Grading the off-season moves:
The following is a report card on each of the Bruins players for the upcoming 2005/06 season. We're going in order of contract (high-low), and we'll tackle the top four contracts first.
Each player will receive three grades: 1)Sega Rating, 2)Contract Grade and 3)Chemistry/Fit/Importance Grade. Here's the breakdown:
“Sega Rating”: The first grade given to the player is essentially the overall player rating, without regard to the contract signed and what kind of fit they are with the team (those come next). I call it a “Sega Rating” because it would be something you see on a video game. The “grade-A” players would be in the 90-99 range, “B” players are in the 82-89 range, “C” players in the 75-81 range, “D” players in the 65-74 range, and “F” players are below 65 (although some prospects on the rise could land an “F” in their formative years.
Contract Grade: If this was a video game and there wasn’t a salary cap, then the player ratings would hold the primary weight in terms of grading the players. However, with a salary cap in place, the contract is critical to the quality of team management can put on the ice. The contract grades will follow a more scholarly scale of: A(90-100), B(80-89), C(70-79), D(60-69), F(less than or equal to 59). Personally, I think the majority of the free agents were overpaid in the new landscape. So, instead of giving everyone an F-, the contracts will be weighed against other players in the league and their subsequent contracts. If the Bruins decided not to overpay for anyone in August, they might have a payroll lower than Washington’s.
Chemistry/Fit/Importance: The third grade is to help quantify how well the team is putting the pieces of the puzzle into place and filling in their needs. John Madden, for example, might not get a Sega Rating in A-range, but his importance to a team (especially in the playoffs) could land him an “A” in this category. The popularity of a player, whether the player can put fannies in the seats, helps the score as well. Same scholarly scale as the ‘Contract Grade system’ applies here.
So, without further ado...
Joe Thornton: A/B/A Sega Rating: 93 (A)Thornton is arguably the best playmaker in the league. It’s no coincidence that Murray and Guerin have had two, 40 goal seasons apiece while playing the wing on his line. Joe may not always use his size as an intimidation factor, but he uses it very well in shielding the puck
and still being able to dish it at the right time to a player in scoring position. The guy creates quality scoring chances on almost every shift and makes the players on the ice around him better. He has an above average shot, which he may not use as much as people would like, but if your linemate is potting 40+ a season, it’s hard to complain. His major weapon in terms of scoring is when he comes from behind the net, protecting the puck, looking for an open player and defenders don’t slide off their men because Joe will find them if they do. It looks like a lacrosse game when the attackman comes from behind the net, swirling around the crease to the front of the net and it puts the defense in an unenviable position. Oftentimes Joe would have the defender draped on him like a sweater in the process – and because of Thornton’s strength, he wouldn’t fall to the ice, which has been some sort of unwritten rule of penalty calling: “if he’s being water-skied, but keeps his feet, we’ll swallow the whistle.” However, it’s still hooking. It’s still holding. If these penalties are called in the new NHL – look out.
Contract: $6,666,667 (three years): Grade: 84 (B)If Bruins management were telling the truth and the number one priority was to sign Thornton, and Joe knew there was no place he’d rather be, then why did it take so long to get a deal done? There are a number of reasons, most notably the fact that Thornton was going to be an UFA next year and the financial landscape was uncertain on August 1st. However, Joe in limbo during the signing period put a damper on things in terms of knowing what the balance is on the checking account when going into the signing period. They also had Samsonov, Raycroft (still do), Boynton (still do) and Gill (still do) in a similar position – so it was difficult to have an accurate gauge on estimated payroll. It seemed like management threw caution to the wind and spent for guys in the hopes that the speech given to Joe about taking a lower salary to field a better team wouldn’t fall on deaf ears. Eh? Joe still got a whopper of a contract – he’ll probably take up close to 17.5% of payroll when all is said and done.
Let’s take a look at other players in the top tier of payroll:
Jagr: $8,420,348
Lidstrom: $7,600,000
Tkachuk: $7,600,000
Yashin: $7,600,000
Iginla: $7,000,000 (three years, $21,000,000)
Guerin: $6,886,445
Lecavalier: $6,875,000 (four years, $27,500,000)
Sundin: $6,840,000
Niedermayer: $6,750,000 (four years, $27,000,000)
Khabibulin: $6,750,000 (four years, $27,000,000)
Thornton: $6,666,667 – (three years, $20,000,000)Sakic: $6,664,797
Blake: $6,364,111
Pronger: $6,250,000 (five years, $31,250,000)
Federov: $6,080,000
Naslund: $6,000,000 (three years, $18,000,000)
Hossa: $6,000,000 – (three years, $18,000,000)
Forsberg: $5,750,000 (two years, $11,500,000)
Weight: $5,700,000
Looking at the list, the contract doesn’t seem too bad, but you can certainly make the case that many of these guys are overpaid – and a good chunk of the group have previous contracts that didn’t have cap implications when they signed the dotted line.
Overall, the Bruins didn’t get any discount on the price paid, but the number is fair from a market perspective.
CFI: 94 (A)Signing Thornton was a big boost for the club in the box office. I’m sure a number of people were holding out on buying season tickets until Jumbo Joe was officially a member of the Boston Bruins. Although, management did say there was an extremely high retention rate on season tickets anyway. There is no doubt Thornton is one of the most gifted hockey players on the ice. He would be a great fit to any club, but has his NHL career roots in Boston and has a solid following. Because the Bruins were able to sign Murray, the fit is even better.
Glen Murray: A-/B/A-Sega Rating: 90 (A)Murray is still one of the premiere finishers in the league. He may not have the same total game as Cam Neely, but his ability to establish position in front of the net and complete the transaction with Thornton is reminiscent of #8. He’s steady in many other aspects of the game, which doesn’t make him a liability in almost every facet of the game. That’s essentially the formula to fall into the low 90’s range: be at the top of your position in one specialization (in Murray’s case, scoring) and not take anything away from the table in the other categories.
Contract: $4,150,000 (four years): Grade: 84 (B)The Bruins thought they would be able to land Murray for closer to $3 million. So did I. Players getting the magic $4 probably
should be getting closer to $3, however that’s not what the market dictated. Murray is an almost automatic 30+ goal scorer in a league that was dominated by defense. The four years locks him up probably for the remainder of his prime, where brass is hoping he doesn’t taper off in the coming years.
Looking at other signings in his ballpark:
Kovalev: $4,500,000 (four years, $18,000,000)
Kariya: $4,500,000 (two years, $9,000,000)
Heatley: $4,500,000 (three years, $13,500,000)
Palffy: $4,500,000 (three years, $13,500,000)
Demitra: $4,500,000 (three years, $13,500,000)
Modano: $4,250,000 (five years, $17,500,000)
Holik: $4,250,000 (three years, $12,750,000)
Rafalski: $4,200,000 (two years, $8,400,000)
Murray: $4,150,000 (four years, $16,600,000)Satan: $4,015,000 (three years, $12,750,000)
Leetch: $4,000,000 (one year, $4,000,000)
Aucoin: $4,000,000 (four years, $16,000,000)
Zubov: $4,000,000
Marleau: $4,000,000
Zhamnov: $4,000,000 (three years, $12,000,000)
Giguere: $3,990,000
Jovanoski: $3,990,000
Peca: $3,990,000
Hejduk: $3,900,000 (five years, $19,500,000)
The $4,000,000 mark doesn’t seem atrocious for getting a guy who can potentially flirt with 50 goals. It doesn’t seem fantastic, either – but he and Naslund ($6,000,000) were the top unrestricted free agents in the market. Also, Murray was an UFA, something that gets taken for granted in a town where the Bruins are criticized because nobody wants to play here. Show them the money, and they’ll play here.
CFI: 90 (A-)If Thornton was traded for a defenseman or something along those lines, Murray’s CFI might have dropped because his superstar potential hinges upon Joe getting him the puck. The chemistry between Thornton-Murray can’t be overemphasized – one of the best one-two punches in the league.
Alexei Zhamnov: B/B-/B+Sega Rating: 86 (B)Zhamnov is another guy who can make players around him better. He had a disappointing 03/04 season, but before that he was getting close to 60 points with 20 goals a season. He’s scored more than 60 points seven times from 1992-02, so if he can return to form, his offensive attributes should rise to the surface in Beantown. Alexei’s a guy who is gifted offensively and is not a big liability in the defensive zone, either.
Contract: $4,075,000 (three years): Grade: 80 (B-) Zhamnov may not be as valuable to the Bruins as Murray, but he’s getting the same contract. A two-year deal might have made more sense given Zhamnov is 35, and with Samsonov’s long-term future uncertain (UFA at the end of the year). $3 million is more accurate for a guy of Zhamnov’s caliber, but the market certainly was inflated where a deal wouldn’t be able to be struck with him otherwise.
CFI: 88 (B+)One of the issues with Samsonov in the past was his linemates couldn’t keep up with his skill in terms of changing direction and finding the right chemistry. Alexei could change all that. One of the major reasons why Selanne had one of the greatest rookie seasons ever at Winnipeg was having Zhamnov get him the puck. Granted, that was more than ten years ago, but he still has a high hockey IQ and can still create some chances for himself and especially his teammates. He immediately upgrades the 2nd line to a formidable one in the NHL. Depth has been a fatal flaw for the club in the postseason, but with the addition of Zhamnov, it could help the Bruins go deeper.
Brian Leetch: B/C/A-Sega Rating: 86 (B)Leetch may have lost a step or two, but he is still a solid pickup for the Bruins, a team with defense being a major concern. His offensive skills, role on the power play and leadership on the blueline are all intangibles that help bring his rating up. Also, something that shouldn’t be overlooked is his ability to retrieve the puck in his own end and make smart, quick decisions and hit his forwards on the tape with the puck. He’s won the Norris a couple of times and the Conn Smythe in the past. We may not see a repeat performance of those things, but it exemplifies the type of abilities he possessed and even in 3rd or 4th gear, he’s one of the better defenseman in the league.
Contract: $4,000,000 (one year): Grade: 75 (C) The fact that it’s a one year works well for the Bruins. Leetch was scorned by the Rangers and it’s rumored that he will re-up if he decides to play another year. While that’s all well and good, it also gives the Bruins the flexibility to have $4 million off the books next year to look for an upgrade or help reshuffle the decks, if needed. $4 million is still a great deal of money for a 37 year old and there were other younger guys on the market that might have been a better long term fit.
CFI: 90 (A-)Leetch is a valuable asset on a Bruins team that was lacking defensive leadership ever since Bourque left. Boynton at times seemed poised to overtake that role in the future – and who better to help the younger apprentice harness the power of the force. In that regard, Leetch boosts his CFI rating. Players can come to him for advice and support, which will also take some of the pressure off of Thornton and his premature (or maybe inappropriate) captaincy. He is one of the best skill players at his position and should add some chemistry on the power play, where his playmaking abilities kick it up a notch.
Sergei Samsonov: B+/B/BSega Rating: 88 (B+)Samsonov is a dynamic forward who is lightning quick with the puck and is one of the best stick handlers in the league. He has good speed and an average shot, but with good accuracy. He can sometimes be a liability in the defensive end.
Contract: $2,774,000 (one year): Grade: 86 (B)The contract grade would be higher, except the Bruins weren’t able to sign Samsonov to a multi-year deal, thus Sammy will become a free agent at the end of the season. The bright side is that his contract is a relative bargain. If Samsonov signed long-term, he would be commanding a contract worth closer to $4-$.5 million. Instead, he’s lumped into this group:
Drury: $2,926,000
Arnott: $2,926,000
Kiprusoff: $2,900,000
Samsonov: $2,774,000Ozolinsh: $2,750,000
Boyle: $2,750,000
Gaborik: $2,679,000
Kozlov: $2,660,000
Morris: $2,660,000
Norstrom: $2,660,000
Rivet: $2,660,000
Miller: $2,660,000
Havlat: $2,600,000
Kubina: $2,584,000
Sanderson: $2,508,000
Malik: $2,500,000
Samsonov is certainly one of the best players in that group.
CFI: 85 (B)With the addition of Zhamnov, Samsonov looks like a great fit on the 2nd line along with Bergeron. As mentioned with Zhamnov above, this makes the 2nd line one of the strongest in the conference. Samsonov is also a favorite with the fans – dazzling many with his moves on the ice.
Dave Scatchard: B-/C+/B+Sega Rating: 82 (B-)Scatchard is a prototypical checking line center. He is one of the better players in the league at his position/role, able to cover the opposing team’s top players and add modest scoring punch in the offensive end. His shot, speed and other offensive attributes are nothing to write home about, but none of them are liabilities, either. Usually, these guys are in the C to B range in terms of Sega Ratings, the key to getting a good grade is their defensive awareness and not lacking too much in any one category.
Contract: $2,100,000 (four years, $8,400,000): Grade 77 (C+)Marty Lapointe left the Bruins this year and landed a $2,400,000 deal in Chicago. Lapointe spent his days in Boston with an albatross around his neck: a huge contract in which fans seemed to expect more out of a gritty guy that added intangibles more so than scoring punch or offensive abilities. If Marty played in Boston with a smaller contract, his popularity would have been much higher and fans would have viewed him in the same light as Isles fans saw Scatchard. That said, Scatchard is comparable to Lapointe in his grittiness and checking abilities – maybe a little less on the offensive side. Lapointe’s real value was probably in the playoffs, where his intensity and leadership rubbed off on other players. Albeit, the Bruins haven’t been able to get out of the first round with him in the lineup, but it’s tough to criticize Lapointe’s effort in the playoffs. With Scatchard, that remains to be seen. If the Bruins can make the playoffs, and Scatchard becomes pivotal in shutting down the opposition and their premiere line – the contract will be a better fit. As it stands, $2,100,000 is a lot to pay for a third line, checking center. Some of the other players in Scatchard territory:
Daze: $2,280,000
De Vries: $2,280,000
Dejardins: $2,280,000
Friesen: $2,280,000
Kaberle: $2,280,000
Savard: $2,280,000
Recchi: $2,280,000
Vokoun: $2,280,000
Shanahan: $2,280,000
Nylander: $2,280,000
Rucchin: $2,261,000
Nieuwendyk: $2,250,000
Roberts: $2,250,000
Spacek: $2,250,000
Smolinski: $2,242,000
Nedved: $2,204,000
Modin: $2,204,000
Gomez: $2,204,000
Johnsson: $2,200,000
McGillis: $2,200,000
Souray: $2,128,000
Draper: $2,128,000
Biron: $2,128,000
Handzus: $2,128,000
Sydor: $2,128,000
Scatchard: $2,100,000LeClair: $2,100,000
Richardson: $2,090,000
Carney: $2,052,000
York, M: $2,050,000
Hannan: $2,033,000
Brewer: $2,014,000
Gagne: $2,000,000
Sturm: $2,000,000
Frolov: $2,000,000
Berard: $2,000,000
Niedermayer, R: $2,000,000
Numminen: $2,000,000
There are certainly a number of players on the list that would be more desirable than Scatchard. However, many were already signed or restricted free agents so the Bruins didn’t really have a shot at them. Lapointe may have had it set in his mind that he was already gone after the criticism he received during his tenure in Boston. LeClair has a history of back problems – never a good thing. Scatchard is a good fit on the Bruins, it just seems like the contract is not. Hopefully, it’s not deja-vu all over again due to the length of Dave’s contract (four years) where fans expect more out of a guy whose value doesn’t always show up in the box scores.
CFI: 87 (B+)Having a guy like Scatchard on the team can be as important as having a 20+ goal scorer. He brings different intangibles to the table that help the team become more balanced from a coverage perspective. It’s a coach’s dream to be able to have a line that can shut down the other team’s top forwards, and with a potential lineup of Axelsson-Scatchard-McEachern/Fitzgerald – Sullivan may just have that. While the contract may have left something to be desired – when you look at the lineup card – Scatchard boosts the net strength of the team.
More to come…
