Howdy! I "missed" most of the "excitement" of draft weekend, as I was golfing some of the jewels of the Windermere Valley with 7 of my peers. There was much consumption of beer, scotch, and tube-shaped pork products, and well as a healthy dose of getting rivered.

However, we did manage to catch wind of the Aucoin acquisition and the 1st-rounder. On Backlund, I second MetroGnome's take (in a word, I give it a Borat-style niiiice).

On Aucoin: everyone is obviously right to call it a calculated risk. If he stays healthy (or even 3/4 healthy), he can probably replace Hamrlik's contributions (Hammer played 126 games in 2 seasons, scoring 7 goals in each), although he's less physical.

Time -- or is it inflation? -- is an amazing thing, because even though Aucoin has suffered through two lousy, injury-plagued seasons, his contract is certainly no worse now than it was when he signed it, and probably quite a bit better. In August 2005, $4M x 4yrs was a big gamble on a guy who may or may not be able to play huge minutes in all situations and be a capable PP QB. In July 2007, $4M x 2yrs for veteran D-man who you shouldn't have to shelter is pretty much what it costs.

When you look at what Timonen got, and what guys like Hamrlik and Danny Markov are going to get (let alone Rafalski, Stuart, Hannan), and even what guys like Aaron Miller are going to get, what else do you expect. (It's been, what, 6 months since the Staios extension of $2.9Mx4, and that already looks like a very good deal for the Oilers).

As such, I really think the Keenan factor in this acquisition is being overblown. For one, Keenan has ties to half the veteran players in the league. And secondly, there just weren't/aren't a ton of options for the team looking for a decent vet on a short-term deal. (If you have a list of available or acquirable players in mind who can provide what Aucoin does for less than $4Mx2, lay it on me.)

The one semi-related thing about this that makes me quite happy is that the Flames won't be signing Stuart. He is about to get overpaid for what he brings to the table, and I'm glad it's not going to be by Calgary.

Brad Stuart is an interesting player. It's easy to see why he was drafted 3rd overall; he's skilled. He can skate, he can pass, and he has a hard shot. He's also smart: he's positionally sound, he tends to make the high percentage play, and he breaks up scoring chances with decent regularity in the exact manner that a coach would prescribe it (or that experience dictates). And he's tough: not afraid to mix it up, he certainly doesn't play scared.

What Brad Stuart is not, in my limited and humble opinion, is gifted. Most of us could name a list of players who are simply more than the sum of their parts (skills), and it's not just a "heart" thing. Ryan Smyth has a pretty weak shot that's not pinpoint accurate, and he's not a great skater, but he's one hell of a hockey player. On the flip side, we all know lots of players who are less than the sum of their parts, ranging from outright draft busts all the way to the Derek Morris/Robert Lang types who, despite being perennially capable, just seem like they should be giving you more.

Brad Stuart, to my eye, is exactly the sum of his parts. Chris Pronger is another high draft choice who is big and skilled, who can make a big hit, shoot, make a nice pass, stop a 2-on-1, etc. But anyone who has watched him for any length of time knows that he is so much more than that; it's difficult, and does him a disservice, to describe him "scouting report-style". He's a gifted hockey player. There's no comparison between him and Stuart, and it's not because of the 4-inch height difference.

For $6M x 7 years, or $7M x 6, or whatever giant deal Stuart is about to sign, I expect gifted. He might get better -- again, he's smart, and he's going to keep learning -- but then again, his offense regressed this year, and if he scores 10 goals more than once over the term of his next deal, I'd be surprised.

-----------------------------------------

A short follow-up to my post on Timonen/Hartnell: mc79hockey and Benjamin both had brief takes on the situation that jumped off from mine.

Thinking about it for the past few days, I still find it hard to comprehend that these players were one of:

• (A) "Holmgren says the offer expires an hour before the draft. This might be the best deal we get, and I really really want to play for Philly!"
• (B) "Whatever, we can probably get the same or better deal on July 1, but this gives us a couple extra weeks of veg time!"

Nevertheless, it would seem that one of these was the case. Doesn't that mean they were getting bad, or at least questionable, advice from their agents? Like Tom says, the players as a whole get the same amount of $$ no matter what contracts are signed by who; does anyone really have an interest in setting the salary bar for a particular kind of player high and early?

The answer to that question is Yes: the "anyone" is an agent with relatively few clients, one of whom is comparable to the player signing early. Like, say, Bill Zito Jr., who is the agent for both Timonen and Brian Rafalski. Incentives matter, indeed.