Friday, April 27, 2012

First round post-mortem: There is no secret formula

"I once asked Al [Arbour], what's the secret to building a team? He said no secret, it's not complicated, get good players."

- Darcy Regier
 
It's been a strange first round this year in the playoffs: several recent superpowers - Vancouver, Boston, Pittsburgh, Detroit, and Chicago - have gone down in the first round to the surprise of fans and pundits alike.

At the end of every Stanley Cup, it seems, we close with a new conclusion on what it takes to win in today's NHL. Without fail, that conclusion is based entirely on the makeup of the team that wins the cup.

Eleven years ago, after the Avalanche won, it was all about having 'two star centres'; other years, apparently, the key is an unbeatable top D pairing. Some years, you'll never win unless you've got a superstar goalie; other years, Chris Osgood will do just fine. Pile up the offence like the Lightning? Or get a lot of good checking forwards? When the Hurricanes won in 2006, it was thanks to all those veterans; when the Blackhawks won in 2010, they were carried by their young legs. Last year, we were told the Bruins won because they had so much toughness.

None of these formulas is the single answer to playoff success. Arbour had it right: just get good players. Pile up as many of them as you can. Your first line can't play every shift; you can't play your first D pairing 40 minutes a night.

GMs must avoid falling into the trap of trying to mold their teams after what's fashionable. They'll pay more in the FA market for that marginal tough guy or 'veteran presence'; they'll turn down great trade offers for the ones they have.

There are, of course, some differences in the playoffs. Perhaps most notably, the teams are better. You can't just have one shutdown line and D-pair; every player on your team needs to be able to match up against top players on the opposing team, because otherwise good coaches can exploit them. That sort of depth is important; your third-pairing D-men, for example, will be playing 15 minutes a night. Obviously that's not as much as the 24-25 the top pair gets, but your third pairing will now be playing against quality guys on the other team. If they're going to get 60% of the ice time the top pair gets, you had better make sure you get someone good in there. Sending out some bum who'll go -4 in a series reverses all the good your top players have done.

The other point I'll make is that teams need to rest their players more in the regular season. What's the point of having Ryan Kesler play 77 games in the regular season if he's injured in the playoffs? Kesler played every game down the stretch, often playing over 20 minutes a night. Even if he doesn't tell the coaching staff that he's injured, why keep playing him so much? Once a playoff spot is clinched, teams need to rotate the healthy scratches in to get the starters some nights off. Key players can thus be fresher for the late rounds of the playoffs - let alone the first round. Nagging injuries can be given time to heal and you give your depth players a chance to play - and at least show you whether they have anything to offer come playoff time. MLB and NFL teams rest starters late in the regular season; why can't NHL teams?

To their credit, the Canucks did play Andrew Ebbett for the last 4 games of the season, though largely as a fill-in for Daniel Sedin. There's no excuse, though, for scratching Kassian, Weise, Tanev, Alberts or Gragnani anytime in March or April. Those players should be shouldering the load while the front-line players get some rest.

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

"Pittsburgh Model, My Ass"

Those were Burkie's words this morning when asked by a reporter whether the Leafs should try to follow the 'Pittsburgh Model'. Presumably this would mean to tear down and try to get lottery picks - ideally first-overall picks - and rebuild around core players.

Pittsburgh did do this, but it was kind of by accident. Jaromir Jagr was traded in 2001 for Kris Beech, Michal Sivek and Ross Lupaschuk. All three had been drafted in the top 34 in 1999; all three bombed as prospects. Only Beech saw much NHL time, but he was a major disappointment. Combined with a poor drafting record in the late 90s and a tight budget, the Penguins were regular cellar-dwellers in the early 2000s. The team was terrible and losing money.

From 2003-2006, though, the team had two #1 and two #2 picks, drafting Fleury, Malkin, Crosby, and Staal. The team eventually improved, posting a winning record in 2006-07. It was a long, hard stretch and a tough price to pay. What's more, it doesn't automatically work.

Burke pointed out that Crosby was won in the 05-06 lottery, where the Penguins were up against the whole league. What's more, though they've had lottery picks, the Penguins were fortunate to have them all turn out; top-5 picks don't all turn out and many are merely average players. There's no guarantee that the Leafs would have such luck, or that they'd be getting a top-2 pick each year given the number of terrible teams in the league at the moment.

What's more, a couple top players doesn't make a team. Look at, say, Tampa Bay. They feature two #1 overall picks - Lecavalier and Stamkos - and #2 overall man Victor Hedman. They're not anybody's idea of a powerhouse team. They lack depth at all positions and don't have any goaltending.

The Penguins have filled out their roster through smart management and a bit of luck. Neal, Dupuis, Sullivan, Kunitz and others were added through trade or free agency; Kris Letang was drafted in the third round.

Other powerhouse teams have built themselves without the benefit of star draft picks. Look at, say, the Boston Bruins. Only Nathan Horton was drafted with a lottery pick won by a losing season for Boston; Tyler Seguin's pick was acquired via trade. The rest of the team was acquired by smart management. Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic and Marchand were all second- and third-round picks; Chara was brought in as a free agent; Thomas bounced around before finding himself in the Bruins' minor league system.

Burke is right that tanking is not a magic bullet to icing a competitive team. A lot of luck and hard work is required to make it work: look at, for example, the Oilers, who now have a high-scoring first line but still lose because the rest of their team stinks. If it goes wrong, teams can get stuck in a downward spiral where fans stop showing up and players take on a losing attitude.

Burke has stated that the team needs a #1 centre and a goalie; he has enough of a team to fill in the rest, which is probably true (though I would suggest they could also use another 1st-pairing defenceman, or better yet, trade Dion Phaneuf and picks for Shea Weber). Those players don't grow on trees, but this summer, there will be goalies available. The centre will be a tougher find.

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

What's wrong with the Toronto Maple Leafs?

No playoffs in 8 years. That pretty much sums it up. The Leafs have been in a bad way for some time, and no end of band-aid solutions has managed to get them back on track. The team has added talented players - Phil Kessel, Dion Phaneuf, and Joffrey Lupul.

So why can't they put it together? As the media has recently pointed out, they need a #1 centre and a goaltender. Easy enough to say, but those assets don't exactly grow on trees.

The Leafs meant to satisfy the first requirement by acquiring Tim Connolly, but it shouldn't come as any surprise that he turned out to be inadequate to the task. In the NHL, one team's trash is going to turn out as trash for everyone else as well. Brian Burke has repeatedly touted James Reimer as the solution in goal - but we've heard that story before. Reimer, like all others, has turned out to be pretty mediocre.

The team is missing a lot of parts; they have a wealth of second-line forwards, a couple good defencemen, but little else. They have two options:

1. Keep trying to paper over the holes. Leafs fans are hard to please, and declaring 'rebuild' has two problems. Firstly, the fans will bemoan the loss of a season or more; second, they will start calling for the team to 'go for it' at the first sign of progress.

2. Tear down and start over. If Burke truly could have added the 'four first-round picks' he spoke of at the trade deadline, he should've perhaps done it. This year's draft class is said to be weak, but many of the Leafs' assets are very replaceable players.

In Kessel, Phaneuf and Lupul, the Leafs have some real assets; are they players to build around? I hardly think so. If the Leafs could get star prospects for them, they should make a move. We've heard that the Leafs brass has been scouting Nail Yakupov; if they can swing a deal with whoever draws the #1 pick, they should go for it. From a PR standpoint, it would work; the team would finally have something to sell. They would finally have a legitimate star in the making, and could use him, rather than the losing, to justify the rebuild - call it the 'Sale for Nail'. Veterans could be sold off for picks and prospects, under the guise of providing a group that could grow together. Leafs fans, already tired of having no real success, would be able to cheer for the team in a different way. The team could sign some veterans to tutor the kids, and start the year with a 'we're not expecting to win; we're expecting to develop' mantra.

Because if the Leafs keep it up with the Band-Aid solutions, where does that get them? A first-round playoff exit? Sustained team success requires real assets - young players who will be with the team long-term. Leafs fans may be fickle and harsh, but they're not stupid; I suspect a lot of them see what's going on in Edmonton and are envious. The Leafs are kidding themselves if they think they can compete with the core they have.

I once had the chance to see Brian Burke speak to a small gathering and he was asked about his philosophy on team-building. I expected he'd repeat his preference to build from the net out, which we've heard in a few places. Instead, he said this:

"First you have to crawl before you can walk. Then you run, and then you sprint."

Pushed by their fans, the Leafs are trying to sprint, but they're forgetting that they haven't got the legs for this race. I wonder if Burke is feeling so much pressure from the Toronto setting that it's overheating his good judgment.

Monday, April 2, 2012

What's wrong with the New York Islanders?

Puck Daddy's Harrison Mooney posted a critical analysis the Islanders' rough finish to the season, calling for a management or coaching change. He singled out coach Jack Capuano, who tried to shake things up by icing 5 d-men for a shift after a lackluster first period.

Mooney argues that Capuano no longer has the ability to motivate the team - but who would? The team has been out of a playoff position for some time now, sitting 14th in the East.

But Capuano isn't the team's problem: it's their budget. The Islanders are the NHL's lowest-spending team, with a $49m payroll, over 15 million dollars short of the cap. With that paltry sum, they were able to roster a squad that is currently tied in the standings with Toronto and Anaheim, two teams that were supposed to be in the playoff mix and spend over $10m more apiece. The Islanders have done this in the NHL's toughest division, where the Rangers, Penguins, Flyers and Devils are all in the East's top 5 in points.

Going forward, the Islanders shouldn't toss out the management or tear up the roster. They have one of the game's best young talents in John Tavares, who's signed for another 6 years at a bargain $5.5m per. He's a player you can build a playoff team around, and with several Eastern teams (particularly Toronto and Montreal) sputtering, they should make their move this off-season.

They have a pretty good forward unit; Matt Moulson has put up three straight 30-goal campaigns - I didn't realize he had been doing this for so long! I suppose life's good when there's not much competition for a first-line job. Re-signing PA Parenteau should be a priority, but it's also a reasonable possibility that Kyle Okposo might be ready to take over the #1 RW job. Is Parenteau really a 65 point player, or is he just riding Tavares' wake?

Beyond that, they've got some good talent. Josh Bailey has been emerging as a real player in the last month or so; Nino Niederreiter and Ryan Strome might take another year, but both are talented prospects. Frans Nielsen has a lot of versatility.

The team needs to shell out for some veteran checkers - maybe bringing Rolston back, or splurging for UFA Chris Kelly, and needs some better veteran defencemen to replace Staios and Eaton, guys who are well past their prime. Streit and MacDonald are good players, and Hamonic has had two nice seasons to start his career. Calvin de Haan might need more time. They could use some more size, maybe someone like Pavel Kubina or Filip Kuba.

It all comes down to whether they're able to up the budget next year. The team is in rough shape financially, needing a new building and lacking the capital to make it happen. With another $5-10 million for payroll, this could be a good team. Even if they keep payroll flat, Tavares will only get better (he's only 21, and 7th in NHL scoring). They've got a real shot to be in the playoffs next year and could surprise people.