With problems like these...

The biggest planning issue facing Darryl Sutter is what to do about impending Restricted Free Agent Dion Phaneuf. It hasn't exactly been portrayed that way previously; the conventional wisdom (mine included) has been more along the lines of, "You get a deal done one way or another with Phaneuf, and then attack the real problems, i.e. Huselius/Langkow or their replacements."

Given the emerging reality -- that there is no way to "amicably" sign Phaneuf unless it's for a lengthy term and a hell of a lot of money -- it's no longer defensible to just shrug off gettin' it done as imperative and unavoidable. Here, as I see them, are the alternatives to signing Phaneuf ~tomorrow to a Chara/Spezza deal.

ONE. Wait (& gamble), with the full intention of signing him. Is it possible that Phaneuf will continue to gain leverage over the next 5 months? Yes, but it's far from certain. An All-Star from his rookie class just signed the richest contract in NHL history; that's hardly a wave Sutter wants to be riding. The risk of waiting until July is two-fold: first, Phaneuf's play & numbers may improve (adding merit to his contract demands), and second, he might get an offer sheet that is for significantly more than the Flames were hoping to pay (and that Phaneuf would have signed for).

But there is an other hand. Phaneuf is not arbitration-eligible; his leverage in July, aside from a competing offer (offer sheet), is a holdout. Here is the key question: what is the difference -- in dollars & term -- between the contract they can sign him to now, and the offer sheet they might have to match? In Thomas Vanek's case, it was a huge difference; the Sabres could have locked him up earlier for a lot less dough. Surely it's less so in Phaneuf's case. If you were to argue that Sutter needs to sign him tomorrow for $7M x 7 years to avoid the risk of having to match an offer sheet, how much bigger do you expect the offer sheet to be? $8M x 8? $9M x 9? More? Which brings us to...

TWO. Wait, with the intention of declining to match a significant offer sheet. The purpose of this post is to look at alternatives, so let's assume (pretend?) that this isn't an unthinkable course of action. I am possibly the hockeysphere's smallest fan and follower of prospects, so besides finding this option somewhat unpalatable, I have very little feel for just what a 1st-round pick is worth. So, what I have done here, in a Google Spreadsheet, is collect all the first-round draft picks from 2001-2004 (i.e. Phaneuf's draft year, the two previous years, and the subsequent years), in an effort to semi-objectively assess what the value is of the draft pick compensation for RFA signings. Notes:

• The threshold for max. compensation (4 1st-round picks) when the CBA was signed was $5M/yr, indexed to Average League Salary. Best I can figure, with the cap expected to be about $54M next year, this threshold will be about $6.9M/yr. I am assuming for the purposes of this exercise that a Phaneuf offer sheet would exceed this.
• Picks are arranged by Team-Slot, rather than by Team (i.e. every team shown as having exactly one 1st-Rd pick every year). I hope this makes sense without further explanation.
• I have added three columns to the right of the players, asking three questions, and essentially dividing the player foursomes into four categories:

1. Is there one player there who would be a good trade for Phaneuf? The idea being roughly, if the Flames drafted in Washington's slot for those 4 years, they'd have Ovechkin, he would make the deal worth it by himself.
2. Would the 4 drafted players as a group be a good trade for Phaneuf? So here, there are more Yesses; while I don't think Phaneuf for Vanek would be a good trade, Phaneuf for Vanek, Stafford, Jiri Novotny, and Keith Ballard would be.
3. Would the deal definitely be something the Flames would regret? The bar goes down some more: while I don't think the Flames would trade Phaneuf for Patrick Eaves, Meszaros, Jeff Woywitka and Jakub Klepis, neither would they be looking back at that deal as a disastrous moment for the franchise.

Rate them on your own if you like, but here's how it broke down for me. The question is, using the first round from 2001-2004 as a guide, how good could the Flames expect their compensatory draft picks (from 2009-2012) to turn out if they let Phaneuf sign with someone else?

• In at least 4 cases (Kovalchuk, Nash, Spezza, Ovechkin) and possibly 7 (add Getzlaf, E. Staal, Malkin), the Flames would get one player who alone would make it worth it.
• In 18 of 30 cases, the Flames would get 4 players who, as a group, would make it worth it.
• In 7 more cases (25 of 30), the Flames would at least get enough not to rue the day they let Phaneuf go.
• In 5 cases, it would be a definite loss, although even here, only a couple would qualify as total disasters.

And not to be forgotten: four 1st-Rd picks is not all that the Flames would "get" if they let Phaneuf be signed away. They also get the cap space he would have taken up. Two scenarios:


I'm not sure I'm prepared to recommend one roster over the other here, although again, in the one on the right, not only do they have Daymond Langkow instead of a min. salary replacement, and a more skilled replacement for Huselius, but they also have someone else's 1st-round pick for the next 4 years, as well as their own -- which can obviously be used in some measure to trade back in for present value.

THREE. Trade him. Presumably all the teams that might be inclined to give Phaneuf an offer sheet on July 1, plus a few more, would be willing to trade for him and pay him his money. Theoretically, the fact that the acquiring team has to pay him a mint to get him under contract should reduce his trade value, but things don't quite seem to work that way yet.

I don't really know what Dion would fetch in a trade, but I would guess something like a quality forward and a quality D-man -- at least one of whom is signed for a while at a good price -- plus a decent prospect or 1st-round pick. Horton, Van Ryn, and a 2009 1st-rounder? Something like that.

Allow me to pause and point out the obvious here, too: while Phaneuf is extremely popular in Calgary, and trading him would cheese off a LOT of Flames fans, they don't need him in order to sell tickets and fill up the building, and that's doubly true if the team is good.

CONCLUSIONS?

The more I think about it, the more I believe that wait-and-see is the right course of action. Look, if Sutter's premise is that Phaneuf is his generation's Chris Pronger (with Scott Stevens' intensity/bloodlust thrown in for good measure), and that he's going to be a Flame for years come hell or high water, then sure: signing him up next week makes sense. It's possible that waiting and hard-balling a bit could result in a better deal for the Flames (what if Dion doesn't get an offer sheet?), but why chance it.

But if Sutter's premise is broader -- that is, he has XX million dollars with which to construct a successful 20-23 player team, and that everyone's importance in the grand scheme of things is greatly dependent on what % of XX he has to be paid, then there are a lot of options going forward. And you know what? They're all pretty good. The worst-case scenario includes:

• re-signing Langkow or Huselius
• having more money to do something about depth (or even the 2nd line) up front
• having two 1st round picks for the next 4 years

Not exactly Nicholls, Rice & DeBrusk. Relax, Flames fans.