some minor changes in position.  The top 10 on the ISS list were the top 10 drafted, with the only big positional change being Nikita Filatov (who dropped due to uncertainty at the time over the lack of a NHL-KHL transfer agreement).  The CSS was significantly less predictive of draft order in 2008 - Myers, Beach, and Boychuk all saw players like Wilson and Hodgson go before them.

Now, which ranking got it more right?  It's tough to say exactly where the CSS thought Filatov deserved to be drafted, but regardless both the CSS and ISS appear to have swung and missed on him thus far in his career.  In a famously D-heavy draft, none of the top D prospects have disappointed thus far in their careers - Doughty and Schenn had immediate NHL success while Bogosian and Pietrangelo have been brought along more slowly, but both still have bright futures.  Obviously everyone got Stamkos right.  The rest of the top-10 in either list has been a rather unremarkable bunch so far - they've all made the NHL but have yet to prove that they're impact players.

The tiebreaker has to go to the CSS for making the call on Tyler Myers, however.  The ISS missed the boat on that one.

(1) Draft order prediction: ISS win (McKenzie was better)

(2) NHL success prognostication: CSS win

Next, in 2007:

McKenzie does OK this time.  He predicts the top 3 in order, and gets Alzner, Gagner, and Voracek pretty close.  No one saw Thomas Hickey coming at #4, and McKenzie struggles a bit in picks 8-10.

The ISS, too, picks the top 3 in order.  Cherepanov fell much farther than the ISS or McKenzie anticipated, but the ISS gets the draft order for Alzner, Gagner, and Voracek pretty close.  The ISS and CSS, like McKenzie, miss on picks 8-10.  The CSS, however, ranks Keaton Ellerby much higher than the NHL teams evidently did and fails to predict 1-3 in the correct order.

Now, in a "weak" draft year, how did the CSS and ISS do?  Well, the CSS struck out with Kyle Turris at #1, and the ISS has been right thus far in predicting Patrick Kane as the best among the most-hyped players in this draft and JvR is starting to look good as the second-best.  CSS also missed with Keaton Ellerby, Angelo Esposito, and Zach Hamill.  Did the ISS miss with Cherepanov?  Tough to say - he died at the age of 19 while playing in the KHL.  We'll never know, but it does appear the ISS missed by putting Maxim Mayorov so high - and badly so.  NHL teams didn't think enough of him to pick him before the fourth round!  Nonetheless, I'll give the ISS the win in a year where the talent wasn't so prominent.

(1) Draft order prediction: ISS win (tie with McKenzie)

(2) NHL success prognostication: ISS win

In 2006:

McKenzie gets the top 5 right, but in slightly different order as Kessel dropped and Staal rose.  He also gets picks 6-8 right, in slightly different order.  He misses on picks 9 and 10.  The ISS doesn't do as well - they rank Backstrom lower and Frolik higher than scouts evidently did.  The CSS, however, impressively picks the top 5 North American skaters in the exact order they were drafted.  Where did they think Backstrom and Frolik would fall?  Tough to say, but I give CSS the win for predicting the order, though they didn't see Kyle Okposo going so high.

Both CSS and ISS put Erik Johnson at #1.  They were both high on Staal, Toews, and Kessel - and rightly so.  All of the ISS top-10 became pretty good NHL players except James Sheppard, who ISS thought of more highly than CSS.  CSS deserves minor props for putting Chris Stewart high, though who knows whether he would have definitely been in their top 10 of NA and Euro skaters combined.  ISS made the mistake of ranking Frolik above Backstrom, however, and that is enough to seal the deal on another CSS win.

(1) Draft order prediction: CSS win (McKenzie better than ISS)

(2) NHL success prognostication: CSS win

2005, the Crosby sweepstakes:

A little bit of a monkey wrench thrown into the proceedings as a goalie (Carey Price) makes his first appearance in the top 10.  We'll just have to ignore him.

McKenzie does OK here.  Everyone from here to Mars could see Crosby coming at #1, and McKenzie gets picks 2-7 mostly right, though Kopitar and Staal dropped.  Again, he struggles with picks 8-10.  The ISS also does OK after Crosby in terms of predicting draft order at the top, but does pretty bad in picks 7-10, with none of the actual draft picks anywhere to be found in the ISS top 10.  The CSS does a little better - the order is off but Bourdon and Setoguchi were indeed top-10 picks.

Which list has predicted NHL success better this draft year?  That's a tough one.  Both lists had high expectations for Benoit Pouliot that weren't met, as well as for Gilbert Brule.  The top 5 is pretty much a wash, though perhaps CSS deserves a little credit for ranking Bobby Ryan that highly.  We'll never know about Bourdon, another prospect who died tragically young, though it looks like they missed on Kenndal Mcardle.  ISS did well ranking Marc Staal high, though they had misses of their own in Ryan O'Marra and Marek Zagrapan.  So who wins?  I'd call it a tie, but the division into North American and European and skaters and goalies feels like a big-time cop-out so my verdict is that ISS gets the win by a hair.

(1) Draft order prediction: CSS win (McKenzie better than ISS)

(2) NHL success prognostication: ISS win (for guts)

2004 (A Euro-heavy year at the top):

Ah, the year of Ovie and Malkin.  Again, we have a goalie picked in the top-10 (Al Montoya).  McKenzie does well by predicting the top 3 in order, but he misses with Tukonen, Schwarz, and Thelen.  The ISS, too, bit on the Tukonen hype and ranked Meszaros and Schremp more highly than they actually went.  The CSS had issues of their own - they ranked Chipchura far higher than anyone else did, and Picard and Wolski were also much higher than where they were actually drafted.  All around, an epic fail for all the pundits.

What of the future NHL performance of these prospects?  This is tough. The top 3 European prospects all went in the top 7 picks of the draft, so should I ignore 8-10 on the CSS's NA skaters, which includes some pretty good players in Bolland and Green?  Ultimately, neither list did very well.  I give CSS the win because Tukonen was a big swing and miss for the ISS (though the ISS did well to predict Meszaros, who turned out pretty good).

Conclusion

Bob McKenzie has done pretty well at predicting the top 7 picks of the draft.  He doesn't do that great with picks 8-10, but that's understandable.  It will be interesting to see the list he comes up with in June, as that may be a guide for some teams to consider trading up/down based on what other teams' opinions of the prospects are.

It seems that teams agree with the ISS more than the CSS in recent years - and the ISS is certainly a better guide for us in this regard because they publish one consolidated list instead of four.

Both the CSS and ISS have gotten better at prognosticating NHL success as time has gone on, and it seems the teams have too.  Even though the players drafted more recently are younger, a higher percentage of top-10 picks in 2006-08 have made a significant impact in the NHL than the ones drafted in 2004-05.  Perhaps that is more a reflection of the opportunities they get in the cap era, but it bodes well for us, even in a weak draft year.

The CSS and ISS have both whiffed on a few hyped prospects.  Ironically, the ISS has whiffed more on European prospects, notably Mayorov, Tukonen, Zagrapan, and the Frolik/Backstrom mixup.  The CSS contributed to the Turris and Ellerby hype and had some misses in 2004 and 2005.  The CSS seems to have done a better job with some less-hyped players, however, like Tyler Myers, Chris Stewart, and a few others.  Overall, I'd say the CSS has done a slightly better job of predicting NHL success, but marginally so.

Considerations for the upcoming draft

Back to the beginning, when I talked about this year's rankings.  Nugent-Hopkins, Larsson, Couturier, Landeskog, Hamilton, Strome, Huberdeau, and Murphy are all considered top-10 prospects by both the CSS and ISS.  That bodes well for their likelihood of making it to the NHL.  The two lists, however, probably disagree more this year in picks 2-7 than in any year since 2004.

Are Jonathan Huberdeau and Nathan Beaulieu this year's Tyler Myers, underestimated by the ISS, or are they more like Keaton Ellerby, overestimated by the CSS?  Is Sven Baertschi this year's Chris Stewart or is he more like Kenndal Mcardle?  Is Landeskog this year's Kyle Turris, a player on whom the CSS has a man-crush and about whom the ISS is a little more reserved?  Or is Couturier this year's Lauri Tukonen, thought of highly by the ISS but not so much by the CSS?

Part 1 of my campaign for defensive depth focused on three current playoff teams and their stories this past season.  I will continue on by looking at recent Cup-winning bluelines and the Devils' blueline.

The D-corps of Stanley Cup Winners since the lockout:

2010 Chicago Blackhawks: Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook, Brian Campbell, Kim Johnsson, Niklas Hjalmarsson, Jordan Hendry, Nick Boynton, (Dustin Byfuglien)

2009 Pittsburgh Penguins: Sergei Gonchar, Brooks Orpik, Kris Letang, Hal Gill, Mark Eaton, Rob Scuderi, Alex Goligoski, Philippe Boucher

2008 Detroit Red Wings: Niklas Lidstrom, Brian Rafalski, Niklas Kronwall, Brad Stuart, Chris Chelios, Andreas Lilja, Brett Lebda, Kyle Quincey, Jonathan Ericsson

2007 Anaheim Mighty Ducks: Scott Niedermayer, Chris Pronger, Francois Beauchemin, Sean O'Donnell, Kent Huskins, Aaron Rome, Shane Hnidy, Richard Jackman, Joe DiPenta

2006 Carolina Hurricanes: Bret Hedican, Aaron Ward, Niclas Wallin, Glen Wesley, Oleg Tverdovsky, Frantisek Kaberle, Mike Commodore, Anton Babchuk, Andrew Hutchinson, Danny Richmond

A lot of pretty deep defenses among this group.  Furthermore, the losing team in the Cup Finals in each of these years had a deep, but less impressively so, group of Dmen: 2010 Flyers (Pronger, Timonen, Carle, Coburn, Parent, Krajicek, Bartulis), the 2009 Wings and 2008 Pens were pretty similar to their Cup-winning versions, the 2007 Senators (Redden, Volchenkov, Phillips, Meszaros, Corvo, Preissing, Schubert)

The only team among all of these finalists which you could argue didn't have a very deep blueline was the 2007 Ducks, who won with the leadership of two stud defensemen and a supporting cast of mostly stay-at-home types, and the 2006 Oilers (led by Chris Pronger, but were pretty much a complete fluke that season).  You could also say that the 2006 Hurricanes, 2007 Senators, 2008 Penguins, 2009 Penguins, and 2010 Flyers (arguably Pronger was snubbed in the nominee voting) were the only ones to not have a Norris-Trophy candidate. It also appears that the Cup Finalists each year were less deep in the first two years following the lockout, but all six finalists in the past three years have all been very deep.

The facts, as they pertain to the Devils' D:

The Devils have an issue with their defense.  Yes, they have issues with aging overpaid forwards, but we see light at the end of the tunnel with that problem.  Yes, our goalie is no longer in his prime.  But the biggest weakness of this team, far and away, is a weak D corps lacking both depth and a true stud who can cover up for poor depth.

In 2010-11. the Devils started the season with five NHLers (Volchenkov, Tallinder, White, Salvador, and Greene).  Salvador went down with injury during training camp and would likely have been a cap casualty anyway had he been healthy.  So essentially, the Devils had four NHLers to start the season.  Not only were Volchenkov and Tallinder new and slow to adjust to the team, but the Devils had to integrate a number of rookies into the lineup: Matt Taormina, Matt Corrente, Mark Fraser, and Alex Urbom at first, and eventually Olivier Magnan, Tyler Eckford, Anssi Salmela, and Mark Fayne as the season progressed and injuries to Volchenkov and White occurred.  We should have known better than to think this team was ready to challenge for the Cup.

Three veterans will see their contracts expire in the next year: Andy Greene this summer, and Colin White and Bryce Salvador next summer (though arguably Salvador is a non-factor since his return to the lineup, even if healthy, is questionable for cap reasons).

Two youngsters have earned a long look in camp this summer: Taormina and Fayne.  Another is a highly touted prospect who will certainly challenge them for a roster spot: Urbom.  The rest (Corrente, Fraser, and Salmela) may have one last chance at making the team.

On the "need" for a stud:

The Devils have two possible ways to find themselves a stud Dman.  The quick way is via free agency or trade - but they will not have the cap space to afford one until 2012-13.  The long way is to hope a drafted player develops that well - perhaps Merrill, or perhaps the fourth overall pick that the Devils hold this summer.

I'm not holding my breath that a defenseman of the caliber of Pronger, Niedermayer, Keith, Doughty, or Lidstrom will emerge from one of our draft picks - not even one as highly touted as Adam Larsson.  Defensemen like that are just a rare quantity, and so many variables come into play in the development of young star defenseman.  Nor do I think the Devils have the assets it would take to trade for one, save for trading Zach Parise.  Don't get me wrong - I'd love to have a truly great Dman, I just think it's easier said than done to end up with one.

The alternative - augmenting depth:

I would argue that the Devils need to bolster their depth with defensemen that may not be perennial All-Stars, or even one-time All-Stars, but will be solid contributors on a winning team.  The additions of Volchenkov and Tallinder were a step in the right direction, especially given the loss of Paul Martin, but the Devils lack the cap space to do any more than they did.

Honestly, though I believe the Devils will be a playoff team in 2011-12 (and anything can happen in the playoffs), I don't believe they have the depth to be a true Cup contender.  I think a real contender needs to have 7 legit NHL defensemen on their playoff roster (some of which can be talented rookies/sophomores who truly belong in the big leagues), and have 5 NHLers (with at least one full season under their belt) at the start of the season.  If those 2 spots can be filled by rookies, great - if not, then trade for depth

Re-signing Andy Greene:

The Devils are far from being ready for that, so I think this team should be built for 2012-13 and 2013-14.  The first step, I think, is to re-sign Andy Greene for 2-3 yrs, provided he does not come with a cap hit greater than $2.5M.  You could spend the same amount of money on another defenseman, but there are no guarantees that player will fit as well in the Devils' system as Greene already does.  Greene is (1) a good stopgap for 2011-12 who has played top-pairing minutes for this team already, and (2) a decent puck-moving defenseman who can play on the 2nd or 3rd pairing for a good team.  He may be amenable to a 2-year contract, but given the plethora of contracts expiring in 2013 (Elias, Zajac, Zubrus, Clarkson, Steckel, Josefson, Tedenby), I think the team will have plenty of cap flexibility that summer and can afford to give him an extra year in exchange for a lower cap hit.  I hope for a 3 year, $6.6M contract ($2.2M cap hit), but would be willing to go up 3 years, $7.5M.

Developing Fayne, Taormina, and Urbom:

The second step is to evaluate the three youngsters throughout the course of the next season.  Taormina is currently up for a new contract, and Fayne will be up for one next summer.  They should both be retained, and my hope is that they sign contracts that do not require them to pass through waivers when shuttling between the NHL and AHL.  I feel both of them have potential, and both could be valuable depth pieces in 2012-13, but neither are have so clearly established their place on this team and I would not want to lose them to the waiver wire.  I hope that one of them establishes themselves to that level this year.

Signing Colin White and another defenseman in free agency:

The third step is a critical summer of 2012.  I, for one, think that Colin White played fairly well this past season and was probably the Devils' best defenseman during the team's atrocious first half.  White will be 34 years old when he hits free agency in 2012 - it will likely be the last multiyear contract of his career.  He has not quite been the same since his eye injury, but his game has probably gotten smarter (fewer defensive errors and fewer bad penalties), and he does a good job of covering up for his partners' mistakes - making him a good partner for a youngster or for Volchenkov, who tends to get himself out of position in order to make the big hit.  I think White will probably be willing to take a significant discount to stay with the Devils - Lou has been extremely loyal to him and he would finish his career having played for one team.  Much depends on how Colin White plays this upcoming season, how much he has left in the tank, and how the youngsters develop.  But I'm comforted knowing the Devils have a good option to provide a steady defensive presence.

This brings our count of veteran defensemen in 2012-13 to four: the heavy-hitting Volchenkov, two-way guys in Tallinder and Greene, and stay-at-home White - a foursome that by this point will have played two full seasons together.  A fifth veteran defenseman (an offensive defenseman with a right-handed shot, ideally) around a $4M cap hit could be signed at this point - the Devils will have the cap space to acquire one as Rolston and Brodeur's contracts expire. JM Liles, Brent Burns, Ryan Suter, and Matt Carle are among those that may be available that summer.  Many of you will probably disagree with my propositions to bring Greene and White back.  But as I said before, there are no guarantees that a free agent signing for similar money will provide a better fit than them.  In fact, free agency rarely provides good value unless you're re-signing your own.

Defensive Dmen: Volchenkov ($4.25M cap hit), White ($2M or less), Tallinder ($3.375M)

Offensive Dmen: Free agent signing ($3-5M), Greene ($2-2.5M)

The sixth and seventh defensemen would then be two of Fayne, Taormina, Urbom, Merrill, or possibly the 2011 fourth overall pick - all of whom have some degree of offensive skill.  Those that don't make the cut after camp could then be allowed to develop in the AHL until the injury bug inevitably hits.  Is it an embarrassment of riches?  I hope so.  But it's not excessive - it's necessary to build a contending team.

I read two articles today which reinforced in my mind the notion that the Devils need to do everything they can to bolster their defensive depth, but not necessarily acquire the "stud" defenseman we've all yearned for since the departures of Stevens and Niedermayer (Scott, obviously).  These days, a Stanley Cup contender must have a blueline that can withstand two, or even three injuries - or else be tremendously reliant on luck.

Case 1 - Washington Capitals: Young stars providing depth

One piece was hater-in-extremis Scott Burnside's article about the development of Capitals' defensemen Karl Alzner and John Carlson into a shutdown/do-everything pairing.  What Burnside failed to mention is how the Caps' blueline has been hit hard by injuries and the play of the two young Dmen has allowed the Capitals to not only survive, but go on a season-ending run to finish first in the conference - and how that momentum has carried into the playoffs.  Mike Green has been injured for much of the season - most recently a concussion in February, and he just returned to the lineup in time for the playoffs.  Dennis Wideman, their big trade deadline acquisition, has been sidelined for the past two weeks with a leg hematoma.  Tom Poti has had groin issues all season - and even if he feels better he won't get into the lineup because the blueline is playing well. 

The Caps continue to look strong because their young stars are stepping up to the big stage, being supported by a cast that includes Scott Hannan, John Erskine, and Jeff Schultz.  When completely healthy, their blueline would comprise 8 legit NHLers: Alzner, Carlson, Green, Wideman, Hannan, Schultz, with Poti and Erskine the extra defensemen.  It should be noted that GM George McPhee acquired Wideman and Hannan during the course of the season - even though the development of Clarson and Alzner was patently obvious (but in some sense the trades were made to make up for the absences of Green and Poti).

Case 2 - Boston Bruins: One stud, poor depth

The Bruins, on the other hand, are not looking so good.  After a strong finish to the regular season, they were touted as a favorite to reach the Conference Finals by many pundits, yet find themselves down 2-0 in their first round series with Montreal.  Boston captain Zdeno Chara missed Game 2 with a stomach virus, and his status for Game 3 is unknown.  The Bruins Blog laments that the Bruins were built too thin on the blueline to withstand any injury to their D-corps, much less an injury to a player of Chara's importance.  The folks at the Bruins Blog are quite panicked, but they see history repeating itself before their eyes.  Last year they saw their team struggle in the playoffs with Dennis Seidenberg and Mark Stuart injured; the year before it was Andrew Ference and Matt Hunwick.

Chara is undeniably a great player, but even he cannot carry an entire blueline by himself.  It worked well enough for the regular season - the D managed to stay healthy and the Bruins were second-best in the league in goals-against.    Chara's supporting cast includes rental Tomas Kaberle, a serviceable second-pairing player in Dennis Seidenberg, and some decent NHLers in Andrew Ference and Johnny Boychuk.  However, even when completely healthy, the Bruins are forced to play with either Adam McQuaid or Shane Hnidy.  With just a single injury to their blueline, they must play with both.  Next up on their depth chart should a second injury occur is first-year pro Steven Kampfer, who finished his NCAA career just a year ago.

Which makes GM Peter Chiarelli's decision to trade Matt Hunwick and his $1.45M cap hit to Colorado in exchange for D prospect Colby Cohen very curious.  The Bruins were cap-strapped at the time and trying to make space to bring Marc Savard back into the lineup.  I appreciate the difficulty of Chiarelli's decision, but he failed to address the lack of depth at defense later in the season.  Yes, he acquired Tomas Kaberle, but he also separately acquired forwards Chris Kelly and Rich Peverley while jettisoning Blake Wheeler and Marco Sturm.  The cap space allotted to one of Kelly ($2.125M) or Peverley ($1.325M), or even both, could easily have been used on depth defensemen instead.  Now, with an excess of depth at forward, the Bruins have top pick Tyler Seguin and his $3.55M cap hit sitting in the press box as a healthy scratch in the playoffs.

Case 3 - Vancouver Canucks: The deepest blueline in the league

The President Trophy-winning Vancouver Canucks have been both lucky and unlucky with their defensemen.  Already boasting a blueline of Alexander Edler, Christian Ehrhoff, Kevin Bieksa, and Sami Salo, the Canucks signed Dan Hamhuis as a free agent and traded for Keith Ballard.  That is six defensemen who are not only legit NHLers, but all pretty darn good.  After them on the depth chart were some journeymen NHLers in Andrew Alberts and Aaron Rome, and youngster Lee Sweatt.

The unlucky of the season for the Canucks' blueline is that five of their top six guys have been injured at various points during the season.  In fact, at one point, Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, and Ballard were all out of commission, forcing the Canucks to play with Ehrhoff, Salo, Rome, Chris Tanev, Yann Suave, and Evan Oberg (huh? who? what?). The "lucky" part for the Canucks is that their defense was never healthy all at the same time, and unlike the Bruins, they were never forced to make a cap-clearing move (thanks largely to the Salvadorian preseason injury to Sami Salo).

In any case, because of their defensive depth, the Canucks survived, and absolutely dominated as they got healthier.  I will admit that the Canucks are a special case.  With all that money allocated to the defense, they have just four other players with a cap hit over $3M: the Sedin twins, Ryan Kesler, and Roberto Luongo - and all four of those guys are providing great values for their cap hit this season.  Four more forwards had cap hits between $2-3M: young forward Mason Raymond, secondary scorer Mikael Samuelsson, defensive/faceoff specialist Manny Malhotra, and scoring pest Alex Burrows.  And somehow, filling in the rest of their forward corps with cheap forwards, the Canucks managed to be the highest-scoring team in the league (and with great defensive forwards, a stacked defense, and a goalie like Luongo, they were of course the best defensive team in the league as well).

See Part 2 of my FanPost on Defensive Depth to see the lineups put forth by recent Cup winners and finalists, as well as my opinion on what the Devils need to do with their defense.

Dare I say the R word, which I'm sure has never crossed the mind of Lou Lamoriello in his tenure as Devils GM?  22 years ago, the Devils made the playoffs for the first time, and they haven't looked back, outside of a hiccup of a season in 95-96 - until now.

Let me be clear before the bubbly optimists disparage my love for this team and my faith in its GM and its players.  I am not saying the Devils have zero chance at making the playoffs.  I am not saying that the team needs to be completely blown up.  And I am not suggesting that we need to suffer through a few more seasons like this one.

Why the Devils Will Be Sellers at This Year's Trade Deadline

Because of their poor start, the Devils are extremely unlikely to be anything but sellers at this year's trade deadline. The deadline this year is March 2, and there are 20 games for the Devils after said trade deadline.  That means that the deadline is occurring after the 62-game mark.  26 games into this season, the Devils have 18 points.  They could play outstanding, conference-best hockey and notch 70% of the pts available from now until the trade deadline, and they would still only have 68 pts by the deadline (Pittsburgh and Washington, the conference leaders, have notched 68% of the pts available to this point).  Even after such an extended hot streak requiring an immediate reversal of the Devils' fortunes, they will need to get 65% of their pts in the remaining 20 games to get to 94 pts, which would guarantee them a playoff berth. 

To put it another way, Atlanta currently sits in the 8-spot with 31 pts in 27 games (earned 57% of possible pts).  If they continue to notch points at the same rate, they would have 71 pts by the 62-game mark.  The Devils could play conference-best hockey from here on out (again, 70%) and they still would not be in playoff position by the trade deadline.

So there's no need to explore trades that will turn this season around and reload this team for a deep playoff run.  I say let's make changes to this team that will benefit it in the future.  There's no sense in stocking up on veterans with expiring contracts this year, but there is sense in dealing veterans that don't fit in the team's long-term plans.

Who Should Go?

Let me start by classifying the players - feel free to disagree with my classifications.

Too valuable to be traded - Zach Parise, Travis Zajac

Let's see how they pan out, we outbid everyone last summer anyway - Ilya Kovalchuk, Anton Volchenkov, Henrik Tallinder

Players with an important place in team history, and they're not playing too bad either - Martin Brodeur, Patrik Elias, Colin White

Star-potential prospects - Mattias Tedenby, Jacob Josefson, Alexander Urbom, Jon Merrill

Intriguing prospects, not untradeable - Adam Henrique, Eric Gelinas, Brandon Burlon, Nick Palmieri

Prospects that need to prove themselves as NHLers soon - Matt Corrente, Alexander Vasyunov, Vladimir Zharkov

Still waiting for him to reach his potential...but does he fit? - David Clarkson

Depends on the market price this summer... - Andy Greene

Not playing up to his contract, not playing horrifically, but easily moved - Dainius Zubrus, Bryce Salvador

Worst contract in the league - Brian Rolston

Rental players-to-be... What's that?  A no-trade clause? - Jason Arnott, Jamie Langenbrunner

The Lineup for the Next Three Years

The following is not meant to be a depiction of our line combinations.  It is my assessment of the level of talent that a player has, and where that player appropriately belongs in the scheme of things.  For example, Parise and Kovalchuk are both top-line-quality LWs.  Zajac, I feel, is not really at the talent level of 1st line centers around the league, but obviously he is more than good enough to play on a scoring line with either Parise or Kovalchuk for the foreseeable future.  Clarkson or Zubrus could certainly end up on one of the top 2 lines at any point, but again, I feel their talent level is better suited to a 3rd line.

I've excluded the 4th line because 4th lines are constantly changing from season to season and are dependent on the development of various prospects and the veteran free agents available each offseason.  I don't think we need to wring our hands over who our 4th liners will be in two years.

Italics for a prospect signifies that the player may reach/maintain that talent level in a given year.  Italics for our veterans indicates a player that might be re-signed at the end of his contract.  I'm assuming there's no way in heck that Rolston is being re-signed.  Safe assumption?  I also don't think Salvador will be re-signed given the recent Volchenkov and Tallinder signings.  Zubrus could be re-signed at a lower cap hit, depending on his play - after all, he is the all-important team mixmaster in the locker room.

Big question marks remain in the form of Langenbrunner and Greene.  Parise will require a healthy raise, and neither player has proven that they absolutely must be re-signed.  Letting go of Langenbrunner, who is still a useful player, would at least be a symbolic gesture that the team is moving on to a new era led by Parise and Kovalchuk, and not going for one last run at the Cup with an aging core.  Greene, for his part, has surely earned himself a raise and a consistent NHL roster spot, but has played inconsistently this season.  More importantly for him, he is in a position to earn significant money for the first time in his career, and I am almost certain he will at least want to test the market.  I'm going to move forward by assuming that Langenbrunner will be gone after this season, and that retaining Greene is a possibility.

2011-12

@font-face { font-family: "Times New Roman"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }table.MsoNormalTable { font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }

1st            Parise/Kovalchuk                                                                       

2nd           Elias                             Zajac                       Tedenby

3rd            Rolston                        Josefson                  Clarkson/Zubrus

Defensive Dmen            Volchenkov

                                       White

                                       Salvador

                                       Corrente

Offensive Dmen             Taormina

                                       Greene

Well-rounded Dmen       Tallinder

(supposedly...)                Urbom

2012-13

1st            Parise/Kovalchuk

2nd           Elias                            Zajac/Josefson       Tedenby

3rd                                               Josefson/Henrique  Clarkson/Zubrus

Defensive Dmen            Volchenkov

                                       White

                                       Corrente

Offensive Dmen             Taormina

                                       Greene

Well-rounded Dmen       Tallinder

(supposedly...)                Urbom

2013-14

1st            Parise/Kovalchuk                                       Tedenby

2nd                                              Zajac/Josefson        Tedenby

3rd            Elias                           Josefson/Henrique  Clarkson/Zubrus

Defensive Dmen            Volchenkov

                                       White

                                       Corrente

Offensive Dmen             Taormina

                                       Merrill

                                       Burlon

                                       Greene

Well-rounded Dmen       Tallinder

(supposedly...)                Urbom

                                       Gelinas?

So What Does This Team Need?

One of the most pressing needs is for another top-line-quality forward to play with Parise or Kovalchuk, particularly at the all-important center position.  All of the current top 4 teams in each conference have a superstar-quality center except Montreal.  However, given the team's limited cap space, such a forward cannot be acquired through free agency.  He must either be drafted or be an NHL-ready prospect acquired through trade.

Another need is for a veteran offensive defenseman who can provide consistent production from the blue line as well as mentorship for prospects like Merrill, Burlon, Taormina, Urbom, and Gelinas.  There are a lot of offensive-minded D prospects in the pipeline, but our veterans are generally defense-first players.  Unfortunately, veteran offensive Dmen are expensive in free agency and rarely available on the trade market.  If the cap goes up and the team wants to play the LTIR game like they did this past season, or is willing to waive Salvador, they may be able to afford a $4M veteran defenseman and keep Andy Greene.  Alternatively, they could keep Salvador and pluck said defenseman out of free agency/trade but let go of Greene.

The team also needs a goalie to succeed Marty, but the need is less pressing and decent goalies are always available in free agency as a stopgap measure.  I just don't feel this needs to be addressed immediately, as I feel Marty may actually continue to play after the expiration of his current contract.

How Do We Get to Where We Need to Be?

The biggest asset the Devils have is not tradeable veterans, but their 1st rd draft pick.  Currently, every team not in playoff position in the East is actually in the bottom 10 of the league.  The disparity between the top teams and the bottom teams in the East is huge, but relatively small in the West.  With such a small spread in the West, more teams will be driving for a playoff spot and will continue to play with desperation.  Simply finishing out of the playoffs, even in 9th place, could still get the Devils a top-10 pick (the Rangers, 9th in the East last season, finished with the 10th worst record in the league).  More likely is that the Devils are bad, but not putrid, for the rest of the season and finish somewhere in the bottom 5-10.

The current ISS top 10 shows two centers at the top of the list, Sean Couturier and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (RNH), and at the moment it would be hard to imagine either player falling out of the top 4.  The rest of the top 10 are mostly defensemen and wingers.  Two centers who are likely to be taken between picks 5-15 are Victor Rask, whose stock fell from #5 to #7 from Oct to Nov, and Ryan Strome, whose stock as skyrocketed from nowhere to debut in the top 30 list at #12 in November.  Time will tell where these rankings end up in June, and the Devils could certainly pick the best available player of any position without regard to the specific need at C, but I, for one, will be keeping my eye on these four players.  If the Devils play badly enough to nab Couturier or RNH, Lou would almost certainly make the cap space for them to play on the team next season.  Any other players taken in the top 10 would certainly get their shot to make the team out of training camp.

Recent trade deadline history is a mixed bag in terms of clues to what we could get in return, and that is a topic for another post.  Could the Devils acquire a NHL-ready talent with top-line potential through trade?  Not with assets like Arnott and Langenbrunner.  Could they get a player worthy of a 2nd line in the near future?  Perhaps.  They are both certainly playoff-tested veterans with tons of leadership experience.  Trading Langenbrunner or Arnott could potentially get us a young offensive defenseman with 2-3 yrs of NHL experience but lacking the potential to be more than a 2nd-pairing D.  It wouldn't be ideal by any means, but it could give our puck-moving a boost from the backend and could be cap-friendly.

My Plan

1.  Re-sign Parise immediately (revolutionary idea, I know).  He needs to be locked down, and we need to know what his cap hit will be.  Hopefully it will be in Kovalchuk's neighborhood and not much more than $7M.

2.  Wait until close to the trade deadline before trading Langenbrunner and Arnott and see where the Devils are in the standings.  Try to package Salvador, if possible, into any deal involving Langenbrunner, to give us more cap flexibility in 2011-12.

(a) If the Devils look likely to get a top-5 pick, then $3M+ in cap space next year must be saved for the player drafted.  Trade for as many draft picks as we can get.

(b) If they look like they won't finish quite so badly, then plan to go with Zajac-Josefson as our 1-2 center combo next year and hope the forward we draft competes for a job in training camp.  Trade Langenbrunner and Arnott for a forward with 2nd line potential who is not yet NHL-ready (but will be ready in about 2-3 yrs), plus whatever draft picks we can get, and save cap space for a run at a veteran offensive defenseman.

3.  Draft a forward with our likely top-10 pick.  If the pick is in the top-2, draft either Couturier or RNH.  If the pick is in the top-5, offer up a 2nd rd pick to move up to take one of them.  If no one wants to trade down, then trade down into picks 6-10 in exchange for a 2nd rd pick.  If our pick is in the top-10, draft the best available forward - hopefully it's a center. With our 2nd round pick(s), draft a gritty agitator-type winger who can fight and score the occasional goal.  Obviously we have one in Clarkson, but I would like another one.  Alternatively, a defenseman could be drafted in the 2nd round.  You can never have too many defensive prospects, and top-notch forward talent is harder to acquire in the 2nd round.

4.  Try to dump Rolston in the offseason with up to a 2nd rd pick as a sweetener. It may be possible, with just one year left on his contract.  If Rolston can be dumped, look for a veteran offensive Dman.  If not...oh well.

5.  Offer Greene $6M over 2 yrs or $7.5M over 3 yrs.  Be willing to go up to $9M over 3 yrs or $11M over 4 yrs.  Even if we land Couturier/RNH, we should just barely have the cap space to fit Greene.  If Greene refuses to settle for those amounts, then walk away and look for another veteran offensive defenseman with a $3-4M cap hit in trade or free agency.  Use Clarkson as an enticement in such a trade, offer Salvador too if they want him.  Be willing to waive Salvador to make the cap space work.

6.  Offer our RFA defensemen (Corrente, Salmela, Taormina, Fraser, Magnan) $500-750K per year x 2-3 yrs on two-way contracts.  None of them have really proven themselves as steady NHLers, but none should be abandoned just yet.  Same goes for Vasyunov and Zharkov.

7.  Don't re-sign Hedberg, save the cap space.  Bring up Frazee or sign a goalie to the league minimum.

8.  If he has not been traded already, trade Salvador at the 2012 trade deadline.  Try to get something for Rolston too.

In a previous fanpost on Nov 2nd (when the Devils had 7 pts in 13 games), I opined that time to turn the season around and make the playoffs was running out.  My prediction at the time was that if the Devils were not able to put together a 3-game winning streak by the 25th game of the season, they would be almost certain to miss the playoffs.

Well, here we are, having played 24 games this season, with only 18 pts in the standings, and no 3-game winning streak to our credit.  I stand by my prediction but I'm willing to give this team 3 more games before I start writing fanposts advocating that we rent out Arnott and Langenbrunner and aim for a top-10 draft pick.

We are in the midst of four consecutive games against some of the toughest competition in the league.  We've managed to get a shootout win in the first game against the Flyers.  The next three games are: at home vs. NE-division-leading Montreal, followed by a pair of road games in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, both tied for the Atlantic division lead.  These three games will put to the test whether this team is ready to break out of its slump or is truly stuck in the mud.

If they notch 4 or more pts in these three games, they have reason for optimism.  They will gain confidence from beating the early Vezina favorite (Price), and containing the best player in the league and the 2nd best offense in the league.

If they notch 2 or fewer, however, they will have no more than 20 pts through the first 27 games - almost exactly one-third of the way through the season.  To make the playoffs, they will need at least 70 pts in the remaining 55 games of the season - essentially the same pace that Pittsburgh, with 34 pts in their first 26 games and a record of 16-8-2, has played at so far, except that the Devils will have to maintain that pace for twice as long.

We'll see....

Editor's Note: User dr(d)evil went through the junk yard of watching Ilya Kovalchuk goals to get to the street of conclusions on how Kovalchuk has scored in recent seasons.  From there, dr(d)evil has a basis to suggest what the Devils should do with Kovalchuk on offense.  To reward the diligence in the research and a reasoned conclusion, it's now on the front page. I hope he/she doesn't mind I clarified the title.  Now go read it.

I reviewed all of Ilya Kovalchuk's goal video highlights on NHL.com.  These are my results:

Continue reading this post »

The magic number to get into the playoffs since the lockout and institution of the shootout has been between 90 and 95 in the Eastern Conference.  Let's say you need to get to 93 pts this year.

With 7 pts in the first 13 games of the season, the Devils need 86 pts in their remaining 69 games to make the playoffs.  86 pts in 69 games is 102-pt pace over the course of an entire season, which means that they need to play like one of the top-3 teams in the conference from here on out.  OK, that doesn't sound so bad - it's where most of us expected the Devils to be before the season started, right?

But 86 pts in 69 games is a lot.  It would require a team to go, say, 40-23-6.  And it leaves very little room for error.

Suppose the Devils do a complete 180 immediately but hit a slump in February in which they only gain 10 pts in 10 games (a slump which would look mighty good compared to what we've seen so far).  That would leave them having to gain 76 pts in the other 59 games - equivalent to a record of 35-18-6.  And I think such a slump is inevitable - they won't be able to stay hot for 5/6 of a season.

It's also unrealistic to think they'll just snap out of it immediately.  If they start playing better over the next 5 games, getting 5 pts, and then get really hot, hit the same February slump as described above, and then finish the season strong, they would need 71 pts in the 54 games that would constitute their two hot streaks - equivalent to a record of 33-16-5.

So, based on this, I'll make my prediction - if the Devils can't put together a 3-game winning streak at some point in the next 12 games (which they'll have to do without Zach Parise), their playoff chances are toast.  And even if they do, they've still got a huge mountain to climb and probably can't afford more than one slump for the rest of the season.

During his post-game interview following last night's 2-1 win over the Ducks, Patrik Elias stated that he enjoys playing center and hopes to continue doing so.  He likes that he gets the puck on his stick more often, and frankly, I like it when he has the puck a lot, too.  He has always been a good two-way player and has acclimated himself to the center position over the past few years.  Yet his natural position is at LW and his faceoff prowess is questionable.

So, should Patrik Elias remain at center?  How can we spark Jason Arnott without his longtime buddy at his side?  And what does this mean for Jacob Josefson?

I'm sure we'd all love to re-sign Zach Parise to a long-term contract and make him a Devil for life, but any such deal is going to have to differ from the Kovalchuk contract, since we have new rules on structuring long-term contracts. Per TG, the new rules are as follows:

Again, the amendment stipulates the following CBA changes:

**A contract of five seasons or more is considered a long-term contract.

**If the long-term contract extends beyond the player’s 41st birthday, the cap hit will be calculated two ways.

A) The average of the player’s salary every year in the contract up to the year after the player turns 41. (The player’s age on June 30 at the end of the season is considered his age for the full season).

B)  In subsequent years, the actual salary for that season will be his cap hit. So, if the player makes $2 million in the season in which his 41 and $1 million when he is 42, his cap hit will be $2 million the first year and $1 million the second.

**For a long-term contract in which any of three years in it average to more than $5.75 million, then for purposes of calculating the salary cap hit, none of years, ages 36 to 40, will be valued at less than $1 million. In other words, if Player X has three years that average more than $5.75 million in a contract of longer than five years and he would make $600,000 at age 38, for the purposes of calculating the cap hit, $1 million would be the salary added into the total—not $600,000—for that season.

There's no guarantee that Parise wants to sign a lifetime deal, but let's suppose that he does and put out contract proposals.  ZP turns 41 on July 28, 2025.  That means that any contract signed through the 2024-2025 season will count in calculating his cap hit - and any years beyond will not.  Let's assume then, that any such lifetime contract will be exactly 14 years - any less would be a detriment to giving the player the most money possible.

So...how would you structure Parise's deal?  The ground rules are:

(1)  "I think Zach will do the right thing for the team and take less money" is not a valid rationale for reducing Parise's cap hit.  In essence, if you're offering less than what we gave Kovalchuk, you would need to be able to face Zach and say "We're offering you less money than Kovalchuk because ______."

(2) His salary in any one year cannot be less than $1 M.  As the above rules dictate, the last 5 years of the deal will count for a $1M cap hit regardless.

(3) The contract must either be front-loaded or equal money in every year.  There is no reason for Parise to accept a back-loaded contract and risk losing out on a lot of money if he gets injured/needs to retire.

There was a lot of discussion on prior FanPosts about which players would be moved to make room for Ilya Kovalchuk's now-rejected 17 yr/$102M contract.  Though many still hold out hope that some daft GM will take Brian Rolston off our hands, the general consensus seemed to be that Bryce Salvador and Dainius Zubrus, as the big contracts without NTCs, were the most likely to go. 

Some argued that if the Devils promoted certain prospects and carried a bare minimum number of players on their roster, they could get away with trading/waiving Salvador only and get under the cap by a hair.  It seems that given the $6,666,667 cap hit of the contract that Kovalchuk and the Devils submitted yesterday for league approval, any possibility of trading Salvador alone to get under the cap is gone.  So how far will the Devils have to go in their salary dump to get under the cap this year, and what additional implications might Kovalchuk's contract have next offseason?

If Kovalchuk's contract is approved by the NHL, the Devils' cap situation would look like:

At this point, permit me to make a few assumptions.  First, let me assume that Zach Parise will be re-signed, and will be given a contract comparable to Kovalchuk's, i.e. a $6,666,667 cap hit for a very long time.  There is definitely a possibility that Parise does not want to commit his entire career to the club and will seek a shorter contract (think 3-5 yrs) at a much higher cap hit (potentially $7.5 million or more).  For now, let's keep it at the same cap hit as Kovalchuk.

I will also make the assumption that Andy Greene will be re-signed, and at a cap hit somewhere between Tallinder's and Volchenkov's.  As it currently stands, Greene is our only truly offensive defenseman and may in fact be more valuable than both, but he's really only got one good season under his belt and is not as much of a "known quantity" as Volchenkov is.  For argument's sake let me set his cap hit in 2011-2012 and beyond at $3.75 M, just about halfway between Tallinder and Volchenkov and if you think he should be paid more or less we can consider those possibilities later.

Finally, given the steep raises that need to be given to Parise and Greene, let me assume that Jason Arnott will not be re-signed and that Josefson will be groomed this year to take his place as 2nd line center next year.  Whether you think Tedenby or Henrique will make the team over Josefson is of little consequence to the cap as their cap hits are all within $60,000 of each other.  The bottom line is that the Devils need a skilled prospect to step into a spot in the top-9 forwards in the event that one of the current veteran forwards is traded.

These assumptions, plus another that the cap ceiling is raised another 5% next season, gives us this situation:

I have kept 2011-2012 bonuses as 0 here because I can't predict whether Zharkov and Hedberg will earn their bonuses and because it's hard to predict which players will make the team in 2011-2012 and what their bonuses will consist of.

In 2010-2011, the Devils need to clear over $3.25 M in cap space even without carrying a 7th defenseman.  If they went with a truly bare minimum lineup consisting of 12 forwards, 6 defensemen, and 2 goalies, they could technically get away with trading only Zubrus, but such a strategy is fraught with risk. Promoting a league-minimum player like Sestito instead of Josefson could earn you enough cap space to carry Eckford or Taormina as a 7th defenseman.  Arguably, that would move Zharkov up to the top-9 and Sestito would play with Pelley and PL3 on the 4th line, but at cost of possibly hindering the development of a player ready for the big time, such as Josefson, Tedenby, Urbom, or Corrente.  It would also leave the Devils with a hole at center, likely forcing them to play Rolston at 3rd line center (eeek) or splitting up Arnott and Elias and having Elias play center again.  Thus it becomes a stretch to think that Josefson WON'T make the team.

Supposing Zubrus is the only one traded, in 2011-2012 the Devils will have $5.97 M in cap space to add 3-4 forwards, 1-2 defensemen, and 1 backup goaltender - a minimum of 5 players.  Supposing that Tedenby and Urbom/Corrente will be 2 of those 5 players, accounting for a $1.745 M cap hit but a $310,000 bonus that can be deferred to 2012-2013, the Devils will have $4.535 M in space for 3 players and a top-9 forward corps consisting of Parise, Kovalchuk, Elias, Rolston, Zajac, Clarkson, Josefson, Tedenby, plus someone else.  In that situation, re-signing Langenbrunner for something close to a $3 M cap hit would leave the Devils with about $1.5M with one forward and one D needing to be signed and no third-line center.  They could certainly let Langenbrunnner walk away and sign a good third-line center for $3 M or less - or even re-sign Arnott, since his cap hit is likely to go down from what it is now.

So all in all, trading away Zubrus alone (or loaning him to, say, the KHL the way Chicago did with Huet) could theoretically do the job, but would leave the Devils in a very precarious situation carrying a 20-man roster for two straight seasons; would be dependent on the progress of top prospects like Josefson, Tedenby, Urbom, and Corrente; and would force the Devils to carry, as part of their bare-minimum 20-man roster in 2011-2012, three near-league-minimum forwards (Pelley, Leblond, and one more - potentially Zharkov if he agrees to it), one cheap Dman (Corrente would fit under the cap if the 12th forward is close to $500K than $750K.

I don't think it's wise to be so tight up against the cap and I think both Salvador and Zubrus must go, but I'm curious what you all think.  Is trading Salvador the ONLY viable option for clearing more space?  How might the Devils fill in the hole on defense if Salvador is traded?  Will the Devils have to make an additional trade in 2011, and what might they be able to do?  Do you think Parise and Greene will make more or less than what was assumed here?

We all know what Ilya Kovalchuk has done since he broke into the league eight seasons ago.  He has scored 40+ goals in six straight seasons and been over a point per game in 5 of the last 6.  He has scored 52 goals twice and broken 90 pts twice.  And he has done it all on a Thrashers team that made the playoffs just once.

I believe that Kovalchuk will not only continue to score 40 goals a season, but he will also notch around 50 assists each seasonor more and is very likely to top the 100-pt mark.

Kovalchuk is a mind-boggling 14.8% shooter for his career and has gotten an average of 3.7 shots per game.  In 49 games with Atlanta, he had 31 goals, 27 assists, and 179 SOG for a shooting percentage of 17.3% and 3.7 shots per game.  In 27 games with the Devils, he had 10 goals, 17 assists, and 111 SOG for a shooting percentage of 9.0% and 4.1 shots per game.

Three things jump out here:

(1) To go from 3.7 shots per game (which is also his career average) to 4.1 shots per game is a significant jump.

(2) A shooting percentage of 9.0% is a far cry from his career 14.8%.

(3) His 17 assists in 27 games as a Devil was, at 0.63 APG, a higher rate than the 27 assists in 49 games he notched with Atlanta (0.55 APG) as well as the 0.53 APG rate he has posted over the last six seasons (I don't think it's fair to include his rookie and sophomore campaigns when assist numbers depend so much on the maturation of his team play).

As far as the SOG go, you might make the argument that he shot more because he was anxious to score goals for his new team.  The more likely explanation, though, is that he got more shots on goal because his team was spending more time in the offensive zone.  Furthermore, I personally got the sense that he was looking to pass more than necessary at times in order to endear himself better to his teammates.  He could very well be capable of notching 4.0-4.5 shots per goal this season.  And that's not even factoring in the fact that Johnny Mac preaches "shoot, shoot, shoot" at every opportunity he gets.

His poor shooting percentage as a Devil could be due to poor chemistry with his linemates, poor shot selection, or inaccurate passing by his linemates.  Or perhaps the Thrashers' style put him in position to have better shot opportunities.  I think it's very likely, though, that he returns to somewhere close to his career shooting percentage as a Devil.  Let's suppose that his shooting percentage ends up somewhere between 12.0% to 16.0%

The higher APG rate makes sense, given that he has better teammates and more time spent in the offensive zone.  Yet he achieved that in spite of not being fully comfortable with his linemates.  I look for his APG rate to range between 0.60 to 0.70.

When you combine all of these things you get a goal total that is 38.4 at the low end (4.0 x 12% x 80 GP) and 57.6 at the high end (4.5 x 16% x 80 GP).  His assists would range from 48 to 56.  His total points would range from 86 at the low end to 114 at the high end.

I've made a lot of big assumptions here, and perhaps I'm being overly optimistic, but I think this is a reasonable argument to expect something close to a 50-50-100 stat line out of Kovalchuk.

Rumors out of the NY Post are running wild that the Devils have offered a 17-year, $100+ million contract to Ilya Kovalchuk, structured to pay him nearly all of the money in the first 10 years.  I for one, am skeptical of the dollar figure posed rumored, but it's certainly not out of the question for the Devils to offer him a contract that Kovalchuk has no intention of paying out.  GMs in recent years have exploited the CBA loophole whereby players who sign their contract before age 35 do not count against the cap if they retire before their contract expires.  Here's a look at all of the contracts of term 7 yrs or longer with salary this year of greater than $6 million.  "Signed Age" is the age at which the contract was agreed to, not their age during the first season it goes into effect.  "End Age" is the age they will be on July 1st of the year that the contract expires.  There may be some discrepancy between signed age, end age, and the length of the contract based on the timing of the signing (potentially up to one year before contract takes effect) and the particular birth date of the player.

Looking at the ages of the players when they signed their contracts and when they expire, there are a clearly a few different flavors of mega-contract.

(1) Long-deal-for-young-star that expires by age 35.  These deals are typically minimally front-loaded and carry a heavy cap hit, but are based on the expectation of not only continuation of past performance but of potential to improve future performance as well.  Ovechkin, Nash, Spezza, Staal, and Vanek fall into this category.

(2) Long-deal-for-player-entering prime that expires by age 35.  These deals may or may not be front-loaded and are paid with the expectation that the player will continue to produce at the level they have just before they signed.  The players in this category are Gomez and Datsyuk.  These deals also carry a heavy cap hit.  Gomez was an unrestricted free agent, Datsyuk did not hit the market.

(3) Lifetime-deal-for-player-in-or-entering-prime that expires at age 39 or above.  These deals are heavily front-loaded to reduce the cap hit.  Keith, Luongo, Hossa, Zetterberg, Lecavalier, and Savard fall into this category.  After Lecavalier's 7.7 cap hit, the next-highest cap hit is Zetterberg's paltry 6.1.

(4) Awkward-long-deal-for-player-in-prime-that-might-not-take-them-to-retirement.  These deals are for players in their prime, and take the player past age 35, but awkwardly end at a time when they might retire, or they might not.  There are two examples of this - Campbell and Briere.  These deals carry a heavy cap hit - Campbell's is not front-loaded, but Briere's is, though if Philly had just gone a few years more to make it a true lifetime deal, they would have been able to get away with a much lower cap hit.  Notably, both of these players were signed away from other teams in unrestricted free agency.

(5) Long-deal-for-old-guy.  This is Chris Pronger.  He was arguably past his prime at age 34 when he signed his contract.  The contract takes him to age 42 when it expires.  Interestingly, he is listed as "35+" on CapGeek - the contract he signed last summer was an extension signed one year early - he will be 35 when the regular season opens on the first year of his contract.

The best values right now in these categories are the guys in category (3), who have taken a lifetime deal with a few extra cheap years that reduce their cap hit.  Time will tell whether teams were smart to offer these deals.  Time will also tell whether the players retire before the expiration of their contract or not, having already collected most of the money they wanted in the front-loaded deal.  Most of them have a precipitous drop in salary around age 37.

Kovalchuk is entering his prime.  The numbers that have been bandied about either fall into category (2) (7 yrs, $60 million would take him to age 34) or category (3) (17 yrs, $100 million would take him to age 44!).  The alternative would be to put him in category (4), somewhere between 7 and 12 yrs, but the examples taken from that category are terrible contracts.  They carry long-term risk as well as a heavy cap hit.  Either up to 7 years or jump all the way to 12+ years may well be the only viable options for a Kovalchukian long-term deal.

What do you think about these mega-contracts?  Is there a pattern to "good" mega-contracts and "bad" mega-contracts?  If you want Kovy, which category would your preferred deal fall into?

As pleased as many Devils fans seem to be about the signings of Henrik Tallinder and Anton Volchenkov, the loss of Paul Martin has left the Devils with a terrible lack of offensive defensemen outside of Andy Greene.  With the strong possibility that they sign Ilya Kovalchuk, the Devils not only lack the cap space to make any further free agent signings, but will have to clear space from their roster in the form of trades - most likely of Dainius Zubrus and Bryce Salvador, and perhaps more.  It is virtually a given that the Devils will have to go with four forwards on the PP, with players like Arnott, Kovalchuk, and Rolston likely to play the point, but outside of Greene, which of the defensemen might be able to man the other point?

With that need in mind, I wanted to see what defensemen were out there who wouldn't break the bank, at least cap-wise.  I used the CapGeek Bargain Hunter and sorted the results by PP ice time per game.  Minimum requirements were as such - at least 30 GP last season, 1.50 min of PP ice time per game, salary less than 2.0 million, and age 25 and over.  I figured that those players who are less than 25 playing 30+ games and getting significant PP ice time were very good young prospects, and that teams would be unwilling to trade them, particularly not for a salary dump.  I also excluded the players who have been recently signed or re-signed in free agency this offseason.

The results were dismaying - perhaps my conditions were too stringent.  There are not a lot of options out there, but they are listed below.  I included their even strength ice time per game as an indicator of whether they were trusted by their coaches defensively enough to play at even strength. 

Out of these results, we can rule out Campoli and White - they are RFAs and they will get pay raises this summer, in addition to being valued highly by their organizations.  Calgary has cap issues of their own and would be unlikely to trade Giordano and White anyway.  Picard and Mara, though they meet the PP ice time criteria, hardly seem to be productive enough to really be considered offensive defensemen.  It seems that the reality is that offensive defensemen get paid - a lot - and it's hard to find a good value.  In fact, one of the best values in the league, who would have been in this table were he not already on the Devils, is Andy Greene, who will be due for a big payday next summer.

M.A. Bergeron is an interesting case.  On the one hand, he has been very effective on the PP and cheap, too.  On the other hand, there's a reason he's cheap - he's a defenseman who's not so good at defense, hence his PP specialist status and lack of even-strength ice time.  Still, given the number of defensive defensemen the Devils have, along with a corps of great two-way forwards, might it be worth it to take a chance on him?

If you think the conditions of my search were too restrictive, please suggest better criteria.  If there is another player whom I have missed, please let me know.  I know that players like Kaberle, Souray, and Corvo have been discussed in the past, but frankly all of those guys are too expensive if the Devils do indeed sign Kovalchuk and aren't really appropriate for this discussion - we need to go cheap here.

It's almost July 1st!  And yet we have to wait another 12 hrs for free agency to even begin and probably another few hours after that to hear any news.

I'm sitting here at home with a pile of work to do and all that's going through my head are pessimistic thoughts.

I peg the Devils' chances of getting Paul Martin back at $5.5 mil or below at 5%.  Their chances of getting him back at more than 5.5 (my cutoff for overpaying) maybe 15%.  The probability he goes somewhere else?  A not-too-optimistic 80%.

I actually like the Devils' chances of signing Kovalchuk much better than their chances of signing Martin, mostly because there are a limited number of teams that have both the cap space and potential to win.  I give the Devils a 30% shot, and the chances that his cap hit provides good value (I would say he provides good value up to and including 8.0 million) about 75%.

The odds that the Devils aren't able to sign either one, and are left reflexively overpaying for the scraps?  Too high for my liking.  Wayyy too high.

Am I going crazy?

Just for fun.  What if Kovy wanted to get traded so that the Thrashers could stock their shelves, and had every intent of returning to an improved Thrashers team as a free agent?  A more serious question would be, is it crazy to think that Kovy could potentially sign with Atlanta when all is said and done?

A look at what Atlanta has netted by trading Kovalchuk - two top-6 forwards (Bergfors and Byfuglien), a top-4 Dman (Oduya), a 3rd-pairing veteran Dman (Sopel), a checking forward (Eager), a two-way center prospect (Cormier).  Their moves have not only improved them for the future, but improve their current state of affairs tremendously.

Atlanta currently has almost $30 million in cap space with their entire defense corps signed for the upcoming year and 6 forward spots and 2 goalie spots left to fill.  That's an average of $3.75 million per player!  Which means that Kovalchuk could sign a contract for $10 million a year and the Thrashers would STILL have $20 million left to sign 7 players.

If Kovalchuk were to sign with the Thrashers, this is what their lineup could look like:

Kovy - Bryan Little (RFA) - Evander Kane

Byfuglien - Antropov - Bergfors (RFA)

Todd White - Rich Peverley - RW (re-sign Afinogenov?)

Eager (RFA) - Slater - RW (re-sign Colby Armstrong?)

Hainsey - Enstrom

Oduya - D (free agency?)

Sopel - Bogosian

Ondrej Pavelec, veteran goalie (like a Turco? or even Nabokov?)

And as crazy as it sounds, if they could unload Antropov and were willing to spend up to the cap, they could probably make a run at all of the top 3 free agents this year - Kovalchuk AND Marleau AND Martin.  They could use their 30 million in cap space this way - 8-10 for Kovy, 7 for Marleau, 5-6 for Volchenkov/Martin, 4 for Little, 3 for Bergfors, 2 for a goalie, 1 each for Afinogenov, Eager, and Armstrong, and -4 for getting rid of Antropov.

Just saying.....it's within the realm of possibility.....and you'd have to suddenly consider the Thrashers a definite playoff team with potential to be a contender very soon.