Making sense of the Phil Kessel trade

If the last few days of NHL transactions have reminded us of anything, it’s this: There’s a huge difference between the trade you choose to make and the one you need to make.

After a round of failed contract talks with Dougie Hamilton and a growing sense that he wanted out, the Boston Bruins felt like they needed to trade him. With a cap crunch and the threat, real or perceived, of an offer sheet looming, the Blackhawks felt like they needed to trade Brandon Saad. In both cases, the return was underwhelming and widely panned. That’s what happens when it’s a trade you need to make — you end up taking what you can get when you can get it, even if that means you’re selling at a discount.

On the surface, the Maple Leafs didn’t need to trade Phil Kessel. The 27-year-old sniper has seven years left on his contract, so he wasn’t hitting the open market anytime soon. At an $8 million cap hit, he certainly wasn’t cheap, but he also wasn’t especially overpaid based on his production. And he was easily the team’s best player, and among the very best in the league when it comes to what he does best; only Alexander Ovechkin, Steven Stamkos, and Corey Perry have scored more goals over the last five years, and Kessel managed that while dragging Tyler Bozak around the ice as his center.

Now, the Leafs did need to trade someone — president Brendan Shanahan had said as much in April, acknowledging that “for whatever reason, the mix doesn’t work” — and after yet another disastrous season, nobody on the roster deserved to be untouchable. If the right offer came along, anyone was available. But if there was one guy among the team’s core that you’d be happy to keep, you’d think Kessel would be that guy. The Maple Leafs could certainly choose to trade him, but they didn’t need to.

Or did they? Yesterday, the Maple Leafs sent Kessel to the Penguins in a trade that would make sense only if it were one they thought they needed to make. The full deal has Toronto sending Kessel to Pittsburgh along with a second-round pick, Tyler Biggs, and Tim Erixon. In exchange, they get prospects Kasperi Kapanen and Scott Harrington, forward Nick Spaling, a first, and a third.

That’s a mouthful, but we can trim it down for evaluation purposes. Biggs and Erixon are minor pieces that were presumably included primarily to free up contract spots, and Spaling is a mildly useful player who’s mostly a salary dump. It’s not unfair to think of this trade as boiling down to Kessel for Kapanen, Harrington, and a first.

That’s not an awful return, but it’s not the sort of package that typically makes a team move its top player. Kapanen is a good prospect, a skilled winger who was the Penguins’ top pick in 2014 and still hasn’t turned 19. He projects as a top-six guy, maybe even a future first-liner if everything breaks just right. Harrington is a 22-year-old defenseman who could still top out as a solid second-pairing guy. Both have value; neither is a sure thing. As for the first-rounder, it’s actually a conditional pick that can’t fall into the lottery, and could revert down to a second-rounder if the Penguins miss the playoffs in each of the next two years.

Then there’s the not-so-small matter of salary retention. The Leafs will eat $1.2 million of Kessel’s salary and cap hit for all seven years left on his deal. Shanahan has (correctly) refused to put a timeline on the Maple Leafs’ rebuild, but it’s safe to say that it’s not “eight years or more.” At some point when the plan calls for them to be contending for a championship, the Leafs will still be sitting with $1.2 million in dead cap space on the books from this deal. That hurts.

So if that’s the best Toronto could do for Kessel, why trade him at all? Why not focus on moving out other players and hold on to the guy you can pencil in for 30 goals and 80 points most years? And in fact, the Leafs had spent the last few weeks assuring everyone that they were perfectly prepared to do just that. If the market wasn’t there, why not wait it out?

Today, the answer seems clear: They were bluffing. They were always going to move Kessel this summer. They didn’t think they had a choice.

>> Read the full post on Grantland

Unanswered NHL questions

With another two weeks left before NHL training camps open and not much coming across the news wire, it can be tempting to assume that all the offseason’s major story lines have been neatly wrapped up.

For the most part that’s true, but there’s still occasional news trickling in. For example, this weekend we learned that the league had finally gotten around to finding a venue for the Winter Classic in Washington, D.C.,¹ just nine short months after they announced the teams involved.

Meanwhile, we’re still looking for a resolution on several other important stories. Here are five offseason subplots on which fans are still waiting for a resolution.

Where will Martin Brodeur play?

This is the time of year when the free-agent pickings start to look pretty sparse. Dustin Penner could help somebody, maybe Todd Bertuzzi if you were desperate, and even good old Paul “BizNasty” Bissonnette is still out there for a team looking to boost its Klout rating.

Other than that, the list is pretty thin. Well, except for that surefire first-ballot Hall of Famer who owns most of the all-time NHL records at his position.

That would be Brodeur, of course, who spent 20 years as the undisputed starter in New Jersey before splitting time with Cory Schneider last season and is now an unrestricted free agent. Given his résumé, you might expect that there’d be a long lineup of teams waiting to talk to him, but there’s been surprisingly little buzz around the nine-time All-Star.

That’s partly because the market for goaltending is already saturated, and partly because Brodeur hasn’t actually been all that good over the past few years. There just aren’t any teams that feel like they’re one .900 save percentage starter away from contending, and Brodeur has never seemed all that enthusiastic about accepting a backup role. That’s led to some recent talk that he may just retire, and the Devils say they have a front office spot waiting for him if he wants it.

Still, there are some scenarios remaining in which it could make sense for Brodeur to come back. He could wait for the season to start and see which team runs into inevitable injury problems. He could accept a backup role on a team where the starter is either on shaky ground or injury-prone, with an eye toward winning at least a share of the job. Or he could talk himself into settling for one last Cup chase by accepting a full-time backup job on a legitimate contender.² So while the odds aren’t looking great, he does have options.

Then again, maybe the best fit would be to return to New Jersey for one more year, back up Schneider, and go out as a hero — or a trade deadline rental if the perfect destination happens to open up during the season. That could be a tough pill for a competitive guy like Brodeur to swallow, but it might be preferable to ending his career with what could be shaping up as an extended Jerry Rice–in-Seattle moment.

Is Daniel Alfredsson coming back?

Unlike Brodeur, the question with the 41-year-old Alfredsson isn’t “where,” since he’s only interested in playing in Detroit. The questions are whether his body will let him play one more year, and whether the Red Wings want him back.

After 17 years in Ottawa, Alfredsson chose to go to Detroit last year in hopes of winning his first Stanley Cup. He performed well enough — his 49 points were actually good enough for a share of the team lead on the injury-ravaged Wings — but didn’t get close to that championship, as the team barely made the playoffs and bowed out quickly in the first round. He has battled back problems in recent years, and while he’s indicated his interest in returning, that could change if he doesn’t feel right once he’s back on the ice.

While the Wings would miss Alfredsson’s leadership, they do have a decent dose of youth on the way that could use his ice time. Earlier in the offseason, GM Ken Holland stopped short of guaranteeing him a roster spot. But more recent reports have been more positive, and there seems to be a fit here. The team doesn’t have much cap space, but could do a bonus-laden deal that would ease that pressure for this year. Chances are, this one doesn’t get decided until shortly before training camp, but the betting is that Alfredsson will be back.

By the way, Alfredsson and Brodeur aren’t the only veterans we may not have seen the last of. Guys like Tim Thomas, Saku Koivu, Ed Jovanovski, and Ray Whitney are all still unsigned, and none have officially retired. Heck, even Teemu Selanne hasn’t quite gotten around to hanging up the skates for good yet, although if he plays it will be in the KHL.

>> Read the full post on Grantland

Things overheard at the Maple Leafs statue unveiling

MLSE also spent a ton of money on a tribute to
Toronto FC’s greatest players, but halfway through
the ceremony the best statues just walked out.

After weeks of speculation, the Toronto Maple Leafs finally unveiled their new Legends Row on Saturday as part of their Fan Fest weekend. The new monument features bronze statues of Ted Kennedy, Johnny Bower and Darryl Sittler, with other legends from franchise history being added each year leading up to the team’s centennial celebration in 2017.

The event was a big deal for Maple Leaf fans, so it goes without saying that DGB spies were in attendance. Here’s a selection of some of the things they managed to overhear.

• Yes, it certainly is a thrill to get a glimpse of a superstar from a long-bygone era who you can only remember through stories passed down to you from your grandparents, but maybe don’t say that out loud to Darryl Sittler, ok Mr. Dubas?
  
  
• Oh cool, they left plenty of space for another eight to ten good players, just like they did for the current roster.
  
  
• Quick, get these wonderful tributes to the franchise’s beloved past unveiled before Tim Leiweke shows up with a blow torch and starts melting everything down.
  
  
• This one statue of a guy taking a penalty shot is so lifelike that if you stare at it long enough it almost seems like it’s actually moving ever so slowly towards… oh, sorry Mr. Allison, didn’t realize you were here today.

Read the rest of this post...

My thoughts on the Brendan Shanahan hire

This morning, the Toronto Maple Leafs officially confirmed the rumor that’s been the talk of hockey for the past 48 hours: Hall of Famer Brendan Shanahan is leaving his post as the head of the NHL’s department of player safety to take a senior role in the Leafs’ front office.

As an objective hockey journalist who doubles as a raving Maple Leafs homer, I was asked what I thought about the story on a Toronto radio station Thursday morning when it was still an unconfirmed rumor. My answer then was that I was cautiously optimistic. Now that the deal is official and I’ve had a few hours to mull it over, I’m sticking with that.

Here’s where the caution comes in: We don’t yet know exactly what the role will involve. Shanahan has been named president of the entire team, not just of the hockey ops department, but that still leaves some room for interpretation.

If the idea is for Shanahan to be some sort of PR figurehead, there to smile for the cameras and act as a shield against mounting fan anger, then it’s no good. It would be just one more attempt at deflection from an organization that seems to excel at it. But that sort of career move wouldn’t make any sense for Shanahan, so that option seems unlikely.

If he’s expected to roll up his sleeves and start making decisions as a de facto GM, that’s also an issue, because he has no experience in the front office of an NHL team. But that wouldn’t make sense for the Maple Leafs, so it’s … well, this is the Maple Leafs we’re talking about, so “unlikely” doesn’t really fit. But it would be a surprise.

That leaves us with something in the middle ground, where Shanahan becomes the face of the franchise and drives the hockey side from a high level while leaving the day-to-day work in the hands of a GM (whether that ends up being Dave Nonis or someone else). And that’s where the optimism comes in, because that’s a scenario that could work.

>> Read the full post on Grantland

Do's and Don'ts for your upcoming NHL arbitration hearing

A frustrated Mark Fraser reacts to the eighth time
his hearing is interrupted by a confused Dave
Nonis asking "Wait, there's a salary cap?"

There's not much going on in the NHL world these days, as we're reached the slow part of the offseason. Most of the major free agents have signed, the trade rumor mill has slowed to a crawl, and training camp is still too far away to get excited about.

But at least we still have arbitration... kind of. While it's true that most cases get settled in advance and hearings have become far less common in recent years, there are still usually a handful of cases heard each offseason. This year saw 21 players file, with six of those cases still unsettled and scheduled to go to an arbitrator over the next few weeks.

If you happen to be one of those six players, you're in luck. I've consulted with my various sources in the legal community, and come up the following list of do's and don'ts to help you win your NHL arbitration case.

DO: Think carefully about whether you wish to file for a one-year or a two-year contract, since the latter is a more significant commitment to the team.
DO NOT: Be distracted when every time you mention a two-year deal, Lou Lamoriello continually nudges you in the ribs while saying "Unless you randomly decide to retire" while repeatedly winking.

DO: Ensure that you will arrive on time by confirming that you have clear directions to the location of the hearing.
DO NOT: Let Tim Leiweke plan your route for you, no matter how awesome he keeps telling you it would be.

DO: Remind the arbitrator that you're a considered a great guy in the dressing room.
DO NOT: Mention that time you helped your teammates murder Justin Bieber for stepping on the team logo, because you all agreed to never speak of that day again.

Read the rest of this post...

New MLSE chief Tim Leiweke's plan to bring the Stanley Cup to Toronto

The first result for a Google Image search
of "Things we will never see again"

The new head of Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment has given his first interview since taking the job, and the results were… interesting.

In a wide-ranging interview, Tim Leiweke unveiled his vision for the Maple Leafs. He's promising to change the organization's culture and build a winning atmosphere. He even plans to take down photos of the franchises championship teams from the 1960s. And he's so confident that his plan will work that he says he's already planned the championship parade.

That last bit has already become a punch line, but it's worth pointing out that the former president and CEO of the company that owns the LA Kings knows a thing or two about Cup parades. So maybe he's on to something.

I wanted to know more, so I put in a call to my MLSE spies. They were able to get me more details on what kind of changes Leiweke has in store. Here are some of the ways the new Leafs' boss plans to change the culture and finally bring the Stanley Cup to Toronto.

Old way: Players were instructed to go out there and try to lose.
New way: Players will now be told to go out there and try to win.

Old way: The team was the butt of a constant string of undeserved "plan the parade" jokes from opposing fans.
New way: End that practice once and for all by ensuring that, effective immediately, all future "plan the parade" jokes will be completely justified.

Old way: The franchise was guilty of living in the past and coasting on long-ago triumphs.
New way: The franchise will focus on the present, unless not doing that would sell more merchandise in which case hey did you hear David Clarkson is the new Wendel Clark?

Read the rest of this post...