Bobrovsky Takes the Vezina

I've already written a bit about Bob's huge season, and the hand-wringing amongst Flyers fans about where the Flyers blew it.  Now his Vezina victory is official, and I'm still serene about the whole thing.

Why am I so serene about it?  Basically because he won it on two months of hot play, and two months don't change everything.  What I wrote previously was a basically a subjective history--here are actual stats of season performances.

At the end of February this season, Bob was 3-6-3, .899%, and 0 SOs.  Nothing any Flyer fan would think twice about.  Over the next two months, Bob caught fire and would go 18-5-3, .946% and 4 SOs.  Thus he won the Vezina in a 4 month season with a cumulative stat line of 21-11-6,  .932%.  History has shown us however, that the first 4 months of the season usually go very well for Bobrovsky, and then the wheels come off.

First, you might notice a general pattern to Bobrovsky's seasons in this chart;

                                    2010 w/Flyers            2011 w/Flyers         2012 w/ Jackets

You can begin to see a pattern there of peaking around month 4 of the season, then sagging thereafter.  Moreover, in all 3 seasons, his month 4 performance is extremely similar.  That chart is still a little convoluted though.  Strip away more of the noise, and just break it up at the 4 month mark of the season.  The dichotomy becomes much more clear;

The second half of the season has been much more challenging for Bobrovsky thus far in his career, and it's probably not a coincidence that his first big season has come in a year where there was no second half.  What he did in the first 4 months of 2012 is better than his first two years with the Flyers, but not drastically so.

Is it possible that he wouldn't have had a bad second half, and he has simply developed his game?  Of course.  Is this a jaded fan rationalization?  Probably.  But I still don't have too many regrets over the situation.

Bryz buyout? But when?

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie8 JunIt's not carved in stone, but in spite of what has been said in past, I expect PHI is likely to use compliance buyout on Ilya Bryzgalov. 

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie8 JunAlso, PHI is in market for D and may be willing to move one of their young centres - B Schenn or Couturier - for the right deal.

And with that, a whole new round of discussion began.

I've already written that a Briere buyout is likely, but I have not written anything about use of the second buyout. I think most fans want to see it used on Bryzgalov, which may be a good idea.

Bryzgalov has 7 years left at $5.66 cap hit. At this point, it's not the cap hit that's the problem, it's the contract length. That is the 9th biggest cap hit among NHL goalies, and very close to the new contracts signed by Quick and Howard. Bryz hasn't been great, but he hasn't been terrible either, and paying an experienced goalie that number isn't unreasonable. If he had a year or two left at that number, you just let him play it out.

The problem is, I don't think the Flyers want to hitch their wagon to him for the next 7 years. He hasn't been a difference maker, has problems with the local media, and perhaps his teammates. Also, no one will take that contract in a trade, leaving a buyout the only option.

(For the purposes of this post, I am going to assume the Flyers have the financial means and will to pay Bryz to go away, which would be about $1.5m/year for about a dozen years)

If the Flyers decide to buy him out, they need another goalie. Handing Mason the starting job right now would be foolish.

As far UFAs go, this offseason Nik Backstrom, Evgeni Nabokov, Mike Smith, Ray Emery and Tim Thomas are available. Next offseason, potential options might be Lundqvist, Miller, Hiller, Halak, Vokoun and Crawford. Guys like Vokoun, Nabokov, Backstrom and Thomas are old and might be available at a reasonable cap hit on a short term deal. Lundqvist and Crawford could cost a mint (if even available).

The other option is a trade. There's already some talk about the Flyers' interest in Bernier in LA. My biggest concern with that route is that the Flyers don't have too many tradeable assets, and an asset used acquiring a goalie cannot be used to acquire a defensemen. Therefore I'm not crazy about the idea of trading Read to LA, as has been floated.

I think the Flyers should give Mason a full season to see how much resources they should devote in terms of cap space and trade assets to solidify the goalie situation. if he stinks, then you do what you gotta do, but if he seizes the job, problem solved. Therefore I lean towards buying out Bryzgalov next offseason, not this offseason.

The only wrinkle to that is the Flyers want to try Nabokov short term (who is is still an above average goalie), or roll the dice with Thomas or Emery. (Hey, this discussion of Emery (1, 2) and Nabokov sounds familiar...).

So my bottom line is, I'd probably buy out Bryz next summer, but not this one.

Next up, McKenzie's second tweet....

Briere and the Likely Buyout

There is lots of talk about Danny Briere being bought out.  Unfortunately, much of it is wasted breath because people don't really understand the finer points of the rules.  The bottom line;

-Every NHL team is allowed two "compliance" buyouts to save cap room.  These buyouts may be made this offseason or next.

-If bought out, the player will receive 2/3rds of the remaining contract value paid out over twice the life of the contract.

-Regarding Briere specifically, he is owed $3m this year and $2m next.  Thus if he is bought out, the Flyers would be paying him ~$3.3m total, or ~$825k/year for the next 4 years (which would not count against the cap).

-If the Flyers don't buy out Briere, he will count as $6.5m against the cap.

-If the Flyers buy out Briere, he will become a free agent, and the Flyers will be ineligible to sign him.

-Briere has a no-movement clause, and thus could veto any trade.

Briere has been very clear; he expects to be bought out, but would prefer to stay.  Hockey-wise, Briere has been amazing in the playoffs, but poor in the regular season the last two seasons.  Undersized and 35 years old, that's probably not going to improve.  That is not worth ~10% of the team's cap space, and the Flyers could easily eat $3 million on their budget.

It also seems a longshot that Briere would accept a trade.  For one, purely monetarily, as long as Briere could find a contract for more than $1.675m/year for 2 years he comes out ahead when you combine the new contract value with the buyout payments he is due.  Second, Briere is a single dad with a few sons and probably would want to stay local.  He won't want to get shipped across the country, for instance.

The only scenario I see other than a buyout is trade to the Islanders.  The Islanders are just up the road from south Jersey, and given their puny payroll and the cap floor they must reach (or pay a penalty), they'd prefer to have Briere at a $6.5m cap hit rather than a $1.675m cap hit.  Are they actually interested in Briere?  I have no idea.

Long story short, expect a buyout, though a trade is a slim possibility.


**I have also heard some possible shenanigans involving trading players, and then having another team perform the buyout.  By doing so, a team would effectively get more than 2 buyouts, or be eligible to sign the bought out player.  I'm assuming no such tomfoolery will be had.

Get Your Story Straight

This week, Bobrovsky was named as a finalist for the Vezina trophy.  Many believe him to be the favorite.  Why can't the Flyers get young goalies like this?

Actually, it's basically time to cue the hand-wringing of Flyers fans and writers.  The predictable reactions are "I knew we shouldn't have traded him!", or "the Flyers are a joke of an organization!"  Hand-wringing aside, what really happened?

The thing about having a blog like this is that there's no hiding your past statements.  Indeed, most of my reason for writing this blog is just to get my own story straight.  Let's recap events:

2010-11 season - The Flyers sign Bobrovsky, and by most accounts he is destined for the AHL.  Instead he impresses in the preseason and Leighton is awful, and he becomes the starter.  He has the job heading down the stretch run, but after a shocking run of results, he gets yanked for good in the playoffs.  At the time, I passionately argued that he was not ready to lead a winning team.  I do not regret a word of that.

2011 offseason - Given the absolute goaltending debacle of the playoffs (using 3 goalies, pulling your starter 5 TIMES in 11 games), the Flyers needed to make a move in net.  I argued then, and still believe now, it would've been insane to give Bobrovsky the keys the team at the time.  My personal plan was to acquire Nabokov on a short term contract, giving the team a proven #1 and allowing Bobrovsky to develop as the backup.  (Or alternatively, sniff around and try to lowball Vokoun, who in fact signed for very little with Washington).  Instead, the Flyers went big and acquired Bryzgalov.  With Bryz in the fold on a 9-year deal, I would've traded Bobrovsky right then because I didn't see a future for him here anymore.

2011-2012 season - Bryzgalov had a rough season, and Bobrovsky had a few stretches as starter.  He didn't run with it, and ended the season with a significantly worse stat line than Bryz.  Either way, Bryz wasn't going anywhere, and I again thought they should trade Bobrovsky since he had no future here.

2012 offseason -  Ultimately, the Flyers traded him for a 2nd and two 4th round picks, which was more than I thought he would fetch as his trade value declined after his mediocre sophomore year.  At the time, I remarked there was no way the Flyers would get a fairly high first round pick for him, as the Avs gave up for Varlamov in the 2011 offseason.  He reminded me of Nittymaki, who was capable of enticing play at times (MVP of 2006 Winter Olympics), but never proved he could be a long term #1 option.

2013 strike season - Well, we know what happened here.

So what's my story?  My story is that no-way no-how was Bob ready to be the #1 after the 2011 playoff debacle.  I thought the Flyers should sign a veteran goalie to be the #1 and give Bob time as backup for another year or two.  Instead, we got Bryzgalov and a 9 year deal.  After that happened, I didn't see a future as a Flyer for him.

In the last few days, Frank Seravalli has tweeted that the Avs wanted Bob MORE than they wanted Varlamov in summer 2011.  I find that a little hard to believe, but if the Avs did offer their 2012 first round pick for Bob, the Flyers were fools not to take it with Bryz already signed long term.

Either way, the Flyers traded him the following offseason for a decent but not overwhelming return.  I did not expect this season from him, and it will be interesting to see how he performs next year in a full length season as the undisputed #1.

I'm sticking to my story that once Bryz was signed, Bob's fate as a Flyers was sealed.  This very well may turn out to be a big mistake long term, but I will call bullshit on people who cry "we should've given him the job in summer 2011 and rode it out!"

Playoff Picks

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Penguins (72) v. Islanders (55)

The Isles have some spunk, and I think they could beat most teams in the East, but they draw Pittsburgh.  Too bad for them.  Pens in 6.


Canadiens (63) v. Senators (56)

I’m just not a believer in this Canadiens team this year, and Price doesn’t look like himself.  I think Ottawa guts it out. Sens in 6.

Capitals (57) v. Rangers (56)

Have the Capitals recaptured their mojo of a few years past, when they were perennial East favorites?  I’m not sure, but they’re playing well enough to knock off the Rangers who never really got it going this season.  Caps in 7.

Bruins (62) v. Leafs (57)

 The Bruins lost in the first round last year, and are probably the coldest team entering the playoffs.  The Leafs are a surprise this year and will not be bullied by the Bruins.  Looks like a 7 game series to me.  Bruins in 7.



WESTERN CONFERENCE

Blackhawks (77) v. Wild (55)

 The Blackhawks were the best team in the regular season.  The Wild are objectively the weakest team in the playoffs.  We have a mismatch.  Hawks in 4.


Ducks (66) v. Wings (56)

 Are the Red Wings as good as they appeared at the end of the season?  Are the Ducks as good as their season-long performance suggests?  I’ll go with the sustained excellence and depth.  Ducks in 7.


Canucks (59) v. Sharks (57)

 I don’t like either of these team’s chances for a playoff run.  Sharks will dominate on faceoffs, and won’t need a lot of goals to win in what will likely be a sleepy series.  Sharks in 6.


Blues (60) v. Kings (59)

This looks like it might be the best first round series.  The Blues are still an up-and-coming team, don’t give up many shots, and have good skaters on defense.  The Kings are the defending champs and can be physically intimidating.  I’ll take the surging Blues and their mobile defense over the Kings with Quick in pedestrian form.  Blues in 7.

Draft Thoughts Follow-up

Just as a brief follow-up to my post on drafting Couturier over Hamilton in 2011, I was struck by an article on ESPN today.  Now the article is concerned with NFL drafting, so it's only loosely analogous, but there's one passage that stood out to me:

"...as a collective entity, the league does an acceptable job of putting guys in buckets.
When it comes to valuing draftees at the same position who are clumped together in a similar tier, I'm skeptical. I wonder whether the margin of error in analyzing those players is larger than any advantage a particular franchise has in scouting talent."
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9202430/bill-barnwell-inconsistency-nfl-draft

It's also worth considering that NFL drafts are for guys in their early 20s for very specialized roles.  If anything, scouting NFL draft picks should be much easier than NHL teams drafting 18-year olds.

I guess I just come back to the question of with what degree of confidence can any NHL team say two very closely ranked prospects is better than another?  Could the Flyers really conclude that Couturier is simply a better prospect, so forget about position?

I can't really slag on the Flyers too much, as they have generally done an excellent job with their first round picks, which are generally in the latter portions of the round.  But by trading away so many picks, and then inordinately drafting centers with the picks they do keep, clearly the Flyers have made their own bed with an empty cupboard of defensemen.

Draft Do-Over?

Regardless of where the Flyers end up picking in this draft, there's always the question of drafting to need.  Most accepted is the theory of drafting the best player available, regardless of position.  It would be pretty stupid to draft to fill a particular need of an NHL roster, simply because most draft picks take years to mature into NHL contributors.  Who knows what your specific needs will be in 5 years?  Whether or not there may be some logic in drafting for an organizational need, however, after identifying lack of depth in a certain area, isn't necessarily so stupid.

The Flyers in fact may have been much better served doing so.

Think back 2 years ago, when the Flyers obtained the Blue Jackets' #8 overall pick, a rare high pick for the Flyers.  At the time, I wrote that the Flyers would presumably look for a defensemen there.  As the draft unfolded, the chips appeared to fall perfectly for the Flyers.  As expected, Adam Larsson was the #1 defensemen available and was quickly snatched up.  After the surprise choice of Scheifele by the Jets though, #2 defensemen Dougie Hamilton was, somewhat surprisingly, still on the board when the Flyers picked.  Easy choice, right?

Not so fast, as Sean Couturier was unexpectedly still available as well.  His draft stock had fallen somewhat, as several months prior he was considered a potential #1 overall.  I think when all is said and done, the Flyers simply thought Couturier was a better player so they drafted him, despite the organization being deep at center with no high-end defensive prospects to speak of.

Two years later, things haven't changed much.  The Flyers are still well-stocked at center for now and the future with Giroux, Briere, Schenn, Couturier, Laughton and Cousins, but they are absolutely screaming for high-end (preferably puck-moving) defensive prospects.  This is not knock on Couturier at all, as I have said repeatedly I think he is the Flyers best prospect since Lindros.  He's had some very tough stretches this season, but I think he will bounce back and likely be a second-line center than Schenn, honestly (better defensively, bigger, and similar offensive potential based on what I'm seeing).

The only thing that hurts is what they could've had in Hamilton.  Since the draft, Hamilton won Canadien Junior defensemen of the year last year, and this year has become a key member of the cup contending Bruins.  He's getting PP time, taking shifts with Chara, has 15 points in 40 games, and overall playing 16-18 minutes a night.  He's also 6'5", has a right-handed shot, and clearly projects as a top pairing guy in the long run.  In other words, EXACTLY what the Flyers organization needs.

Because of the situation described above, the Flyer may trade Couturier this offseason.  He's their most valuable asset, and it may make sense to slot Schenn in at #2 center and Laughton at #3 (assuming he keeps impressing), leaving Couturier with no clear spot.  Oh, and the Flyers now have more of a need than ever for a long term puck-moving solution on defense.  If the Flyers want to address this problem, Couturier is the best tool to do so.  Or they could've just drafted differently 2 years ago and not have to play the fickle trade market....