"You know what I'm going to get you next Christmas, Mom? A big wooden cross, so that every time you feel unappreciated for your sacrifices, you can climb on up and nail yourself to it."

Chris Pronger is now trying to make himself out as a martyr for his family. Yes, it is us big, bad Oilers fans who are out to destroy you, Chris. You were totally professional about things, what with the skipping town, letting your agent make the request the night before the draft, leaking the story to the media, and giving a Bill Clinton-esque performance at your "press conference"... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Hat tip to Mirtle for the story.


At least I have my own new nickname for the guy: Mom.


In other news, Ken Holland wins the non-existent "steal of the off-season award" for his signing of Dominik Hasek. Money has not been disclosed, but everyone seems to think it is in the 500K to 1.5 million range, with lots of incentives. As Avi noted to me in an email entitled Damn Red Wings, "Detroit will now have the best dollars-to-performance ratio for goaltending in the league." I couldn't agree more. And before any of you start complaining about his age and his injuries, take a look at the number-one goalie on our depth chart.

I haven't done this in a while, so I thought I would update it. I can't let Lowetide have all the speculative fun.

This is a depth chart. I have placed the players in the positions that the Oilers list them in. Lupul is in blue, because he is still unsigned. My assumption is that they will move either him or Pisani into the LW slot on the 2nd line, but I'm leaving it open because I don't want to have more people telling me that I have guys in the wrong positions. Sykora is in red, and is a rumoured signing. The players in orange are the Oilers top prospects, players who will likely fill out this year's roster.

(click image to enlarge)

The roster is top-heavy, which is leading some to believe that K-Lowe will make a trade for a defenceman. Torres seems to be the number one rumour. I remain unconvinced that Lowe is looking for a defenceman. I still think the plan is to go with a Sabres-like roster, rolling four good lines and a serviceable defensive core. That being said, there isn't enough room for all the forwards, assuming that at least two kids make the roster. So who knows? If no one is moved, it will certainly make for an interesting training camp.

I should also note that the big question mark for me with this roster is not the defence. It's Roloson. Will he be able to play like he did in the playoffs? Will his knee hold up? Will he be able to keep his helmet on for longer than five minutes at a time? To me, THIS is the big gamble. It's of course accentuated by a defensive core missing Chris Pronger, but if Rolli doesn't hold up Oilers fans are going to be choking back bile all year long.

I'm going on a quest for fun. A Mancation. And I won't be back for three whole days. If the Sykora deal, or this rumoured Sabres/Oilers/Canucks three-way, go down while I'm gone, well then f*#@k it. Someone else will have to cover it. I'll be mad, because I like writing about threesomes, but what can I do? I gotta see a man about a Moose, and not even a--I believe the word is ménage à trois-- is gonna stop me. Camp Northstar, Wally World, here I come!!!

I'm attempting to keep in mind that this is on European ice, against non-NHLers, but this YouTube clip of Alexei Mikhnov has me dying for an agreement between the NHL and the Russian Ice Hockey Federation. I don't know if I've ever seen a player that big skate that fast. Makes you wonder if Lowetide is correct, and a bunch of Oilers forwards are going to be moved. I'm also a big fan of the soundtrack to this clip. Its got a Scorpions vibe going on that makes me want to both smash things and make sweet love to a hobo.

Here's another site looking at salaries and team caps. The format is solid, and the numbers seem right. Hat tip to Off Wing Opinion.

Six-year deal, which is fantastic. RiversQ tells us that Team 1260 is reporting $24-26 million for the deal, which I like even more. That is $4+ million a year. It's a big raise now, but by year three, or even two, it will be a flat out steal of a deal.

Personally, I think this sort of contract will be the way of the future with GMs and their own homegrown talent. The player gets the security of knowing that his money won't be eaten up by incoming free agents, and the teams don't have to worry about losing the player in two years because of ridiculous offers from elsewhere. A win/win for both sides.

I'm exaggerating a bit, but I don't know whether to laugh or cry at Steve Simmons' column this morning: Welcome to the expensive world of arbitration.

The good thing, I suppose, is that he has assessed the effect of salary arbitration quite correctly. Notwithstanding the club's right to walk away from any award, arbitration perverts what you might roughly call "the market" because neither the willingness nor the ability of the Club to pay are taken into account.

[Put more broadly (let's see if I can get macndub on my ass again), salary arbitration neutralizes one of the features (for the consumer) of a free market, which is that an abundance of any particular commodity will tend to depress the price of that commodity. That is: if Daniel Briere was an unrestricted free agent, his salary would depend greatly on whether there were one, five, or thirty teams interested in his services. Furthermore, his salary would also depend greatly on whether there were twenty, ten, or zero other players available offering comparable services.

Salary arbitration is blind to these factors: all the arbitrator can do is look at comparable players who have signed contracts and assign Briere a salary that is "fair".]

Anyway, the problems with Simmons' column are that I'm not exactly sure (A) what his gripe is; (B) what his proposed solution might be; and (C) if he's actually serious, or merely playing devil's advocate (or professional complainer). This is his conclusion:

What this CBA does is protect the league and its franchises, but not the makeup of rosters, if you understand the distinction. The league will tell you this is working properly.

In Buffalo and Phoenix and New Jersey and even with the lunatic fringe on Long Island, many will disagree.

Of course it's working properly. Simmons uses the weasel-phrase "many will disagree", so as I noted, I'm not sure if he's standing behind his own complaint here. But let's assume he is. He makes a couple of statements that are pretty tough to reconcile:

[1] When there was no salary cap, teams like the Maple Leafs and Red Wings and Stars could buy anything and everything they wanted, and that's how Bill Guerin wound up as one of the highest paid players in hockey.

[2]You see, left to his own devices, Buffalo general manager Darcy Regier probably could have made a reasonable deal with Briere. But that's where the sting comes in.

You're not left to your own devices.

Back in 2003 or whenever, Stars GM Doug Armstrong was left to his own devices, and entered into a big money contract with Bill Guerin. I can only assume this arrangement was made freely by both parties, to what they believed to be their mutual benefit. Guerin's salary as a UFA did not bind any other GMs to pay other players the same amount, a la Martin Havlat ("So, the minute the geniuses who run the Chicago Blackhawks overpay for Martin Havlat -- a player comparable to Briere -- the cost is no longer in Regier's control, or budget.") And yet clearly Simmons thinks that Guerin's contract was a problem.

So what the hell does Simmons mean by Darcy Regier's own devices? Since it's clearly not the ability to freely negotiate a salary that pleases both Regier and Briere, he must mean the leverage of being able to say, "Mr. Briere, you will play for what I offer you or not at all." Mustn't he?

But back to his conclusion: he appears to be lamenting the fact that a team that drafts (or otherwise acquires) a lot of young players who make The Leap at the same time cannot afford to keep them all, and keep their roster intact. Fans of many teams will sympathize with this general statement (Edmonton c. 87-91, Calgary c. 91-96, Ottawa c. 2006, etc.). These same fans were allowed (or encouraged) to think, during the lockout, that a salary cap would mean this would never be a problem.

But the only way to accomplish this business of protecting roster makeup is to divorce player compensation from performance, past and anticipated. The system that allows a team to keep a host of players who perform well is the system that does not reward those good performances.

Maybe that's the Simmons solution. Extend the rookie salary scale to age 27 (or 31, or 35, whatever) so that all players are paid for their age and years of service. The Clubs ("both the competent and the incompetent") are happy, right? The fans are happy, right? The players will still make a great living relative to Joe Sixpack, so they're happy, right? I can't see any terrible unintended consequences arising from this system. And if there are, then the League, media, and fans can just bully the players into accepting some new and other restrictions to "fix it".

First off, I'm told by a reliable source that the NHLPA is taking a hands-off approach to individual arbitration hearings, and it is the Agent's job to make the player's case. This is the right thing for them to do given the conflict of interest they have, but it nevertheless must be an uncomfortable (and tacit, one presumes) admission that they really can't take a keen interest in the compensation of their individual members.

Second, in that previous post on Arbitration, I was working under the assumption that it is now Final Offer Arbitration, where the Club and the Player both submit a proposed salary, and the Arbitrator is bound to select one number or the other (Tyler says the same thing here). However, upon closer reading of the CBA (Article 12) and the various news stories on the action so far, I'm no longer sure that that's the case. There's no language to that effect (that I can find) in the CBA, and the stories on (for example) Briere and York aren't specific on whether those players Won or Lost, nor on the salaries requested by either party.

Anyway, I still have some confusion on that issue; apologies if I added to yours. (And if you know of a link where this is explained in black & white, please drop it in the comments).

And lastly, NHL watchers are having a laff (and rightly so) that it was Mike Milbury standing up for the Isles at Mike York's arbitration hearing. Larry Brooks was one of them, but something else in his piece struck me as even more ridiculous:

It's true, Milbury remained mute throughout the session at which hired-gun attorney Larry Bertuzzi argued for management that York should take a $1.05M pay cut from the $2.05M he earned last season while finishing fourth on the team in scoring (13-39-52, minus-9), but still, where was anyone from the crack Board of Directors and what does this say about the fired GM's ongoing influence with the owner and what does this tell us about the owner's judgment?

Emphasis mine: the Islanders' submitted a proposed salary for Mike York of $1M? What? Huh? This can't be true, can it?

If I was inclined to defend Charles Wang re: the events of last week, I would have roughly said that there are no Definites in pro sports; just because no one has successfully run a team like that before doesn't mean that it's impossible and/or doomed to failure (i.e. New always looks Stupid); and that Garth Snow may end up being better than a whole lot of NHL GMs, in spite of his lack of experience. But a submission of $1M for Mike York's salary at arbitration is hard evidence of pure incompetence. They might as well not have shown up, for all the credibility they must have had in front of the Arbitrator.

Here is the Edmonton Oilers All-Time Roster. Excluding the two in this picture, name your Top 5 European Oilers.

Another arbitration avoided. Two-year deal. I see no money amounts yet.

In additional news, the Oilers signed prospect Tom Gilbert.

Oh, and Geordi Laforge got a four-year extension yesterday, as well. So much for Friday being "take out the trash day." That's a good couple of days for the organization.

***Update*** It's $4.4 million over 2 years.

I know Sportsnet/CP is trying to create a story out of the fact that so many Oilers from last season are no longer with the team, but cmon. First off, the only player who has left that wasn't an unrestricted free agent is Chris Pronger. Secondly, Lowe signed two of his three free agent priorities (Roloson and Pisani). Thirdly, Dvorak still hasn't signed with anyone, so you're lying. And lastly, when you include Ty Conklin in order to build up your argument, you're essentially admitting that you have no case at all. So here's my suggestion: stick with facts, rather than making up fiction.

Unlike my last beast, I'll make this one short. Check out mc79hockey. You'll never be the same.

"We've tried to do what's right for the 700 guys and put our association in the right direction." -- Trevor Linden

With arbitration hearings starting today for ~47 players, I thought I'd bore you all by pointing out that the interests of the majority of NHLPA members would be best served if the players lost every single ruling.

I've gone over this before, but since total player compensation is fixed by the CBA, every dollar from any individual contract comes straight off the bottom line of every other player. More for the other guy means less for you, period. This is from Article 12 (Arbitration) of the CBA:

Participation at the Hearings.

A player shall be represented at the Hearing by the NHLPA unless the NHLPA chooses to delegate its authority in whole or in part, with the Player's consent, to the Player's Representative.

So for the next week, the NHLPA is in a position where it is supposed to advocate for the financial interest of a small minority of its members at the direct expense of a large majority of its members. If you're Daniel Briere, you gotta be feeling great right now, no?

The wording of that clause certainly suggests that it's up to the union, not the player, whether the player's interest is represented by his own personal agent. I don't know how it works in practice, but if I'm (say) Joffrey Lupul, I'm doing whatever I can to ensure that my agent is in that room, since he actually has a financial incentive to win.

APPENDIX:
It's tempting to sort of shrug at this; I'm not trying or expecting to elicit outrage (ooooh, if Ladislav Nagy wins his case, that's one less ivory back-scratcher for Alexei Yashin). But I'll take a quick run at the financial implications for, as a random example, new NHLPA Executive Committee member Wade Redden.

• Total player compensation will be ~$1.2B, which is ~54% of ~$2.2B in NHL revenues
• Redden makes $6.5M, which is ~(1/185th) of total player compensation, i.e. for every $185 in player compensation given to someone else, Redden pays $1.
• I count 43 players remaining on the arbitration list. There's not too many elite guys; I'm guessing for most of them, the difference between what they're requesting and what the club is offering is about ~$500k. For the bigger names (Briere, Hemsky, Nagy, etc.) that difference might be closer to $1M. I'm just going to flat out guess that the avg. difference is $600k
• In other words, the grand total difference between asked and offered for the 43 players is about $25.8M.
• So, if every player won their case, the amount surrendered by Wade Redden would be:

You can scale that figure up and down for every other player under contract in the league.

The one saving grace for players headed into arbitration hearings is that the NHLPA does have one major incentive to perform well, and that's self-preservation. If the PA is not perceived by individual players as committed advocates on their behalf, then the rumbles will really start to grow about exactly what it is they're good for anyway. Negotiating a % once every few years? Administering a retirement plan?

"Opinions are great—don't get me wrong. They're great for starting research projects. Then you go study and see if you can prove the opinion or not. But when placing multi—million dollar bets on future outcomes, opinions are wholly unsatisfactory. Opinions as conversation starters are fine. Opinions as conclusions are very bad. I started research projects to discern the objective “why.” I wanted to know why certain teams won and why other teams lost; why certain drafts produced big stars and others didn't. This was the naïve question at work."

Continue reading "On Powerplay"...
PREAMBLE
Over the next little while, I am going to look at the Edmonton Oilers powerplay during the Stanley Cup Finals. The complete post is enormously large (surprise!). I started out with an opinion on the Oilers powerplay in the Finals, but had no idea if the evidence would support it. I have seen the numbers, the only numbers I was able to scrounge up, and now have more of a clue on how right and wrong I was. But I have no idea concerning the full validity or value of these numbers, or my thoughts. At this point, I am still the naive questioner searching for answers. Hopefully, these posts will bear some fruit. They took me an enormous amount of time to do, so I hope they are also of some value to others, even if the value is in how poorly the examination was performed.

---

Part I: The Opinion
During the Stanley Cup Finals between the Carolina Hurricanes and the Edmonton Oilers, there was a great deal of debate and discussion about the Oilers powerplay. Personally, I had been frustrated by the Oilers powerplay all season long, as it seemed entirely predicated on one, and only one, strategy: get the puck to the point. The strategy worked fairly well through the first three rounds, and the Oilers were able to score timely powerplay goals. In fact, they scored a powerplay goal in 13 of their first 17 playoff games.

Oilers Playoff Rounds
	Game 1	Game 2	Game 3	Game 4	Game 5	Game 6	PP Success/Total	PP Success/%
vs. Detroit	2/6	0/3	1/9	2/9	1/4	2/6	8/37	21.6%
vs. San Jose	1/5	0/2	1/6	1/5	3/7	0/5	6/30	20%
vs. Anaheim	1/5	1/3	2/7	1/8	0/6	NA	5/29	17.2%

The powerplay had stalled in the Finals, however, as Carolina adjusted to what was, at least to my mind, the Oilers singular powerplay strategy. I was of course furious about this lack of diverse planning, as I had been all year long. Other, more moderate voices, however, suggested that the powerplay was getting better, and would come through to make a difference in the end. I didn't believe them. In between Game 5 and Game 6, I contacted Tyler and Avi, who I both knew to be statistical nutbars. An opinion was brewing in my head, and I wanted to be able to validate it. Here's how it all broke down, in present tense:

• I am intrigued by the assertion that the Oilers powerplay is getting "closer". I disagree.

• Other than Hemsky's goal in Game 5, when was the last time someone other than a player on the point took a shot on the Oilers powerplay?

• I would bet that over 80% of the Oilers shots on the powerplay throughout this series, if not throughout the entire playoffs, have been taken from the defensive side of the hashmarks.

• Based on what I know about hockey and basketball, but admittedly without much data to back me up, I want to identify those shots as being low percentage shots due to variables like distance and traffic.

• I also want to identify that a high volume of shots taken from the point also lowers their effectiveness, despite the quality of the shot-taker, due to their predictabilty.

• It also seems to me that the strategy is a waste of the talent within those players north of the hashmarks, but that probably demands a type of analysis that I am unqualified to perform.

• I want to know if anyone keeps a running tab of shots in the NHL, like they do in the NBA. I am sure stats companies do, but is any of it public? Like this:



• The NBA shot chart allows me to see the shots broken down by quarter, by distance, by location, and by shooter. It also tells me which shots were made, and which shots were missed.

• What is guiding my thought process here is indeed the NBA. If a team took 80% of its shots from beyond the 3-point arc, with two defenders always in their face, they would be crucified by players, coaches, managers, reporters, fans, and even casual observers. And they would be crucified, even if they had Michael Jordan and Larry Bird taking those shots. They would be attacked even more if they had a solid supporting cast in higher percentage shooting areas that weren't taking the easier shots. Essentially, I think this is what the Oilers are doing, even though not even Chris Pronger is as good as Jordan or Bird.

• I am also aware that the NBA and NHL are two very different games, and the analogy may therefore be tenuous at best. But it is the best way I could think of to describe it.

• I suppose that at the end of the day, the success of a powerplay can be broken down into sheer results. We got one more goal in Game 5 than we did in the previous three games, so I guess it did, indeed, get better. Maybe my question really should be, "Is a poor coaching strategy inhibiting the powerplay from being even better than it currently is or becoming?"

---

These were the thoughts, questions and opinions running around in my head. I knew already that the guys at Hockey Analytics had done some work on shot quality, showing that indeed distance does matter. I also knew that Tyler had done some work in relation to shot quality and goaltending, but that it was different from the answers I was trying to find. Tyler has now done some more work, focusing on the powerplay, and more powerplay, but again it doesn't really cover the things I want to know. It's probably best that he didn't cover them actually, as he knew I was working on this, and I'd be forced to kill him if he posted on it before me.

Anyway, I was seemingly on my own, and would have to figure out the answers to my questions myself. So I did what any sane person looking for information on the NHL would do. I typed in www.NHL.com. And that is where my problems began.

---

"My chief aim in this work has been thoroughness..."

--Immanuel Kant, The Critique of Pure Reason

Part II: The Barriers
So what exactly was I looking for? Well, to be precise, I wanted to know where shots were taken from, their distance, and who was taking them. For every game of the Stanley Cup Finals. Once I had those, I would create a series of tables, and analyze the results. I went to NHL.com, and couldn't find a shot chart. I went to TSN, SportsNet, and Yahoo! Sports as well. Nothing. The best I could find were the play-by-play reports on NHL.com. The play-by-play reports for each game gave me some valuable information, including the time of the powerplay shot, the shooter, the type of shot, and the distance of the shot. But there were many other problems with the play-by-play reports, such as:

• They identified three kinds of powerplay shots--shots that made it through, shots that were blocked, and shots that were missed. But they didn't provide the same information for each one of these shot kinds.

• They did not tell me exactly where the shot was taken from for any of the shot kinds. They only provided distances.

• For missed powerplay shots, they didn't tell you either the distance or location.

• For blocked shots, they didn't provide the shooter, the distance, or the location.

All of these things created problems. Only providing shot distances was inadequate, because it didn't give you a full picture on the quality of those shots. Obviously no number tells you the complete story, but it would at least help to know whether a shot taken "14 feet" away is being taken from directly in front of the net, or from along the side boards. Missed powerplay shots didn't have a distance or a location listed with them, which makes them almost completely useless to look at in relation to shot quality, and therefore powerplay efficiency. And it simply blew my mind that blocked shots didn't have a distance, location, or even a shooter listed with them. It listed the blocker of the shot, but that is all. So, even though I had my suspicions that Kevyn Adams was blocking a fair share of Chris Pronger's shots from the point, because he was listed as blocking quite a few shots and I knew he played on Pronger's side on the powerplay, I couldn't in fact prove it. Exasperating, to say the least.*

I went ahead with my plans anyway, knowing full well that I might not be able to find the answers I was looking for, but hoping that I could at least gain something else from the experience (I should also note that my plan after failing to find the shot charts was to create some shot charts myself, but the further I moved along the more convinced I became of the impossibility of such a venture). The very next thing I did, after finding the play-by-play reports, was try and determine the dimensions of the NHL hockey rink. I wanted to see if the distances gave me any idea of where the shots were coming from. I eventually found up-to-date dimensions on the NHL Officials page, and a bit of an explanation for them in the NHL Rule Book.



Looking at the map, I found that there is 75 feet between the backboards and the blueline. I discovered that the distance from the goal line straight out to the slot is 20 feet. The distance between the blueline and the goal line is 64 feet, so I started with the assumption that a decent shot is anything under half that distance, 32 feet or less. Having that information, as well as the incomplete information from the play-by-play reports, I began inputting the data into Excel spreadsheets.

I was almost done inputting the data for Games 1 to 5, and beginning to see some mildly interesting things, when I got an email from Tyler. He told me that the distances the NHL provides in the play-by-play reports are the subject of some controversy. Apparently Vic insisted that they are measured from the backboards, rather than from the goal line. Tyler disagreed, noting that it made no sense to calculate them in that manner. I hadn't even thought of it myself, completely assuming that they were being calculated from the goal line. Yet I knew there was a way I could verify how the shot distance was being calculated. In Period 3 of Game 1 of the Finals, Ales Hemsky had scored a beautiful goal on the powerplay. He had done so by dancing around a couple of players, and then deking out Cam Ward on the goal line to score. If Tyler and I were correct, the goal would be marked at a distance near or around 0 feet. If Vic was correct, the goal distance would be identified at around 11 feet. I took a peak at my spreadsheet...and saw that Vic was correct. Hemsky's goal was listed at 12 feet.

I took the night off after that one. While in hindsight I understand how the NHL would think to tabulate the distance in this manner--they might think that they would be forced into noting that Wayne Gretzky scored a ton of points from a negative distance--it also seems counter-intuitive. If the point is to score a goal on a net, couldn't and shouldn't the distance be marked as the space between said net and the player, regardless of where he is on the ice? Doesn't a combination of a distance from the player to the goal, as well as a shot chart to provide locational context, solve the problem in a simple manner? Of course the real problem was that I couldn't even find an explanation on how the NHL calculates shot distances. I still don't know for sure. All I have to go on is the numbers they do provide, and my memory of that one goal. Like with the rest of my statistical hunting for this project, I found the whole thing preposterous.

Once I got back at it, I had to redo some of my numbers, based on the fact that I now had to declare anything under 37.5 feet to be a decent shot. It changed my findings, in a dramatic manner. Shots in the 32-37.5 foot range, which I had initially marked down as poor shots, now made the quality cut. I countered this by adding a new range of quality shots, that being the distance from the backboards to the face-off dot in the offensive zone. 31 feet and less. This creates a problem at least once, but you'll see that later.

Near the completion of entering the redone information for Games 1-5, I discovered, thanks to Avi, shot charts. Ahhh. At last. Shot charts. From CBS Sportsline. Initially I was ecstatic, because they looked similar to the NBA charts.



I could see where the shots were taken from, see who took them, and see all it by period or grand total. If I moved my mouse over the X's and O's, I could even see what zone of the net the shot was taken on. My plan was to simply cross the data I had already found with these shot charts. I still wouldn't have all the information about missed shots and blocked shots, but I would at least have a clearer idea on the shots that got through to Cam Ward. I thought I might even be able to expand my scope, and see where Carolina were taking their powerplay shots from, as a point of comparison.

That plan didn't last for very long. It took me about an hour, but I eventually realized the shot charts on CBS didn't square with the official play-by-play reports of the NHL. For one thing, the shot times didn't align. It wasn't just that CBS kept track of the time by counting down, like European hockey clocks, rather than up, like the NHL clock. The times were just off, often noticeably off. For another, the CBS chart was giving credit to players for shots that the NHL did not give. The total number of shots were the same, but the shooters themselves differed. I was foiled yet again. If I had come upon the CBS site first, I probably never would have been aware of the discrepancies, and gone about my business in a happy but ultimately erroneous manner. But I had come across the official-play-by-play results of the NHL first, and was therefore back to square one. The irony wasn't lost on me, either, that the existence of incomplete, scattered, mostly useless, but official NHL statistics had ruined my chances of getting the information I needed from a more complete, valuable, but non-official source at CBS.

Fed up with it all, I stopped doing the work. I wouldn't pick it up again for a few weeks. By that time, the Oilers had lost the Stanley Cup.


*As I went to post this tonight, I decided to take another look at the stats on NHL.com. I took a look again at the offensive supersheets and the shift charts. I was suddenly terrified that the information had been there for me all along, and I had just missed it. The offensive supersheets list blocked shots and missed shots by who shot them, which is at least an upgrade from the play-by-play reports for the blocked shots. But you can't tell if the shots were taken on the powerplay or at even strength, and you don't know distance or location. You also don't know what period they were blocked or missed in. Even cross-referencing them with the shift charts won't work, because the players taking the missed and blocked shots on the powerplay are probably playing at the same time. I may be wrong, but I think the full information is still missing. To be honest, I hope it is now. If it is there for me to see, I'm going to have to re-write the remaining three posts. I think I'd rather die than have to do that.

---

"Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas. One seeks the most general ideas of operation which will bring together in simple, logical and unified form the largest possible circle of formal relations."

--Albert Einstein, New York Times, on the death of Emmy Noether

Part III: The Numbers
Legend

• Red Font Indicates Canes Player Blocking Powerplay Shot
• Blue Font Indicates Oilers Powerplay Goal
• Purple Font Indicates Missed Powerplay Shot
• Shots Blocked And Missed Do Not Indicate Where They Were Shot From
• Blocked Shots Do Not Indicate Who Shot, But Who Blocked
• 37.5 Feet Is Half The Distance From The Blueline To The End Board
• 31 Feet Is The Distance From The End Boards To The Line On Which The End Zone Faceoff Circles Are Placed
• I Do Not Differentiate Between a 5 on 4 and a 5 on 3 Powerplay
• I Count The Goalpost As A Shot, Not As A Missed Shot Like The NHL
• * Indicates My Own Determination Of Shot Distance

---

Oilers Powerplay Shots: Game 1
1st Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	2:48	Smyth	Wrist Shot	36 feet
Missed Shot	4:01	Pisani	Wide of Net
Shot	15:03	Smyth	Tip-In	14 feet
Blocked Shot	15:20	Wesley
Missed Shot	15:26	Spacek	Wide of Net
Blocked Shot	15:34	Wesley
Shot	16:45	Stoll	Slapshot	49 feet
Blocked Shot	17:03	Commodore
Blocked Shot	18:19	Ward
2nd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
3rd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Blocked Shot	2:33	Wesley
Shot	3:16	Bergeron	Wrist Shot	38 feet
Shot	9:09	Stoll	Wrist Shot	29 feet
Shot	9:22	Hemsky	Snap Shot	13 feet
Shot	9:24	Hemsky	Snap Shot	10 feet
Goal	13:31	Hemsky	Backhand	12 feet
Summary
	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period	Total
Shots Missed	2	0	0	2
Shots Blocked	4	0	1	5
Shots Through	3	0	5	8
Total Shots On Net	9	0	6	15
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	2	0	4	6
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	1	0	1	2
Shots Through From <31 Feet	1	0	4	5
Powerplay Success/Game	1 for 7
Powerplay Success/%	14%
Total Powerplay Time	11:12
Game 1 Play-By-Play
Game 1 Scoresheet
Game 1 GameCenter

Oilers Powerplay Shots: Game 2
1st Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Blocked Shot	4:07	Wesley
Blocked Shot	4:45	Hedican
Blocked Shot	5:17	Ward
Blocked Shot	5:20	Ward
Blocked Shot	7:23	Brind'Amour
Missed Shot	13:15	Samsonov	Wide of Net
Missed Shot	14:10	Pronger	Wide of Net
Shot	19:46	Spacek	Slapshot	60 feet
Blocked Shot	19:49	Hedican
Missed Shot	19:59	Horcoff	Wide of Net
2nd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	0:12	Hemsky	Snap Shot	36 feet
Shot	12:45	Samsonov	Snap Shot	11 feet
Missed Shot	12:56	Pisani	Wide of Net
3rd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Missed Shot	9:19	Spacek	Over the Net
Shot	14:21	Pronger	Slapshot	46 feet
Missed Shot	14:25	Spacek	Wide of Net
Missed Shot	16:00	Torres	Wide of Net
Summary
	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period	Total
Shots Missed	3	1	3	7
Shots Blocked	6	0	0	6
Shots Through	1	2	1	4
Total Shots On Net	10	3	4	17
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	0	2	0	2
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	1	0	1	2
Shots Through From <31 Feet	0	1	0	1
Powerplay Success/Game	0 for 6
Powerplay Success/%	0%
Total Powerplay Time	11:34
Game 2 Play-By-Play
Game 2 Scoresheet
Game 2 GameCenter

Oilers Powerplay Shots: Game 3
1st Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	6:59	Stoll	Slapshot	60 feet
Shot	7:53	Smyth	Slapshot	13 feet
Missed Shot	7:55	Smyth	Wide of Net
Blocked Shot	12:45	Larose
Missed Shot	13:03	Pronger	Wide of Net
Missed Shot	13:25	Pronger	Wide of Net
Blocked Shot	13:34	Ward
Blocked Shot	13:42	Wesley
Blocked Shot	14:06	Commodore
Missed Shot	17:40	Hemksy	Wide of Net
2nd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	2:06	Spacek	Slapshot	57 feet
Blocked Shot	2:33	Adams
Missed Shot	8:03	Smyth	Wide of Net
Blocked Shot	8:39	Adams
3rd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	3:21	Pronger	Slapshot	55 feet
Missed Shot	3:47	Pronger	Wide of Net
Shot	4:14	Pronger	Slapshot	54 feet
Missed Shot	4:20	Pronger	Wide of Net
Summary
	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period	Total
Shots Missed	4	1	2	7
Shots Blocked	4	2	0	6
Shots Through	2	1	2	5
Total Shots On Net	10	4	4	18
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	1	0	0	1
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	1	1	2	4
Shots Through From <31 Feet	1	0	0	1
Powerplay Success/Game	0 for 7
Powerplay Success/%	0%
Total Powerplay Time	12:44
Game 3 Play-By-Play
Game 3 Scoresheet
Game 3 GameCenter

Oilers Powerplay Shots: Game 4
1st Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Blocked Shot	10:37	Adams
Shot	11:32	Pisani	Tip-In	26 feet
Missed Shot	11:44	Horcoff	Wide of Net
Shot	16:23	Peca	Wrist Shot	33 feet
Shot	16:37	Pronger	Slapshot	45 feet
Shot	17:14	Stoll	Slapshot	52 feet
Shot	17:30	Stoll	Slapshot	46 feet
Blocked Shot	17:44	Wallin
Blocked Shot	17:51	Commodore
2nd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Missed Shot	9:02	Smyth	Wide of Net
Missed Shot	9:16	Hemsky	Wide of Net
Shot	10:02	Pronger	Slapshot	48 feet
Blocked Shot	10:50	Adams
3rd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Summary
	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period	Total
Shots Missed	1	2	0	3
Shots Blocked	3	1	0	4
Shots Through	5	1	0	6
Total Shots On Net	9	4	0	13
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	2	0	0	2
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	3	1	0	4
Shots Through From <31 Feet	1	0	0	1
Powerplay Success/Game	0 for 5
Powerplay Success/%	0%
Total Powerplay Time	10:00
Game 4 Play-By-Play
Game 4 Scoresheet
Game 4 GameCenter

Oilers Powerplay Shots: Game 5
1st Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	12:12	Torres	Snap Shot	15 feet
Blocked Shot	12:35	Adams
Missed Shot	12:41	Pronger	Wide of Net
Blocked Shot	13:02	Williams
Goal	13:25	Hemsky	Slapshot	31 feet
Goalpost	18:33	Stoll		>37.5 feet*
2nd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	1:05	Pronger	Wrist Shot	52 feet
Missed Shot	3:43	Spacek	Wide of Net
Shot	4:05	Spacek	Slapshot	37 feet
3rd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Blocked Shot	5:06	Adams
Blocked Shot	5:11	Adams
Shot	5:14	Pronger	Slapshot	55 feet
Blocked Shot	6:11	Wesley
Missed Shot	8:06	Hemsky	Wide of Net
Shot	8:16	Pronger	Slapshot	64 feet
Blocked Shot	8:39	Williams
Missed Shot	9:24	Stoll	Wide of Net
Blocked Shot	9:33	Wallin
Summary
	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period	Total
Shots Missed	1	1	2	4
Shots Blocked	2	0	5	7
Shots Through	3	2	2	7
Total Shots On Net	6	3	9	18
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	2	1	0	3
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	1*	1	2	4
Shots Through From <31 Feet	2	0	0	2
Powerplay Success/Game	1 for 7
Powerplay Success/%	14%
Total Powerplay Time	11:13
Game 5 Play-By-Play
Game 5 Scoresheet
Game 5 GameCenter

Oilers Powerplay Shots: Game 6
1st Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	6:03	Smyth	Snap Shot	18 feet
Shot	6:53	Samsonov	Snap Shot	17 feet
Blocked Shot	7:33	Commodore
Blocked Shot	7:45	Wallin
Shot	13:01	Pronger	Slapshot	52 feet
Shot	13:39	Moreau	Backhand	6 feet
2nd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	1:39	Spacek	Slapshot	52 feet
Goal	1:45	Pisani	Backhand	26 feet
Missed Shot	11:00	Spacek	Wide of Net
Shot	11:11	Pronger	Slapshot	57 feet
Shot	11:45	Smyth	Wrist Shot	13 feet
3rd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Goal	3:04	Smyth	Backhand	23 feet
Shot	3:28	Spacek	Snap Shot	55 feet
Blocked Shot	5:45	Wallin
Shot	6:03	Staios	Slapshot	50 feet
Shot	12:04	Samsonov	Snap Shot	20 feet
Shot	12:46	Horcoff	Tip-In	20 feet
Goal	13:05	Horcoff	Snap Shot	31 feet
Summary
	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period	Total
Shots Missed	0	1	0	1
Shots Blocked	2	0	1	3
Shots Through	4	4	6	14
Total Shots On Net	6	5	7	18
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	3	2	4	9
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	1	2	2	5
Shots Through From <31 Feet	3	2	4	9
Powerplay Success/Game	3 for 9
Powerplay Success/%	33%
Total Powerplay Time	12:51
Game 6 Play-By-Play
Game 6 Scoresheet
Game 6 Game Center

Oilers Powerplay Shots: Game 7
1st Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	4:19	Pronger	Slapshot	50 feet
Blocked Shot	4:22	Hedican
Blocked Shot	4:38	Adams
Missed Shot	4:54	Stoll	Wide of Net
2nd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Shot	16:37	Pisani	Snap Shot	25 feet
Blocked Shot	16:53	Wesley
Missed Shot	17:52	Samsonov	Wide of Net
Shot	18:01	Pronger	Slapshot	50 feet
Shot	18:12	Hemsky	Wrist Shot	31 feet
3rd Period	Time	Shooter	Type of Shot	Distance
Blocked Shot	12:50	Wesley
Missed Shot	13:17	Spacek	Wide of Net
Blocked Shot	14:18	Adams
Blocked Shot	14:30	Adams
Summary
	1st Period	2nd Period	3rd Period	Total
Shots Missed	1	1	1	3
Shots Blocked	2	1	3	6
Shots Through	1	3	0	4
Total Shots On Net	4	5	4	13
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	0	2	0	2
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	1	1	0	2
Shots Through From <31 Feet	0	2	0	2
Powerplay Success/Game	0 for 4
Powerplay Success/%	0%
Total Powerplay Time	7:00
Game 7 Play By Play
Game 7 Scoresheet
Game 7 Game Center

---

"Who says there's an unemployment problem in this country? Just take the five percent unemployed and give them a baseball stat to follow."

--Andy Van Slyke

Part IV: The Findings
Well, there you have it. All of my numbers for Games 1-7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. To recap, here are some of my more interesting findings:

Oilers Powerplay Summary: Games 1-7
Powerplay Shots
	Total	% of Total PP Shots
Shots Missed	27	24%
Shots Blocked	37	33%
Shots Through	48	43%
Total Shots On Net	112	100%
Powerplay Shots Through
	Total	% of Total PP Shots Through	Total Minus Game 1 & 6	% of Total PP Shots Through Minus Game 1 & 6
Shots Through	48	100%	26	100%
Shots Through From <37.5 Feet	25*	52%	10	38%
Shots Through From >37.5 Feet	23	48%	16	62%
Shots Through From <31 Feet	21**	44%	7	27%
*15 Of These Shots Occurred In Games 1 & 6
**14 Of These Shots Occurred In Games 1 & 6
Powerplay Success/Game	5 for 45
Powerplay Success/%	11%
Total Powerplay Time	76:44

• 57% of Edmonton's powerplay shots in the Finals didn't even make it on the net.

• 52% of the shots that actually got through to the net were from less than 37.5 feet.
• 48% of the shots that actually got through to the net were from more than 37.5 feet.
• 44% of the shots that actually got through to the net were from less than 31 feet.

• Excluding Games 1 and 6, 38% of the shots that actually got through to the net were from less than 37.5 feet.
• Excluding Games 1 and 6, 62% of the shots that actually got through to the net were from more than 37.5 feet.
• Excluding Games 1 and 6, 27% of the shots that actually got through to the net were from less than 31 feet.

• One of the through shots in Game 6--by Ethan Moreau--was marked at a distance of 6 feet. That means it was taken from behind the net.

Players Taking Shots
	Missed	Through	Through From <37.5	Through From >37.5	Through From <31
Bergeron	0	1	0	1	0
Hemsky	3	6	6	0	5
Horcoff	2	2	2	0	2
Moreau	0	1	1	0	1
Peca	0	1	1	0	0
Pisani	2	3	3	0	3
Pronger	6	12	0	12	0
Samsonov	2	3	3	0	3
Smyth	3	6	6	0	5
Spacek	6	5	1	4	0
Staios	0	1	0	1	0
Stoll	2	6	1	5	1
Torres	1	1	1	0	1
Total	27	48	25	23	21

• Chris Pronger took 25% of the Oilers shots that got through to the net.
• Every one of Pronger's shots that got through were from beyond 37.5 feet.
• Chris Pronger took 24% of the Oilers missed and through shots.

• Oilers defencemen took 40% of the Oilers shots that got through to the net.
• Oilers defencemen took 41% of the Oilers missed and through shots.

• Bergeron, Pronger, Spacek, Staois and Stoll took 52% of the Oilers shots that got through to the net.
• Bergeron, Pronger, Spacek, Staois and Stoll took 52% of the Oilers missed and through shots.

• Pronger and Spacek took 44% of the Oilers missed shots.
• Pronger, Spacek, and Stoll took 52% of the Oilers missed shots.

Oilers Playoff Rounds
	Game 1	Game 2	Game 3	Game 4	Game 5	Game 6	Game 7	PP Success/Total	PP Success/%
vs. Detroit	2/6	0/3	1/9	2/9	1/4	2/6	NA	8/37	21.6%
vs. San Jose	1/5	0/2	1/6	1/5	3/7	0/5	NA	6/30	20%
vs. Anaheim	1/5	1/3	2/7	1/8	0/6	NA	NA	5/29	17.2%
vs. Carolina	1/7	0/6	0/7	0/5	1/7	3/9	0/4	5/45	11%

(click image to enlarge)

• The Oilers scored a powerplay goal in 5 of the 6 games in Round One.
• The Oilers scored a powerplay goal in 4 of the 6 games in Round Two.
• The Oilers scored a powerplay goal in 4 of the 5 games in Round Three.
• The Oilers scored a powerplay goal in 3 of the 7 games in Round Four.

• The Oilers overall powerplay success decreased through every round of the 2006 playoffs.

• Excluding Game 6, the Oilers powerplay success rate was 5.5% in the Stanley Cup Finals.

---

"Now the partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. And the difference between him and me at the present moment is merely this--that whereas he seeks to convince his hearers that what he says is true, I am rather seeking to convince myself; to convince my hearers is a secondary matter with me."

--Plato, Phaedo

Part V: The Conclusions
Taking a look back at my original queries and opinions, I would say that I was both bang on and totally off, with a healthy dose of "who the hell really knows" thrown in the mix.

Question: Did the Oilers powerplay get "closer" to being good as the series against Carolina went along?

Answer: I certainly don't think so. As the numbers in Part IV show, the Oilers powerplay success rate dropped through every single round of the playoffs. They started out with a 21.6% success rate against the Wings in Round 1, and ended up at 11% by the end of the Finals. The graph in Part IV also doesn't indicate any growing strength in the seven games against the Canes. The Oilers did score three powerplay in Game 6, but they went back to scoring 0 in Game 7. The powerplay success rate in the Finals is especially alarming if you consider that the Game 6 success bumped up the percentages by 5.5%. The Oilers shouldn't be criticized for scoring powerplay goals in Game 6, but it really was the exception to the rule in the Finals.

Question: Other than Hemsky's goal in Game 5, when was the last time someone other than a player on the point took a shot on the Oilers powerplay?

Answer: It actually happened a minute and thirteen seconds before Hemsky's goal, on a shot from Raffi Torres. Clearly an absurd claim on my part. But a 33 foot shot from Mike Peca at 16:23 of the first period, in Game 4, was the last time a shot from less than 37.5 feet was taken before that. That's about 55 minutes of space in between shots from somewhere other than the point.

Question: Did over 80% of the Oilers shots on the powerplay throughout the Finals come from beyond 37.5 feet?

Answer: No. That number is much lower, at about 48%. But several points should be made here. The first is that the number goes up by 14 points, to 62%, if you take out the 15 shots the Oilers shot from less than 37.5 feet in Games 1 and 6. If you take out Games 1 and 6, and look at shots from less than 31 feet, the numbers change even more. Excluding those two games, 73% of the Oilers shots were taken from beyond 31 feet.

It should also be noted that this doesn't count missed and blocked shots. 57% of Edmonton's powerplay shots in the Finals didn't even make it on the net. 37 shots were blocked, and 27 were missed. Jaroslav Spacek had 6 missed shots, and so did Chris Pronger. All of Pronger's shots that actually got through to the net were from beyond 37.5 feet. Is it reasonable to assume that all of his missed shots were also from beyond that distance? Of the 5 shots Spacek got through to the net, 4 were from beyond 37.5. Do I make a similar assumption with him? That's an extra 9 or 10 shots added to list, which would surely raise the percentage of shots from beyond 37.5. And what about those 37 blocked shots that I have no distance or shooter for? How many were taken from beyond 37.5 feet? It's all speculation, obviously, but I think the numbers are misleading, and much closer to my 80% guess than they are with the incomplete statistics.

Question: Did over 80% of the Oilers shots on the powerplay throughout the 2006 Playoffs come from beyond 37.5 feet?

Answer: I don't know. The only thing I bothered to look at for the other three rounds was the overall playoff success rate. The lack of statistical data was going to prevent me from even seeing a complete picture of the Finals. I wasn't about to waste another 50 hours looking at more incomplete information.

Question: Can you verify that shots at a distance beyond 37.5 feet are low percentage?

Answer: No. But others can, and have. Take a look at the graph from Alan Ryder's work on shot quality.

(click image to enlarge)

The numbers are from the 2002-2003 season, but I see no reason why the arc would have changed dramatically. Statistically speaking, distance matters, and the closer the shot, the better.

Question: Can you verify that a high volume of shots taken from the point also lowers their effectiveness, despite the quality of the shot-taker, due to their predictabilty?

Answer: Again, no. I think the way to do this would be to monitor the Oilers' success on the powerplay throughout the entire season, as well as the playoffs. Then you could properly determine the percentage of shots taken from the point all year (assuming that you could actually get this data, which as I have shown, you can't), how well an opposing team adjusted to the strategy, and whether that affected their powerplay success rate. But the Oilers powerplay success rate did drop in each consecutive round of the playoffs, and that has to count for something, even if it is a small something.

Question: Can you verify that a powerplay strategy primarily focused on the point shot is a waste of the talent within those players north of the hashmarks?

Answer: I didn't even try. I wouldn't even know where to begin on that one. Maybe a cost/benefit analysis? You've got me. It is a neat concept though, and raises some interesting questions. Are kids with "better hands" placed at the forward positions, or do they develop "better hands" because they are placed in the forward positions? It also relates to the question before this. How important is shot distribution? When should the puck be placed on the stick of your best shooter? And so on.

Question: Does anyone keep a running tab of shots in the NHL, like they do in the NBA? And is it public?

Answer: Part II deals with this, and the answer is yes and no. CBS Sportsline does have a shot chart, and it has similar functions to the shot charts the NBA publishes. But the information on them doesn't align with the information on NHL.com, so their value is questionable. My guess is that CBS and the NHL use different companies to keep track of things, which creates the discrepancy. It does illustrate the subjectivity of the NHL statistics many take to be Gospel, however. Those statistics are still being tabulated by human beings, and I'm 100% certain they are making subjective judgments on things like shots, in the same way that baseball scorers make subjective judgements on things like hits and errors.

Question: Was a poor coaching strategy inhibiting the Oilers powerplay?

Answer: While admitting that I don't have all the data, yes. This is obviously a complicated question with many different aspects, and my whole goal has been to try and sort through it all. My failure to answer this question as completely as I could is, at least to me, no fault of my own. As a point of fact, the end result of this entire post may not so much be an indictment of the Oilers powerplay, but rather an indictment of the NHL's incomplete statistical gatherings. I do not know the location of any of the Oilers powerplay shots. I do not know how the NHL gauges shot distance. I do not know the distance or the location of missed powerplay shots. I do not know the distance, location or shooter of blocked powerplay shots. Without this data, I am prevented from seeing what I would like to see. I am blinded from truly knowing whether I am right or wrong about the Oilers powerplay.

But there are some things I do know for certain. I do know that the Oilers powerplay success rate declined through each consecutive round of the playoffs. I also know for sure that every single powerplay goal the Oilers did score in the Finals was from less than 31 feet, the distance from the slot to the back boards. I know for certain that Chris Pronger took the majority of missed and through shots on the Oilers powerplay, doubling the amount of the two next closest forwards (Ales Hemsky and Ryan Smyth). I know for certain that fellow defenceman Jaroslav Spacek had the next highest amount of missed and through powerplay shots. I know for certain that every single one of Pronger's through shots were taken from beyond 37.5 feet. I also know for certain that in Game Six, when the Oilers scored 3 of their 5 Finals powerplay goals, they took 9 shots from 31 feet or less. That was half of their total shots through for that game, and a substantially larger number of shots from that distance than they took in any other Finals game. These things I know.

The hockey powerplay is unique in North American professional sports. No other major professional sport on this continent allows the rules--and the breaking of them--to create such a regularly distinct offensive advantage and opportunity. The free throw exists in basketball, and it is likely the closest comparison, yet it is functionally different from the powerplay. There, a player gets one to three uninterrupted shots from a mandated distance. But regular play is stopped, and the shooter works alone. In hockey, the penalized player leaves the ice, and regular, team play, resumes. As such, it is difficult to draw analogies on the best strategies for success. Yet like in basketball, and even football, certain things are critical if teams wish to succeed. Things like ball and puck distribution come to mind, as well as maximizing your odds by taking shots at the right time, with the right players.

It is my contention that the Edmonton Oilers failed in this regard during the 2006 Stanley Cup Finals. They placed too much emphasis on having their powerplay shots come from certain players, at certain distances. Those distances were not statistically advantageous, leading to a decline in powerplay success rate. In addition, because of the repetition of the act, the Carolina Hurricanes were able to key in on certain players and a certain distance from the ice, again leading to a decline in powerplay success rate. It was the equivalent, in my mind, of having one or two players consistently taking a 3-point shot in basketball. The distance leads to a poor success rate, and after a while, the opposing team gets a lot of hands in the faces of those shooters. The success rate plummets. Another equivalent might be a football team consistently attempting to throw fifty-yard passes, to the same receiver. Again, the distance is inopportune, and after a while a team just starts keying in on the route.

It is my belief that the Oilers should have developed a better powerplay strategy, focused on the activities of better puck circulation and shot distribution, eventually culminating in taking high percentage shots from high percentage places. That is why I made the suggestion, after Game 4, that the Oilers dress Robbie Schremp for the rest of the playoffs. Tyler disagreed with me, stating among other things that as a replacement player Schremp's value was less than other players in the lineup, and that looking at the 82 games in the regular season proved that the Oilers powerplay was simply better than the Canes penalty kill. Of course he did this all without any actual VORP numbers, and by ignoring the fact that Carolina hadn't played Edmonton 82 times that year, and that adjustments had clearly been made to shut down the Oilers singular powerplay strategy, but I digress. I suggested in his comments that Schremp shouldn't be thought of as a real player, but as a metaphor. Here is my explanation for that statement. My point was that what the Oilers needed at that time wasn't another defenceman or forward who liked to take howitzers from 60 feet away, but a forward with good hands and a fearless ability to shoot from close distances. I really didn't care who it was, as long as it happened. I know that ultimately without a reformulated plan of attack from Craig Simpson and Craig MacTavish, the personnel wouldn't matter. But my belief was that Schremp was egotistical enough to ignore the plan of attack, and shoot from 25 feet or less anytime he touched the puck.

I stand by my suggestion even now, though I believe I should have suggested that Tyler think of Schremp as a change in philosophy, rather than as a metaphor. There is an orthodoxy in the game of hockey, as there is in every sport. I believe this orthodoxy, this stubborn refusal to change or modify beliefs and strategies in the face of predictive or actual failure, cost the Edmonton Oilers the Stanley Cup. I believe that more shots from less than 37.5 feet, more variety in the shooters taking those shots, all mixed with the occasional blast from the point, would have allowed the Oilers to score 2 to 4 extra goals in the Finals. My belief is especially strong considering the many 5-on-3 chances the Oilers had in the Finals, which I didn't even begin to discuss in this post. 2 to 4 extra goals would have made a big difference, likely a big enough difference to bring the Stanley Cup back to Edmonton, where it so rightly belongs. Chris Pronger would have still left town, but we'd have all been too drunk to care.

TSN is reporting that Craig MacTavish is "expected" to sign a four-year extension with the Oil.

I'm torn on this, as per usual. His work with Horcoff and Stoll last year was fantasic, he is a great interview, and I'm pretty sure he is a very smart guy. On the other hand, his lineup moves continually baffle me, and the powerplay makes me want to sacrifice virgins to the Hockey Gods.

Thoughts?

Tyler's take on the Islanders situation is solid, and could well have been ghostwritten by me (though I wouldn't have thought of the brilliant Trading Places theory).

Read the whole thing, but I would like to offer a loud INDEED! to two sentences in particular. One:

I'd usually be willing to cut Snow some slack on the fact that he has no training or experience but I think his poor judgment is demonstrated by the very fact that he thought taking this job was a good idea.

See Jim Playfair, c.2002. And two:

Absolutely insane. These people deserve to lose buckets of money.

I assume various NHL players around the league have been asked for their takes on the goings-on. I'd like to see at least one reporter phrase his/her question something like this: "So, what do you think of what your partner in Long Island is up to?"

I think I have figured out a way to hack Blogger so that it will allow me to do an expandable post for one and only one post, without affecting the rest of the posts already on this site, and any future ones we may want to do. I am going to work on it, so that I can publish "On Powerplay" as one post. That way it won't take up very much space on the main page even though it will be all together, people can ignore it if they want, and I don't have to worry about someone telling me all my work is for naught before I'm even finished publishing it all.

I'll need some time to do it, and I'm exhausted right now. So look for the entirety of "On Powerplay" sometime later Wednesday night. Unless things don't work out, I guess. Then I don't know what I'll do. I am so tired of this damn thing...

To update Matt's post on the gong show on Long Island, reports are that Hall-of-Famer Pat LaFontaine has resigned. Memo to Ted Nolan: RUN!!!

Pierre Lebrun said on The Score tonight that he actually had to email the story to a GM today, because the GM thought Lebrun was pulling a prank on him. He refused to believe it until he saw actual evidence. And here's a semi-serious question: since Garth Snow is now the General Manager, as well as a player still under contract to the Islanders, can he trade himself to another team? I wonder how this went over with the League Office?

If I was a General Manager, I'd be calling and asking about Rick DiPietro right now. He's an RFA, this team is stupid enough to do anything, and they seem to have a goalie thing going on. Plus, Snow would finally be able to get that starting position back. Pick up the phooone...

Dateline--July 13, EDMONTON:

Turns out Chris Pronger isn't the only person who doesn't want anything to do with Edmonton.

City officials found that out the hard way this week, when they struggled to find three randomly selected Canadians willing to accept a free vacation there.

City staff had to offer the trip to 25 people before they could find three takers, admitted city spokesman Robert Moyles.

Yeah, it's been a rough month for the 'chuk.

"Even prior to our current slump, Mike and I had been discussing the next phase for him," said Wang. "I have often challenged him about what he wanted to do when he grows up..."

I suppose that relative to when Neil Smith was hired, that quote is from eons ago. I don't get to do this that often, so I'd like to pat myself on the back for a nice prediction:

Well, whoever Milhouse chooses as a new GM, I'm sure it will be wise, and the result of many hours of serious drinkingthinking.

Today's events also serve as a good demonstration of Why Blogs Are Fun To Read; check out some of the guesses as to why Smith is toast. Abboud:

...if I had to guess, I would say he drew the ire of former GM and current VP Mike Milbury by not trading any of his goalies in his first month on the job.

Chris!:

I've heard the knock against Ted Nolan is that he's supposed to be a GM killer, but normally he doesn't work so fast.

[...]Maybe someone told Charles Wang that Smith's wife hated living in New York and wanted to move to Edmonton.

Commenter PPP at Mirtle's:

I guess Milbury couldn't stand seeing someone else making terrible decisions for his team.

And yet none of the comments inspire a chuckle more than anything that comes out of Charles Wang's mouth, like this:

"...Most importantly, Garth is a man of integrity, someone I trust will work hard, be creative and represent the Islanders with dignity."

Well, I guess somebody might as well. Good luck to Garth Snow -- I hope he's going into this with his eyes wide open.

Peca reportedly had a three-year offer for $7.5 million US to return to Long Island, but he and Isles captain Alexei Yashin don't have a great history. Instead, Peca took the Leafs' one-year pitch, in large part because of proximity to his Buffalo home and the chance to play for the team he grew up watching.

That's Hall-of-Famer Jim Matheson in the Edmonton Journal. So Peca accepted a one-year deal when he could have had three -- fine, that's for his own reasons, the beauty of unrestricted free agency. But have we heard any reason why the Leafs were only offering a 1-year deal? Besides the option on Sundin, the Leafs don't have a single forward under contract for over $1M beyond this season. If signing Peca is a good idea right now (while the Leafs are getting tight to the cap), why isn't it a good idea for 2 or 3 years? Two suggestions:

1. JFJ doesn't actually like Peca that much, he's just signing him as a sop to local fans and media (i.e. "They'll thank me in June")
2. JFJ is under strict orders from MLSE not to make any more deals that impact the cap for his successor beyond this season

Either of these seem plausible. If your view of JFJ's analytical powers is at all favourable, then you have to believe it's #1. As David Johnson notes in his Leafs Off-Season Report, the Leafs' biggest problem last season, besides their goaltending, was that "they struggled to score goals at even strength". True: they were 27th in the NHL in ES scoring last season.

So anyway, there were 293 forwards who played more than 60 games in the NHL last season. Try to guess what these 11 fellows have in common:

Adam Hall, Curtis Brown, Blair Betts, Mark Rycroft, Donald Brashear, Serge Payer, Mike Ricci, Brian Savage, Kirk Maltby, Jed Ortmeyer, Ryan Johnson

Give up? They were the only 11 of those 293 who scored at Even Strength at a worse rate than Peca's 0.92Pts/60min. I know he's from the area, but this...

The two parties have been courting each other for well over a week with both camps agreeing Toronto is a good fit for the 11-year NHL centre.

...is pretty dubious. The Flames are probably the only NHL team that needed a guy with Peca's statistical profile less than the Leafs.

Fun small-sample-size statistical window from Vic at IOF back on March 29: in February and March, a span of 19 games, Peca was on the ice for a grand total of one goal for at even strength, despite taking a regular shift. The good news? He was only on for 4 ES GA. As Vic concluded, "You might as well just go get a beer when Peca starts a shift. :D"

This isn't to say he's a "not at any price" guy. His hands/touch are probably above average, as evidenced by his success on faceoffs and breakaways (he was also 2-for-5 in the Shootout, which is a lot better than the Leafs 4-for-24 last year). He can skate like hell, and he is legitimately and consistently strong defensively.

But his internal motivation is pretty, uh, variable; he never makes plays because he always gets rid of the puck before lifting his head; and he is simply not productive (and hasn't been in years). I hope Leafs fans love Clark Wilm, because they now essentially have two of him, and if you think I'm exaggerating, just wait...

Barely-related postscript: I found this laugher on NHL.com. Spot the misdirection:

Peca is a 12-year NHL veteran. He sat out the 2000-01 season after taking a low hit in the previous season's playoffs that badly damaged his knee.

I suppose the word "after" makes this strictly true; just don't take it to mean "as a result of". Lastly, same article -- this one's for you, Oiler fans:

His 616 penalty minutes are mostly divided between standing up for himself and taking penalties on plays that might lead to goals. He knows the difference between a "good" penalty and a bad one.

Ohhhh, mercy.

"Opinions are great—don't get me wrong. They're great for starting research projects. Then you go study and see if you can prove the opinion or not. But when placing multi—million dollar bets on future outcomes, opinions are wholly unsatisfactory. Opinions as conversation starters are fine. Opinions as conclusions are very bad. I started research projects to discern the objective “why.” I wanted to know why certain teams won and why other teams lost; why certain drafts produced big stars and others didn't. This was the naïve question at work."

PREAMBLE
Over the next little while, I am going to look at the Edmonton Oilers powerplay during the Stanley Cup Finals. The complete post is enormously large (surprise!), so I have taken the liberty of breaking it up into five parts. I started out with an opinion on the Oilers powerplay in the Finals, but had no idea if it would be supported by the evidence. I have seen the numbers, the only numbers I was able to scrounge up, and now have more of a clue on how right and wrong I was. But I have no idea concerning the full validity or value of these numbers, or my thoughts. At this point, I am still the naive questioner searching for answers. Hopefully, these posts will bear some fruit. They took me an enormous amount of time to do, so I hope they are also of some value to others, even if the value is in how poorly the examination was performed.

And for those of you who are tired of all the numbers, and just want some good old fashioned ranting and raving, don't worry. It's coming. GOIL!!!

Part I: The Opinion
During the Stanley Cup Finals between the Carolina Hurricanes and the Edmonton Oilers, there was a great deal of debate and discussion about the Oilers powerplay. Personally, I had been frustrated by the Oilers powerplay all season, as it seemed entirely predicated on one, and only one, strategy: get the puck to the point. The strategy worked fairly well through the first three rounds, and the Oilers were able to score timely powerplay goals. In fact, they scored a powerplay goal in 13 of their first 17 playoff games.

Oilers Playoff Rounds
	Game 1	Game 2	Game 3	Game 4	Game 5	Game 6	PP Success/Total	PP Success/%
vs. Detroit	2/6	0/3	1/9	2/9	1/4	2/6	8/37	21.6%
vs. San Jose	1/5	0/2	1/6	1/5	3/7	0/5	6/30	20%
vs. Anaheim	1/5	1/3	2/7	1/8	0/6	NA	5/29	17.2%

The powerplay had stalled in the Finals, however, as Carolina adjusted to what was, at least to my mind, the Oilers singlular powerplay strategy. I was of course furious about this lack of diverse planning, as I had been all year long. Other, more moderate voices, however, suggested that the powerplay was getting better, and would come through to make a difference in the end. I didn't believe them. In between Game 5 and Game 6, I contacted Tyler and Avi, who I both knew to be statistical nutbars. An opinion was brewing in my head, and I wanted to be able to validate it. Here's how it all broke down, in present tense:

• I am intrigued by the assertion that the Oilers powerplay is getting "closer". I disagree.

• Other than Hemsky's goal in Game 5, when was the last time someone other than a player on the point took a shot on the Oilers powerplay?

• I would bet that over 80% of the Oilers shots on the powerplay throughout this series, if not throughout the entire playoffs, have been taken from the defensive side of the hashmarks.

• Based on what I know about hockey and basketball, but admittedly without much data to back me up, I want to identify those shots as being low percentage shots due to variables like distance and traffic.

• I also want to identify that a high volume of shots taken from the point also lowers their effectiveness, despite the quality of the shot-taker, due to their predictibilty.

• It also seems to me that the strategy is a waste of the talent within those players north of the hashmarks, but that probably demands a type of analysis that I am unqualified to perform.

• I want to know if anyone keeps a running tab of shots in the NHL, like they do in the NBA. I am sure stats companies do, but is any of it public? Like this:



• The NBA shot chart allows me to see the shots broken down by quarter, by distance, by location, and by shooter. It also tells me which shots were made, and which shots were missed.

• What is guiding my thought process here is indeed the NBA. If a team took 80% of its shots from beyond the 3-point arc, with two defenders always in their face, they would be crucified by players,coaches, managers, reporters, fans, and even casual observers. And they would be crucified, even if they had Michael Jordan and Larry Bird taking those shots. They would be attacked even more if they had a solid supporting cast in higher percentage shooting areas who weren't taking the easier shots. Essentially, I think this is what the Oilers are doing, even though not even Chris Pronger is as good as Jordan or Bird.

• I am also aware that the NBA and NHL are two very different games, and the analogy may therefore be tenuous at best. But it is the best way I could think of to describe it.

• I suppose that at the end of the day, the success of a powerplay can be broken down into sheer results. We got one more goal in Game 5 than we did in the previous three games, so I guess it did, indeed, get better. Maybe my question really should be, "Is a poor coaching strategy inhibiting the powerplay from being even better than it currently is or becoming?"

---

These were the thoughts, questions and opinions running around in my head. I knew already that the guys at Hockey Analytics had done some work on shot quality, showing that indeed distance does matter. I also knew that Tyler had done some work in relation to shot quality and goaltending, but that it was different from the answers I was trying to find. Tyler has now done some more work, focusing on the powerplay, and more powerplay, but again it doesn't really cover the things I want to know. It's probably best that he didn't cover them actually, as he knew I was working on this, and I'd be forced to kill him if he posted on it before me (That goes the same for those of you who might want to jump the gun on things, and start talking about items best discussed in future posts. I have already completed most of this baby, so be patient. And if you know of someone who has already done all sorts of work on these questions, please wait until the end of the last post to tell me. I don't know if my poor little soul can handle it!).

Anyway, I was seemingly on my own, and would have to figure it out for myself. So I did what any sane person looking for information on the NHL would do. I typed in www.NHL.com. And that is where my problems began.


Part II of "On Powerplay" will be posted tomorrow. It will focus on the barriers I faced in getting the numbers I needed.

Bwaaaa-ha-ha-ha:

Sources tell TSN the Toronto Maple Leafs are expected to announce the signing of veteran centre Mike Peca on Tuesday.

Peca has agreed to a one-year, 2.5-million dollar contract.

This is the same Maple Leafs that only had $750k for Eric Lindros, right? Whatever. Welcome to 14th place, Toronto fans.

Finally, the Calgary Flames coaching staff have confirmed what we in Edmonton knew all along: their organization's modus operandi has little to do with attempting to field a team of any talent.

"That's what you have to do to be a good team -- you have to have family values and good work ethic. That's what the Sutters have and what I've been brought up with and what our team has grabbed onto."

Thanks to Mirtle for the link. It's actually a good story about a seemingly good guy, despite my ball-busting.

Hi! I don't doubt that there's readers out there who are getting confused, nerded-out, or worse (bored!) with the stats discussions here and all over, but it's July! I thought it might be useful to sort of summarize the state & prospects of NHL Statistical Analysis, so that at the very least, all this site's readers share a base understanding of some kind.

From my perspective as a guy who likes to dick around with stats to try to learn true & interesting things, there are four kinds of hockey player statistics. I've broken them down into groups below: they are not grouped by merit or meaningfulness, but by "source": in other words, how accessible they are, how useful they are to work with, etc..

First: the basic ones, aka the ones that are already done. Any stat you can look up on NHL.com and find a number, without any further work. Goals, assists, penalty minutes, total time on ice, shots, hits, blocked shots, etc. Most of these stats are things that are counted, though there are a few that are calculated (e.g. Shooting%). No matter -- these are stats that anyone with a mouse can seek--and sort--at leisure.

Second: the subjective ones. These are the "opposite" from the first. You can't look up these stats, because the league either doesn't record them or doesn't publish them, and not all teams record them or even care about them. This group would also include stats that individual teams invent and record for their own purposes.

Scoring chances, puck battles won/lost, successful outlet passes, odd-man rushes, etc. all fall in this category. I should add here that if your aim is to construct a more rugged statistical basis for player evaluation and comparison, you probably don't want to use these anyway. Sure, you have another number (whatever it may be), but it's kind of subjective, and it has no known correlation to scoring and preventing goals, so where are you now...

Third: the "basic-plus" ones. These are stats that anyone who's somewhat computer literate can compute on their own, using stats from the First group above. An excellent example here is ESP/60: Points per 60 Minutes of Even Strength Icetime. Lots of us like this stat; it's a measure of offensive ability that corrects for disproportionate PP Scoring (high or low) and/or Icetime (high or low).

This isn't a stat you can just look up anywhere, as far as I know. However, NHL.com does publish Time-On-Ice stats for each player, broken into ES/PP/PK, and they also publish scoring stats broken down this way. You can copy and Paste-Special these tables into Excel, add some formula columns, and boom. Once you've done it a couple of times, you learn a few tricks re: how to minimize your grief.

In the context of Andy's discussion of an open-source statistics project: yeah, it would be convenient if some of these types of stats were online, but only worth the bother if they were (A) automatically updated and (B) sortable. There's not really any "work" to be done here except for the Web/technical kind, because the inputs are (by the Third group's definition) so readily available.

Fourth: the original and enlightening ones. This, partly screencap-ped below, is an official NHL Play-by-Play sheet; there's one for every single game, going back somewhere between 5 and 20 years.
The data on this sheet, combined with the data from the Shift Reports, represents (to my knowledge) the sum total of statistical information officially recorded by the NHL for each game.

Most of the data on the sheets is collated and published at NHL.com in one form or another, but as anyone who's played around at that site knows, it's not a fully flexible database by any means.

Example: if it was, I could look up Ryan Smyth's PP Shooting% from 15-20 feet. Or, Robyn Regehr's Shots Against per minute at Even Strength in the 3rd Period. Etcetera: all the data to figure these things out exists, it's just not in a format that's very convenient, and that's a severe understatement.

However, that's not to say that it can't be done, because it is, and well. Some of the fellows at IOF have done very interesting things (e.g. Vic Ferrari - Quality of Opposition). And of course Tyler, who I'm going to use as an example here.

Tyler has published (and as far as I know, invented) the stat Expected Goals Against Average for the 30 NHL teams. The gamesheets record every shot taken; from what distance that shot was fired; the time on the game clock; and who's on the ice & in goal -- and Tyler compiles this information. [It amounts to reading every game sheet and marking it down; he has software that he has made/modified to do this for him, but he still has to collect the game sheets and run his software on each one, not a task that's overly speedy or that any jackass can duplicate in 5 minutes of spare time.]

Once this data is compiled into a workable database, there is a crazy amount of information available. This includes:

• League average SV% on shots from X feet
• Individual goalie's SV% on shots from X feet, and thus whether they are better or worse than average on those shots, and thus how many goals their performance saved/cost their team
• Number of goals a team should be expected to allow, based on the quantity and location of the shots they allow
• Broken-out information on shots that are assumed to be rebounds (any 2nd shot within 1-3 seconds of the 1st shot)

He has taken data that is readily available right off of NHL.com and created something that ought to be of tremendous interest to hockey fans and phenomenal value to NHL teams.

This to me is fascinating. It's also why I'm not too high on inventing new stats for a guy watching a game to record -- basically, there's a ton of fascinating things that can be done with the stats that are already recorded. I mean, right now we geeks can't even look up something as seemingly basic as how many of Dion Phaneuf's PP goals were at 5-on-3.

This seems like a good place to end today's post. I'm sure I've made at least one basic error in fact above; correct me in the comments and I'll update. I hope this helps the semi-initiated understand the challenges associated with taking NHL Stats Analysis to the next level (as amateurs, that is, with access to published materials only). They're not insurmountable at all, but it would take some work.

Here's a look at the cap/roster situation for the Canadian teams in the Northwest Division (click to enlarge):

I've used the same source numbers as Andy basically, but note the following:

• Just like the previous times I've gone through this, I've shown a minimum salary at each roster slot that's unfilled. I just think it gives a better overall picture of the true amount each team has (or doesn't) to spend.
  
• At this point, RFA players are not going anywhere unless via trade, so I think it's wise to show them on the roster.
• Stoll and Hemsky are lined up for arbitration, so the $value of their Qualifying Offer is no longer relevant - I've just put in an estimate. (I should note also that the estimate is for a settlement prior to actually going through S.A.; since S.A. is of the Final Offer variety where the judge selects either the team or player figure, I would expect the numbers to be lower if the Oilers "win", and higher if the players win.)
• I've also just thrown in estimates for Lupul and Lombardi, because I expect them to sign for salaries that are higher than their QO.
• The salary estimates for all 6 Canucks are the exact number of their QO's; presumably one or more of them will actually sign for more, and we should find this out soon. (The QO$ is a 10% raise if the old salary was $450-$660k; a 5% raise if it was $660k-$1M; and no raise if it was >$1M.)

I think it's interesting that the three teams are essentially in very different situations. The Flames are fairly tight to the cap, but have a full roster. The Oilers have lots of cap room, but need to fill out (and presumably upgrade) their roster. And the Canucks are fairly tight to the cap, and need to fill out their roster.

I don't envy Dave Nonis a bit. You can't really find fault with any individual move he's made; in fact, some of them have been terrific (I'd give him an A+ on both the Bertuzzi-Luongo trade and the Cloutier trade). But he's in a brutal, brutal position.

If any Canucks fans are wondering why they haven't signed Anson Carter to a deal, the sheet above should make that pretty clear. Even if you get him for $2.5M per season, which has got to be the low end of what he could get:

• The team would be within $650k of the salary cap
• They'd still need to sign (or assign) two forwards who they actually plan to dress; every dollar that these two guys get above the minimum eats into that $650k
  
• They'd still need to sign (or assign) one or two guys to sit in the press box; every dollar these guys get above the minimum eats into that $650k
  
• And again, there's 6 RFAs who haven't actually signed contracts yet; every dollar they get above the QO$ eats into that $650k
• This doesn't even address the need for regular short-term injury replacements

And you know what the delightful cherry on top of this is? Every one of the contracts that has put them in this position extends through at least 2007-08. (Sami Salo's contract expires after this season, but at $1.5M, he's a bargain).

I suppose what this means for Canucks fans is that if the team is good, then, Whew! Everyone's tied up for at least 2 years, and they get a couple of kicks at the cat. But if they're bad, or mediocre, there's hardly a thing they can do to retool. Developing...

Whew.

Here is an email response I got from Irish Blues, whose "Estimated Cap Impact" numbers I used in yeterday's Cap Watch post. I have already gone through the Eastern Conference, and matched TSN's current depth charts with IB's averaged payroll commitments. But I think for now the best thing to do is just wait until tomorrow or Monday, and take a look at IB's page and spreadsheets then. If people are dying to see my new numbers, based on who TSN says is making the team and what IB says they are making, holler and complain in the comments section. It's a Saturday. What else do I have to do, right?

Andy:

I am including RFA's in the numbers. There's 2 sets of numbers to look at - the summer numbers and the '06-07 numbers.

The "summer numbers" are the ones in effect right now; this is what the NHL is using to figure out where all 30 teams are right now. It includes all qualifying offers extended to RFA's as long as the offer is valid (5pm today, or right before I send this). While the offer is valid, the amount of the qualifying offer counts toward the team's cap if it's a 1-way offer; the percentage of the QO based on the number of days a player was on an NHL roster in '05-06 is used if it's a 2-way offer.

Should a team sign a player from another team to an offer sheet, the averaged amount of the offer sheet will be charged to the team extending the offer sheet while it has not been accepted or rejected by the player's current team. We may see this happen, and if so my numbers will change accordingly.

Once I update tomorrow (after all QO's will expire and we should know who has and who hasn't accepted), this will be more clear. For more information on this, see Article 50.5(d) in the CBA - it gives a pretty clear explanation of what counts at what periods of time.

The '06-07 numbers currently posted for each team assumes that every player who has a QO accepts it as is; again, this will update tomorrow because those offers will have expired.

What you see for each player's cap number is (as best I can tell) each player's averaged contract salary. It is not the player's actual salary for 2005-06 or for 2006-07. I have many of the contracts documented in my notes where I have the details; otherwise, I'm going off two articles THN has published that listed the cap numbers of most players and, using the '05-06 salaries and some guesswork, coming up with an idea of what those players' salaries are for '06-07 and, if necessary, '07-08 until we know what those salaries really are.

I feel pretty confident that for everyone except the players on entry-level contracts, if I'm off it's not by that much.

The guys on entry-level contracts? I have Cam Barker of Chicago at $984,200 and a Blackhawks fan wrote yesterday and said that Barker's cap number is really $2.8 million. I'm waiting on proof before I change that one, but guys who have the ELC's (and are the ones I have *very* little info on) could be off by hundreds of thousands of dollars each.

The team numbers: mine are the sum of the top 23 cap numbers for the '06-07 team total, the sum of all of the summer cap numbers for the summer team total. I figure (A) going with the top 23 gives a worst-case scenario, and (B) even though some teams may go with 20-22, there's no way of knowing until the final rosters are set how many each team will carry and who will be on the team. This way, each team gets treated equally and then if the final roster is fewer than 23 or if certain players don't show up, it's a bonus.

For those who have a tendency to never click on links--and I am one of those people--I would just like to let you know that several months ago I took the the time to create a page where I could start to track down all the information available on player salaries, team caps, player contracts, the CBA, and the like. Unfortunately, there is not a single site that gathers all of this information in a manner desireable to hockey fans with a more critical oulook on the game. Until such a thing occurs, and I do believe it is coming, here is the link I always start with. If you know of other sites and pages that are of value, please let me know, either through the comments or by email.

We should all also consider, I believe, pooling our time, energy and hardrives into one collective force. Many of us are working on various projects requiring information and statistics that are not readily available. Yet many of us have the time and desire to look for, or complile, this information. Yet even more of us have folders upon folders of spreadsheets containing valuable, and already sorted, data. If we would like to advance the cause of what can only be called "hockey metrics," and transform our sport from one guided by subjectivity and orthodoxy into one guided by objectivity and rationality, we must begin now to collaborate. We already do so, but we must do more. It is obvious that the hockey establishment is in large part disinterested with seeking out the truth. We must therefore begin the long march ourselves.

Legend
• My original numbers are here.
• Non-Averaged Payroll, # of Players Under Contract, and # of Undisclosed Salaries can be found through TSN, which I have organized here.
• Notable players not signed are gathered from here.
• Estimated Cap Impact gathered from here.
• Team salary charts, including length and value of contract, are beginning to appear here.
• Another site with contract lengths can be found here.

---

Atlantic Division

Team	Non-Averaged Payroll Commitments	Estimated Cap Impact (Averaged)	# of Players Under Contract	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
New Jersey Devils	43,930,000	46,729,850	18	0	Ken Klee, Viktor Kozlov, Krzysztof Oliwa, Brian Gionta, Scott Gomez, Paul Martin
New York Islanders	29,343,200	40,215,567	13	0	Wyatt Smith, Aaron Asham, Rick DiPietro, Trent Hunter, Mike York
New York Rangers	39,203,500	40,720,530	17	0	Martin Rucinsky, Jason Strudwick, Petr Sykora, Fedor Fedorov, Marcel Hossa, Dominic Moore, Michal Rozsival, Fedor Tyutin
Philadelphia Flyers	35,073,800	38,961,663	22	2	Eric Desjardins, Brian Savage, Chris Therien, Simon Gagne
Pittsburgh Penguins	16,362,600	25,619,693	14	0	Eric Boguniecki, Aleksey Morozov, Lyle Odelein, Ryan Vandenbussch, Colby Armstrong, Marc-Andre Fleury, Milan Kraft, Ryan Malone, Brooks Orpik

Northeast Division

Team	Non-Averaged Payroll Commitments	Estimated Cap Impact (Averaged)	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Boston Bruins	34,369,500	42,476,333	13	0	Tom Fitzgerald, Brad Isbister, Brian Leetch, Jiri Slegr, Patrice Bergeron, Brad Boyes, Milan Jurcina, David Tanabe
Buffalo Sabres	16,923,290	31,911,403	10	0	Maxim Afinogenov, Daniel Briere, Tim Connolly, Jean-Pierre Dumont, Dmitri Kalinen, Ales Kotalik, Toni Lydman, Adam Mair, Ryan Miller, Jason Pominville, Henrik Tallinder, Chris Thorburn
Montreal Canadiens	40,000,870	41,684,310	23	1	Jan Bulis, Todd Simpson, Alexander Perezhogin, Michael Ryder
Ottawa Senators	35,032,600	39,963,089	14	0	Dominik Hasek, Vaclav Varada, Chris Kelly, Chris Neil, Peter Schaefer, Antoine Vermette
Toronto Maple Leafs	37,949,180	41,037,553	19	1	Jason Allison, Alexander Khavanov, Eric Lindros, Clarke Wilm, Carlo Colaiacovo, Matt Stajan, Kyle Wellwood

Southeast Division

Team	Non-Averaged Payroll Commitments	Estimated Cap Impact (Averaged)	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Atlanta Thrashers	32,706,700	39,284,371	18	1	Serge Aubin, Peter Bondra, Mike Dunham, Ronald Petrovicky, Steve Shields, Niko Kapanen, Kari Lehtonen
Carolina Hurricanes	38,308,800	39,433,201	22	0	Mark Recchi
Florida Panthers	31,060,200	35,830,752	19	1	Jay Bouwmeester, Ric Jackman, Juraj Kolnik, Vaclav Nedorost, Mike Van Ryn
Tampa Bay Lightning	39,812,450	43,496,095	20	4	Martin Cibak, Chris Dingman, Shane Willis
Washington Capitals	18,868,300	30,340,725	17	4	Andrew Cassels

Central Division

Team	Non-Averaged Payroll Commitments	Estimated Cap Impact (Averaged)	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Chicago Blackhawks	28,433,900	36,635,723	15	1	Eric Daze, Kyle Calder, Tuomo Ruutu, Jim Vandermeer, Radim Vrbata
Columbus Blue Jackets	27,084,000	35,925,540	15	2	Jan Hrdina, Radoslav Suchy, Jason Chimera, Pascal LeClaire, Nikolai Zherdev
Detroit Red Wings	33,381,000	37,924,070	16	1	Cory Cross, Manny Legace, Jason Woolley, Johan Franzen, Jason Williams
Nashville Predators	25,096,200	33,420,477	13	0	Greg Johnson, Danny Markov, Yannic Perreault, Martin Erat, Scott Hartnell, David Legwand, Jordin Tootoo
St. Louis Blues	24,645,100	32,751,620	16	0	Dean McAmmond, Scott Young, Eric Brewer, Doug Lynch, Jeff Woywitka, Jay McClemment

Pacific Division

Team	Non-Averaged Payroll Commitments	Estimated Cap Impact (Averaged)	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Anaheim Mighty Ducks	36,319,300	40,131,229	18	0	Ilya Bryzgalov, Chris Kunitz, Vitali Vishnevsky
Dallas Stars	38,207,500	40,309,401	21	0
Los Angeles Kings	33,131,000	38,250,568	19	0	Valeri Bure, Nathan Dempsey, Sean Avery, Eric Belanger, Dustin Brown, Mike Cammalleri, Mathieu Garon
Phoenix Coyotes	31,010,600	39,540,019	17	2	Oleg Kvasha, Geoff Sanderson, Mike Comrie, Ladislav Nagy, Oleg Saprykin
San Jose Sharks	31,857,600	38,017,220	17	1	Christian Ehrhoff, Marcel Goc, Mark Smith, Patrick Rissmiller

Northwest Division

Team	Non-Averaged Payroll Commitments	Estimated Cap Impact (Averaged)	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Calgary Flames	39,781,200	41,893,933	20	0	Brian Boucher, Cale Hulse, Mike LeClerc, Bryan Marchment, Matt Lombardi
Colorado Avalanche	35,880,100	41,241,36	20	0	Jim Dowd, Marek Svatos
Edmonton Oilers	25,333,400	30,933,984	14	0	Radek Dvorak, Todd Harvey, Rem Murray, Mike Peca, Dick Tarnstrom, Igor Ulanov, Ales Hemsky, Joffrey Lupul, Jarrett Stoll
Minnesota Wild	37,865,500	41,837,557	19	0
Vancouver Canucks	33,450,000	40,175,86	11	1	Taylor Pyatt, Anson Carter, Trevor Linden, Richard Park, Eric Weinrich, Josh Green, Artem Chubarov, Ryan Kesler, Lukas Krajicek, Mika Noronen

So Horc is done, for $3.6 million a year. It's interesting that TSN didn't note that Lupul is also still a RFA, but whatever. I'll also ignore the Lindros rumours. I guess it is a business, but something seems off when Le GG is sent packing, and a guy who refused to play in small-market Quebec City is welcomed into town.

In other news, Joni Pitkanen re-signed with the Flyers. It's a one-year deal. Anyone know the money involved? TSN has it as undisclosed. I'd like to know how much closer the Flyers are to the wall.

Via The FAN960 radio this morning, I learned that Darren McCarty has gotten remarried. Congratulations from me -- I'm happy for him (and his new wife seems lovely). He's had a tough few years: he had to quit the bottle; he got divorced; and in April, filed for bankruptcy with debts of $US6.2M, including $185k to three casinos.

So where does a guy who is a self-described "adrenalin junkie" who can't drink or gamble get married? Why, Vegas, of course!

I desperately hope DMac stays out of trouble after his hockey career, which is probably even money to last until the end of this season but no longer.

*Picture found here

Today, 91.7 The Bounce gave Edmontonians the chance to say goodbye to Georges Laraque. They showed a clip tonight on the news, and I was pleased and astounded to see the number of people who went to the station to say goodbye. I don't have a story to link to, or a photo, but the lineup must have gone for a couple of blocks. The news report claimed that "thousands" came to bid farewell, and I believe it. Just an awesome sight. I wish I had known of it before the fact.

Sniff. Sniff.

***Friday Update*** A couple of stories are now up. Thanks to Rod for the links.

This might be my favourite Darryl Sutter quote ever:

"Jimmy is lucky to have a great coach as his general manager"

Having heard it on the radio as well, I'm 99% certain he was being serious, though he may wish now that he had chosen his words differently...

Also, in the Sun, Eric Francis confirms my memory of Playfair's judgement back in 2002. Says Playfair, 3+ years later:

"Was I nervous and did I wonder if I'd ever get this chance again? Absolutely 100 percent for sure, I did.

"But I never left the whole process with a sour taste in my mouth or felt slighted at all.

"Regardless of the outcome, my decision to turn it down was based on the right principles.

"I would have been the third young coach to come into the organization in three years and you can't expect the players, the fans or the owners to believe that's the best move."

Beauty.

**The more I think about it, the more negative I get about the Jeff Friesen signing. At least it's only a one-year deal. The reports have his salary at either $1.3M or $1.6M; I'm going to assume that this difference is due to some incentive clause, which I suppose begs the questions:

1. What milestones is he rewarded for passing?
2. (this question applies even if the premise is flawed) What is expected/hoped from him, or rather, what would constitute a successful year for Friesen?

I've been going over his numbers, and I just don't see the upside. His career high in points was 63, all the way back in 97/98. His high in a year starting with a "2" is 51, back in 02/03 (he also had 10 goals for the Devils in the playoffs that season, which is the absolute most recent bit of data that shows he might be offensively talented).

But forget all that; last season's numbers are much, much worse. In his defense, he went from the Devils to the Caps to the Ducks, with at least one trip through waivers: certainly not ideal conditions for a guy to excel. But:

• At even strength last season, Friesen had 9 points in 546mins of TOI. That's less than 1pt/60, which is unbelievably dismal. The lowest Flames forwards, none of whom were expected to contribute really anything offensively, were Nilson, Yelle, McCarty, and Richie: all between 1.0 and 1.1ESP/60.
• On the powerplay, Friesen had 2 points in 133mins of TOI. Yeah, that's 0.9PPP/60. By way of comparison, Iginla, Huselius, Langkow, Phaneuf, and Ference were all between 4 and 6PPP/60. Even Stephane Yelle had 4PPP in his 60mins of powerplay time.
• He was a Minus player for a good Ducks team in both the regular season and the playoffs.

What to say? He'd better be a hell of a guy in the dressing room, because statistically, he's a poor man's Shean Donovan (never thought I'd use that phrase!).

**To follow up a bit, Yes, I'm happy to see that the Flames have moved Jim Playfair into the Head Coaching position. He's got a lot of pressure on him, but I think he's well-equipped to handle it. He's a smart guy; he has HC experience (in the AHL) and NHL experience (as the Flames AC for 2-1/2 seasons); and he knows the team.

I also have warm feelings about his judgement. This is all from memory, so correct me if I'm wrong, but: when the Flames fired Greg Gilbert, they didn't have a replacement ready to go, and wanted to put an interim coach in place (which ended up being Al Macneil). At the time, Playfair was the HC of the Saint John Flames, and Ken King/Craig Button offered him the job -- with the Interim tag.

A lot of guys would jump at any opportunity to become an NHL HC, even though the circumstances are both lousy and tenuous (Therrien and Torchetti being the most recent examples), because they never know when another opportunity might come up. But Playfair said No. He essentially told the Flames that he would accept the Head Coaching job c/w a suitable contract and committment, but that he wasn't going to do it on a caretaker basis.

Objectively this seems like a wise decision (more obviously so in retrospect), but it takes some stones. That might have been the only offer he ever got to coach an NHL team, but he declined it because the situation wasn't right for him (and the team) to be successful. I'm real, real glad it worked out for him.

(Footnote: yes, JP is the first former Oiler player to be the Head Coach of the Flames).

**The chatter on the radio about Coach Playfair's promotion included pretty much unanimous agreement that this spells the end of the era of the single coach/GM. They may be right, but the discussion was weird: they were basically saying that oh, now that there's a salary cap, there's a lot more work for the GM. I don't get this.

Surely the "new" work created by the cap (say, more number crunching, financial & statistical projections etc.) is the first thing delegated by any GM, not just one who's also the coach. Surely the GM's roles of supervisor, leader, and decision-maker are substantially the same as they've always been.

The element of truth, I suppose, would be that with more roster turnover, summers are busier with more decision-making. NHL Head Coach is a fairly consuming job; even if you assume that during the season you can do both jobs by delegating the right tasks from both, you need a vacation at some point.

From my own perspective on the Flames, the reason I'm glad the job is being split up is for the checks & balances. As I discussed at length in May, the Sauve situation was made much worse by Darryl Sutter's dual role. If a comparable situation comes up next January, the coach has a GM who can tell him, "You screwed up! Go kiss and make up, and if a good deal presents itself, I'll make it."

**Yes, Tie Domi was in Calgary over the weekend. I am assuming for my own mental health that it was to watch the chuckwagon races and spend a day in Banff, and will entertain no rumours or suggestions to the contrary. Now I'm going to end this post, so I can cross my fingers and leave them that way until he signs with the Penguins or somebody.

Go Flames.

You never hear a word from him. And no one says a word about him, unless it is in rage. But he was once a king in Edmonton, the man who gave us Gretzky, Sather, and Stanley Cups. He was friends with Presidents and Prime Ministers. He even ran for Canada's top political job in 1983. Yet he is nowhere to be found. And I am struggling even now to type in his name, for fear of bad luck and hard feelings. Does he even still live in Edmonton? Or has he scrambled into the wilderness, a Desert Father fleeing persecution from the Oilers Nation? Pe..Pet...Peter...I can't do it. I can't do it without getting angry and scared. And I know I'm not the only one. You try and say it, Oilers fan. Go ahead. Say it right now. If you succeed, note what next pops into your mind. Or if you're at work, in Edmonton, go up to a colleague and say his name. See if the face scrunches up, see if steam exits the ears. Keep an eye out for a sudden left hook.

Tyler and I often talk about the similarities between the Boston Red Sox and the Oilers. It's not an exact comparison, but there are things. Early franchise dominance. The trading of the greatest player to ever play the game, and consequent national icon, for peanuts. The relative lack of championship success after the trade. But the similarities don't just end with the team and its activities. They spread into the attitude that fans have about the franchise. With Oilers fans, as with Red Sox fans, there is a persistent and pervasive belief in Murphy's law. Whatever bad that can happen, will happen. In Boston, this fatalistic, pessimistic attitude is, in essence, natural. You'd expect it of an Irish diaspora. But in Edmonton, it's an attitude that has been developed. And that development has its roots in that guy I was talking about.

Throughout the 1980's, the City of Edmonton had its way with winning. The Edmonton Eskimos won five Grey Cups from 1978-1982, a feat that has never been matched. They also won the Grey Cup in 1987. The Drillers won the NASL indoor championship in 1981. In 1984, the Edmonton Trappers became the first Canadian team to win the Pacific Coast League Championship. The Oilers, of course, were re-writing the NHL record books in the 80's, with perhaps the greatest ensemble of hockey players the game has ever known. Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, Kurri, Fuhr, Anderson, Lowe, Moog. Five Stanley Cup appearances in six years. Four Cups in five years. All for a team that began as an NHL franchise in 1979.

The Trade started the downward slide. On August 9, 1988, Wayne Gretzky was traded to the Los Angeles Kings for Jimmy Carson, Martin Gelinas, and three 1st round draft picks, which yielded Corey Foster, Martin Rucinsky, and Nick Stajduhar. Oh, and a transfer of $15 million dollars was involved. Fans were livid, blaming Gretzky and his wife Janet Jones. But mostly, they blamed the owner. It got so bad in Canada that one Member of Parliament, Nelson Riis, tabled a motion in the House of Commons to block the trade. What's-His-Name was burned in effigy, and Edmontonians learned the hard way that nothing is sacred, that no one, not even the greatest player to ever lace up the skates, is untouchable.

After that, things went from bad to worse. Well, not really. The Oilers won one more Stanley Cup, with what is in hindsight a pretty fantastic roster. But at the time it seemed like they were coasting on fumes, that the sheer will of Messier and Lowe was allowing them to advance. Soon after that fifth Stanley Cup in 1990, the rest of the Oilers core skipped town. Moog and Coffey had been shipped out before Gretzky. Messier, Fuhr, Anderson, Kurri, Lowe, Huddy, Tikkanen, and MacTavish left after The Great One, usually ending up in Los Angeles or New York. Those teams went to the Finals. The Rangers even won the Stanley Cup in 1994. The old Oilers would drop into town for a game every once in a while, big smiles on their faces. The Oilers? Missed the playoffs. Again. And again. And again. The fans? Depressed beyond belief. Every day they would open the paper, to find that something new and horrible had happened. A beloved player was demanding a trade, or had just been traded. The owner was complaining about not being able to run the team. And so on. He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named threatened Edmontonians, constantly. HE almost sold the Oilers, twice, to men who were planning on moving the team. Edmontonians lost their minds. Oilers fans became embittered, stopped going to games, and Peter Pocklington's name became mud.

Peter Pocklington.

There. I said it. That's his name. Peter Pocklington. Peter Puck. Fuckhead. Asshole. Traitor. Judas. Whore. Sleazeball.

Ahhh. That feels better. Okay, one more. YOU FUCKING-DOUCHEBAG-SON-OF-A-FUCKING-BITCH-COCKSUCKER.

Whew. I feel great. I think. Wait. Do I? No, not really. But why? Isn't that cockfuck the root of all our hockey anxiety? I guess so. But if I think about, that was a long time ago. And a lot has happened since then. New owners, who give all for the city, the region, and the team, and make nothing off of it. Glenn Sather is long gone. So too are his cronies, like Barry Fraser. Old players have come back to the city, and the organization. Lowe, MacTavish, Huddy and Simpson. Four members of the Oilers dynasty have been inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame, and each one has returned to claim, like an ex-lover, that we were their favorite all along. The Heritage Classic. A Game 7 upset of the Dallas Stars. Coming back from being down 3-1 to defeat the Colorado Avalanche. Olympic Gold in 2002, with Smyth and Brewer on the Canadian team, and Gretz and Lowe managing it. The Stanley Cup Finals in 2006. All good things. And yet there have been many bad things in that time. Year after year of overtime playoff losses to the Dallas Stars. More players who have left, never to return. Joseph, Weight, Guerin. A lockout, with no Stanley Cup being awarded. Mike Comrie. Torino. A Game 7 loss in the Stanley Cup Finals. Chris Pronger. Georges Laraque.

Pocklington has had nothing to do with any of it. Oilers fans have suffered through new highs, and new lows, and it has all occurred since he sold the team. So why do we still hate the man? Is he a boogeyman that we cling to as a reminder of what can be, a superstitious loathing we still adhere to without any connection to reality? Probably both, and more. I do know that he continues to haunt us, all these years later. The euphoria over winning a second round series against the San Jose Sharks tells me this, as does the hair-pulling and eye-gouging over Chris Pronger's trade request. I had hoped that getting to the Stanley Cup Finals would help us, help me, exorcise the man, but the Game 7 loss, Lauren Pronger and a depleted defensive core has sent us three steps back. Our ups are still too up, and our downs are still way, way, too down.

We have to let go of this man. We have to let go of him for our sake, and for his. It'll probably take a Championship. No one talks about Babe Ruth and the Red Sox anymore. One of the best things I have ever read is a story written by Bill Simmons, after the Red Sox won Game Three of the World Series in 2004. The story is called, "The Next Win Is For Everyone." At the time, the Sox were one win away from ending almost a century of suffering. The whole article is filled with stories from Sox fans, talking about how they could finally get on with their lives if the Red Sox won the World Series. The article still makes me weep, even today. It sounds insane, unless you are a sports fanatic. Then you know. Simmons goes on to give a list of "who to win it fors," which I hope to someday crib. I'd do it after the fact, of course, because I'm an Eagles fan, Red Sox fan, and an Oilers fan. Plus I'm Irish, and knowledgeable on Greek Tragedy. But the story begins with the Sports Gal asking Simmons a very simple question: "How will your life change if the Red Sox win the World Series?" His answer?

"That's easy," I told her. "Everything would get wiped away. No more baggage. No more Babe Ruth pictures, Buckner highlights, fans walking around with Curse signs, 1918 chants, announcers hinting at doom around every corner. Everyone would just leave us alone. We'd be just another baseball team."

I like that answer. I like that answer alot. I look forward to the day when the Edmonton Oilers can become just another hockey team. And I look forward to the day when Peter Pocklington can become just another man, rather than what he is now, a breathing metaphor of one city's pain.

Andy hit on most of the general highlights of the NHL schedule. Calgary's full sked is here, and features:

• Ten back-to-backs. Five are Road/Road; four are Home/Road or Road/Home; and one is Home/Home.
• One 6-game roadtrip in December is their longest roadie by far. They have no 5-gamers, and only two 4-gamers. The majority of the schedule is alternating 2-3 game home stands/road trips.

A few more notes from a very quick glance through things:

• That BoA schedule is deja vu; home/away is spread out better than last season, but the dates are very similar.
• Interconference: it's a bit different than last season. The East-West games start right away (CGY's roadtrip to the NE Div is Games 4-7 of the season) and are spread through the whole season, whereas last season they started in December and were over before the Olympic break.
• So, the Oilers, finishing the season on a 6-game roadtrip... I've never heard of such a thing, but I guess that's the price you pay if you want to host the World Curling Championships. (If you're keeping track, that's a 5-gamer to make way for the cowboys, a 6-gamer to make way for the curlers, and a 7-gamer to make even fewer guys want to play in Edmonton, i.e. for no apparent reason.)
• The Jan.13 BoA is Part 3 of this season's Hockey Day in Canada.

Lastly, a recurring question on the blog last season was, "Why do teams playing back-to-backs in Alberta always seem to play in Calgary the first night?" We counted, and they did: I figured it was probably a wash against Edmonton's greater number of back-to-backs and longer roadtrips.

Anyway, by my count, there are 9 occurrences this year of a road team playing on back-to-back nights in Calgary and Edmonton. 6 times they start in Calgary (DET, CBJ, CAR, PHX, MIN, NSH) and 3 times they open in Edmonton (PHX, LA, ANA). We'll see if the Oil can take a bit better advantage of it this time.

The Edmonton Oilers 2006-2007 schedule is up on the NHL page. I am going to keep updating this all day.

***Update**Amazingly (or not, considering), the NHL schedule is actually missing games. Thanks to those who alerted me to this. The Oilers page has a full schedule, as well as a pre-season schedule. Some of this info will have to be changed as I learn more, then. I do wish the Oilers had their schedule as a list, rather than month by month. It would make this alot easier. Of course, it wouldn't be a problem if the NHL could actually publish a full calendar.

Battle of Alberta Dates
October 5: Calgary @ Edmonton
October 7: Edmonton @ Calgary
November 21: Calgary @ Edmonton
December 31:Edmonton @ Calgary
January 13:Edmonton @ Calgary
January 20: Calgary @ Edmonton
March 3: Calgary @ Edmonton
April 7: Edmonton @ Calgary

Chris Pronger
October 25: Edmonton @ Anaheim
November 28: Anaheim @ Edmonton
January 18: Anaheim @ Edmonton
March 9: Edmonton @ Anaheim

Other Notable Dates
October 23: Phoenix @ Edmonton (Le GG's return)
December 6: Carolina @ Edmonton (Stanley Cup Final rematch)
October 28: Washington @ Edmonton (The Ovechkin Show comes to Edmonton)


Some early thoughts:

• Opening night against the Lames will be banner night, which means nothing other than that there is a 90-95% chance of the Oilers losing that game.

• Still no Sidney Crosby in Edmonton.

• Does anyone else find that the NHL's page often screws up when you try to scroll down?

• Only play 4 day games this year.

• 6 sets of back-to-back games before January, 3 in January alone, and 3 the rest of the year. Only one of those sets is a home-and-home (October 16/17 with Vancouver)

• The longest away streaks are for 5 games in November, 7 games in February, and THE LAST 6 GAMES OF THE YEAR!!

• The longest home streaks are for 7 in November/early December, and 6 in March.

• No Northeast division games in Edmonton. That means no Leafs or Canadiens games here. Yes! Sadly, it also means no Sabres game here.

• The Red Wings and the Blackhawks will be the only two Original Six teams to play in Edmonton.

• The All-Star Game is January 24, 2007, in Dallas.

• The pre-season opener with Phoenix will be played in Winnipeg.

• Training camp will be held in Grande Prairie this year.

• I have yet to see a date for the traditional ass-whupping that is the Golden Bears vs. Oilers Rookies game.

• Oilers fans outside Alberta can look for games in Montreal (November 7), Toronto (February 17), Ottawa (February 20), and Vancouver ( October 16, December 4, January 5, and February 1).

• The back-to-back with the Canucks and Flames on December 30 and 31st will be fantastic.

• Only one game has been announced for t.v. so far (game 2 versus the Flames).

I finally got an email address where people can contact me. It is andygrabia@gmail.com, and can also be found on the left side of this page under "Contributors." I'm going to get you to go ahead and feel comfortable contacting me, mkay? Um, yeah.

The 2006 Stanley Cup playoffs line-up cards are currently up for auction on NHL.com. The bids are quite low so far, in my own estimation. Interestingly, there is only one line-up card available from the Calgary Flames, while there are seven available from the Edmonton Oilers. I wonder why that is? Is their organization against helping people out? Calgary got just as far as Edmonton, I see no reason why they couldn't give up more...

Oh. Wait. Riiigght. Ha. Sorry. My bad. Ha. Carry on. Charity is good. Give all you can!

Kudos to Matt and Sacamano, as well as BoA's loyal and (mostly) erudite readers/contributors. Vue Weekly has named The Battle of Alberta, along with mc79hockey, the "Bestest Way to Follow the Oilers."

"You can read John MacKinnon’s and Terry Jones’s forced-out-to-fill-pages musings if you want, but for my money, the most entertaining and thoughtful sports commentary of the past year didn’t come from those paid to deliver it, but from the fans. While they don’t possess the insider scoops of the real press, and their democratic nature can lead to some silliness from time to time, blogs like battleofalberta.blogspot.com and mc79hockey.com, and columns like Vue’s own In the Box provided unique and passionate takes on our favourite game, during one of the most exciting seasons in recent memory. This stuff may not be the future of journalism, but it is a nice diversion from Don Cherry telling us to support our troops while there’s a Stanley Cup Final going on." (DB)

Hmm. I wonder who that "DB" fellow could be?

GM Sutter has replaced Coach Sutter with Coach Playfair. As previously discussed, I approve.

Memo to the new coach: I have no idea how long your career will last, or where it will head, but it is extremely unlikely that you will ever have a two-year opportunity like you do now. You have a huge core -- talented mix of youth and middle-age -- with a Vezina Trophy winner to boot. I hope you're not inclined to treat this as a learning experience.

(click image to enlarge)
As of today, July 11, 2006, this is what we know. I will assume that we sign Hemsky, Horcoff, Stoll and Lupul. Other than that, I make no assumptions. This defence could end up being Canes and Sabres good, or it could end up being Conkkanen bad. Just what is Kevin Lowe thinking, is what I would like to know. It seems to me like you could write a book about everything that's happened to the Oilers this summer. Start with the playoff run, move into the Pronger fiasco, the draft, free agency, and the filling of a roster. And do it all through Lowe. It could and would be a fantastic read. But we know that won't happen, so I have to ask: where the hell are Edmonton's hockey reporters? Why are we not getting insight into the thinking and strategizing of Oilers management? Or the absence of both? I don't care. Just a few articles, please. Pretty please?

Thanx to Jesse for this link. It will indeed warm Sacamano's heart.

Oh, yeah. $6 million a year for Martin Havlat? Hey, Kool-Aid!!!

Mike Peca is presently unemployed. The wage he (cough) earned in his previous job is no more relevant now than the wage I earned in mine. There are two major problems with using the phrase "he is willing to accept a pay cut" (to play at home, in the right situation, for a contender, etc.):

1. Per the above - it implies that there is pay to be cut, which there is not.
2. To call it "pointing out the obvious" is beyond understatement. If you were a crime reporter, would you ever write that Robert Pickton is "willing to accept jail time"? Jeez.

Come mid-September, I'm sure of a few things. The sun will rise every morning in the east. My golf game will still stink. And Mike Peca, if he's playing hockey, will be doing it for less money than he did last time.

Salaries are the best numbers I could come up with. In the case of players (e.g. Kipper, Warrener) where this season's salary is different from the cap number (AAV), the cap number is shown.

This gives us a depth chart of something like this:

Mayonnaise in the sun lasts longer than most line combinations in Calgary, so I don't pay them much mind. The D-pairings seem to endure a bit more, though: I'm interested to see who Robyn Regehr's regular partner will be now that Leopold is gone.

Interesting to see that (assuming Lombardi re-signs) the Flames will be hitting training camp with 13 experienced NHLers at forward. Seems like bad news for guys like Eric Nystrom and Carson Germyn, and makes me wonder about the Friesen signing. Like, wonder, "Why'd we sign Friesen?"

- It's just a one-year deal, so that's good.
- It's for $1.3M (or $1.6M, depending on who you listen to), so that's mostly bad. (Pro$: it's not too likely that spending that sum, per the bottom line in the table above, will hamstring the Flames flexibility later in the season. Con$: but it might! Plus, the value of what he produces is unlikely to be worth that figure.)
- What if Eric Nystrom comes to play in September? What do you do with him?
- Can Jeff Friesen still play? I can't say as he blew my socks off in the playoffs (16GP, 3-1-4, -1). This is a guy who's supposed to make the Flames better?

Injuries make this guessing mostly pointless, but here's a shiny penny that says Friesen will be a healthy scratch more that any of the 12 other forwards listed above.

Anyway! I like the looks of the roster. There's really no one that needs to be protected from strong opposition (unless that 2nd line gets rolled out as shown). The acquisition of Zyuzin goes a long way to restoring one of the best D-corps in the league, and while I will miss Shean Donovan, I prefer Alex Tanguay.

Calgary won the Northwest Division by 8 points last season, and this offseason, they've improved. Go Flames.

Cue up the cowbell, because I'm going to be out of town for the next couple of days. I can't tell you exactly what I'll be doing, but I can say that it involves the sovereign nation of Latveria and a surfboard.

Until I (hopefully) return, amuse yourself with the brilliance of Mr. Fenwick, who should be delivering that Jarmoe post any day now, as well as others in the Oilogosphere. Tyler dropped a meandering post this evening, devoid of commas and semicolons (as per usual). IOF has a new member, and a new post. Now that Marty Reasoner is back in Oilers digs, Loxy will likely be preoccupied with her friend. But she may come up for air some time soon, so be sure to check her out. Black Dog and Lowetide will likely have new content up by tomorrow, so check them out, too. Mike, PM and Chris! are probably drunk and debating about whether they would rather take Dave Brown, Dave Semenko, or Le GG into a streetfight with them. Keep an eye out for a post on that, or just one of Chris! pouring wine down Mike's Heston-like hairshirt. And last but not least, my boy Avi has delivered a post that warms by Moneyball-loving heart. It's all about exploiting market inefficiencies , baby! Bring on the cripples!


***Update*** Hell, let's make it our own game. Cosh started it with a wise move, but I fear Le GG is too timid to go into an streetfight with. So here's the question: Which Oiler, current or alum, would you take with you into an streetfight? Not some dance in a ring, either. An all-out, dirty, no-holds-barred brawl in the back streets. Maybe even give a top-three list if you so desire. I'm easy. And my surfboard blew up tonight, so apparently I'm not going away for the weekend. I knew I shouldn't have disobeyed the World Devourer!!!

[Postscript Added]

Propz to Colby Cosh on his actual reporting regarding the status of the 3rd-rounder the Oilers owe the Wild on account of their signing UFA Dwayne Roloson. Andy linked to it last night; I hope you've all had a chance to check it out and get familiar with the issue.

My reaction to what Cosh found out can be roughly summed up like this: Man, does the NHLPA suck. Here, again, is the CBA clause on What It Means To Be An Unrestricted Free Agent:

Such Player shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with such Player, without penalty or restriction, or being subject to any Right of First Refusal, Draft Choice Compensation or any other compensation or equalization obligation of any kind.

That's Cosh's emphasis. I have no doubt that the reason the three bolded words there were included was to "extinguish the old system of league-specified compensation for teams that lost players to unrestricted free agency". But if I was Roloson, or another player affected in the same way, I'd be hanging my grievance on the rest of the language in the clause, namely the words "completely" and "of any kind". Cosh again:

In the NHLPA's view, since the Oilers still had to outbid 29 other unencumbered teams for Roloson's services, the terms of the trade had no practical effect on Roloson's negotiating power.

This is a somewhat uncharitable (to Roloson) take on the economics of Unrestricted Free Agency, isn't it? The NHLPA is basically saying OK, since the top bid from one of the other 29 teams was $X, the fact that Lowe was willing to pay [$X + $1 + a 3rd-rounder] doesn't change that the most Roloson would have gotten was still [$X + $1].

Whatever -- that's far from obvious, but perhaps defensible. The biggest problem, though, is not the PA's take on Roloson's specific situation; it's their stance in general. Namely, that all this CBA language about "completely free" (and the word "unrestricted") was

not [intended] to prevent teams from seeking an extra conditional reward in a trade of a soon-to-be UFA.

Wow. Apparently the PA is A-OK with Clubs creating restrictions on individual players' future choices and earning power out of thin fucking air. The NHL Bylaws are not online, as far as I can tell: is this interpretation limited to "conditional rewards" associated with the players involved in the trade?

The Oilers sent the Wild a 1st-rounder and this conditional 3rd-rounder. What if, along with Roloson, the Wild had sent the Oilers a "conditional 3rd-rounder, if MIN signs Pisani or Dvorak as a UFA"? Would there be any difference in principle between that, and what the PA has approved? It's not like Roloson had the right to approve the terms of his trade; I don't think you can count "showing up as per his contractual obligations" as implicit approval.

What if the conditional picks were a 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-rounder? Ta-dah -- as far as the Oilers are concerned, he might as well be a restricted free agent!

What if, every time the Flames make a trade of any kind, they extract a conditional 1st-rounder in the event that the other team signs Kipper to a free agent deal in 2008? Suddenly "29 other unencumbered teams" becomes 25 -- or 20, or 15, etc.

This is all the more disheartening because if there's anything that the players "won" as part of the new CBA, it was the loosened free agency. In theory, it affords them the freedom to seek out the best deal for their own preferences: money, location, lifestyle, etc. at a younger age (i.e. for a greater portion of their career). But as it turns out, they didn't even get that. You think any of the players who were on the fence about approving the new CBA were clear on this?

The first time I touched on this issue, I had a question:

Will the NHLPA continue to advocate in earnest for individual players? I don't know, but there's not much of an incentive when "winning" a grievance just means that money transfers among the players.

I guess I have my answer. There's only two things you really need to know about economics, and the first is, Incentives Matter.

POSTSCRIPT: I may have let the hypotheticals etc. above cloud the central issue here.

On March 1st (pre-trade), Dwayne Roloson had a collection of rights coming up on July 1st: the right to negotiate a contract with any of 30 clubs "completely freely". When the Wild traded him they, as Tyler pointed out when he first brought this up,

...managed to do what the CBA otherwise prohibits and will collect compensation in certain circumstances. They had no interest in Roloson's rights following this season but somehow managed to create a compensable interest, albeit a limited one.

So on March 1st, Roloson had the right to negotiate an contract with the Oilers (as of July 1st) without encumbrances. Minnesota helped themselves to that right, and left Roloson with the right to negotiate a contract with any of 29 clubs "completely freely".

Perhaps the NHLPA could reconcile why that right has a value of $0 to Dwayne Roloson, but a value of a 3rd-round draft choice to the Wild/Oilers.

Furthermore, it is simply not true to say that the terms of the trade had no practical effect on Roloson's negotiating power. Any of the 29 other clubs who may have offered him a contract was aware that Edmonton was competing for his services with an encumbrance, and their offers may well have reflected that. (This is most obvious if you consider that Edmonton and one other team were serious -- in that case, the $X discussed above would have been affected by Edmonton's restriction.)

Conclusion #1: the NHLPA should be filing a grievance on Roloson's behalf, asking the League or Edmonton pay him the cash value of a 3rd-round draft choice. If the NHLPA isn't interested (and it appears that they're not), his agent needs to take the appropriate legal action with the PA and/or the League.

Conclusion #2: if you're an NHL hockey player, you'd better make sure that your personal agent is representing your individual interests vigourously, because you clearly cannot count on your union to do so.

ANDY UPDATE: 4:20 p.m., Friday afternoon

Tyler weighs in on his own site.

And yes, the time I posted this update actually was 4:20.

We are currently bickering over whether Kevin Lowe is a genius or lazy over at SportsMatters, in addition to discussing whether there is something horribly wrong with the city of Edmonton. Lowetide is discussing whether the Oilers will sign any UFAs, as well as the possibility of picking up Brad Stuart. And RiversQ talks about the stomach punches over at IOF. Check em out, and throw in your two cents.

A fantastic post from Cosh on Dwayne Roloson's new contract, based on an older (and also fantastic) post from Tyler.

Did Matt and I decide to leave town on the same day? I just got back, and I see that Spacek signed with the Sabres, Le GG signed with the Coyotes (sniff, sniff), Gaborik signed with the Wild, Cole signed with the Canes, and Calgary signed Tanguay and Friesen? Madness I say.

I have to admit that I don't care about Spacek leaving. I don't know what he got, and I don't care. He was another Boris Mironov, Igor Ulanov type of player: brilliant one second, and then absolutely retarded the next. I know our defence is depleted, but I really don't care about losing Spacek. My real concern is with losing Le GG. My favorite Oiler is now a Coyote, and my #27 jersey is officially retro. I must admit that I find Laraque's reason for leaving a little bewildering, though. He said he would be willing to play for less--$2.4 million for two years, btw?--but the Oilers wouldn't include a no-trade clause. So let me get this straight: you want a no-trade clause because you want to finish your career in Edmonton, so if the Oilers don't give it to you, you are going to go play somewhere else? I haven't had a chance to peek around the Oilogosphere yet, but am I the only one who finds this completely illogical?

Tomorrow I will update the defencemen chart I made, along with the salary cap stuff I did last night. Tonight it is too hot, too sad, and I have this quote dancing around in my head:

"We understand that John Henry must be embarrassed, frustrated and disappointed by his failure in this transaction. Unlike the Yankees, he chose not to go the extra distance for his fans in Boston."

If you know what I mean, you know what I mean.

Abboud has some pics of Jarret Stoll and his new girlfriend, Rachel Hunter, up on SportsMatters. Insert Rod Stewart jokes whenever you are ready.

Loxy? Someone wake her up. I could hear her head hit the floor from here.

Tyler is right. I have nothing but time to perform the most meaningless of tasks. Since companies with a paid staff of trained monkeys don't know how to do this, I did it myself. Below are the payroll commitments for each NHL team. I am going to do this by Division, starting with the Atlantic. I will add the Divisions as I finish them. The numbers are supplied by TSN, which is assuming roster spots for some players. Click on each team's link to see what I mean. I did not include buyouts, and the notable free agent names are taken from here. The NHLPA also has a payroll list by team, but it includes minor league players. I am going to just go with TSN's roster assumptions for now.

As you can see, there are already teams whose rosters are ripe for the plucking.

***Update*** If you read the comments, you will see why these numbers are in fact off. But it's the best I could do in light of the fact that nobody--not the NHL, not the NHLPA, and not any media outlets--provides info on contract length and terms.

Atlantic Division

Team	Payroll Commitments	# of Players Under Contract	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
New Jersey Devils	43,480,000	17	0	Ken Klee, Viktor Kozlov, Krzysztof Oliwa, Brian Gionta, Scott Gomez, Paul Martin
New York Islanders	22,642,200	11	2	Wyatt Smith, Aaron Asham, Rick DiPietro, Trent Hunter, Mike York
New York Rangers	35,203,500	16	0	Tom Poti, Martin Rucinsky, Jason Strudwick, Petr Sykora, Fedor Fedorov, Marcel Hossa, Dominic Moore, Michal Rozsival, Fedor Tyutin
Philadelphia Flyers	32,423,800	18	1	Donald Brashear, Eric Desjardins, Brian Savage, Chris Therien, Simon Gagne, Antero Niittymaki, Joni Pitkanen, RJ Umberger
Pittsburgh Penguins	16,362,600	14	0	Eric Boguniecki, Aleksey Morozov, Lyle Odelein, Ryan Vandenbussch, Colby Armstrong, Marc-Andre Fleury, Milan Kraft, Ryan Malone, Brooks Orpik

Northeast Division

Team	Payroll Commitments	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Boston Bruins	33,907,000	12	0	Tom Fitzgerald, Brad Isbister, Brian Leetch, Jiri Slegr, Patrice Bergeron, Brad Boyes, Milan Jurcina, David Tanabe
Buffalo Sabres	6,446,000	4	1	Maxim Afinogenov, Martin Biron, Daniel Briere, Brian Campbell, Tim Connolly, Jean-Pierre Dumont, Dmitri Kalinen,Ales Kotalik, Toni Lydman, Adam Mair, Ryan Miller, Jason Pominville, Taylor Pyatt,Derek Roy, Henrik Tallinder, Chris Thorburn,
Montreal Canadiens	30,044,800	16	1	Jan Bulis, Todd Simpson, David Aebischer, Chris Higgins, Mike Komisarek, Alexander Perezhogin, Mike Ribeiro, Michael Ryder
Ottawa Senators	35,027,600	13	0	Dominik Hasek, Vaclav Varada, Ray Emery, Martin Havlat, Chris Kelly, Chris Neil, Peter Schaefer, Antoine Vermette
Toronto Maple Leafs	36,492,180	16	0	Jason Allison, Alexander Khavanov, Eric Lindros, Luke Richardson, Clarke Wilm, Nik Antropov, Carlo Colaiacovo, Matt Stajan, Kyle Wellwood

Southeast Division

Team	Payroll Commitments	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Atlanta Thrashers	32,706,700	18	0	Serge Aubin, Peter Bondra, Mike Dunham, Ronald Petrovicky, Steve Shields, Niko Kapanen, Kari Lehtonen
Carolina Hurricanes	34,580,800	20	0	Mark Recchi, Glen Wesley, Erik Cole
Florida Panthers	23,937,200	11	0	Jamie McLennan, Bryan Allen, Alex Auld, Jay Bouwmeester, Nathan Horton, Ric Jackman, Juraj Kolnik, Steve Montador, Vaclav Nedorost, Mike Van Ryn, Stephen Weiss
Tampa Bay Lightning	36,299,000	16	3	Martin Cibak, Chris Dingman, Shane Willis, Ruslan Fedotenko, Dimitri Afanasenkov
Washington Capitals	15,386,200	10	0	Andrew Cassels, Jeff Halpern, Kris Beech

Central Division

Team	Payroll Commitments	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Chicago Blackhawks	19,288,900	10	0	Matthew Barnaby, Eric Daze, Mark Bell, Kyle Calder, Rene Bourque, Tuomo Ruutu, Jim Vandermeer, Radim Vrbata
Columbus Blue Jackets	26,509,000	14	2	Jan Hrdina, Trevor Letowski, Radoslav Suchy, Jason Chimera, Pascal LeClaire, Nikolai Zherdev
Detroit Red Wings	33,624,000	15	0	Cory Cross, Manny Legace, Brendan Shanahan, Jason Woolley, Dan Cleary, Johan Franzen, Brett Lebda, Jason Williams
Nashville Predators	29,596,000	13	0	Greg Johnson, Danny Markov, Yannic Perreault, Martin Erat, Scott Hartnell, David Legwand, Jordin Tootoo
St. Louis Blues	22,945,100	16	1	Petr Cajanek, Dean McAmmond, Scott Young, Eric Brewer, Doug Lynch, Jeff Woywitka, Jay McClemment

Pacific Division

Team	Payroll Commitments	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Anaheim Mighty Ducks	32,219,300	16	0	Jeff Friesen, Ilya Bryzgalov, Stanislav Chistov, Chris Kunitz, Andy McDonald, Vitali Vishnevsky
Dallas Stars	35,332,250	19	0	Steve Ott
Los Angeles Kings	31,576,000	16	1	Valeri Bure, Nathan Dempsey, Sean Avery, Eric Belanger, Dustin Brown, Mike Cammalleri, Mathieu Garon
Phoenix Coyotes	30,010,600	14	1	Oleg Kvasha, Geoff Sanderson, Mike Comrie, Ladislav Nagy, Oleg Saprykin
San Jose Sharks	31,387,600	15	1	Christian Ehrhoff, Marcel Goc, Mark Smith, Patrick Rissmiller

Northwest Division

Team	Payroll Commitments	# of Players Under Contract)	# of Salaries Undisclosed	Notable Names Not Signed
Calgary Flames	33,822,200	18	0	Brian Boucher, Cale Hulse, Mike LeClerc, Bryan Marchment, Chris Simon, Matt Lombardi, Alex Tanguay
Colorado Avalanche	32,780,100	16	0	Jim Dowd, Peter Budaj, John-Michael Liles, Marek Svatos, Kurt Sauer
Edmonton Oilers	22,559,400	14	0	Radek Dvorak, Todd Harvey, Georges Laraque, Rem Murray, Mike Peca, Sergei Samsonov, Jaroslav Spacek, Dick Tarnstrom, Igor Ulanov, Ales Hemsky, Shawn Horcoff, Joffrey Lupul, Jarrett Stoll
Minnesota Wild	28,787,500	14	0	Marc Chouinard, Derek Boogard, Pascal Dupuis, Marian Gaborik
Vancouver Canucks	36,420,000	11	0	Anson Carter, Trevor Linden, Richard Park, Eric Weinrich, Josh Green, Artem Chubarov, Ryan Kesler, Lukas Krajicek, Mika Noronen

Anyone care to take a stab at what the cash value is, USD$, of a third-round draft choice? A couple of you may know where I'm going with this; I'll follow up later in the week.

Alright, enough Oilers/Canucks stuff for the moment. The Flames roster is just about filled out; signing RFAs Tanguay and Lombardi are the biggest items left on Sutter's to-do list. Here, roughly, it is:



Budget/cap-wise, the wild card is Tanguay. His Cap$ figure will depend fairly heavily on the length of contract he signs. Longer term = higher number, roughly the $5M I've shown. If Sutter can't tie him up for 3+ years, the number could be quite a bit less.

I'm pretty sure the 13th F & 7th D will be at or about the minimum; the backup goalie should probably have a placeholder of $1M, which puts the Flames' salary committments at right about $41M.

I've noted before that, even if you easily have the $44M cap to spend, it seems pretty unwise to start the season much above $41M. $41M affords the flexibility during the season to have callups and injury replacements fairly comfortably, AND to address any needs that become glaring over the first few months (e.g. the dreaded Kipper-gets-hurt scenario).

So, adding salary is probably a no-go at this point, meaning that any upgrades/changes need to be salary neutral (or salary-deleted). Besides dumping Iginla for a package of guys (PASS), I don't know that there's many possibilities on that count either. Or is there?

A fascinating (and totally unexpected) consequence of this run on capable defensemen is this: I think Roman Hamrlik has suddenly become tradeable. I'm pretty sure the Flames could put his $3.5M to more effective use; they just need to find a trading partner that fits the following description:

• needs a D-man who can play Top 4 minutes
• needs a D-man who can play on the #1 PP unit, perhaps while a younger guy grows into it (i.e. same mentality Sutter had 12 months ago)
• has a bit of money to spend

The most obvious candidate here, unfortunately, is a close division rival where Hamrlik wore out his welcome once before, but I'm sure there's more. Plus, he's only got one year left on his deal. Surely, for some teams, paying Roman Hamrlik $3.5M for one season is preferable to paying Jaro Spacek $3.5M for three seasons.

Developing...?

Excellent pic on the front of the Edmonton Sun this morning. This little kid manages to express, non-verbally, what most of us who occasionally wear the flaming horse on our shoulder think of the Pronger/Lupul trade:



Also, we hack on the Sun quite a bit around here (well, mostly Terry Jones), but Robin Brownlee and Robert Tychkowski are actually pretty good. RT's piece on the Pronger media call ("Let me make this perfectly unclear ...") lays out the realities maturely, but doesn't let Pronger off the hook ("...that's his call. You don't have to like it or respect it, and I don't, but...").

A line in his companion piece on the "factless" rumours caught my eye, too. I know Pronger is trying to shield his wife, but if I said something like this to that end, I'd be in big, big trouble:

"She's the mother of my kids and my wife and somebody I love very much.

"It's sad that she's had to be put through a lot of this and not understand a lot of why she got dragged into the mix."

Emphasis mine.

Similar to what I did with "Be The GM" Part I, II, and III, I am going to spend some time looking at what the Oilers can and need to do now that they have traded Chris Pronger. I see that Pleasure Motors has done the same over at Covered In Oil. I haven't read it yet, but will do so after I post this. I am sure we are thinking many of the same things. This beast is going to be huge, and could be pointless by this time tomorrow. But what the hell, right? Oh, wait. Matt has that evaluation-of-Jarmoe-post that he promised us way back in April coming, so I may be hogging the page here. I hope he will forgive me.

Preliminary Thoughts
• I'm going to assume that Lowe will sign all his RFA's. Other than that, I'm not going to speculate much on who we should sign, but rather focus on what strategies we might want to explore to fill out the rosters.

• It's interesting to me that not a single Oilers UFA has signed anywhere else. Asking for a tad too much, perhaps?

• I hadn't even thought of it until now, but we got Joffrey Lupul, Ladislav Smid, a 2007 first-round pick, a conditional first-round pick and a 2008 second-round pick, as well as a year of Chris Pronger in his prime, for Eric Brewer, Jeff Woywitka and Doug Lynch. In essence, that is all it really cost us. I'm practically giddy after thinking of it in that manner.

• We are all in a panic, because right now the Oilers aren't very deep on the blueline. But taking a look at the type of money that has been thrown at free agent defencemen since July 1, I'm sure glad Kevin Lowe hasn't panicked. There is no other word for some of those contracts than ridiculous. There is no way I would be happy with Lowe throwing that kind of money around. I was mad enough at him for giving Roloson $4 million a year. The Oilers defence is now pretty much the same defence they had two years ago, and while it isn't amazing, it isn't awful. Since Matt loves the word so much, I'll say it again. It's "serviceable."

• In his telephone conference today, Lowe made a passing comment to Terry Jones about a two-tier system developing in the NHL. He never brought it up again, but I'm curious as to what he was thinking. It is obvious that he isn't impressed with the type of money being spent on unrestricted free agents, especially the defencemen. I wonder if we could get him on here to do an interview, like Billy Beane does with Athletics Nation. I am going to try and eliminate my inflamatory and foul language for awhile, in the hopes of making it a reality. First question: "Kevin, have you read Moneyball?"

• A year ago, Oilers fans were freaked that Lowe hadn't made any big moves. The phone lines were filled with people expressing their frustration. Well, Lowe came through. We got more than our fair share of trades and signings this year. I am going to try and keep reminding myself of this fact over the next few days. I may even turn it into a Zen Koan: "what is the sound of one GM waiting?"

• Jaroslav Spacek is going to soon become a very well-compensated man.

• Lost in the debate over the Pronger trade is the fact that Joffrey Lupul is actually a restricted free agent. We still have to sign the kid, if you can believe it. And I have no idea about Ladislav Smid. Can anyone give me his status?

• I believe Lupul's grandparents are also part of the ownership group. I think he should have to negotiate his deal with his Grandpappy.

• Getting Lupul also means that the Oilers now have three solid right wingers in Ales Hemsky, Fernando Pisani, and Lupul. One of them is likely going to have to move positions.

• Most Edmontonians are mad at Chris Pronger. But can you imagine if you made the grave error of buying a Chris Pronger jersey over the past two months? If you bought it at the beginning of the season, at least you got some wear and tear out of it. But I can totally imagine some poor old lady deciding six weeks ago that she was finally going to cave and buy a Pronger jersey. I mean, why not? He's gonna be here for four more years, right? Wrong. I expect to read in the Edmonton Sun about someone suing Chris and Lauren within the next eight to ten days.

• Teams that have been very silent: Buffalo, Montreal, San Jose, Dallas, Philadelphia and Chicago.

• Martin Biron is still in Buffalo, J.S. Giguere is still in Anaheim, David Aebischer is still in Montreal, and Evgeni Nabokov is still in San Jose.

• If Dominek Hasek were smart, he would stay in game shape, and just sit until next year's trading deadline. Someone will certainly call him, and he'll get a nice paycheck for two-three months work.

Oilers Lineup As Of July 3rd, 2006 (Salary)

Player	2006-2007 Salary (US$)
Dwayne Roloson	$4 million
Ryan Smyth	$3.5 million
Fernando Pisani	$2.5 million
Jason Smith	$1.976 million
Steve Staios	$1.615 million
Ethan Moreau	$1.026 million
Marc-Andre Bergeron	$969,000
Marc-Antoine Pouliot	$942,400
Raffi Torres	$925,000
Robbie Schremp	$860,000
Matt Greene	$855,000
Jussi Markkanen	$850,000
Jeff DesLauriers	$554,000
Total	$20,572,400

Oilers Lineup As Of July 3rd, 2006 (Depth Chart)
(click image to enlarge)

Oilers Free Agents As Of July 3, 2006*

Player	Type	Age	2005-2006 Salary (US$)
Mike Peca	Group III UFA	32	$3.99 million
Sergei Samsonov	UFA	27	$2.77 million
Jaroslav Spacek	Group III UFA	32	$2.25 million
Dick Tarnstrom	Group III UFA	31	$1.6 million
Radek Dvorak	Group III UFA	29	$1.596 million
Ty Conklin	UFA	29	$1.14 million
Georges Laraque	Group III UFA	29	$1.083 million
Shawn Horcoff	Group II RFA	27	$1 million
Ales Hemsky	Group II RFA	22	$901,740
Joffrey Lupul	Group II RFA	22	$900,600
Igor Ulanov	Group III UFA	36	$900,000
Jarret Stoll	Group II RFA	24	$501,600
Rem Murray	Group III UFA	33	$450,000

*I did not place minor league players in this list.

Unrestricted Free Agents Who Are Still Available

Defencemen: Danny Markov (Nas), Tom Poti (NYR), Aki Berg (Tor)

Forwards: Jeff Friesen (Ana), Marty Reasoner (Bos), Mark Recchi (Car), Eric Daze (Chi), Brendan Shanahan (Det), Jeremy Roenick (LA), Jan Bulis (Mon), Yanic Perreault (Nas), Viktor Kozlov (NJ), Martin Rucinsky (NYR), Petr Sykora (NYR), Vaclav Varada (Ott), Oleg Kvasha (Pho), Geoff Sanderson (Pho), Petr Cajanek (STL), Scott Young (STL), Jason Allison (Tor), Eric Lindros (Tor), Anson Carter (Van), Richard Park (Van), Jarkko Ruutu (Van), Jeff Halpern (Was)

I should note that there are other UFA players available. I just didn't list them. You can see the complete list here.

What To Do, Option I: Raid The RFA Market
This one was floated around today. I have never really understood why General Managers shy away from trying out the restricted free agent route. As Matt has noted, it doesn't cost the pursuing GM very much, and the defending GM always has the option to match. The existence of the salary cap actualy makes me think that it should be used more, as a specific tactic to harm irresponsible General Managers or force General Managers in your own division to waste money. I only remember two times in recent memory that teams have tried the RFA route: when the Rangers went after Joe Sakic, and when the Canes went after Sergei Fedorov. They failed both times, as the offers were matched. The difference now, of course, is that some teams just won't be able to match, because of the cap issue. The most famous RFA signing is likely the Scott Stevens/Brendan Shanahan deal. Interestingly, Curtis Joseph and Rod Brind'Amour were the original compensation offer made to the Devils for Shanahan. The Oilers also lost someone through restricted free agency in the early 90's, if I remember correctly, but I don't remember which players were involved. I do remember that we were robbed. And I want to say it involved the Devils, but I can't be sure.

I actually don't have a limitless amount of time, so I can't go through each NHL team roster and determine their current payroll commitments. If TSN would take the time to put a total at the bottom of their payroll commitments, we would know for sure, but I am going to guess that at least four teams are pressed up against the cap wall: Vancouver, Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Boston. Buffalo will likely also be, if they sign all their RFA's. And Toronto might be too, since they have spent around 50% of their cap room on four defencemen and Mats Sundin. If Lowe were to look at grabbing a restricted free agent, these would be the places to go. The problem, of course, is that an opposing General Manager can also decide to go after your restricted free agents. It may make sense from an aggressive management perspective to go after a Eric Staal, Jay Bouwmeester, Patrice Bergeron or Joni Pikanen. From a defensive standpoint, however, you have just opened up your flank to a bunch of GM's who all of a sudden decide they would very much like to get their hands on Ales Hemsky or Shawn Horcoff.

If Lowe does go after a restricted free agent, I hope it is Joni Pitkanen of the Philadelphia Flyers. Like I said in the comments section today, I like this idea for four reasons:

a) Pitkanen is a fantastic young player, and could immediately become our number one defenceman.

b) Philly is close to the cap, and will be hard-pressed to match.

c) I hate Bobby Clarke.

d) I have little qualms about poaching players from Clarke and Ed Snider. They have signed players to ridiculous contracts for years, and it led to a preposterous escalation of NHL salaries that ultimately led to the lockout. It would be poetic justice to see the small-market Edmonton Oilers steal a player from them.

Which Restricted Free Agents Are Still Available?*

Defencemen: Paul Mara (Bos), Dmitri Kalinin (Buf), Mike Commodore (Car), John-Michael Liles (Col), Marek Svatos (Col), Jay Bouwmeester (Fla), Mike Van Ryn (Fla), Bryan Allen (Fla) Joni Pitkanen (Phi), Brooks Orpik (Pit), Christian Ehrhoff (SJ)

Forwards: Andy McDonald (Ana), Patrice Bergeron (Bos), Brad Boyes (Bos), Maxim Afinogenov (Buf), Daniel Briere (Buf), Tim Connolly (Buf), Erik Cole (Car), Mark Bell (Chi), Kyle Calder (Chi), Tuomo Ruutu (Chi), Nikolai Zherdev (CBJ), Nathan Horton (Fla), Stephen Weiss (Fla), Marian Gaborik (Min), Mike Ribeiro (Mon), Michael Ryder (Mon), Martin Erat (Nas), Scott Hartnell (Nas), Scottie Upshall (Nas), Brian Gionta (NJ), Scott Gomez (NJ), Mike York (NYI), Martin Havlat (Ott), Peter Schaefer (Ott), Antoine Vermette (Ott), Simon Gagne (Phi), Ladislav Nagy (Pho), Oleg Saprykin (Pho), Ruslan Fedotenko (TB), Nik Antropov (Tor), Matt Stajan (Tor), Ryan Kesler (Van)

* I left goalies off this list.


What To Do, Option II: Make Trades
This one makes more sense, although we may have to give up young talent in return. Then again, looking at what we gave up for Pronger, and looking at what we got back for him when we traded him, it might cost us very little. Teams that have no choice but to make a trade, whether it is due to cap problems or bizarre trade requests, can ultimately ask for little in return. That is what happened when we acquired Pronger from the Blues, and Lowe may indeed be thinking of doing it again. I agree with Tyler that Lowe is much better with trades than strict negotiations. Like I said earlier, I don't know for sure who is up against the cap wall, but there are probably several teams who have to move players as part of their short-term or long-term plans. All of the free agent defencemen signings had to have pushed more than a few teams up against the cap wall, and some of them may be planning on moving others to offset the cost. Then again, it might have just been the usual General Manager stupidity prevalent in every professional sport. Either way, whether intentional or not, some players have to be on the trading block. One example would be New Jersey, who likely can't keep both Brian Gionta and Scott Gomez.

By the way, if you haven't done so already, go out and buy a copy of Michael Lewis' Moneyball. Don't even continue reading the rest of this post. It'll be here when you are done. Go. Now. Go.


What To Do, Option III: Save The Money For Next Season
People won't like it, but I'll ask it anyways: do we really have to spend all of our money now? Is there anything wrong with having a pretty good set of of forwards, pretty good goaltending, and an average defence? Does every single thing about our team need to be awesome? And do we have to spend all of our money to do so? I don't have any answers to these questions, mind you, but I do think they need to at least be asked. Can we go a year without making the playoffs, if it means we get to go back again for the five-year period after that?

Thanks to Chris McMurty, who ripped the list off of the HF Boards for me, we can all have a look at who will be available at the end of next season.

UFA & RFA For The 2007-2008 Season

Centers: David Legwand*, Peter Forsberg, Joe Sakic, Daniel Briere*, Pavel Datsyuk, Scott Gomez, Petr Nedved, Marty Murray, Tyler Arnason, Michal Handzus, Andy McDonald*, Ian Laperriere (player/team option for `07-08), Martin Straka, Radek Bonk, Pierre Turgeon, Sammie Pahlsson, Bryan Smolinski, Scott Nichol

Wingers: Marian Gaborik, Martin Havlat, Alex Tanguay*, Simon Gagne*, Shane Doan, Todd Bertuzzi, Teemu Selanne, Paul Kariya, Brendan Morrow, Erik Cole, Mike Knuble, Fred Modin, Kyle Calder*, Ales Kotalik*, JP Dumont*, Maxim Afinogenov*, Darcy Tucker, Ladislav Nagy*,Brian Gionta*, Steve Konowalchuk, Mike Johnson, Tomas Holmstrom, Richard Zednik, Sami Kapanen, Brad Tapper, Brad May, Adam Mair*, Antti Laaksonen, Andrew Brunette, Scott Mellanby, Aaron Downey

Defencemen: Brad Stuart, Chris Phillips, Sheldon Souray, Andrei Markov, Brian Campbell*, Toni Lydman*, Henrik Tallinder*, Dave Tanabe*, Craig Rivet, Sean O'Donnell, Joe Dipenta, Anders Eriksson, Patrice Brisebois, Lars Jonsson

*Guys who are eligible for UFA status next season but are RFAs right now; meaning, their status could change


What To Do, Option IV: Build
An idea that will draw even more ire than the last one. I am going to suggest that the best strategy for the Oilers might be to slow down, and possibly start from scratch. The Oilers now have a fairly young and talented offensive core. We have a couple young defencemen who have played all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals. But we also have a fairly old defensive core, and an old goaltender. It seems to me, and Kevin Lowe hinted at it today during his telephone conference, that the teams most likely to succeed in the "new NHL" are those who can grow most of their talent themselves, sign those players to lengthy deals at a cheaper rate than what the free agent market is dictating, and then fill out the roster with some older, more experienced but less talented players. I don't know if Cosh would remember this, but I articulated a belief in starting from scratch to him over an email exchange a year ago, before Lowe had signed Pronger and Peca. My belief then was that Lowe should hold a press conference wherein he would tell Oilers fans the plan was to watch and learn what kind of formula for success the new CBA dictated, and respond accordingly. That it would take at least 3-5 years to build a highly competitive and successful franchise, and to ask for patience. Well, a year later, after being one good performance away from winning the Stanley Cup, we have some idea of what the new CBA and rule changes are demanding. Personally, I wouldn't mind if we slowed it down a bit, built up a stable of high-level prospects through the draft and trades, and did things right from the start. All I ask is that I get told about it, and am given some deadlines.

**Every so often, I wish I knew Photoshop. When? When I see something like this. Dynamite. I was psyched that the Sabres were going back to their original colours, but I'll never look at the new logo the same way again.

**Missed in the excitement of the G2/Finals Conkannen decision (a.k.a. Dominic Roussel We Hardly Knew Ye): Ingmar "W" Bergman posted the names and pictures of every goaltender in Oilers history, including the WHA days. Go have a look.

**Razor liveblogged the draft, and raised his eyebrows at the bio of the Stars 90th overall pick, Aaron Snow:

His favorite team is Detroit.
His favorite player is Joe Sakic.
And his favorite show is The OC.
What's next? He'll suggest that Hull's goal shouldn't have counted?

Eh, I'm a cheap laugh.

**The Prez is still faithfully lighting a candle for the return of Ullie - Sacamano would approve. Also, I never updated with her reaction to the G7 Loss. I think she speaks for all Oiler fans here:

Everyone was speechless after the loss. I drank more beer and ate a fudgesicle, but nothing helped. We were devastated.

It's a bad day when even a fudgesicle can't turn your frown upside down.

**And speaking of cheap laughs, I must be in a good mood, because I even thought this link was funny.

I have StarChoice as my tee-vee provider here in Lethbridge, and one of the audio channels up in the 800s is 630 CHED out of Edmonton. Anyway, I just listened to Bryan Hall take calls for maybe 5 minutes; nodding and grunting with callers saying stuff like "I just want to take this opportunity to thank Kevin Lowe", and challenging (nay, bullying) callers with the TEMERITY to suggest that "gee, maybe this wasn't the greatest deal". Awesome -- and just like Mike W drew it up!

If it's any consolation, Oiler fans, you gotta know that the reason Michael Peca isn't signed yet is because no one came out on July 1 with the kind of offer that he was expecting. (Your "leverage" is kinda crappy when you're a UFA, isn't it Mike.)

*Footnote: one word post title entirely for Mirtle's benefit

Chris Pronger is currently doing a conference call on 630 Ched. Make sure to check it out, so that you can hear a man saying a lot of absolutely nothing.

***Update*** Whew. That was an extraordinary feat. I wonder if they hired someone from the Bush White House to prep him? I kept waiting for him to pull out the "national security" line.

"We're not going to go out and over-pay to fill our defensive spot."

I had originally come up with this chart as an addendum to Matt's post from last night. In light of the Pronger trade, and speculation that Lowe may indeed dip into the RFA market, it should be helpful to all. Feel free to comment in any of those posts. Matt and I will find you.

Player	Team	Contract (Yrs./Total $)	Salary Avg./Yr.
Niklas Lidstrom	Detroit	(2/15.2)	$7.6 million
Zdeno Chara	Boston	(5/37.5)	$7.5 million
Wade Redden	Ottawa	(2/13)	$6.5 million
Ed Jovanovski	Phoenix	(5/32.5)	$6.5 million
Rob Blake	L.A.	(2/12)	$6 million
Bryan McCabe	Toronto	(5/28.75)	$5.75 million
Pavel Kubina	Toronto	(4/20)	$5 million
Kim Johnsson	Minnesota	(4/19.4)	$4.85 million
Jay McKee	St. Louis	(4/16)	$4 million
Willie Mitchell	Vancouver	(4/14)	$3.5 million
Ruslan Salei	Florida	(4/12.1)	$3.025 million
*Colin White	New Jersey	(6/18)	$3 million
Filip Kuba	Tampa Bay	(3/9)	$3 million
*Nick Boynton	Phoenix	(3/8.85)	$2.95 million
Aaron Ward	New York Rangers	(2/5.5)	$2.75 million
Joe Corvo	Ottawa	(4/10.5)	$2.625 million
Brian Pothier	Washington	(4/10)	$2.5 million
Frank Kaberle	Carolina	(4/8.8)	$2.2 million
Hal Gill	Toronto	(3/6.3)	$2.1 million
Keith Carney	Minnesota	(2/4.2)	$2.1 million
Francis Bouillon	Montreal	(3/5.63)	$1.88 million
*Karel Rachunek	New York	(1/1.8)	$1.8 million
Andrei Zyuzin	Calgary	(2/2.8)	$1.4 million
*Mike Commodore	Carolina	(2/2.5)	$1.25 million
Nolan Baumgartner	Philadelphia	(2/2.4)	$1.2 million
Anders Eriksson	Columbus	(1/600k)	$600,000
Andy Delmore	Tampa Bay	(1/450k)	$450,000
Niclas Havelid	Atlanta	(3/?)	???
Mark Streit	Montreal	(2/?)	???
Mark Eaton	Pittsburgh Penguins	(2/?)	???
Brendan Witt	New York Islanders	(3/?)	???
Teppo Numminen	Buffalo Sabres	(1/?)	???
Brett Clark	Colorado	???	???
Karlis Skrastins	Colorado	???	???
Matt Walker	St. Louis	???	???
Average Salary			$3.41 million

*RFA Signing
**Philadelphia also signed Lars Johnson, out of Sweden, to a one-year deal.

So they're saying that besides Lupul and Francois BootLadislav Smid, the Oil are receiving a 1st-rounder, a 2nd-rounder, and another conditional 1st-rounder.

Look back at the RFA compensation schedule, and tell me what those "extra" draft choices and about $4M to play with equates to:

Up to $660,000 - No compensation
$660,000 to $1 million - One 3rd round draft pick
$1 to $2 million - One second round pick
$2 to $3 million - One 1st and one 3rd round pick
$3 to $4 million - One 1st, one 2nd and one 3rd round pick
$4 to $5 million - Two 1sts, one 2nd and one 3rd round pick
Over $5 million - Four 1st round picks

Chris brought this up in Lowetide's comments: maybe Bouwmeester is on his way to Northern Alberta after all...

P.S. Lots of other awesome comments in that thread. Vic Ferrari:

If Selanne goes down to injury (Torres, nudge nudge) those draft picks might be high. :-)

And Dennis:

There are some draft years where even a top 10 pick isn't worth a signed Kim Issel jersey.

Among others. P.P.S. Smid might turn out to be a fine player, but (statheads correct me if I'm wrong) guys who score 1 goal in 87 AHL games as a 19-year-old don't turn out to be quality NHL PP quarterbacks.

P.P.P.S. A few more comments from that Lowetide thread:

Open up the check book for Spacek and uh Witt or Markov I guess?... Spacek must be laughing... Spaceck (sic] and Markov asap...

Good times.

Chris Pronger has been traded. I'm not happy about this, though I blame Pronger for it, not Lowe. All I have seen so far is Lupul coming back, along with prospects and draft picks. Can anyone say Bernie Nichols? Jimmy Carson?

Thoughts?

MATT UPDATE: Sportsnet says the non-roster player is Ladislav Smid; here's his stats from hockeydb.com:



Presumably, Stoll is going to see a lot of PP time on the point.

ANDY UPDATE: Hey, if you are going to rub our faces in shit, could you at least do it in your own post?

ANDY UPDATE: Boy, would I ever love to be a reporter at Pronger's press conference tomorrow. My question(s) would be thus: "Chris, your tactic of fleeing the country and letting your agent leak your trade demand was obviously intended to limit the Oilers leverage and bargaining power. But in your wildest dreams, did you ever imagine that it would drive down your value so much that the Oilers return would barely be more than a bag of pucks? In short, what are your thoughts on fucking over Kevin Lowe, Craig MacTavish, your teammates, and over a million Oilers fans?

Steve Yzerman is expected to announce his retirement today. I prefer to think of him going out like a champion, rather than the way he actually did go out: on the bench as the Oilers eliminated the Wings from the Stanley Cup playoffs. I mildly disliked Mike Babcock before he left Yzerman sitting on the bench for the final faceoff draw in the Oilers zone, but I loathe the guy for it now. So long, Steve. Thanks for some amazing hockey.

Pleasure Motors and Lowetide have both run down what's left in the way of free agent defensemen. Is it just me, or does Pronger for Aucoin and Seabrook suddenly look pretty good from the perspective of an Oiler fan?

Aucoin's $4M/yr contract resembles a boat anchor a lot less than it did this time last week, and frankly, getting two legitmate NHL defensemen in exchange for Pronger might be the only way to add them.

The Dominion Day spending orgy continues, with Jason Arnott signing a five-year contract with the Predators.

Existing payroll commitments and other info here. Most of the legwork is being done on TSN, Sportsnet, and Spector. Sportsnet has a tracker, and TSN tells us who is left, by team.

Yeah, so you know how on Friday, I pointed out that Dave Nonis had about $5M to upgrade 13 roster spots from Minimum Salary Players? Signing Willie Mitchell for $14M/4yrs means that number is now $2M for 12 roster spots... notes on the TSN.ca figures:

• Luongo's cap # is $6.75M, not $6M
• I don't think Linden is actually under contract, is he?
• Giving Cloutier away frees up another $2M (giving Nonis $4M for 12 spots)

Interesting.

Two down. The Oilers have signed Dwayne Roloson to a three year contract. Let me be the first to say that I think this is a very bad decision. That is way too long of a contract for a guy who will be 37 in October, and who has just come off a knee injury [edited]. $4 million for the first two years, and $3 for the last year? That is horrible. Let me repeat: HORRIBLE.. Anyone who attacked my belief that we should sign Hasek better not defend this decision.

The Cane's have signed The Inbreeder, Eric Staal. And the Devils have signed Jamie Langenbrunner.

Thoughts on the Roloson signing?

I'll try to update in the comments all day. Existing payroll commitments and other info here. Most of the legwork is being done on TSN, SportsNet, and Spector. SportsNet has a tracker, as well.