Spezza's Maturing

cash wrote:

Mojo wrote:

cash wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:
Again, you dont need to get rid of Spezza if you can get rid of Heatley, but one of the two have to go. If you;re a Spezza lover, better hope Heatley waives his NTC.

Here's hoping *crosses fingers, legs, arms, toes, eyes...*

This talk of waiting it out with Heatley is exactly how teams lose value for their players. The simple fact is that Heatley is too slow for the new NHL. He will always be able to put points up, but he will always be a liability.
If it wasn't for his damn NTC, I would trade him so fast his head would spin.
(And much like Redden - and even more so - he would find success somewhere else)

This has to be one of the most ridiculous statements I have seen in a while. Heatley has been doing pretty well in the "new NHL". He may not be the fastest skater, but he does what he gets payed for, putting up the points.

I haven't gone through every player, but from what I can tell he is third in goals since the "new NHL" started three and half years ago. Ovechkin has 190 goals and is +42, Kovalchuk has 160 goals and is -32, Heatley has 157 goals and is +93, Lecavalier has 143 goals and is -11, and Iginla has 142 goals and is +44.

Heatley may not have Havlat speed, but is has been doing alright over the past three and a half seasons.

The new NHL has evolved. What you say about the past is true, but that doesn't change the fact that his pattern of poor performance followed by point outbursts, within individual games, isn't so. It also doesn't change the fact that he's slow as Diddle. And is a virtual non-threat when he plays this predictable, one-dimensional game.

Guys with that many goals don't have "point outbursts" they have slumps.

Mojo wrote:

cash wrote:

Mojo wrote:

cash wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:
Again, you dont need to get rid of Spezza if you can get rid of Heatley, but one of the two have to go. If you;re a Spezza lover, better hope Heatley waives his NTC.

Here's hoping *crosses fingers, legs, arms, toes, eyes...*

This talk of waiting it out with Heatley is exactly how teams lose value for their players. The simple fact is that Heatley is too slow for the new NHL. He will always be able to put points up, but he will always be a liability.
If it wasn't for his damn NTC, I would trade him so fast his head would spin.
(And much like Redden - and even more so - he would find success somewhere else)

This has to be one of the most ridiculous statements I have seen in a while. Heatley has been doing pretty well in the "new NHL". He may not be the fastest skater, but he does what he gets payed for, putting up the points.

I haven't gone through every player, but from what I can tell he is third in goals since the "new NHL" started three and half years ago. Ovechkin has 190 goals and is +42, Kovalchuk has 160 goals and is -32, Heatley has 157 goals and is +93, Lecavalier has 143 goals and is -11, and Iginla has 142 goals and is +44.

Heatley may not have Havlat speed, but is has been doing alright over the past three and a half seasons.

The new NHL has evolved. What you say about the past is true, but that doesn't change the fact that his pattern of poor performance followed by point outbursts, within individual games, isn't so. It also doesn't change the fact that he's slow as Diddle. And is a virtual non-threat when he plays this predictable, one-dimensional game.

Guys with that many goals don't have "point outbursts" they have slumps.

I'm talking about individual games: He plays like Dung, then he scores a few points. He does it 40 times a season and people talk about him as though he's a premier player. He is certainly a premier scorer (although he isn't acting like it) but he certainly is not a premier player.

One thing Spezza really needs is for somebody to help him improve back-checking technique. I get frustrated watching him coast back to the zone when the other team is rushing away, but every time he does try vehemently to check he seems to get a penalty for it and we yell at him for that.

Maybe I'm being optimistic, but I think he could become a much better defensive player if someone with more defensive savvy could mentor him in that regard. Maybe bring in a guy like Sami Pahlsson or Jere Lehtinen in the off-season.

Neely4Life wrote:Also, its going to take way more then just 5 games to turn it around. There has been 19 of the 38 he has been invisable. Is it 7 mil a year for 41 games? or 82?

Spezza has a long, long, way to go before he is even considered elite or anywhere near it. He isnt even an all star at this point.

Right now, no-one on this team is an All Star. Some one will have to be picked and I wouldn't be surprised if it's Spezza or Heatley, although personally I'd just make it a rule that, if no-one on your team is voted in, then you send the Captain.

Neely4Life wrote:I disagree with basically all of this, but if you want to keep Spezza in Ottawa, then Heatley has to go. If that happens, then you can work with Spezza, if not, the economics make zero sense and the Sens are up the creek for a long time.

Its not that complicated. One of the 7 million dollar salaries has to go!

Calgary: Iginla (7), Phaneuf (6.5), Kipper (6.5), Langkow (4.5)
Philly: Briere (6.5), Timmonen (6.3), Richards (5.75), Gagne (5.25), Carter (5). Hartnell (4.2), Lupul (4.25)
Rangers: Gomez (7.357), Drury (7.05), Lundqvist (6.875), Redden (6.5), Rozsival (5)
Pittsburgh: Crosby (8.7), Malkin (8.7), Gonchar (5), MAF (5)

If your point is $14.5 tied up in two players, there are plenty of examples. If your point is $14.5 in two *forwards* there are definitely fewer examples, but still some. Pittsburgh (yeah, their two are better than ours), Philly (god, how do they even compete with all those huge salaries), Rangers. If your point is $24M in four players, lots of examples.

I think your point must have been $24M in four forwards, leaving us too little for a stud D and a stud G. Philly comes close with 22.5 for the top four forwards, but they also have two more making over 4 each, *and* a stud (salary-wise) D. Again, how the hell do they even compete?

I haven't done a thorough analysis of every team in the league, of course, but I don't think you can just throw a statement like "You can't have 4 forwards making $24M and compete" and walk away. There are teams out there doing this and some of them are competing.

wprager wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:Also, its going to take way more
then just 5 games to turn it around. There has been 19 of the 38 he has
been invisable. Is it 7 mil a year for 41 games? or 82?

Spezza
has a long, long, way to go before he is even considered elite or
anywhere near it. He isnt even an all star at this point.

Right
now, no-one on this team is an All Star. Some one will have to be
picked and I wouldn't be surprised if it's Spezza or Heatley, although
personally I'd just make it a rule that, if no-one on your team is
voted in, then you send the Captain.

I wish Sean Donovan would be the lone pick. That would have to be
a pretty big kick in the Donkey to all the dead weight on this team right
now.

Look at all the teams on top of the league, they all have major cash invested in their bluelines!

Neely4Life wrote:Look at all the teams on top of the league, they all have major cash invested in their bluelines!

A short time ago, so did we. Plus, we felt that Philchenkov were a steal and deserved way more.

The problem is not the payroll but the performance.

wprager wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:Look at all the teams on top of the league, they all have major cash invested in their bluelines!

A short time ago, so did we. Plus, we felt that Philchenkov were a steal and deserved way more.

The problem is not the payroll but the performance.

Having a big pay role isnt a problem, where the money is giving out and to who is.

The make up of this team is totally wrong and wont win and cant win as is. Wont be a quick process fixing this.

I recognize where you're coming from, but understand a couple of things.

First of all, as you've said, this team cannot win right now. Therefore, we have to look at winning in the longer term.

Considering that, which would be the most logical choice to keep? The 36 year old, the 27 year old or the 25 year old?

Second, which do you believe is the more important position? Centre, or wing?

Third, whose value (of the two tradeable ones, since Alfie goes nowhere) is higher?

asq2 wrote:I recognize where you're coming from, but understand a couple of things.

First of all, as you've said, this team cannot win right now. Therefore, we have to look at winning in the longer term.

Considering that, which would be the most logical choice to keep? The 36 year old, the 27 year old or the 25 year old?

Second, which do you believe is the more important position? Centre, or wing?

Third, whose value (of the two tradeable ones, since Alfie goes nowhere) is higher?

I'm all for dealing Heatley, 100%. You get rid of that monster contract and Spezza isnt such a big problem. If you cant, then Spezza has to go.

To me its all about whats logical and possible, not what people think is right or wrong.

Dealing 1 of the 2 will allow for this team to move forward and put our resources into mobile D men that can play big mins that can play at both ends of the ice.

The player this team needs is still J Bo, despite people's view on him. That would be a big step forward, but its impossible with the large contracts committed right now. I also think Fisher should be dealt, but that pesky NTC is there.

Kelly is a great 3rd line guy IMO, and 2.1 for a checking 3rd liner who pops in the odd goal and kills penalties is a good deal IMO. Thats one player I would not want to give up.

Neely4Life wrote:

asq2 wrote:I recognize where you're coming from, but understand a couple of things.

First of all, as you've said, this team cannot win right now. Therefore, we have to look at winning in the longer term.

Considering that, which would be the most logical choice to keep? The 36 year old, the 27 year old or the 25 year old?

Second, which do you believe is the more important position? Centre, or wing?

Third, whose value (of the two tradeable ones, since Alfie goes nowhere) is higher?

I'm all for dealing Heatley, 100%. You get rid of that monster contract and Spezza isnt such a big problem. If you cant, then Spezza has to go.

To me its all about whats logical and possible, not what people think is right or wrong.

Dealing 1 of the 2 will allow for this team to move forward and put our resources into mobile D men that can play big mins that can play at both ends of the ice.

The player this team needs is still J Bo, despite people's view on him. That would be a big step forward, but its impossible with the large contracts committed right now. I also think Fisher should be dealt, but that pesky NTC is there.

Kelly is a great 3rd line guy IMO, and 2.1 for a checking 3rd liner who pops in the odd goal and kills penalties is a good deal IMO. Thats one player I would not want to give up.

I agree with your point about Kelly, but given the difference in salary, I'd rather keep Vermette than Kelly. He's got more scoring upside.

I also agree that dealing a large contract needs to be done to bring balance to the payroll. Right now, I'd deal Heatley before Spezza, but I think that due more to Heatley fetching a better return. That and centres having more value.

I like Kelly more than Vermette for sure, but thats just me. He is a smart player that knows exactly what his role is. He is the PERFECT 3rd line center IMO.

Mojo wrote:Take this for what it's worth (and going back to the original topic of this post) but here is reference to Spezza's worth.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/22113-Fantasy-Mailbag-Lightning-in-a-bottle.html

"Take the Spezza deal. I still believe his upside in the NHL is higher than anyone else in the league, save for the three players currently atop the scoring race. Spezza will pay off for you next year."

The fact that it is actually answering a fantasy question is irrelevant.

Dobber has been saying the exact same thing for the last 2 years. He sees an upside for Spezza of 160+ points, which is about the same level as Crosby, Malkin, and OV. In fact, he's been predicting that Spezza will win the Art Ross before long.

I'm glad most people around here are getting off the 'trade Spezza' wagon. I fully realize that we have to free up money, and that we have too much invested up front to have a balanced team, but you don't trade franchise players. There has to be another way.

And before I hear the "Spezza is not a franchise player," I will again make the challenge: name me 3-5 players under the age of 27 who have scored an average of 90 points or more in the last three years, but who AREN'T considered franchise or at least potential future franchise players, and then I'll listen to the "Spezza isn't a franchise player" argument. We all know Spezza's game hasn't quite reached where it needs to be. But no one will deny that he's a very, very special talent.

hemlock wrote:I agree with your point about Kelly, but given the difference in salary, I'd rather keep Vermette than Kelly. He's got more scoring upside.

One thing too many people overlook is the amount of Vermette's mistakes that Kelly covers for. Vermette is a pretty random and somewhat unpredictable player (less so this year and he's having less success...) and can only be paired with exceedingly intelligent players - The Kelly's, Stillman's, Alfredsson's of the hockey world. I personally believe the line combinations have been an issue all season long and there are several strong combinations Hartsburg hasn't tried. In fact, it's kind of pissing me off right now because he hasn't tried some of the ones with the most obvious potential.

He's stuck on this CASH line or Alfie with Fisher BS that has supposedly worked in the past; although, obviously not well enough...The only time he's tried Heatley and Fisher is when Alfredsson is on the other wing. Is Heatley not capable of playing with anyone other than Spezza, Alfredsson, or Kelly? Is he that bad that he can't play a little more of a crashing role? Put him on a line with Foligno and Fisher and just let them gel for a couple games. And keep Alfredsson attached at the hip to Vermette and Kelly. Give Spezza Winchester and call up Zubov and then we may actually see somewhat of a balanced attack.
Hartsburg has made some questionable decisions but his unwilllingness to experiment with some of these combinations is aggravating. He needs to think outside the box for a couple minutes.

504Heater wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:I disagree with basically all of this, but if you want to keep Spezza in Ottawa, then Heatley has to go. If that happens, then you can work with Spezza, if not, the economics make zero sense and the Sens are up the creek for a long time.

Its not that complicated. One of the 7 million dollar salaries has to go!

Basically...I've done the math a thousand times and this is the only reason I can see him going.

It's tough with the cap at 50 to have half your $$ in 4 guys - one of whom simply doesn't produce.

OK, I keep reading stuff like this, so I thought it's time to demystify some of the statements that are being made about how cap money is being allocated by many teams (including top teams) in the NHL.

I've spent some time over at NHLSCAP.com and crunched a bunch of numbers on how much other teams (who spend close to the cap, like the Sens) spend up front on their 4 highest paid forwards. The simple truth of the matter is that what the Sens spend on their 4 forwards is very, very comparable to what other teams spend on their 4.

Here's a snapshot of what other comparable teams are paying, combined, for their 4 highest paid forwards:

OTT: just under $23 mil
PHI: just under $23 mil
SJ: just over $20 mil
DAL: just under $21 mil
NYR: just under $21 mil
WAS: $23 mil
DET: $20 mil

There are a couple of things to factor in here.

1) Some of these salaries are shorter term, meaning that some cap hits will come off the teams' books soon, whereas all of our players are locked up long term. This is a significant factor, but it also gives us stability and predictability, which other teams lack (see point 3).

2) Mike Fisher probably isn't, and certainly doesn't produce like, a top-4 forward even though he's paid like one. This is a big problem that is largely, but not totally, particular to our team: Jere Lehtinen, Chris Drury, Martin Havlat, Sergei Federov, and Valtteri Filppula and Dan Cleary (who are, yes, indeed 2 of DET's top 4 paid forwards), I hope we can agree, are all either over paid, not producing like top-4 forwards, or simply not top-4 forwards (like Fisher), period.

3) Some players on these, and other teams not listed here, are in for major pay hikes, which will throw their caps out of whack; think of, for instance, Toews and Kane, Backstrom (WAS) and Semin, Zetterberg, Eriksson, Zherdev, Setoguchi, Lucic and Krejci, and so on. The truth is that most, if not all, of the teams that are currently doing well are simply not going to be able to afford to keep everyone together for much longer.

The simple fact of the matter, then, is that what the Sens spend on their 4 highest paid forwards is on par with what other teams, spending a comparable amount of money, spend on their 4 forwards.

What accounts for the discrepancies between good teams like SJ and DET and bad teams like OTT is NOT, then, how much we have tied up in our 4 highest paid forwards -- BUT RATHER how well those top 4 are producing and how much we're getting out of the supporting cast -- the players who are NOT on the big-ticket money deals. Production from rookies on cheaper deals -- of which we are currently getting little to nothing -- is particularly key. Think of guys like Setoguchi, Backstrom, Eriksson, etc. What makes Ottawa different from most teams is that they're not getting much from the guys they spend little money on, which is not the case with current successful teams. To be a good team in the NHL today, you need low-money guys to step up big for you, plain and simple.

So, getting back to OTT, how do you make room for another big contract or two at D or G? The key would seem to be eliminating most of the middling deals -- the guys who make $1-3 mil (Kelly, Vermette, Smith, etc.) -- and replacing them with inexpensive and/or rookie talent. And if you want to succeed, those rookies have to come in and produce quickly. That's the big difference between teams like OTT and DET or SJ, and not the amount of money we spend on our 4 highest paid forwards.

Solid points. One thing I will question about the Sens is the division of PP time... Just throwing this out there and I am not sure of stats for other teams but our secondary scorers get no relevant PP time. Our top 3 take up at least 3/4 of our PP time. They stay out far too long, way past the point when the can compete. Given that we suck 5-5 perhaps the problem is that we only give time to the 2nd and 3rd lines in these circumstances and the big line is too tired to compete consistently in the 5-5 scenario. I say limit everyone's shift to 30 seconds and bench those who don't comply. Strip the non-competitors of their letters and give them to someone who does and then see what happens. Maybe it doesn't fix the problems but maybe it does shake 'em up. If you can't get a PMD and you don't want to clean house in the front office, this is all that is left. It is what I would try.

Thanks Rooney. I asked earlier if there was an alternative to trading away one of the big contracts due to my quick comparison of Washington who actually had more money tied up than us. I'm happy to see you extrapolate the cap situation to this degree as it leads to a more educated discussion.