Blue Chip Prospects

Maple Leafs Playoff Review

2013-05-14T16:18:00.001-04:00

What a series.

As disappointing as last night's collapse was, the mere fact of Toronto having pushed Boston to overtime in a game 7 is cause for celebration for fans of the Maple Leafs. No team has given this edition of the Leafs as much trouble as the Bruins and yet there we were, with them until the end, pushing Boston to the brink of elimination, and though it's the Leafs who find themselves on the outside looking in, there's something creditable in the way that they acquitted themselves during this year's playoffs -- something we'll hope to carry forward into next season.

While seven games isn't a sample size worthy of hard and fast conclusions, it does give us a glimpse through the window of what some of our players are or aren't capable of. There were some surprises during the playoffs and some disappointments; some things to be excited for and some causes for concern. Below are my observations on what we saw from our boys during the second-season.

Phil Kessel, Demon Hunter - It's indisputable that Phil Kessel had struggled mightily to produce results against the Bruins during his time with the Leafs and while many people wrongly attributed these struggles to vacuous psychological shortcomings, the truth is that lining up against a Norris-calibre defenseman is hard on everyone. During this series, Kessel was able to exorcize his demons and put to bed any fears that Leafs fans may have had that Kessel wilts under pressure. He was almost certainly our best forward in the playoffs and will be worth every penny he earns on the extension that we'd all better hope he signs this offseason.

Primetime Reimer - As good as Kessel was, there's no doubt as to who takes home the honour of series MVP. James Reimer had a marvelous series and if there are any detractors left then they probably aren't people who warrant listening to. True, there was the odd issue with rebound control but there's no doubting Reimer's abilities as a puck-stopper and his athleticism was on full display this series as well and one would think that there wont be any Luongo rumours this offseason. Reimer was great in the regular season and great in the playoffs -- he's a guy we can rely on moving forward.

From the Doghouse to the Penthouse - Jake Gardiner spent the majority of the season in Randy Carlyle's bad books for some inexplicable reason and was a healthy scratch in the opening game of the series. After drawing into the second game of the series, Gardiner finished second to only Dion Phaneuf in icetime per game at just over 23 minutes a night and was among the top performers in blue and white. As with Reimer, his game wasn't without its faults but the sum of his play was a big positive for the Leafs and I don't suspect that we'll see his name as a healthy scratch very often next season. Gardiner is a high ceiling defenseman and he's got himself on track after the concussion issues he dealt with to start the season.

Should He Stay Or Should He Go - There were probably four players whose careers as Maple Leafs had a lot riding on this series; JM Liles, Tyler Bozak, Cody Franson, and Clarke MacArthur.

Based on the company line on Bozak, the Leafs sound like they'd already made up their minds to keep him and if you went into this series with a preconceived notion of what Bozak was as a player, this series probably didn't tip the scales. Bozak was decidedly average in the series as a whole and if you're the type who puts a lot of stock in faceoffs, then the team's performance in the circle with Bozak out of the lineup would lead you to believe that Toronto needs him. Outside of that, Bozak was pretty replaceable when he went down, and the Leafs probably had two of their best three games in the series while he was out of the lineup.

Cody Franson is a guy that I was very much on the fence about heading into the playoffs. I like his offensive game, in particular his ability to get the puck on net through traffic, but his defensive lapses seemed to be increasingly frequent as the regular season wore on. In the playoffs I thought Franson improved his defensive play and dialed his physicality way up. He's never going to be a top-end defensive player but he did enough during this series to convince me that he's a guy I'd like to keep around.

Clarke MacArthur, like Jake Gardiner, was the irrational target of Randy Carlyle's ire. MacArthur put up 3 points in the 5 games he played and brought the consistent, all around game that Leafs fans have come to expect from him. I get the sense that he isn't in the Leafs longterm plans but if I were Nonis, he'd be in mine.

John-Michael Liles had a Bozak-esque series in the sense that he probably didn't do anything that would change whatever opinion you had of him coming into the series. Did he do enough to keep the team from using an amnesty buyout on him or to convince some other team to take on his contract? Tough to say.

The Dream - There may be no player who will benefit more from this year's postseason experience than Nazem Kadri who looked very nervous in the first two games of the series, turning the puck over regularly, but became the offensively dynamic player we saw during the regular season in the series' final games. Kadri picked his spots physically, drew penalties, and was dangerous in the offensive zone and his play against a team with the level of toughness that the Bruins possess bodes well for future playoff appearances. The knock on Kadri has often been his size but I don't think there was ever a time in this series where he looked intimidated nor did he get pushed around. It looks to me like Kadri's skills will translate to the tighter checking playoff game in the future which is a comforting sign for Leafs fans.

The Defense - To the surprise of very few, Toronto's Achilles' Heel was their defense. Reimer faced an average of just under 39 shots per game during the series which is asking way too much of your goalie. If watching Boston play has taught us anything, it's the value of having a truly elite defenseman and just how significant the gap is between the truly elite (Chara) and the All Star-calibre (Phaneuf). Having a dominant player like Chara on the ice for 50% of the icetime at even strength was a huge advantage for the Bruins.

The question of what needs to happen to this defense is a tricky one. Landing one guy of Phaneuf's level or better would probably be enough but how much can we improve this group if that guy isn't available? Gunnarsson should be better provided his hip heals, Gardiner played at a high level in each of his games, and Franson was pretty competent. I suppose adding a 3 or 4 defenseman makes this team better but is that really going to shave 7-10 shots per game? The only solution that I can come up with is to add a high impact defenseman and to do so with the free agent crop being what it is this offseason means that Nonis will have to look to the trade market. What kind of assets should we be comfortable parting with if it meant adding a Keith Yandle? Or do you stay the course and hope that Rielly is an impact defender sooner rather than later? I'm glad that I'm not the guy who needs to answer those questions.

The Team's Streakiest Player - Phil Kessel is consistently labelled streaky but to me, that seems to be based on results more so than his actual play on the ice. If you're looking for a guy who actually looks like a completely different player on a night to night basis, I think you'd have to point to JVR. There were times where he looked like a first line winger and the kind of player who could will a team to a victory and then there were games where you forgot that he was even dressed. Possible that he's playing with an injury, possible that he's more susceptible to being shutdown by tough matchups, but for whatever reason, JVR was Jekyll and Hyde for the majority of the season and that carried forward into the playoffs. Hopefully he'll be able to lay off the serum for the entirety of next season and be the player we saw in the early stages of this year.

A Burgeoning X-Factor: Jake Gardiner

2013-05-11T16:53:00.002-04:00

I'm not much of football fan. I'll watch the sports centre highlights and what not, but it's rarely my first choice for TV viewing these days. I understand the basic fundamentals of the sport and generally how the points are accrued, the difference between on field positions, and the varying types of penalties (except for holding, which appears to occur on every play of every game).

In the fall of 2004, while not a fan of football or the NFL, I became an ardent supporter of Kanas City Cheifs wide receiver Dante Hall, commonly known to many as the 'X-Factor'. For uninitiated Dante Hall was the leagues preeminent kick off and punt return specialist between 2003 and 2007.

He was an absolute joy to watch, special teams plays become games within the game, complete spectacles to behold. At any given moment Hall could zig, or zag, or some combination of both, while bounding towards the oppositions end zone. I was flat out mesmerized, that feeling of aw and anticipation every time he was on the field is something I'll never forget. After watching nearly all 16 Chiefs regular season games that season I can't recall the name of a single player outside of Hall, but I can remember vividly how I felt.

While watching Jake Gardiner and the Maple Leafs in Game five on Friday night I found myself reminiscing about Dante Hall. That feeling of imagination and expectation is something that Gardiner's play conjured up in me during the game. Much like Dante's ability to completely transform the momentum of a football game Gardiner seemed almost omnipresent in Friday's game.

I've tried to watch the 22 year old blueliner closely throughout the series, to better understand both his rave reviews as an offensive catalyst and his limitations defensively.

First off, his defence. Yes, it could be better. But before we label him an all round poor defender it's important to understand no defenseman is all things in all situations. At times throughout the series Gardiner has displayed splendid composure in the defensive end, maintaining his body position against the significant girth of players like Lucic, Horton, and Thornton. The root of many pundits criticism is that he can be prone to poor decision making. This has manifested itself at times in the form of bad pass, the wrong choice for outlet of the puck, or failing to clear the puck from the defensive zone. The good news, for fans, is that these limitations appear more mental than physical. Decision making is something that can be worked with the coaching staff and through on ice instruction and video review. With only 90 total games of NHL experience it's fair to say that he will continue to learn and the nuances of the pro game and hopefully minimize those errors.

In the offensive zone, Gardiner has shown at both the AHL and NHL level, that he could be something special. Last year, as a rookie with the Maple Leafs he amassed 30 points (7 goals, 23 assists) in 75 games. This year, while playing with the Marlies throughout the lockout, he had 31 points (10 goals, 21 assists) in 43 games.

Over the past 2 games Gardiner has shown a Neidermyerian (this may not be a word) ability to drive a teams offense from the back end. Judging from his ice time during that time, 24:05 and 27:45, Randy Carlyle has been warming to his style of play. He's made a number of slick outlet passes from within the Leafs zone to a streaking forward on Boston's side of center. Allowing players like Kessel and Lupul to maintain their momentum and enter the zone with speed.

When carrying the puck himself, Gardiner has proven to be devastatingly elusive to the Bruins. His skating stride and lateral agility forces the opposition to give him space, lest they be beaten to either side. When Jake possess the puck in the Leafs zone you can see how difficult it is for Bruins forwards to press him. He will routinely look up ice, insinuating a pass, only to turn, or pivot, leaving the defender off balance. If you look closely you can see how well Gardiner uses his shoulders to mask his intentions, dipping them to either side to ward off defenders and confuse them as to his intentions.

With the possible exception of Phaneuf the Maple Leafs defensive corps doesn't typically carry the puck through the neutral zone to generate an attack. Choosing to instead dump the puck in along the boards, or pass off to forwards. Gardiner, however, routinely takes the puck into the zone, thus creating odd man rushes and generating possible scoring chances. He has done a great job of finding the right player at the right time with deft passes upon entering the attacking zone.

The challenge for the coaching staff moving forward is to help Gardiner blend his offensive risk taking with his responsibilities as a defenseman. The most successful example for Gardiner to emulate today is Ottawa's Erik Karlsson. Another player with whom fans have taken umbrage in the past for his lack luster defensive play. Over the last 2 seasons Karlsson has successfully maintained his offensive flair without compromising the teams defensive needs.

I by no means believe that Garinder has become "must see TV" around the NHL. Dante Hall, during his stretch of dominance, was a star across the entire NFL. But what we have witnessed from Jake this post season, that feeling I've gotten when he has the puck, you can't help but wonder what he could become in the future.

The Maple Leafs success or failure on Sunday night will hinge on a number of factors. But the one that most excites me, the one I'll be watching most astutely, it's number 51, Mr. Gardiner.

Go Leafs Go!

The Leafs Hybrid Approach to Beating the Bruins – Using Speed and Pugnacity

2013-05-05T12:16:00.000-04:00

At one time or another in our lives, most likely during adolescence, we’ve all experienced what it’s like to be bullied. This bullying can range from simple teasing, a swirly in a nearby toilet or something more egregiously bad.

What amazes me about bullying is the strategy sometimes employed by parents in trying to curtail the bullying. The answer, in many cases is “If he hits you, stand up for yourself and hit him back – he’ll leave you alone after that”

This I never quite understood. In most cases (at least from what I have seen) the bully tends to be a significantly stronger or meaner kid than the one suffering the bullying. Which means if the smaller victim were to punch the larger aggressor in the nose the odds are he’s going to get walloped pretty hard back. Suffice to say we as a society need to institute better methods of addressing bullying, but since this is a hockey blog we’ll park the social commentary for now.

We all understood that physical intimidation and to a degree, on ice bullying, were going to play a role in the Leafs-Bruins series. For the past 3 or 4 years the bruins have been, in the opinion of many, the biggest, nastiest, meanest team in the NHL. This is born in large part from their roster containing both Zdeno Chara and Milian Lucic, who are able to do a bit of everything on the ice.

In game #1 the Leafs players attempted to punch the Bruins in the nose, metaphorically and a couple of times literally. The Bruins played a physical game and Leafs tried to match them, finishing every check and engaging in every possible post whistle scrum. In one instance Cody Franson abandoned his position as the lone remaining defender to throw a big hit, leading to a Boston goal.

With both Orr and McLaren in the lineup for game 1 Carlyle seemed determined to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Bruins and see if he could beat them at their game. Carlyle’s two prominent roughians finished with a combined 16 minutes of ice time, compared to their season average of 11.5. This is something the Bruins crave, because in the end few, if any teams, have a roster that can match the sheer size and physicality of the Bs. The possible exception would be either of the St. Louis Blues or Los Angela’s Kings.

In the 2011 Cup finals the Vancouver Canucks were able to have some success against Boston by staying disciplined and using their league best power play (24.4% in the regular season, 20.4% in the post season) to penalize the bruins for their feisty play. The Leafs by no means have the same level of elite power play but the strategy and template is one they seemed to employ in game #2.

The one asset the Leafs ultilized marverlously in game 2 was their forwards distinct speed advantage over Boston’s defense. A grouping of Chara, Seidenberg, McQuaid, Boychuk and Redden on the back end provides ample opportunity to expose their lack of quickness. It’s probably unfair to call Chara “slow” as he has one of the most unique skill sets in the league, combining size and puck handling in a way not seen since Pronger. Redden, while a smooth skater in his younger years is nearing the age of 36, and appears to be slowing somewhat. Their team is built splendidly to defend against the cycle and gain pucks along boards where their size is an asset. If the Leafs can continue to generate speed through the neutral zone and push the pace against the Bruins defense they’ll be able to score more goals off the rush.

Last night, we witnessed a Leafs team that was skating and pushing the play in the right direction. Both the JVR and Kessel goals were a direct result of team quickness and the inability of Boston to keep pace. The insertion of Jake Gardiner and Matt Frattin buoyed the overall team speed and seemed to create a more balanced attack. Throughout the evening Carlyle mixed and matched his lines numerous times in an effort to release Kessel from Chara's rather large shadow. Had the team dressed both tough guys again they may have been more limited in how much line shuffling could be done.

I don’t mean to say the Leafs weren’t a physical bunch in Game #2, because they certainly were. But it was the kind of toughness that we crave; fighting hard for loose pucks, battling in front of the opposition net, playing physical on defense along the boards. Near the end of the game Grabovksi finished a hard check on Milian Lucic that almost knocked the Vancouver native on his rear end. It was a fantastic moment to watch and was indicative of what I liked all game from the Leafs. Grabbo moving his feet, playing a fast brand of finesse hockey while still finishing his check when needed.

Colton Orr didn’t register a fight in game #2, but landed powerful body checks on Zdeno Chara and was an absolute load to manage in front of Tuukka Rask. That’s the kind of toughness a team can always use and I much preferred watching Colton contribute in that manner, than if he had fought Shawn Thornton for the umpteenth time.

If the Leafs can continue the trend of game #2, blending toughness with team speed and finesse, they could be poised for success in game #3. While the team is still an underdog in this series, they showed on Saturday night that there exists a formula for success against the Bruins, and it doesn’t necessarily have to involve Colton Orr punching anyone in the nose.

Go Leafs Go!

Manufacturing Goals in the Post-Season – The Power Play

2013-04-28T16:26:00.000-04:00

This week will mark the first playoff appearance by the Maple Leafs in nearly 10 years. While the act of simply extending the season past April has many proclaiming this year a success, there’s no doubt that fans would also enjoy a playoff round win as the proverbial cherry on top of any already thrilling year.

After reading a number of articles over the last week it appears the Leafs need a myriad of different tools in order to win in the postseason, chief among them: confidence, momentum, toughness, focus, enthusiasm, gumption, quick-starts, effort, mental fortitude, and concentration.

While those things are critical ingredients for any Hollywood portrayal of a sporting event, the winner of a hockey game is only 50% of the time the team that spews the greatest number of platitudes. The winner, almost without exception, is the team that manages to score the most goals. As hockey, at it’s very core, has always been, and remains, a goal scoring competition.

The website quanthockey.com provides a chart (shown below) that compares the average number of goals per game in an NHL regular versus post season game. Throughout nearly the entire history of the league goal scoring has seen a decrease going into the playoffs. There are some exceptions, most notably in the 1950s where scoring seemed to increase in the post season. However, during the modern era of the league goals seem to be scored less frequently when the games matter most.

We can ascribe this dip in goal production to a number of different factors, the two I most agree with being 1) Teams simply check more vigorously, with players putting a greater focus on two way play and ensuring that they are more committed to defensive tactics and systems 2) Coaching staffs are able to better game plan against the opposition over a 4 to 7 game series.

The question is how can the Leafs continue to manufacture goals and mitigate, as best they can, the factors that lessen goal production in the playoffs? The challenges faced during 5 on 5 even strength play will differ significantly from that of special teams. The Leafs managed a power play percentage of 18.7% in during the regular season, 14^th best in the NHL. Herein lies the best opportunity for the team to produce goals while avoiding the tight checking of even strength.

The team’s offence on the power play has been more balanced than some teams, with no player amassing more than 6 goals and seven with greater than 3 tallies. Below is a list of the Leafs top powerplay goal producers:

Phil Kessel – 6

Nazem Kadri – 5

James Van Reimsdyk – 5

Tyler Bozak – 4

Cody Franson – 3

Dion Phaneuf – 3

Joffrey Lupul – 3

Watching the games of late we can anecdotally surmise what has been working for the Leafs; Franson and Phaneuf have been getting well-timed, hard shots through from the blue line, forcing the opposing team’s forwards to over commit on point coverage; Kessel has been able to generate space and create opportunities from the half wall; JVR and Lupul (when healthy or not suspended) have been driving the net and helping to create rebounds and second chances.

During the final few games of the regular season Carlyle experimented with Kadri and Kessel playing on the same line (more out of necessity than imagination with Bozak injured). The chemistry was palpable between the two, with Kadri possessing the elite passing ability Kessel hasn’t had in a linemate since Marc Savard in Boston. Looking to the playoffs, it would be behoove Carlyle to at the very least pair Phil and Nazem together on the first powerplay unit. A forward set up of Kessel on the half wall, Kadri near the icing line, and Lupul/JVR hovering in front could certainly be potent.

The more limited scoring opportunities during even strength will make capitalizing on special teams paramount to success in the post season. If the team can continue to generate shots from the point and utilize Kadri and Kessel from the half wall and behind the net the Leafs should carry forward the production they enjoyed during the regular season.

10 Playoff Thoughts for the Toronto Maple Leafs

2013-04-24T14:01:00.000-04:00

Blue Chip Prospects started churning out articles in May of 2010. When we first started out, the blog was more general hockey-related stuff and we spent a fair bit of our time just making fun of other teams and their fans. Over the years, we've become increasingly focused on the Leafs and, in my opinion, found our niche in one of the best blogging communities the internet has to offer.

Before I get going, I'd like to say a quick thank you to the guys over at Pension Plan Puppets, Maple Leafs Hot Stove, Vintage Leaf Memories, and Hope in the Big Smoke for all of their support. In addition to the work going on by the group at The Leafs Nation, the guys who contribute on these sites are all bright, insightful individuals who have pushed me to understand hockey in a more complete way and they've all shown BCP a tremendous amount of support over the years, for which I'm tremendously grateful. The community of Leafs bloggers is a group that I'm very proud to be a part of.

When I started blogging 4 years ago, this was the post that I wanted to write: A collection of thoughts on the state of the team as they head into the playoffs. It was pretty clear at the time that I wouldn't be writing this post about the 2010 Leafs, but I sure didn't think I'd have to wait until 2013. As I put pen to pad (or finger to keyboard) the Leafs have three games remaining before facing what looks like either Boston or Montreal and I think I can safely speak for all of you when I say, "PLAYOFFS!!1"

Here are a few things that are on my mind as we inch closer to hockey's second season.

1) Doesn't Mikhail Grabovski strike you as precisely the kind of player who was made for playoff hockey? Grabbo is, for my money, one of the better two way centres in all of hockey and he's the kind of guy who would put his face through the boards if he thought it would help his team. On a Leaf Matters podcast a little while ago, Anthony Petrielli said that he thought Grabovski was the toughest player on the Leafs and I have a hard time arguing the point. I worry that he may continue to get under-utilized in the playoffs but if he gets the icetime that I feel he deserves, I think he'll emerge as a more mainstream hero among Leaf fans.

2) James Reimer has been stealing games for the Leafs all year and I wouldn't be surprised if the Leafs' playoff run lasts longer than most expect because of it. You don't need to delve too deeply into the aforementioned blogs to find a post that laments how badly the Leafs have been outshot this year which means the reasons they're in the playoffs are 1) a lucky shooting percentage, and 2) James Reimer being one of the better goalies in the NHL this season. I've written more extensively on Reimer here so I wont go on a long diatribe but suffice to say that in addition to being an A+ person, James Reimer has developed into a goalie deserving of our trust.

3) Does size matter in the playoffs? As often as we're reminded that the Leafs are among the league leaders in fighting majors, the Leafs' skilled group of forwards are still undersized relative to many of their potential playoff opponents. I've often opined that team toughness is more important that lobbing a line of face-punchers over the boards for 6 minutes a game and I think the Leafs are still outclassed in this regard. If we play Montreal then I'm not terribly worried about it but a seven game series against physical Bruins, Capitals, Rangers or even Pittsburgh would be a real challenge for the group. I'll be interested to see how they cope.

4) Phil Kessel's reputation in the mainstream hinges disproportionately on what he does in the next few weeks. Legends and goats are made in the playoffs and Kessel's detractors, for want of statistical evidence, usually turn to the tired "disappears in big games" trope. I've often argued that not getting results against Zdeno Chara and historically excellent goaltending doesn't make a winger a choker and this may be Kessel's chance to put those fears to rest. Kessel's competitiveness is really underrated in a lot of circles and I think that barring a first round matchup against Chara, Leafs fans will be pleasantly surprised with what we see from our All-Star.

5) Wherefore art thou, defense? All year I've been whining about this and all year James Reimer has made guys like Fraser, Kostka, and to a lesser extent Franson look better than they are. With the spotlight on every move that this team makes, I wonder if the Leafs' D might finally get exposed for the liability they are. If the Leafs are eliminated early, I suspect it will be this and not their lack of experience that's the cause.

6) Entitlement or experience? Hope in the Big Smoke recently wrote a piece about how the whole "end of the entitlement culture" narrative that some have been preaching is more of a myth than a reality. Carlyle strikes me as a guy who favours experience and as HITBS suggests, he certainly has his favourites. I'm not the type to discount the value of experience and the effect that it can have on a team full of playoff first timers but I do hope that Carlyle makes better judgments on the guys who are actually making valuable contributions. If Kadri and Gardiner play up to their capabilities, I sure hope that Carlyle notices and rewards them for it.

7) Duck, duck, goose. Guessing which tough guy and how many of them Carlyle will put into the lineup in the playoffs is an important question but it's anyone's guess at this stage. Dressing fighters in favour of roleplayers seems especially costly when the games are so important and mistakes are magnified. I don't mind the idea of putting one of Orr or (preferably) McLaren in the lineup but I think it's a mistake to play both. And, to my way of thinking, better to have those guys take an instigator on a guy who's taking liberties with Kessel or Kadri than to square off with some comparable scrub on the other side. When Orr grabbed Kaleta against Buffalo, it really did seem to straighten him out and with our PK as effective as it's been this year, keeping our skilled guys healthy is probably worth the two minutes.

8) The playoffs are a war of attrition. The Leafs have been a relatively healthy team this year but Lupul has missed significant time and is just getting his legs back under him while Gunnarsson has been playing hurt all year. Having those two on the top of their game and keeping the rest of the guys healthy will be crucial to the team's success. If Dion Phaneuf should happen to get hurt at any point in the playoffs, I'm loathe to think of who on this team would be responsible for his minutes.

9) Home ice advantage? We all know that for a packed house, the ACC isn't exactly the loudest building in the NHL but this team hasn't been in the playoffs for so long that I wonder if we may see people wearing their ties more like Brian Burke than Gordon Gekko. The price of tickets will probably keep a lot of "real" fans out of the building which is a shame but surely it wouldn't be seen as crass or vulgar for some of the lower bowl to let loose a little bit, given the occasion. I could see things going either way on this one but I really hope it's more ScotiaBank Place Leafs fans than Quiet Night at the ACC Leafs fans.

10) The atmosphere. It's hard to remember exactly what it was like when the Leafs were last in the playoffs. The thing that I'm probably the most excited for is to see the mood around town on game days; the people wearing Leafs jerseys on their way to the office, the flags whipping in the wind on the 400. This is a celebration of hockey and I really hope that we haven't forgotten how to enjoy the party.

Six Seasons And A Playoff Appearance!

2013-04-22T12:12:00.001-04:00

(Stick Tap to Cole for the Art)

Guess who's going to the playoffs? That's right! Guess who's not going to the playoffs? Scott Hartnell.

Go Leafs Go

What To Expect Moving Forward From Nazem Kadri

2013-04-17T18:21:00.002-04:00

If you spend time hanging around Twitter, you've probably heard someone say that Nazem Kadri has had a pretty lucky season. The 22-year old former 7th overall pick has been plugging along at roughly a point per game pace most of the season -- he's sitting at 41 points in 42 games right now -- and has put to bed any fear that he may not have the chops to skate in the top-6.

Anyone who watches the games can tell that Kadri is a dynamic offensive player. He creates chances more consistently than any Leaf forward aside from Phil Kessel, and he's done it while often carrying 6'3", 205 lbs gorilla-winger Colton Orr on his back.

That said, when you look at the numbers, it's clear that things have been going Kadri's way more often than we should reasonably expect.

As things stand today, Kadri's on-ice shooting percentage is a remarkable 14.98 percent which is tops in the league among forwards who have played more than 20 games. Now, while there is some evidence to suggest that on-ice shooting percentage can be sustained at high levels and has predictive value (I'll point you to this post from David Johnson at Hockey Analysis) I would suggest that this season's sample is too small to expect Kadri to definitively be the type of guy who can impact a line's shooting percentage in such a significant way. By way of illustration, I'd point to last season's 9.17 percent in 21 games (7th among Leafs forwards).

What mean should we be expecting Kadri to regress to exactly? Well, I would certainly say that Kadri is an improved player from the Nazem Kadri we saw last season. The challenge is that so few players post an on-ice shooting percentage of over 11 percent (only 22 last year). Is Kadri the kind of talent we can expect to do this on a regular basis? I'm a bit of a homer but personally, I think he can be close.

What effect would an 11 percent on-ice shooting percentage have on Kadri's numbers? Well, his 41 points would turn into just over 30 points on the year, which would translate to about 59 points in an 82 game season. This may surprise many of you but those are still awfully impressive numbers. I think a lot of us are guilty of talking about point per game players as if they grow on trees but the truth is, there aren't many of them out there. Last year, there were 72 players who registered a 0.7 point per game rate over 70 or more games, meaning that if Kadri were to produce at that level, he'd be giving us first-line production (top-90).

So that's a cursory attempt to control for Kadri's luck this year, but what about some of the drags on his production? First of all, Kadri is 5th among Leafs forwards in powerplay icetime per game. If you follow me on Twitter, you'll know how crazy I think this is. Kadri, to my way of thinking, could be the best powerplay forward on the team if given the opportunity. He has the kind of close-quarters puck skills that thrive with the time to set up and plan your attack and his playmaking is right on par with Kessel's.

If we gave Kadri the :45 second per game disparity between himself and Bozak then what would that do to his point totals? Well, 45 seconds represents 37.5% of each individual powerplay, assuming no goal is scored and the powerplay isn't interrupted by other infractions. Over the course of an 82-game season, Bozak is robbing Kadri of 30.75 full 2-minute powerplays which means, if we control for shortened powerplays when goals are scored, Kadri is off the ice when 6 powerplay goals are scored (at the Leafs' current efficiency rate of 18.1%). Does that mean Kadri would get a point on all 6 of those goals? Of course not. I think it's reasonable to say that he's probably suffering a 4-point production dip because of it though. This puts Kadri at 63 points.

Kadri is also 6th on the Leafs in time on ice per game at 16 minutes. I would suggest that the sweet spot for Kadri is somewhere between that number and the 20 minutes a night that Bozak is currently getting. If we grant Kadri the :45 seconds of extra powerplay icetime then that leaves an additional 1:15 at even strength. Suddenly, Kadri's 59-point projection has been inflated to roughly 67 points in an 82 game season between extra powerplay time and a boost to his even strength minutes.

Finally, there's the one thing that's nearly impossible to account for which is the possibility of Kadri skating with Kessel. On the surface, the two seem to be a match made in heaven. Both have exceptional offensive instincts and Kadri drives possession in the right direction in a way Kessel has only been able to dream of since suiting up for the Leafs. What improvement in production would we expect from both of these players if they were slotted on the same line? Look at what Kessel did to Lupul's numbers. Heck, look at what he's done with Bozak's. It would be pure conjecture for me to guess at a number but I will say that I'd be reasonably confident that Kessel would eclipse his 82-point total from last season.

So there you have it. My projection for Kadri on a go-forward basis would be ~67 points in a full 82 game season if he were deployed properly. That may seem like a modest projection when looking at his current points per game in isolation but there aren't many players who put up those kinds of totals. Kadri has exceeded the expectations of many and looks to be well on his way to being a first line player in the NHL.

James Reimer Is A Very Good Goalie

2013-04-14T13:22:00.003-04:00

For the better part of ten years, the Toronto Maple Leafs' Achilles' heel has been their goaltending. Even when the team in front of the goalie was terrible, the goaltending was worse. Not since a 40-year old Ed Belfour have the Leafs had any stability between the pipes and it's probably for that reason that some people haven't been able to fully embrace James Reimer.

It isn't as though we haven't seen the odd flash of competent goaltending. After an abysmal start to his Leafs career, Vesa Toskala was able to finish his first season strong and salvage a .904 save percentage on the season. His strong second-half tricked management into believing that we'd solved our goaltending woes but Toskala would go on to post consecutive seasons of sub-.900 goaltending to close the book on his career as a Maple Leaf.

When Reimer started his NHL career with a .921 save percentage in 37 games, fans were optimistic with an asterisk. It was only half a season -- let's see how he does in a full year.

Well, Reimer started 2011-12 just fine and it looked like we may have finally solved our goaltending problems when a 5'6", 168 lbs ball of fury made an unintentional hit to the head that would have made Scott Stevens proud and de-railed the rest of the young goalie's season. Reimer did return from the injury but he wasn't the same goalie the rest of the year and he struggled in posting a .900 save percentage (partly because of an abysmal penaltykill. but I digress).

Offseason rumours of a deal for Roberto Luongo made a lot of sense. He had to move, we had uncertainty in our crease and a GM who, at the time, looked to be fighting for his job. Gambling on James Reimer returning to form was a roll of the dice that not many thought the Leafs would make.

But they did and they hit the jackpot.

James Reimer has put up a .922 save percentage so far this year to go with a 16-5-5 record. As good as Kadri has been, as many minutes as Phaneuf has played, and as productive as Lupul has been while in the lineup, James Reimer is the single biggest reason why this team sits 5th in the Eastern Conference.

For some inexplicable reason, the Leafs engaged in conversations with the Canucks around Luongo at the deadline despite Reimer's exceptional play and Luongo's trainwreck of a contract, but in the end, logic won the day and the Leafs stood pat in goal.

Reimer candidly admitted that all of the speculation was a distraction and for the first time looked a little frustrated at some of the questions he was being asked in media scrums. After the deadline, however, Reimer has responded to the tacit endorsement from Leafs management by outduelling both Henrik Lunqvist and Carey Price in three games this past week.

I'm a pretty active guy on Twitter and I get exposed to a broad range of opinions on every Leaf-related topic imaginable but one of the most befuddling positions I see regularly is that Reimer isn't an NHL goalie: He is. Not only is he an NHL goalie, he's a very good one, and he's been our MVP this season.

If you want some comparables for just how good Reimer has been, I'll refer you to the company he's keeping on Hockey-Reference. He's one of the good ones and it's time we start appreciating what we've got.

The Shootout and Sample Sizes: Addressing the Leafs' Shootout Woes

2013-04-13T14:54:00.001-04:00

The Leafs lost on Wednesday night to the New York Rangers in the shootout, dropping their shootout record to 0 wins and 5 losses on the season. The players are collectively 3 for 24 on shootout attemps for a 12 percent success rate – 2nd worst in the NHL. Something must be done! We need to figure out a way to fix the team’s shootout woes lest we be forever doomed to leave with only one point in the vaunted 3 point games!

Would the Penguins trade us Jussi Jokinen? Is the trade deadline already passed? Damn. What about Jason Allison, is he still skating with those cement laced boots that prevent him from skating from the center ice line to the goal? Gosh darn. What about Sundin or Mogilny? Surely in their early 40s they still have some finesse and could be used as a “shootout specialist” if called upon.

Ok...deep breaths, everyone. Long, deep breaths --especially you Nick Kypreos-- the sky is not falling and the Leafs are not necessarily bad at shootouts.

Over the past week or so the mainstream media has been harping on the Leafs lack of shootout success this season. They’ve layered on statistic after statistic, showcasing the abysmal shootout percentages of all our forward corps. All 3 of the team’s shootout goals have been scored by Tyler Bozak, with the rest of the team sitting at a combined 0 for 21.

As a result of all this media attention and my inability to escape the mainstream media (try as I might) I have spent some considerable time thinking about the shootout. The way I see it there are two basic things we want to know:

1. Are the Leafs forwards good, bad, or average at scoring in the shootout?

2. If we are in fact incapable of scoring goals, what steps do we then take to become good at it?

The eureka moment came for me, ironically enough, while watching a Jays game earlier this week. The Jays are off to a 4 and 6 start this season and are being criticized by some as a result of the lofty offseason expectations. However, baseball experts have been continued to emphasize patience with the fan base, noting that baseball is a long season and not to make any snap judgements based on such small sample size of games. In fact, some pundits have suggested watching 50 to 60 games of America’s pastime before drawing any firm conclusions.

Herein lies the crux of my point and the obvious correlation between the NHL and MLB: A shootout between a goalie and a player is a statistically similar data point to that of a pitcher versus a batter. By statistically similar I mean to say that there is a specific outcome that can be attributed to the event. In baseball, a player can either strikeout, walk, or register a hit. To simplify this, we can say that the batter can either reach base safely, or be retired by the pitcher.

In hockey’s shootout there are a number of different outcomes; a player can score with a deke, a backhand shot, a slap shot or the goalie can make a save. In the simplest of terms a player can either score a goal or be stopped – like baseball, two possible results.

Since I’m not a baseball expert I had to look up how many at-bats a typical everyday major league ball player has each year. After reviewing a couple well known batters it appears a typical season entails around 600 plate appearances. As noted above, experts have cautioned fans not to look too closely at baseball numbers until the 50 or 60 game mark – approximately 34% of the way through a 162 game schedule.

Taking that 34% and multiplying it by 600 bats we can conclude that a baseball players batting ability should not be completely judged until he has approximately 204 at bats. Now that’s just for a single season, keep in mind that if you truly want to understand the proficiency of a player at the plate you would use multiple seasons of data – 1000s of plate appearances.

For the NHL I wanted to look at some of the most successful players in the shootout and try to discern if we did in fact have enough of a sample size to call them “shootout specialists”. Below are the career shootout numbers for some notable players:

Zach Parise: 32/68 (47%)

Pavel Datsyuk: 32/69 (46%)

Patrick Kane: 28/64 (44%)

Phil Kessel: 15/52 (29%)

Steven Stamkos: 5/27 (18.5%)

After reviewing the stats, available here from NHL.com, it appears that the most experienced NHL players have had in and around 60 shootout attempts. To put this into baseball terms, 60 shootout attempts is the equivalent of about 15 baseball games.

We’ve all watched TV broadcasts where at the start of a shootout they flash the career shootout record of Steven Stamkos and expose his career struggles. Conversely, fans marvel at Pavel Datyuk’s wizardry with the puck and he is routinely referenced as the top shootout producer in the league. The point is that neither conclusion may be correct. Stamkos may in fact be horrible at shootouts and Daystuk might be the best in the world, but we simply do not have nearly enough data or evidence to make a conclusion either way. Making firm assessments on a players shootout prowess based on 60 attempts is akin to pronouncing Vernon Wells a superior batter to Jose Batista two weeks into a baseball season.

If we take the thought process above and apply it to a single year the amount of statistical error becomes almost laughable. In one NHL season the most any one player is likely to participate in the shootout is 10 to 15 times, the baseball equivalent of 3 games.

To circle back to our original thought: How do we know if the Leafs are good at the shootout and if they are in fact bad how do they improve?

The only way to properly understand the team’s shootout ability or lack thereof is to substantially increase the sample size. One idea is for Toronto to conduct multiple shootouts over the course of training camp and record the results. For example, the Leafs could have all skaters shoot on the team’s goalies at the end of each practice.

Of course shooting on the same goalies over and over would no doubt pollute the data since the familiarity of the players to the goalies would be significant. To help mitigate this the team could look at including their AHL goalies as well, perhaps going as far as partnering with nearby college or junior teams to maximize the goalies present.

For the purpose of our exercise, let’s say the Leafs collect 10 goalies (2 NHL, 3 AHL, 3 ECHL, and 2 Junior). After 14 practices each player takes 2 shots on each goalie (yes, this would take a while). The end result would be 280 individual data points (2x10x14) on all Leaf skaters. If each result was recorded this would represent a statistically relevant amount of data.

By reviewing upwards of 300 shootout attempts across multiple goalies the Leafs could begin to accurately access if their ability in the shootout. Additionally, they could record how a player does when taking a shot versus attempting a deke. Over the course of hundreds of attempts they may see trends arise and subsequently look to coach players to become better.

I certainly have no inside knowledge as to the inner-workings of NHL teams, it’s quite possible they already conduct in depth reporting on shootout ability and tendencies. However, the articles that I’ve read in the past allude to the shootout being an afterthought at the end of practice where players simply experiment while shooting on their own netminder.

After the Rangers loss this week Randy Carlyle was asked about by the media about a stat indicating the Leafs went 24 minutes without a shot on goal. His reply below leaves one to wonder exactly how much statistical analysis is undertaken by the coaching staff:

“Stats are for you guys.”

There has been no indication that the shootout is going away anytime soon, as it will continue to serve as the game deciding mini-game during the NHL regular season. When it comes to the shootout it might be time for the Maple Leafs to heed the example of their MLB counterparts and embrace the new world of statistical analysis and sample sizes.

On the Playoffs and John Michael Liles Future in Toronto

2013-04-11T15:18:00.000-04:00

We seem to be stuck in a sort of Leafs fan limbo these days. Ever so close to mathematically clinching a playoff spot, butt wary of making any official proclamations given the 10-year hiatus. The team currently sits 5^th in the East with 49 points through 40 games; staring down a likely first round matchup with either Boston or Montreal.

Well, I’m going to say it – the Toronto Maple Leafs are going to the playoffs and there is no such thing as jinxes.

Ok, ok! To make sure I’m not struck down by some wayward bolt of lightning in the coming days I’ll hedge it a bit – there is a reasonable if not probable expectation that the Leafs will make the playoffs this season. Better?

These playoffs will have significant ramifications for the Leafs not only this year, but on their actions or lack thereof in the summer. For fans, there is no doubt that a playoff run of any length will be a moment of pure ecstasy, allowing us to collectively unleash 10 years of pent up Leaf fandom. For the team however, the playoffs will represent a final opportunity for Nonis and the front office to evaluate the roster and decide what changes, if any, will be made in the offseason.

This summer the Leafs have the following players as either a UFA or RFA.

UFAs: Clarke McArthur, Tyler Bozak, Colton Orr, Ryan O’Byrne, Mike Kostka

RFAs: Cody Franson, Mark Fraser, Carl Gunnarsson, Leo Komarov, Joe Colborne, Frazer McLaren, Nazem Kadri

Reviewing the names above it’s clear that this offseason could bring about a number of changes to the roster. Interestingly, the player that most intrigues me is one not listed above, that being John Michael Liles. His play could be the catalyst for a number of changes this offseason and directly impact some of the players listed above.

JML played hockey at Michigan State University for 4 years before signing on with the Colorado Avalanche AHL affiliate Hershey Bears in 2002. He played the 2003-04 season in the NHL with Avalanche amassing 34 points in 79 games as a rookie. Over his first 5 seasons in the league he scored over 10 goals 4 times and registered north of 39 points on three occasions. Expectations were high when arrived when Toronto traded a 2^nd round pick to acquire Liles in June of 2011, as he was coming off o 46 point campaign and carried a reputation as one of the games better offensive blueliners.

Liles' time with the Maple Leafs has been somewhat turbulent, marred by both inconsistent play and time spent in the infirmary. Last year, he registered 7 goals and 20 assists in an injury shortened 66 game season. Brian Burke rewarded him for his strong play midway through the 2011-12 season with a new 4 year, 15.5 million dollar contract. The contract received mixed reviews, while the cap hit of 3.875 is manageable, the term of 4 years for a player 32 years of age raised questions. Since signing the contract, Liles suffered through a concussion at the end of the last season and spent a string of games alongside Mike Komisarek as a healthy scratch this year.

Since re-entering the lineup Liles has shown signs of life, displaying the offensive creativity and puck moving acumen that he was known for in Colorado. Over the past 6 games he has registered a goal and 3 assists, despite seeing somewhat limited ice time in the team's 3^rd defensive pairing. At many times during games he is jumping into the offensive zone and helping to create odd man rushes. In the playoffs, when goal scoring typically sees a decline due to tighter checking, having your defence generate offensive chances will be critical. Additionally, he has made a number of sublime passes while on the attack, making the backhand spin-o-rama pass a regular part of his repertoire.

The questions surrounding Liles seem to center less on his physical ability, which appears to still be intact, and more around how Randy Carlyle intends to use him. If Randy is using Liles as the 4^th or 5^th defenseman, seeing some time on the 2^nd power play unit, then his $3.8 million dollar cap hit can be managed. However, if Carlyle sees Liles as more of 6^th defenseman who spends some time in the press box as a healthy scratch then the contract could be detrimental over the next 3 years.

Adding to the complexity of the Liles situation is the future of Jake Gardiner and Morgan Rielly. There is the potential that one, or both, could be skating in the NHL next season, rendering a number of the skills possessed by Liles redundant. While you can never have too many offensive puck moving defenseman on your roster, Carlyle and Nonis have proven to favour having an injection of size and truculence on the back end.

Which brings us back to this year’s probable playoff run and what it means to JML. Should Liles continue his strong play and assert himself as an integral piece of defence it will provide Nonis with a number of options. He can decide to keep Liles, perhaps allowing Cody Franson to leave as a RFA and exploring trade options for the highly regarded Gardiner for a potential centerman or upgrade elsewhere. Now I’m not recommending the team trade Gardiner, merely pointing out it would be an option. However, should Liles falter, or fall further out of favor with the coaching staff; Nonis may work to ship Liles out in the offseason. JML’s contract isn’t necessary ideal, but it’s not onerous to the point of being unmoveable. Teams like Detroit and even the Avalanche have been rumored to need a solid puck moving defenseman and Liles may be a player they could use.

As the team closes in on the playoffs I don’t expect fans to be thinking about next season and beyond, as the thrill of a post season push will certainly be riveting. However, for the MLSE front office the playoffs look to be a blend of emotion and strategic planning as players like Liles audition for future roles.

How To Talk To Hockey Nerds

2013-03-29T16:47:00.000-04:00

One of the great things about the last five to ten years, from my perspective at least, is the relatively new mainstream appeal of being a nerd. I've always been a nerd at heart but I didn't always wear the badge as proudly as I do now and while part of that is a bi-product of growing up, it would probably be dishonest to say that I'd self-identify as one if I were the only person doing it with pride.

In part, I was able to keep my inner-nerd closeted during the time it wasn't so chic because I was reasonably athletic and genuinely loved sports. Given these two interests, it's not particularly surprising that I have a hockey blog.

Being a hockey nerd is a little bit different than liking the Christopher Nolan Batman movies though; it's not exactly universally accepted. Part of that comes from the fact that the advanced stat community often challenges preconceptions that have been held for a very long time in the sport, but part of it comes from misunderstandings. With that in mind, I thought I'd take a little bit of time to clear the air on some of the nerdier elements of hockey analysis.

The Stats We Dislike

(+/-): A lot of advanced statistics is predicated on the idea that "goals" is too narrow a result to be of much predictive value. There aren't enough goals scored to clear up a lot of the statistical noise and a handful of goals against caused by skating with a defensively inept linemate can really skew your own personal results. For this reason hockey nerds tend to seriously dislike (+/-) and this is especially true if you're comparing guys on different teams. (+/-) without regard for context is anathema for us.

Hits: Cam Charron had an exceptional piece over at Backhand Shelf where he touches on how teams with a lot of hits tend to lose a lot of games. The reason behind this is pretty obvious if you actually think about it: In order to make a hit, you can't have the puck which means to make a lot of hits, you have to spend a lot of time without the puck. When a hockey pundit praises a guy for being third in the NHL in hits, you can expect that hockey nerds everywhere are rolling their eyes. To a lesser extent, you can throw out shot blocks for the exact same reason.

Goals Against Average: Goal against might be the most absurd "goalie" stat ever conceived. If there were ever a stat that was screaming to be considered a team statistic rather than an individual one, this might be it. When it comes to goaltending, if you're looking for a regular statistic to use to compare the quality of goaltenders, stick to save percentage.

Why We Like Possession Stats

There are a number of possession stats out there (most being some permutation of corsi or fenwick) and they're all based on getting shots toward the goal and preventing shots from being directed at your goal. The reasons they're based around shots are two-fold. First of all, a shot for or against is only one remove from being a goal and thus can be considered a goal-like event. Since the purpose of hockey is to score more goals than the other team, this makes sense. The second reason is that it provides us with a significantly higher number of events than goals do.

Now the correlations between these possession stats and points in the standings are extraordinarily strong (especially if you isolate for when the game is close) but context is still important here. Is a guy playing against tough opposition? Is a guy getting buried with defensive zone faceoffs? Is he skating with AHLers? Having bad possession numbers, on its own, doesn't mean a guy is necessarily a bad hockey player. It might mean he's mis-cast or it might mean he's given tough assignments.

A Common Error

Perhaps the most common mistake that I encounter with people who are new to advanced stats is that they consider corsi or fenwick to be a measure of a player's defensive aptitude. Both of those metrics are based on both shots for and shots against, and for this reason should be considered a barometer of a player's all-around game.

Why We Fight

The Stats community and the Anti-Stats community seem to get into endless debates about a lot of these things and truthfully, most of the fights I see come from one side reading something that wasn't actually there. Take my statement above as an example: Teams with a lot of hits tend to lose a lot of games. Now someone may infer from that statement that I think hitting is bad or is something to be avoided but that person would be wrong. When you don't have the puck, hitting is one of a small handful of ways to get it back and it's a tool that I absolutely believe in. The reason those teams lose, as I said above, is that they spend too much time without the puck.

Another common argument revolves around luck. The Maple Leafs' shooting percentage with Nazem Kadri on the ice is very high and is almost definitely inflating his point totals. Very few players have seen on-ice shooting percentages as high as his has been most of this year and it's enormously rare for a player to have those numbers stay high year-over-year. What this means is that his point pace, barring further development of his talent, is likely to come down from what it is right now. What it absolutely doesn't mean is that he's a bad player. Just because a hockey nerd says that a player has been lucky, doesn't mean that we think that player is bad, only that he's unlikely to continue the pace at which he's been putting up points.

If you're not really heavily into advanced stats and you're about to engage in a debate with someone who is, read what they're saying very carefully. A lot of times things that may seem counter-intuitive or subversive actually make a lot of sense without needing to delve too deeply into the math.

Wrapping Up

The best part about writing about hockey is without a doubt the conversations. This outlet has afforded me admission to a community of passionate and insightful individuals who have the same interests that I do, and has given us a forum to debate our ideas. Twitter has been the source of no end of great hockey conversations for me and I love having those discussions, even when we disagree.

The more we understand each other, the better conversations we can have and that's a two-way street. If you don't understand why someone has the opinion they do about a certain player or team or situation then ask and, when they answer, listen carefully. If I can understand you and you can understand me, we're probably both going to learn a thing or two.

A Darwinian Look at Phil Kessel & The Kovalchuk Model of Star Evolution

2013-03-19T13:40:00.001-04:00

It’s no secret that the Leafs have been struggling lately, losing five straight with two coming in overtime. There are a number of culpable parties, sharing the blame for the poor showings; Randy Carlyle’s refusal to call up Jake Gardiner, Mikhail Grabovski’s inability to produce offensively while buried in the defensive zone, uneven goaltending, and the lack of goals from Phil Kessel.

It’s likely that all of the above are contributing factors in the lack of wins, but where I disagree with the standard rationale is on why Phil Kessel has been disappointing. Recording 30 or more goals in 4 straight seasons and coming off of a 37 goal 2011-12 has made Kessel’s current 82 game pace of 28 goals inadequate to some.

Since becoming a Maple Leaf Kessel has repeatedly been labeled as a ’40 goal scorer’, based largely on his potential to do so, since he has never in fact scored 40 goals in a single season. As a result, he seems to be unfairly judged against a standard he has never actually achieved. Furthermore, he seems to be graded along a single axis, in one category (that being goals) when there is so much more a player of his calibre can contribute to a team. Phil Kessel is most certainly a sniper in the truest form, but speed and latent playmaking ability give him the tools to perhaps be more.

As a possible case study I’d like to examine the transformation of Ilya Kovalchuk. Much like Kessel, he was known primarily as a goal scorer in his early years with the Atlanta Thrashers. Kovalchuk scored 29 times in his rookie campaign and went on to amass an 6 straight seasons of 40+ goals – impressive. Not quite as awe inspiring was his Augusta-worthy plus/minus over that time, recording a -19,-24,-10, -6, -2, -12 and -12 over the same stretch. Granted, the Thrashers weren’t all that good during his tenure, so we can forgive him the plus/minus. However, it’s clear no Selke trophies were coming his way.

Digging deeper into Kovalchuk\s statistics this season we can see that his time on ice per game is over 25 minutes (10^th in the NHL), making him the only forward in the top 40 for playing time. As a Thrasher, his time on ice hovered in and around 21 minutes per game. Devils coach Peter DeBoer is clearly comfortable using Kovalchuk in all situations – he regularly plays all 2 minutes of the powerplay (you don’t want to be the 2^nd unit left defenseman in Jersey) and is playing a large part on the penaltykill. Prior to last season Ilya had only played over 32 minutes shorthanded once in his career. Last season he played over 88 minutes on the penalty kill and is on pace to play over 140 this season (82 games).

Taking in a game earlier this week against the Philadelphia Flyer,s it’s evident Kovalchuk is taking his role as an all round contributor seriously. In the attacking zone he will hold up if his line mates are already on the forecheck, guarding against a potential odd man rush. In the defensive zone, he regularly comes down to his goal line along the half wall to help battle for loose pucks. Yes, part of this commitment to detail is born from the Devils style of hockey, but he has bought in.

In the lockout shortened season Kovalchuk has 10 goals in 29 games, on pace for his lowest total since his rookie season. However, when you watch him he seems to be hustling every shift and more committed to winning than at any other time in his career. Selfishly, I’d enjoy return to 40 plus goal seasons with nightly highlights (especially for my fantasy team), but to win, and win consistency, you have to do a bit of everything.

Readers will point out that Phil Kessel is not quite as talented as Kovalchuk - which I’ll concede. The comparison is drawn more in their style of game than their exact skill sets. Kessel doesn’t possess the size of a Kovalchuk, but conversely Ilya likely doesn’t have the top end speed of Phil. However, both players are undeniably snipers, and few, if any, Stanley Cups have been won where the team’s best player can only produce in one fashion.

A change in Phil Kessel’s game would not happen overnight – changing athletes’ tendencies rarely does. But it isn’t really incumbent on Kessel to change his game alone; the coaching staff has to play a major role. Allowing Phil to change his mindset, judging the success of a shift, period, or game on a larger scale than just goals, is something Leafs management needs to lead. Over the last two years, we've seen a definite improvement in the consistency of Kessel's effort without the puck. Truth be told, you rarely see him gliding anywhere these days.

The trade deadline is approaching and coinciding with the big day are the annual whispers (mainly from Damien Cox) that the Leafs should explore trading Phil Kessel. I suppose no player is untradeable, but with one as talented as #81 the team would do well to look at the Kovalchuk model of star evolution and see what can be applied to ours before we bid adieu.

Making Lemonade Out Of Lemons: Internal Fixes For The Leafs Lineup

2013-03-13T14:40:00.000-04:00

As things stand today, the Leafs sit in 6th in the Eastern Conference and are 3 points ahead of 9th place Winnipeg following last night's loss to the Jets. Not a bad spot to be and had you told me in the offseason we'd be in a playoff spot 27 games into the season, I would have been pleasantly surprised. The underlying numbers for how we've gotten here suggest that we've been awfully lucky to be so successful but this is where we are and nobody can take those points away from us.

That said, it doesn't mean that you look at the underlying numbers, shrug, and say, "well, we've gotten away with it so far." This team is 3rd last in the NHL in Fenwick Close. For the uninitiated, Fenwick Close is essentially shot +/- when the game is within a goal (during the 1st or 2nd period) or tied (in the 3rd or overtime). It may seem counter-intuitive to a lot of you, but if you isolate this number for road games it actually correlates more closely with home points than points earned on the road does. In a nutshell: This might be the most important number the NHL has for predicting future success.

A lot of what happens during the rest of the season will hinge on how Randy Carlyle is able to manipulate the lineup in an effort to improve our Fenwick number moving forward, thereby improving our odds at success. The good news, in my opinion, is that there are internal solutions for most of what ails this team.

First of all, I would point to our #1 centre spot. Tyler Bozak is a woeful possession player and his inability to keep the play going on offense is the main reason for it. Over at The Leafs Nation, Cam Charron argued that the best way to use Bozak would be to start him primarily on defensive zone faceoffs. For all of his faults offensively, Bozak is a competent defensive player and a fantastic faceoff man. It makes some intuitive sense that it's easier to get the puck out of your zone than it is to get a shot on net while in the opposition zone, so maybe that initial faceoff win (and possession of the puck) would lead to clearing the zone more often. By putting Bozak on a third line with McClement and, for argument's sake Kulemin, we've built a line that can handle tough defensive minutes and move the puck in the right direction.

This means Nazem Kadri can move to the top unit which is a bit of a polarizing idea among Leafs fans. What a lot of Leafs fans may not realize though, is that Kadri is one of the best possession players on the team. A lot has been made of his defensive deficiencies but the reality is, what he produces offensively is so significant that he's been able to keep the play in the right zone at a rate that's better than any of his teammates. If you were to move Kadri on to the top unit with Kessel and, again for argument's sake Lupul, then you'd be putting two talented offensive players with a guy who keeps the puck in the offensive zone. Moreover, you can give this line the lion's share of the offensive zone faceoffs to make sure that they spend as much time there as possible.

What's left is a better zone start split for Grabovski's line (with JVR and MacArthur) so that they can produce more offense than Grabovski has been able to thus far while still matching up against reasonably tough opposition (because he's really good at it).

The way our defense has been handled is a complete mystery to me. Carlyle's fixation with having his defensemen playing the side that corresponds with their handedness has pushed Dion Phaneuf from his favoured right side to the left. This has meant that A) he's looked less comfortable himself, and B) he's been paired with an endless rotation of AHL defenders. If we simply moved Dion back to the right, we could then pair him with Gunnarsson thus re-uniting our most effective duo from last season.

Also, by moving Dion to the right side, we free up a left defense slot which means we can start operation #FreeJakeGardiner. One of the reasons why he may still be in the AHL is that we're overloaded with left side defense right now. Phaneuf, Gunnarsson, Fraser, Liles, and Gardiner all skate on that side while the right has been left with Kostka, Franson, Holzer, and Komisarek. It's pretty clear which side is the thinner of the two and Holzer is the only player in the group who can be sent to the AHL without having to pass through waivers.

Now all of this might look like one long diatribe whose purpose is to make Randy Carlyle look like an incompetent boob, but it isn't. I'm not as bearish on Carlyle as a lot of people I talk to are. I like how he's handled the goalies, I'm willing to give him some of the credit for the improved penaltykill (it can't all be McClement, can it?), and I also understand that it can be tough to change what's been working when it comes to the idea of moving Kadri to the first line.

The problem with the team is that, in a lot of ways, our success thus far has been a mirage. That doesn't mean that it has to get worse though -- it only means that we're lucky it wasn't. If we can improve our possession numbers on a go-forward basis by shaking up the lineup then the past numbers lose a lot of their predictive value over the team. In economic terms, the points we have are sunk and we don't give them back. It's what we do from here on in that will decide what kind of team we are.

Phil Kessel and the Ryan Getzlaf Contract - A Ripple Effect

2013-03-12T15:52:00.002-04:00

On Friday March 8^th, the Anaheim Ducks signed a contract extension with their star center, Ryan Getzlaf. The deal amounts to $66 million over 8 years, making the 27-year old one of the highest earning players in the NHL, pulling in $8.25 million a season. While the agreement quite obviously impacts the Ducks, it will also have a ripple effect throughout the league as teams, like the Maple Leafs, try to navigate the waters of the new CBA.

The Leafs next year will be faced with the difficult proposition of what to do with Phil Kessel. Much like Ryan Getzlaf, Kessel will be a UFA at the end of next season and on the edge of what many believe will be his most productive hockey-playing years. The contracts of Marian Gaborik, Rick Nash, Ilya Kovalchuk and Zach Parise have demonstrated the significant investment required to keep a player entering free agency in their mid to late 20s – close to their maximum value.

The difference between the players above and the deal struck in Anaheim is how the new CBA has forced teams to re-think superstar contracts. No longer able to sign players to heavily front loaded dollars that tapper in the late going, thereby maintaining a manageable annual cap-hit. Today’s GMs must now impress stars with the promise of an 8^th year (opposing teams can only offer up to 7) or the allure of winning a Stanley Cup.

One interesting anecdote regarding Getzlaf that was mentioned on the radio, something I hadn’t really considered, since living in Toronto precludes our memories of championships, was the importance of Ryan Getzlaf to the 2007 Stanley Cup playoffs. Notwithstanding Teemu Selanne (who turns 43 in July) Getzlaf and Perry represent the last remaining vestige from that winning roster (editor's note: it was pointed out that Beauchemin was too, though not contiguously). In a market like Anaheim, where hockey is a distant 4^th in the psyche of sports fanatics it’s speculated that signing Getlzaf, the team’s leader and captain, will play a critical role in selling season's tickets. It’s quite possible that, as a result of this nostalgia, Ryan had more value to the ducks than any other Franchise. That is not to underestimate his abilities as a player going forward, which are considerable, but to illustrate, in part, why he was awarded what some have argued is too much money.

Back to Kessel, despite his struggles to score consistently in the lockout shortened season, he has still amassed a respectable 23 points in 26 games, remaining one of the game’s premier snipers, and has performed at a high level in almost every game this season. Boasting a lethal wrist shot and game changing speed that will no doubt have enemy GMs (and Phil’s agent) swooning. Assuming for a moment, that the Getzlaf deal is used as the new de facto barometer for star contracts, it’s quite possible Kessel will cross the $8 million dollar threshold. I don’t foresee Kessel making as much as Getzlaf, given the lack of playoff resume, however all bets are off if Phil makes it to UFA status where GMs are known to open the wallet, or the safe, as the case may be.

If the Leafs wish to sign #81 they’ll likely have to do it during next season. Committing that kind of money and that amount of term to a player could be unsettling, especially to new GM Dave Nonis (assuming he's still occupying the chair), wherein a Kessel contract could be the lasting memory of his tenure, much in the same way the Seguin trade defined his predecessor.

A contract of that size and length would unofficially anoint him as the centerpiece of the team moving forward (not that he isn’t the best player today). If the front office don’t see Kessel as an 8-million dollar player than perhaps they should consider their trading options this offseason, particularly at the draft, where plenty of suitors would no doubt be lurking.

$8 million is a lot of money, especially with Getzlaf’s Rocket Richard winning all-star winger potentially entering the free agent market this summer. There are no shortage of things to ponder right now in Leaf land, but come this summer we’ll all be asking the same thing - how much is Phil Kessel worth to you?

Optimus Reim Showing Off Some Autobotian Heroics in 2013

2013-03-05T20:28:00.002-05:00

The most pleasant surprise of the 2013 Maple Leafs season has undoubtedly been the consistent and exceptional play of James Reimer and the perfectly adequate backup performance of Ben Scrivens. The steadying performances of both goalies has been one of the key reasons they team currently sits 5th in the Eastern Conference, and has all but completely silenced the whispers surrounding Roberto Luongo in Toronto.

Ben Scrivens, the AHL's reigning Harry Holmes Memorial Award (lowest goals allowed in a minimum of 25 games) winner has been more than adequate, and despite that, Randy Carlyle is justifiably leaning towards James Reimer when he's healthy.

Reimer’s statistics thus far have been reminiscent of his numbers during the 2010-11 season when he posted a 2.60 GAA and .921 save percentage with a 20-10-5 record. The wayward Brian Gionta elbow put him off track for most of last season, side lined with a concussion. However, his play this year has stoked the fire once again on talks that he has the skill set to succeed as a number one goalie in the NHL.

Taking a look at two key measures for goalies we can see he is in some lofty company, in line with some of the league’s best.

Below are the rankings for goals against average and save percentage of netminders having played a minimum of 10 games:

Goals Against Average

12. Martin Brodeur – 2.27

13. Henrik Lundqvist – 2.28

14. Ben Scrivens – 2.41

15. James Reimer – 2.43

16. Marc-Andre Fluery – 2.44

Save Percentage

4. Kari Lehtonen - .930

5. Tuukka Rask - .928

6. Ray Emery - .926

7. James Reimer - .923

8. Ben Scrivens - .923

The above represents the first time in nearly a decade that the Maple Leafs have been able to boast league-average or better goaltending. There are a number of factors that could be playing a role in the success; Randy Carlyle has brought a renewed focus to the penaltykill where the team has improved to 13^th in the league at 82.7%. Additionally, Reimer, nearly 25 years of age is certainly maturing as a goalie and an athlete, coming into training camp this year a notable 15 pounds lighter. With the unceremonious departure of Leafs goalie coach Francois Allaire prior to the season Reimer has been encouraged to play a more aggressive style, moving out of the shadow of the goal posts and to the edge of the crease. This has seemingly made him bigger in the net, helping to limit the number of pucks sliding past his sometimes exposed upper body and glove hand.

Looking at their contract statuses, Reimer is signed through to the end of next season, after which he will be an RFA, while Scrivens is a UFA after next year.

This leaves Nonis with some interesting questions to answer in net. If Reimer can stay healthy and continue to gain the confidence of the coaching staff and management there is no reason to think he won’t be offered a contract after next year. His current salary of $1.8 million would increase, but will still likely fall in the bottom 3^rd of NHL goalie pay cheques. Scrivens currently only makes $612,000 per season, meaning the Leafs have one of the cheapest goalie tandems in the league.

The financial flexibility afforded by the low contracts of Reimer and Scrivens could allow the team to pursue a veteran back up in the offseason via trade or free agency. Looking at the quality production teams like the Rangers (Biron), Penguins (Vokoun), and Devils (Hedberg) have been getting from their NHL calibre backups has me thinking this could be the right route to go while Reimer continues to develop.

Notable UFAs available this offseason:

Niklas Bakstrom, 35

Evgeni Nabokov, 37

Ray Emery, 30

Chris Mason, 36

Dan Ellis, 32

A number of the names above will sign contracts with their current teams and stay put. However, at least a couple will be available this offseason for a reasonable contract, solidifying the backup role with a proven NHL goaltender.

Bringing in another goalie would mean the end of Ben Scrivens in Toronto. He has had multiple opprotunities to step in and takeover as the primary goalie. However, looking at the roster today the Leaf need is more a veteran presence than a 26 year old still looking to cement himself as a bona fide NHLer.

The fantastic puck stopping from both goalies this season has been fun to watch. If Reimer can continue his evolution into a #1 goaltender and the team brass can look to bring in a veteran presence in the position of back up the teams netmininding issues may be a thing of the past.

Of course, it’s still relatively early into the season, and after suffering through years of Toskala and Raycroft it’s understandable that Leaf fans are no more than cautiously optimistic with their goalies. But the play of Reimer has been a bright spot during a year that has provided many thus far.

Spring Shopping List: A 1st Line Center

2013-03-01T20:31:00.000-05:00

Somewhere in California, with his tie slightly undone (just enough to make you ask why he bothers wearing it in the first place) Brian Burke is smirking at the Leafs success.

The team seems to be a spitting image of the one Burke hoped to create 4 years ago. A nice mix of scoring and finesse on the top 2 lines with tenacious checkers and men quick to drop their gloves in the bottom six.

The goaltending has moved from league worst to the top third of the league. The defense, while imperfect, has been strong enough that Carlyle has kept Jake Gardiner, once thrust into the throngs of an NHL season, out of the NHL lineup and unsure as to where he will even slot in. A good problem to have if you’re Dave Nonis.

Alas, one remaining issue plagues the team and its roster – that of the never-ending search for player capable of playing 1^st line center minutes. The hole left by Mats Sundin has proven to be deeper than many fans were willing to admit. It’s been temporarily filled by the likes of Matt Stajan, Nik Antropov, Tim Connolly, and most recently by Tyler Bozak.

Rumours have circulated for quite some time over replacements that could be signed or traded for to stabilize the position. Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry are both unrestricted free agents this summer and the speculation is that Anaheim may only be able to retain the services of one. Both will be looking for deals north of 7 million dollars per year for an extended time. Getzlaf represents the prototypical 1^st line center that can play in all situations and would certainly end all questions about the position in the foreseeable future. However, the free agent market can be extremely fickle, and placing the team’s future in the hands of pending UFAs can be dangerous.

There exists no shortage of trade partners for the Maple Leafs to explore retrieving a center. The question becoming now what is Nonis willing to give up in return. With the overflow of NHL talent on the backend – recent benching of Liles, and strong play of Cody Franson the team certainly has pieces to dangle in front of the noses of opposing GMs. Sam Gagner has been spectacular this year in Edmonton, and at the age of 23 seems to be finally delivering on the promise of his rookie campaign. Edmonton has a number of young, talented players; however, with Hall and Eberle already signed long term the team may be forced to move one or two of its young offensive pieces.

In Florida there have been whispers about the availability of Stephen Weiss. The 29 year old Panther is a pending UFA and seems unlikely to return to the team in the summer. He has a career high of 60 points and has generally hovered around 20 goals and 35 assists per season. While I do believe Weiss would be substantial improvement over our current #1 center, the situation bears a curious resemblance to the Connolly signing, in that it may represent a player who is only a temporary solution to the problem at hand.

The Avalanche have officially matched the Calgary Flames offer sheet to center Ryan O’Reilly, thus potentially making Paul Stastny available at the trade deadline. The 27 year old has registered 3 seasons with over 70 points, although has fallen on tough times of late with the emergence of Duchene and O’Reilly in Colorado - Relegating him to the 3^rd line at times. Depending on the asking price from the Avalanche, he could be an interesting addition to the Leafs top 6.

Lastly, we have the player that requires no offer sheet, new contract, or trade talks – the internal candidate – Kadri.

I was one of many who doubted the youngster after a few years of unrealized potential and rumours of a lacklustre offseason regimen surfaced. I, like some fans, was prepared to move on from Kadri and looks for a new solution. As it turns out, I couldn’t have been more wrong. Kadri has looked absolutely dynamic on the ice this season, creating scoring chances both for himself and his teammates.

Nazem currently sits with 21 points (8 goals, 13 assists), leading the team despite not skating on the top line. Detractors have pointed to his inconsistent work in the faceoff circle (43%) as a key reason to keep him from the 1^st line. Tyler Bozak currently wins 55% of his face-offs – meaning that for every 20 face-offs taken Bozak would win 2 more than Kadri. While the team would no doubt prefer better faceoff work from Kadri, it hardly seems like it warrants being the determining factor when Kadri brings such a unique skill set to the line. It seems that given his current success it’s worth at least experimenting with Kadri on the front line to see if he can help in bringing new life to Phil Kessel's stalled goal scoring. He would represent the most gifted playmaker Kessel has skated with since his days in Boston playing alongside Marc Savard.

While the #1 center position remains unfilled, Leaf fans can take some solace in the knowledge that now, more than ever over the last 5 years, the team appears to have options. Whether it is ultimately addressed through free agency, trade, or promotion from within there are players on the horizon hat can help to stabilize the 1^st line and bring Toronto’s offensive capabilities more in line with the other playoff teams in the Eastern Conference.

Success At The Draft: 10 Years Of Maple Leafs Draft Picks

2013-02-17T21:13:00.006-05:00

The Toronto Maple Leafs don't know how to draft or develop players; we hear this all the time. Just last week, Damien Cox wondered if the Leafs had finally figured it out as Kadri and Frattin were both making a meaningful impact at the NHL level. Well, it may surprise a lot of you to hear this given what you're forced to read, but the Leafs are actually pretty good at drafting players.

An interesting post by Aaron Chan over at Maple Leaf Muse got me thinking about the Leafs' track record at the draft. I've always felt like it was better than they got credit for. Aaron made some interesting points but I wanted to be a little bit more precise with how picks are compared to one another.

With that in mind, I looked at 10 years worth of draft data (1999 to 2008) and the results are impressive. Over this 10 year period, the Leafs had a first round bust rate of 14% (note: The only bust, Luca Cereda, is an interesting case. He was diagnosed with a heart defect the year after his draft.) Their median first round draft slot over this time was 21st which makes the low bust rate particularly impressive. When compared to the league-wide bust rate of 42% among first round draft picks, the Leafs' draft record stands out yet again. The Leafs' impact draft rate in the first round was over 70% compared against a league-wide average of roughly 39%.

In the second round, the Leafs had a bust rate that was slightly lower than league average and their record for drafting impact players (top-6 forwards or top-4 defense) was double that of the rest of the league.

In the interest of full disclosure, I combined the third and fourth round when looking at the Leafs' picks and compared those against third rounders of the rest of the league. I haven't parsed the entire league past the third round and the Leafs' third round numbers are abysmal relative to their fourth round numbers (which we'd clearly expect to normalize over time.) Basically, given the disparity between the two numbers, I think that the n is the issue and not that the Leafs have some mysterious hex placed on their third rounders.

Once again, the Leafs are two-and-a-half times more likely to find an impact player in these rounds than the league average and also have a slightly lower bust rate.

Over this 10 year period, the Leafs also added Ian White and Carl Gunnarsson in rounds 6 and 7 (where they have an 8% impact player rate -- the league-wide average is 4% by the third round.)

Below are graphs comparing the figures for the Leafs and the rest of the league:

These results are even more dramatic if we consider that Dave Morrison has been our current director of scouting since 2006 (3 of the drafts above.) In the 2006 draft alone, Morrison added Tlusty, Kulemin, Reimer, Holzer, Stalberg, and Komarov. In 2007, with no first or second rounder, he added Matt Frattin and Carl Gunnarsson.

In short, the Leafs don't have a drafting problem, they have a problem with trading away prospects and draft picks. During Dave Nonis' tenure as GM of the Vancouver Canucks, he hoarded prospects and picks which might be the best thing for the Leafs future given their success on the draft floor.

Positional Draft Analysis By Round: 10 Years of Forwards and Defensemen

2013-02-12T15:24:00.001-05:00

About a week ago, I was talking with a friend about 2013 eligible draft prospect Darnell Nurse. He's huge and athletic and while I'm not a pro-scout, I'd guess that he's a guy with an awfully high ceiling. I suggested that some team that barely missed the playoffs was going to be awfully lucky to draft him and that I wouldn't even be surprised if he snuck into the top-10 on draft day. It was at that point that my friend suggested that taking a defenseman in the top-10 was a risky proposition.

We shot some names back and forth of forwards and defense who had worked out, where star players came from, Cam Barker, &c. &c. Are your odds better of getting a good player in the first round if you take a forward? At what point, if any, are defensemen generally safer picks? We couldn't really come to any reasonable conclusions without doing the work.

So with that, I set about putting together a spreadsheet with 10 years of draft data (1999 to 2008) where each pick in the first three rounds was categorized as an All-Star, an Impact Player, a Replaceable Player, or a Bust. For now, I've held fast to defining an All-Star strictly (must have actually been an All-Star) but I do think this analysis would benefit from a little more flexibility in this regard (ex. Hamonic and Subban are not All-Stars but Justin Williams and Alexander Frolov are.) An Impact Player is a top-6 forward or a top-4 defenseman, a Replaceable Player would be a guy who has predominantly been an NHLer but generally in a support role, and a Bust would be a guy who didn't have a significant NHL career.

The following charts represent the percentage of players who fall into the defined categories per player selected at those positions. In terms of raw numbers, roughly two forwards are drafted for every one defenseman.

The first round results were a little surprising. The blue segment represents players who fell in the All-Star range and Impact range combined. While the bust rate among defensemen selected was slightly higher than it was for forwards, the number of impact defensemen per defenseman taken actually outpaced forwards in the first round. Now again, given that this is done in percentage terms, there are more impact forwards taken than impact defensemen, but when you adjust the numbers to a 'per defenseman taken' and 'per forward taken', you see that a greater percentage of selected defensemen seem to provide meaningful contributions to their teams.

The second round also sees a greater share of defensemen providing impact-level performance. This was a little less surprising based on the guesses that I made heading into the exercise. Take note of how high the bust rate is in the 2nd round (over 75% overall.)

Again, take note of the bust rate. Also, there's a greater proportion of those who 'make it' who are replacement level here. Pretty tough to find a top-6 or top-4 guy by the time you get to the 3rd round. Once again, we see that the numbers seem to slightly favour defensemen.

So what does this data mean? Well, first of all, in isolation it suggests that not enough defensemen are being taken in the first or second rounds. If the number of defensemen selected in early rounds were to increase, we would likely see these numbers come together a bit. Secondly, it could mean that GMs believe that drafting an impact forward is more valuable than an impact defenseman. While I'm pretty comfortable, generally speaking, with the categories I employed, what they don't take into account is the order of magnitude that these players impact their teams -- as far as these numbers are concerned, Malkin and Frolov are the same guy.

What I am comfortable saying is that I prefer that my team take a defenseman over a forward in the second round. The number of cases where we see ultra-high impact players selected in the second round is limited and in instances where it occurs, those players generally seem to be defensemen. Not only this, but the numbers pretty clearly suggest that your odds of getting any kind of asset are better if you take a defenseman in the second round rather than a forward.

Moving forward, it may be interesting to break apart the first round into pick-segments and depending on how well received this post is, I may take that on. For the time being though, it's safe to say that I wouldn't be avoiding a guy like Darnell Nurse with a pick in range of tenth overall, certainly not on the basis of the position that he plays.

As always, you can track me down on Twitter at @bcphockeyblog

Revisiting When Elite Players Breakout

2013-02-05T16:43:00.003-05:00

Nazem Kadri has been on fire to start the season, putting up an impressive 8 points in 9 games and creating chances seemingly on every shift. It's early, and I think we're a long way from being able to make anything approximating a conclusion based on statistical data, but a lot of Leafs observers, including myself, have been preaching patience with Kadri.

A while ago, I had a look at some milestones that we should be watching for if we expect our prospects to eventually reach the upper-echelons of NHL scoring. With Kadri off to a fast start, I thought it might be interesting to track his production relative to the development of other premier point producers.

Methodology:

What I did was pretty simple. I looked at every player who scored 70 or more points between 2008-09 and 2010-11, and then tracked a few key measures. First, I looked at their ages when they produced a 60+ point season, a 70+ point season and an 80+ point season. On the graph below, I divided the group by draft position to make the comparisons a little bit tidier.

Here are the results:

As we can see, the 6th - 10th position is a little out of whack with the standard trend which is clearly the result of having a small number of cases (only Selanne, Mikko Koivu, and Doan meet these criteria.) Aside from this aberration, the trend is fairly steady.

Nazem Kadri was drafted 7th overall and is currently 22-years old. Based on the chart above, we should expect Kadri to play 50+ games this season and probably to get close to putting up 60 or more points if he's ever going to become an elite point producer (a 60 point pace this year would be about 35 points in this truncated season.)

Also of interest, should Kadri ever become a 70-point scorer, we should expect that to occur sometime between 23 to 25 years of age. What this means, in my view, is that Kadri is well suited to be a key piece of this team whether they're able to ice a competitive product with the existing core, or if they should decide to move toward a more conventional rebuild.

That's the good news.

The bad news is how this data reflects on Leafs prospect Joe Colborne. Colborne has yet to play 50 NHL games in a single season and unless you think he's going to step into the lineup full-time next season and put up 60-points while making that transition then the data would suggest that he's unlikely to ever be a high-end point producer. This probably doesn't surprise many of you at this stage but when the Leafs acquired Colborne, he did seem to have the potential to get to that level, however unlikely.

Now there are a couple of things to take note of when considering this data, foremost among them is that this only takes into account those players who did produce at an elite level and not those who flounder. As such, the data here is better used as a development check than a predictive tool (ex. Kadri is on track, Colborne is not).

So far this year, Kadri has looked exceptional and has undoubtedly won over some of the skeptical set. If he can toss up a further 26 points in the remaining 39 games, he'll be right on track to be one of the better point-producing forwards in the NHL moving forward.

A Brief History Of Dave Nonis

2013-02-01T15:22:00.002-05:00

When Brian Burke was shown the door by Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment and Dave Nonis was named as his replacement it may have felt sudden but it was probably a transition that most saw coming to some extent or another. Nonis seemed to be doing an ever increasing amount of the legwork in the Leafs' front office and Burke was always quick to praise his assistant GM for the things he'd accomplished. In essence, the timing was odd but the change was not.

Having adjusted to the surprise of the timing of Burke's dismissal, we were then left to wonder whether this move signalled any change in direction for the franchise. I'm a big believer in not firing coaching or management staff unless you think you can get someone better or if there's some dissatisfaction with the philosophy of the individuals currently in place. In Burke's case, reports seem to suggest that he was let go largely based on his personality which isn't an answer that I'm particularly enamoured with but, be that as it may, the on-ice results were poor enough that it's tough to really take umbrage with his dismissal.

With Burke out and Nonis in, we're left to wonder what we should expect from our new GM and a little bit of history would probably be instructive in this regard. Nonis was General Manager of the Vancouver Canucks from 2004 until the end of the 2007-08 season when he was dismissed following a second season outside of the Western Conference playoff picture during his three year tenure. While his time in Vancouver may have been short, his track record is pretty close to being squeaky clean.

Trades

Out: Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen, Alex Auld

In: Roberto Luongo, Lucas Krajicek, 6th Round Pick

This deal was a clear win for Nonis and really solidified the one area that Burke had been entirely unable to address during his time in Vancouver. Nonis inherited the core of the team that has won the past two President's Trophies but it's fair to say that the acquisition of Luongo was the piece that truly put them over the top.

Out: Matt Cooke

In: Matt Pettinger

This is probably the ugliest of Nonis' transactions during his tenure as GM. Say what you will about Matt Cooke, he's an effective little rat and Pettinger's time in Vancouver was both brief and lacklustre.

Draft

2004

1st Round, 26th overall: Corey Schneider: Pretty tough to argue with that use of a late first at this stage

3rd Round, 91st overall: Alex Edler: Indisputably a great pick. Edler is a top-pairing defenseman.

The Canucks also drafted Mike Brown (5th Round) and Jannik Hansen (9th Round) in what you'd have to consider a pretty remarkable draft for the team.

2005

1st Round, 10th overall: Luc Bourdon: Tough to say what would have been had Bourdon not passed away following a motorcycle accident.

2nd Round, 51st overall: Mason Raymond: Once again, tough to argue with the pick. Yet another NHLer.

2006

1st Round, 14th overall: Michael Grabner: Perfectly adequate pick. Missed Giroux but so did a lot of people. Not many better names behind him.

2007

1st Round, 25th overall: Patrick White: With David Perron, Brendan Smith, and PK Subban all taken after White, it's fair to say this was a miss.

Signings

Alex Burrows: In 2006, Nonis signed Burrows to a 2-way deal and the rest is history. Without burning an asset, Nonis was able to add an effective member of Vancouver's top-6 group and a guy with a 35 goal season on his resume.

Willie Mitchell: Also in 2006, Nonis signed Willie Mitchell for less money and less term than Mike Komisarek and arguably, each probably had similar expectations. As it turns out, Mitchell has been infinitely more valuable to his teams than Komisarek has been to Toronto.

Those two were the only significant free agents that Nonis brought to Vancouver but on the bright side, he also doesn't have a history of handing out bad contracts. Suffice to say he'll have more financial flexibility in Toronto than he had in Vancouver and with that comes greater opportunity to sign facepalm-inducing deals. Whether or not his salary constraints saved him from himself is something that we'll have to wait and see on but his track record to date is certainly promising.

Conclusions

Nonis' time in Vancouver would have to be considered a resounding success. Of his two most prominent deals, one was a slam-dunk and the other while certainly a loss was far from being franchise altering. His draft record while in Vancouver was exceptional and his forays in the free agent market were successful and efficient.

Also of note, Nonis seems to believe in building from within. None of his moves involved significant prospects headed out of Vancouver which is something that should be promising for Leafs fans who have seen that movie far too often.

So far as GM of the Leafs, he's avoided moving Kadri for Luongo (assuming you believe the rumours) and has moved out veterans like Connolly and Lombardi to make room for some of Toronto's promising youngsters -- moves which suggest an eye for the long view.

If Nonis actually is MLSE's man moving forward, it looks like the franchise is in able hands. My only real concern is the possibility that the added financial wherewithal that comes with being GM of the Leafs may force Nonis into the same mistakes made by his predecessor and it isn't a major concern as there's no historical evidence on Nonis to suggest it will be the case. Suffice to say, we clearly have a GM at the helm who is, at minimum, competent at every significant portion of his job and it may not be long before this ship is finally on course.

Early Answers With The Toronto Maple Leafs

2013-01-30T20:15:00.001-05:00

6 games into the sprint that is the NHL’s lockout shortened regular season and we’re left with number of questions and very few answers. For example, when did Patrick Marleau start leaping tall buildings in a single bound and where does he hide his cape? How is Martin St Louis playing the best hockey of his career as he nears 38 years of age? And what has happened to the Philadelphia offense? (Hint: It wears number 68 and moved to Dallas).

As it relates to the Maple Leafs, not a whole lot is known at this point. Sitting with 3 wins and 3 losses the team has shown some glimpses of being a potential playoff team, while also demonstrating defensive lapses in line with their lottery pick of a year ago. Below are some of what we know and don't know as the early season marches on.

What we know

1.       Nazem Kadri is not going back to the AHL. With an impressive 6 points in 6 games (3G, 3A) Kadri is flashing some of the offensive potential that made him the 7^th overall draft pick in 2009. Nazem has that rare ability to slow down the pace of a game when he’s in possession of the puck, seemingly having an extra half second of decision making. It’s the type of offensive imagination and flair that fans have always pined for in Tyler Bozak as a first line center. If Kadri can continue his growth this season, you have to believe he’ll have a real opportunity to crack the first line heading into the 2013-14 season.

2.       Nikolai Kulemin has not regained his scoring touch. In 2010-11 Kulemin recorded a career best 30 goals and 27 assists. Last year he plummeted to only 7 goals, leaving many pundits to wonder what exactly happened to the well-rounded top 6 forward they had come to know. During the lockout Kulemin played alongside reigning Hart and Art Ross trophy winner Evgeni Malkin for Metallurg of the KHL, registering 38 points in 36 games. The expectation being that Kulemin could carry over some of this offensive momentum and reaffirm his position in the Leafs top 6. With zero goals through 6 games (he does have 5 assists) it appears his NHL scoring slump has carried forward to this season. He still brings accountability and effort to the defensive end, but on a team missing Joffrey Lupul and desperately in need of consistent scorers it remains to be seen if Kulemin can get back to form.

3.       Matt Frattin is a top-9 forward. Simply put Frattin has been a revelation in the early goings of the season. With 3 goals and 2 assists through only 3 games he has been producing at an astonishing clip while driving the net and creating offensive opportunities. His goal in overtime past Ryan Miller of the Sabres was exactly the type of the goal Frattin has made his hallmark with the Marlies of the AHL – going to the net with authority and speed. He plays a north-south game that is adaptable to almost any role within the top-9, possessing the speed and offensive abilities to contribute on both a scoring or checking line as needed. He appears to be fully healed from offseason knee surgery and poised to be a key cog in the Leafs forward group this season.

What we don’t know

1.       As much as things change they stay the same. After pin-balling back and forth between Ben Scrivens and James Reimer in net the goaltending situation remains murky in Toronto. Neither goalie has been able to grab anything more than a tenuous hold of the number one starting slot. With a team GAA of 3.29 it’s clear the Leafs are still in need of an NHL netminder. The hope is that either Reimer or Scrivens will grow into the role during the remaining 42 games of the truncated season - the more hockey I see the less likely this appears to be.

The positive in all this is that poor goaltending will no doubt improve our chance at landing one of the bevy of top prospects available in the 2013 draft class – stars in waiting such as defenseman Seth Jones and forward Nathan Mackinnon. However, long term a goalie is a must if the team is to challenge for a playoff spot. Whether the position is ultimately addressed through a trade for Luongo, or in the offseason, eventually Nonis will need to resolve the issue.

2.       What exactly James van Riemsdyk can be as a player. It took Randy Carlyle all of a week to call out JVR for his perceived lacklustre play. James responded with 2 goals in a spirited effort against the Pittsburgh Penguins. Van Riemsdyk comes to Toronto sporting an elite draft pedigree (2^nd overall in 2007 by the Flyers) but also with some unanswered questions. His potential was flashed only periodically in Philadelphia and injuries derailed much of his season in 2012-13. With an imposing frame and good offensive instincts he should be a consistent contributor on one of the top-2 lines.

What remains to be seen is exactly how good he can be. When driving the net and forcing himself into the proverbial ‘dirty’ areas of the ice, he's a handful for opposing defenders to manage. If he can maintain his compete level and find chemistry with Phil Kessel he may be an adequate replacement for Lupul while he tends to his broken arm in the coming weeks.

3.       What the future holds for Phil Kessel. It has been a sluggish start for the quiet star as he’s registered only 3 assists and no goals in 6 games despite registering some pretty impressive shot totals. This is hardly cause for concern (unless you ask Damien Cox) as Kessel has become known for his streaky scoring and I’m sure once he pots a goal or two they will start to come in bunches. Phil Kessel is quite literally the least of the Maple Leafs issues. He will be a UFA at the end of the 2013-2014 season, meaning that the team can begin negotiating an extension next year. It will be interesting to see how GM Dave Nonis (assuming he is still in his current role at the time of negation) manages Kessel’s contract.

If Phil produces offensively this season at a clip in line with his past years he will be looking for a contract in the 7 to 8 million dollar range over 5 to 6 seasons. Curt touched on the Kessel question, and how it hinges on where management expects the team to be in 2 or 3 years time. Essentially, if the Leafs believe they can be a contender during the next 4 to 5 years (Phil Kessel’s expected prime years as a hockey player) then they’ll likely need number 81 to be an integral part of the offense.

The Kessel Question

2013-01-28T13:08:00.000-05:00

In Monday's Toronto Star, Damien Cox did what Damien Cox does and wrote a piece designed to elicit strong disagreement or passionate approval; it is time, he suggests, to trade Phil Kessel.

While I don't agree with the assertion that Kessel looks "ill-conditioned, isolated [or] troubled", I do have some concerns that this team is running the risk of walking the line between a playoff spot and a realistic shot at a top pick. If you're a team that's building toward something then that doesn't necessarily mean that you move your top young goalscorer to get out of it but if you expect to be in this position for a while then maybe it does.

Kessel is 25-years old and a top-tier offensive player in the NHL. He has four consecutive years of 30+ goals and last season put up a point per game while playing all 82 in a fully healthy season. He probably has another 5 years of all-star level production ahead of him and possibly more depending on how sharply he regresses through his non-prime years.

The problem, as I see it, isn't with Kessel as a player so much as it is with the team as it sits today. Nobody is picking the Leafs to make the playoffs this year and while our system is improved from the group that Burke inherited, the real help (Percy, Rielly, Finn, Leivo) are still at least a couple of years away from being impact contributors. Kadri and Gardiner are both nice players who are still in their development years but neither are the type of player who can, in isolation, bring this team from where it is now to a team that will reliably be a playoff team in the Eastern Conference.

So what do you do if you're Nonis? Kessel is a year-and-a-half from unrestricted free agency and will almost certainly command an enormous contract. While I'm not willing to say that there's little hope he'd re-sign in Toronto or that he's unhappy here under the media spotlight, there is a chance that it's true.

Even if it isn't, is Kessel the kind of player you want to commit over 10% of your salary cap to? He's a very good offensive player but an argument could be made that when it comes to wins and losses, there may be a better way to spend that kind of cap space. The problem, of course, is finding that 'better way' which is a lot easier said than done.

What it all boils down to is, A) whether you think this team can move from one of the weaker teams in the East to a contender during Kessel's prime, and B) what the chances are of Kessel signing an extension that locks him up through his remaining peak years.

It's pretty clear that you're not going to get one-hundred cents on the dollar if you move Kessel but that's generally the price of a rebuild. The problem that arises when deciding whether or not we should deal Kessel at 25-years of age is that it's conceivable that this team could be good while he's still in his prime and then you're left having paid a dollar for two quarters and three dimes.

My personal opinion would be to wait and see what this offseason brings. If the year plays out more or less as it's begun, the Leafs will be adding a blue chip prospect to a group that already includes Morgan Rielly, Kadri will be emerging as a bonafide top-6 forward, Reimer will be solidifying himself as a legitimate starter in the NHL, and who knows, maybe Nonis is able to parlay the team's cap space into a top-line UFA. Either way, you'll have a much better idea of what kind of dollars Kessel is expecting on his next deal (and his willingness to stay in Toronto), and where the team stands moving forward.

I don't see what the rush is to ship Kessel out of Toronto. We'll have more information if we wait until the summer and with more information, we can make a better decision on what's best for the longterm health of the franchise.

Re-Evaluating Luongo To The Leafs

2013-01-23T15:57:00.002-05:00

Elite goaltending is tough to find. Top-tier goalies are almost never traded and rarely, it seems, hit unrestricted free agency. The only way to get an elite goaltender is to develop one, or to trade for Roberto Luongo at one of the 5-year intervals in which he seems to consistently find himself on the trade block.

With those assumptions in mind, I've been of the opinion that a trade for Roberto Luongo - particularly in light of the fact that he'd be dealt at a value that was far from commensurate to the value he provides a team - would be a good move for the Leafs. The team is more than one piece away, but this is a piece we can add now and we may not get another chance like this.

Over at Pension Plan Puppets there was a great fanpost that measured what the impact of Luongo's contract would be to the Leafs as it pertains to the cap re-capture formula. The post looks at what the cap penalty would be if he retired in each year of the deal and charts the results. In a nutshell, the penalties aren't all that significant.

So if the penalties aren't significant, the cost of acquisition is discounted, and Luongo is still a very good goalie (which in my opinion, he is) then it makes sense to make the move. Strike while the iron is hot, as it were.

Also at PPP, Steve Burtch had a look at how goalies age in an effort to see how many years of Luongo we were buying. His conclusion was that there was virtually no correlation between a goalie's age and performance which was certainly promising, on the face of it. Building off of this post, Eric T at NHL Numbers pointed out an oversight in the original post, namely, that survivorship bias was at work. The question shouldn't be whether your average 34-year old goalie is better than a given 28-year old but rather whether the same goalie was better at 28 than at 34. The conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that goalies tend to get worse as they age.

So if you're paying the price for Luongo, what are you buying? I think we can safely say that you're getting at least two years of performance that would be worth both the cost of acquisition as it pertains to outgoing assets as well as the cap-related cost of his contract. He's a good goalie today and the odds are that his play wont swan dive in the next year or two.

From there, it's tough to say what to expect from Luongo. He's due a pretty hefty sum of money from whoever holds his contract so I think we can safely assume that he wont be retiring for the next 6 or 7 years minimum, irrespective of performance. If his on-ice performance takes a serious tumble, you could be in for four years of a serious anchor contract, in addition to a cap recapture penalty that's more than nominal for a few years thereafter.

What we're left to consider is where the Leafs are in their own success cycle and I don't think it's necessary to weave a thorough argument in this regard: They're not a good team. Whether with Luongo or without him, this team is not among the top handful of teams in the Eastern Conference. Could they be a good team while Luongo is still more or less worth his cap hit? Possible but not something I'd want to bet on - especially given that you know Luongo is going to be a liability on the back-end of that deal at some stage or another.

The one consideration that could plausibly tilt the mental calculus in favour of a Luongo deal would be whether having a top-tier goalie improves your chance at landing an elite UFA like Corey Perry. When trying to attract free agents the two most important factors, generally speaking, are 1) dollars, and 2) the prospect of on-ice success. There's no doubt that the Leafs will have the financial flexibility to throw a heavyweight offer at a top UFA this summer but without Luongo, it will be tough to sell 'prospect of on-ice success'.

What I'm left thinking is that acquiring Luongo isn't something that I'm interested in, no matter the trade cost. If we were at a different point in the success cycle then I'm probably willing to absorb the back-end cost on Luongo's contract but that just isn't where we are. My inclination is to roll Scrivens and Reimer this year and figure out what we've got. If the answer is 'nothing' then it's a good draft and I can take solace in that. If the answer is 'something' then maybe we've saved ourselves some flexibility a handful of years down the line.

If there's one thing that Leafs fans have been trained to loathe since the last lockout it's uncertainty in goal, but another year of it might just be worth the clarity on the other side.

Kadri, Frattin And A Luongo Trade: If It Smells Like A Duck...

2013-01-08T14:59:00.003-05:00

Michael Traikos tweeted today that Matt Frattin would sit for tonight's Marlies game because of the upcoming training camp. No mention has been made of Nazem Kadri's status for tonight's game but no news generally means status quo so we can infer that Kadri will likely dress which raises some interesting questions as it pertains to the Leafs top forward prospects.

The first conclusion that we may draw is that the organization feels that Frattin is the more useful player at the NHL level in the short term. Statistically speaking, Kadri has more points in fewer games in the NHL than Frattin does but on its own, the difference (4 more points in 6 fewer games) isn't significant enough to say for certain whether this assessment is off-base.

Those who suggest that Frattin is a vastly superior defensive player and is thus better suited to a bottom-6 role may be surprised to find that the advanced numbers don't bear that argument out. Kadri, as it turns out, is a possession monster, posting the second best Corsi-Rel (10.9) on the team according to BehindTheNet. Frattin was 14th at -1.5. For the uninitiated, Corsi-Rel is a measure designed to capture a player's all-around game. It's basically shot +/- for when a player is on the ice compared against the team's shot +/- when they aren't.

If you think linemates were the difference, you're probably wrong there too. Kadri's most common linemate was Matthew Lombardi while Frattin's was Grabovski.

Furthermore, Kadri has outperformed Frattin in the AHL this season as well. Given that all of the recent data, all of the NHL level data, and future potential all seem to favour Kadri's move to the NHL, why does Frattin seem to have the inside track?

The least Tin-Foil Hat theory is that Kadri is playing tonight because it will only be his second game back since sustaining a concussion (or... erm... not a concussion) on Boxing Day. That's a good reason to keep him in the lineup and is certainly a plausible explanation. If you're convinced by this then Frattin doesn't necessarily have the inside track on an NHL roster spot and the Leafs may still be very happy with what they have in Kadri.

Another possibility is that the Leafs actually are more keen on having Frattin in camp than Kadri despite the evidence that Kadri is the superior player. Whether Burke is being tongue-in-cheek or not when he talks about the Leafs not being interested in advanced statistics is anyone's guess but if Frattin really is the Leafs Brass' Golden Child then we can probably start taking Burke at his word on this one. I'm a little less convinced on this possibility mainly because of Randy Carlyle.

When Kadri was an emergency call-up late last year and the Leafs couldn't keep him in the NHL once they had the requisite number of healthy bodies, Carlyle told Kadri that if he could keep him on the Leafs, he would have. If Carlyle liked Kadri that much then, and 6 months later having watched Kadri hover at a point-per-game pace in the AHL, I can't imagine his opinion would have dramatically changed.

Which leads us to our third possibility: that Kadri is one of the pieces headed West in a Luongo deal and thus, by default, Frattin is NHL-bound.

Vancouver was reportedly on a scouting trip and took in the Toronto Marlies last week (Kadri played Saturday night). Of the players currently playing regular minutes with the Marlies, only Kadri, Frattin, Colborne, and Blacker would qualify as assets of any real significance.

If this is the case and a deal appears close, why keep skating Kadri and risk injury? Wouldn't it make sense to pull him out of the lineup? Wait a minute. The Leafs are pulling Frattin out of the lineup.

This is all idle speculation at this point but the way the team is handling these two at the moment is certainly a cause for some raised eyebrows and the confluence of the Luongo rumours, Vancouver scouts' presence, and the strange behaviour around two of our most marketable AHL assets has me thinking that if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and smells like a duck... maybe it's a duck.

Kessel, Lupul, And a Scientific Look At The Elusive 'Prime' Years

2013-01-04T19:58:00.002-05:00

Everyone ages.

We all grow from infants to teenagers to adults and finish, if we're lucky enough to get there, as a member of the privileged elderly class enjoying a significant discount at all major restaurants. Throughout that process our bodies physical and athletic abilities develop and grow, eventually maximizing at a specific point in time commonly known as our “prime”.

In sports, all teams look to maximize the number of players on their roster that are currently enjoying their prime athletic years; conversely minimizing the number of players that are still developing and the ones that are physically declining leading towards inevitable retirement.

For the Maple Leafs, the contracts of Joffrey Lupul and Phil Kessel will be expiring at the end of 2013, forcing management to consider where they fall on the spectrum of an athlete’s climb and decline. The unrestricted free agent crop of 2013 (including Anaheim’s Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry) will also tempt the team to hand out significant money and term to star players.

The problem is, we can’t predict exactly when a player is at his best; nor when he will begin the inevitable decline. Each player is different and their individual development curve could differ from that of their peers. The use of statistical data can further muddy the waters, since numbers like goals, assists, power play points...etc can often be a result of opportunity, linemates, team situations, and other statistical noise.

Predicting these peak years becomes even more critical in a league like the NHL where the salary cap system increases a team's need to squeeze maximum performance out of its players for minimal dollars. Unlike Major League Baseball where teams have the ability to hide poor long term contracts to aging stars (if your pockets are deep enough) the National Hockey League doesn’t have that luxury. In the NHL if your team is burdened with a player past his physical prime, whilst still being paid marquee dollars there is no easy fix. Yes, you can try to package that player in a trade to another team or buy them out, but either way, you'll be paying the price for giving a player a contract that rewards a player for his prime years during the years where he's past his peak.

This is a dilemma that many teams could face once (if) the NHL and NHLPA can agree to a new collective bargaining agreement. The salary cap is rumoured to be moving from close to $70 million down to $60ish million. Teams like the Flyers, Canucks, Rangers and Bruins could find it difficult to sign certain RFAs and be a major player in free agency as a result of the slimmed down cap.

There will be a renewed focus by team management to hand out player contracts where they have a reasonable chance to perform in line with their pay cheque. Additionally, it’s expected that contracts will be limited to between 6 and 7 years in length, with a fixed percentage of yearly salary variance throughout the term of the contract. This should effectively end front loaded deals that dwindle in the latter years, which had allowed teams to circumvent the cap for star players. In the future, accurately determining the ‘prime’ years of a player --and paying him accordingly for that window-- will be paramount to success.

Last week I came across a research study published in August 2012 by the journal AGE. AGE is an international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes articles describing research in the biology of aging and research on biomedical applications that impact aging. Which, of course, has a lot to with sport and our current discussion on when athletes achieve their peak level of performance.

The study is entitled ‘Exponential growth combined with exponential decline explains lifetime performance evolution in individual human species’ (full article here). To quote the venerable Marty McFly, that’s “heavy” stuff. The basic concept of the study was to look at the physiological capacity of humans and how this changes with age. At birth we have close to zero capabilities that then increases to a maximum output and then decreases back to zero when we pass away. This applies for both physical and intellectual skills. In order to capture both aspects of human function and how it correlates to each, the researchers looked at performance of humans over 3 disciplines: chess, swimming, and track and field.

The data was collected over the course of 30 years beginning in 1980; looking at 13 Olympic sports (1392 subjects), 12 swimming events (815 subjects), and the careers of 96 chess grandmasters. In order to get a more broad view they looked at the individual career progressions of athletes as well as the world records and the age at which they were set.

The researchers admit to certain limitations with the study that couldn’t be successfully controlled for. This includes; the evolution of nutrition and training over the past 30 years that has allowed athletes to compete at an earlier age and for a longer period; medical improvements to injury and recovery; technological improvements, most notably swimsuit advancements; they failed to include Wayne Gretzky as one of the Chess Grandmasters, which is about the only way to explain 2857 career points.

Of course the biggest caveat from the vantage point of a Leafs fan is the study didn’t look directly at ice hockey as one of its data points. We can surmise certain concepts and possible conclusions from the results, but the study is certainly not definitive. For those of you already writing in the comments section “Oh yea, well what about Martin St. Louis”.... yes, we know he's old; that's what we call an 'outlier'.

The study concludes the age of peak performance for each of the 3 areas to be:

Track and Field: 26.0

Swimming: 21.0

Chess: 31.4

Looking at the 3 results we can’t take any one and apply it to completely to hockey, since the physical and mental elements of hockey overlap in part with all 3. There is the speed and strength dynamic of hockey that has become increasing important since the 2004 lockout that would be akin to the requirements of track and field and swimming. However, the NHL is also a significantly cerebral league, requiring players to constantly evaluate game situations, puck circulation, when it’s optimal to pass, shoot, check...etc. Of the 3 data points, only chess is 100% mental (if you ignore the strain of physically moving the pieces, which, come on).

Growing up I always understood the best years of a hockey players career to fall between age 26 and 32. Theoretically, this is when he has developed enough physically while also possessing the right amount of mental acuity and experience. The results of the study seem to add some degree of credence to this theory, if perhaps slightly adjusted. If a player is at or near his prime at 25, it’s reasonable to think that the mental aspect of hockey (in some ways similar to that of a chess player) would extend the prime years to close to 30.

It takes a couple of calculated inferences, but we can guess that a hockey player will generally enjoy his best years in the NHL between the age of 25 and 30. This can vary significantly where opportunity, injury, and team situation either positively or negatively affect a player at different points in his career.

Below are the ages of the 4 players mentioned earlier:

Phil Kessel – 26

Joffrey Lupul – 29

Ryan Getzlaf – 27

Corey Perry – 27

What’s exciting about all 4 is that they fall within our theoretical ‘prime’ years. The question for Brian Burke and Leafs management will be how much to offer each (in the case of Perry and Getzlaf, if they become UFAs).

Phil Kessel, at 26, should produce at a relatively constant rate over a 4 to 5 year contract, helping to mitigate the risk in giving him a longer deal. Conversely, Joffrey Lupul will pose a risk on a long term agreement, depending on the contract and cap hit. There is value in a player, even when he is in his declining years; the trick is to make sure he isn’t still being paid to be the player he was when he was in his prime during the years while he's not. The big question with Lupul is whether he is willing to take a contract more in line with his expected performance going forward, or if his new-found success in Toronto has played him out of the city.

Determining a players ‘prime’ years, even when rooted in scientific results, is still ultimately an educated guess. GMs are forced to look at a number of individual player factors, while also considering overall team issues such as budgets and where they are in the success cycle. In the end, the best teams --the ones that have enjoyed success over the past 5 to 8 years-- have been able to find a good mix of entry level contracts and affordable veterans to surround their star players. Not every contract on your books needs to be efficient but you do need to be sure that if you're going to overpay for a free agent, that you can insulate him with some guys who will outperform their own deals.

The plight of many GMs is a veteran player who signed a long term deal as a star and has since faded can severely constrict a team and lead to a prolonged rebuilding stage. However, a 21 or 22 year old performing at close to their peak level on an ELC can result in substantial cap flexibility.

While the pre-salary cap NHL used to reward free agents for what they had accomplished in the past, the new NHL is relying increasingly on expected future production in determining contract values. Understanding when players decline (and by how much) is one of the principle keys to running an effective front office. The decisions that Burke makes on players like Lupul who are about to see their skills erode will be critical when it comes to creating an efficient team-wide salary structure moving forward.