ARTHUR: The NHL has finally reached a point in its media coverage where it depends on its knowledgeable fans. During this year's playoffs, we've seen an effort to bring the game back to the mainstream: ESPN producers put hockey talking points in the second (and sometimes FIRST) segment on shows like PTI and Around The Horn. Yet, the panelists are rather blunt about their oblivion in regards to the sport, reinforcing the idea that it's acceptable to dismiss it, as though it were curling or a pool trick-shot competition. And at the end of the day, these lukewarm stabs at relevance do so much less for hockey than an honest evaluation from a true fan. That's why hockey needs Joel Stein on the front lines. You may remember Stein as the man who told you that you didn't deserve the Ducks. When he wrote that, he was particularly critical of print media, as the LA Times, to which Stein is a regular contributor, no longer followed the Ducks or Kings on the road (and have since consolidated the beat into one writer). "Hockey cuts" are a pandemic in the print world, and Joel now finds himself fighting off the infection.
TIME.com's managing editor, Josh Tyrangiel, recently banned Stein from writing about hockey, declaring the sport "not relevant enough to be in a mass-circulation magazine." The fate of hockey in TIME, the same magazine that once put Bernie Parent on its cover, has been put to a vote. Please vote if you haven't already (please say you have; this story is two weeks old). California and New York have contributed the most voters with an overwhelming stay of execution.
Joel loves hockey, and he's fighting to keep it on the national stage. And having a hockey fan on the national stage is so much more important than having the national stage mention the sport in passing. It's nice to have Wilbon and Kornheiser say a few favorable words about hockey, but ultimately, we know they're not fond of it and can't talk about it intelligently. We don't need those voices, effusing about as much joy and intellect as Bob Costas covering a tractor pull. We need to hear from the people who love hockey, and are dying to tell you about it.
At first blush, that may sound like a blogger call-to-arms. It isn't. Despite the fact that I decided to co-write a hockey blog, I don't think blogs should be the future of NHL coverage. I just think we can do without the sports talk-show hosts nervously discussing hockey out of obligation, as though it were the Kentucky Derby or The Olympics. We need real hockey fans talking about hockey, and we need to support them, far more than we need to clamor about getting onto PTI or the Sportscenter Top 10.
[2008 IHWC: Koivu to Selanne to Kloistinen and through the side of the net.]
ARTHUR: Anaheim calling to the hockey world...
For a few offseasons now, we've heard the rumor: Selanne to Montreal. Apparently, between calls from Paul Kariya, Teemu fields impassioned pleas from his countryman, Saku Koivu, to come join him in French Canada. But as of TSN's report yesterday (a translation of an unnamed Russian paper), it seems that Koivu is done with the Canadiens, who are moving on and offering his contract and captaincy to Kovalev. It stands to reason that Saku might consider this an opportunity to go play with Teemu.
Daniel, you recently suggested we write about the free agent market, but I said the waters were a bit murky this side of July 1st. I was, however, willing to say I wanted Koivu if he was a free agent, and this report would seem to guarantee he will be. So, let's start the Koivu to Anaheim rumor. Give me your upside/downside of a Saku Koivu signing. DANIEL: Now that you've confirmed your brilliant hockey sense once again, I've gotta say I'm only kind of a fan of this prospect. There's no doubt that Koivu could shore up our second line scoring. He's a natural center, and it would let us move Ebbett to the wing where his size would be less of a problem. I do like an Ebbett, Koivu, Selanne, line. It'd be two guys who have great play making abilities, which means you have two guys who can work the puck between them until Selanne is open to finish. I think that line would be a lot more deadly than people realize. Especially since Koivu and Selanne know each other well enough, in terms of playing together, that training camp will probably be enough for them to gel as linemates. The only real problem is that he lacks size and that might affect the cycle game that we like to play. It would not be a line that plays the puck possession style we like. It would be a faster line looking for transition opportunities. Not that that's bad, just it wouldn't fit perfectly into our scheme.
I think the real concern, though, has to be injuries. I'm not saying he's fragile, and certainly part of it had to do with the fact that he battled cancer in the middle of his career, but he only played 65 games last year. In fact, he's only played more than 70 games 5 times in his 13 seasons. Granted, 4 of those have been in the last 6 seasons, but I think the injury concern needs to be factored in to any contract he gets. Otherwise, I think it's a smart move. If he plays next year, it will probably be Selanne's last. We owe it to him to get someone who can keep up with him and play on the rush with him. That guy could definitely be Koivu. I think our physical style of play makes Koivu's susceptibility to injuries a greater concern for us. You've said it yourself, small guys have to protect themselves, and it causes problems. But with Koivu we have to worry if our physical game ends up taking him out of the line up.
ARTHUR: I'm going to disagree that cycling is a concern for the second line. Selanne's recent lines have all played a speed and short-pass style, which has allowed him to play with centers like McDonald and Ebbett. Here's my Upside/Downside:
Upside -Selanne would be happy. Teemu hasn't agreed to play next year, and can you blame him? He took a pay cut again, and we signed Brendan Morrison. We owe him this, and if Selanne's happy, you have to think he and Koivu might sign to play additional years with the Ducks. That's right, I said it. I want Selanne to play until he's arthritic in both hips.
-Instant Chemistry. Koivu is one of two veterans that knows how to play with Teemu, how to receive a Selanne pass and how to cover for bad Selanne plays. They would make each other better.
-Quick on the Draw. The Ducks have had trouble in the circle without McDonald (and then without Sammy). Koivu was 54.1% on the dot this season, 13th amongst NHL centermen who took 1000+, and he was 52.3%/21st the year before.
-Best on the market. As far as Top Six centers in this year's potential free agent market, Koivu's probably the best pickup we could make. I might've said Connolly before the Sabres resigned him, but the veterans are all retirement candidates and there are no young guns that warrant the risk of a multi-year deal. If Murray's intent on not going "0 for 3" as he put it, this is the best pickup short of a trade.
Downside -Inconsistency. I agree that his injuries may catch up with us, but you also have to consider that in his most recent and most productive complete season, he posted a minus-21 on a 75-point campaign. Granted, the East is not about defense, but will he be able to score and still play consistent defense in the West?
-Salary. Ideally, Koivu comes in at a discount (3/3.75M) on a one-year deal to play with Selanne. A multi-year contract or a big one-year contract would be out of the question for the Ducks.
News came down this week that recent Ducks acquisition Petri Kontiola signed a 2-year agreement to play with Metallurg Magnitogorskin of the Kontinental Hockey League, the same team making a push for the services of Sergei Fedorov. This marks a second consecutive loss of a notable Ducks prospect to the KHL, following Geoff Platt's defection to Minsk last year.
The KHL appears to be operating on steady feet after last month's redraft, which cut some key (read inflated) players' salaries between 20 and 50%. Its days of stealing NHL superstars may be over, but the KHL remains an attractive (and better paying) alternative to the US minor leagues.
Daniel, the Ducks and David McNab seem comfortable with slow development, but I doubt there's anything 'comfortable' about it for the players waiting in the AHL or ECHL, as opposed to the kids finishing their time in the NCAA or the Canadian juniors. Is the Ducks' prospect pool in perennial danger from KHL poaching? And do you think the KHL can change the face of the NHL from the ground up, by stealing depth players instead of superstars, as they'd originally intended? DANIEL: I don't think the Ducks talent is in serious jeopardy. Like you said, the KHL is struggling. More importantly, the league only allows 5 foreign players per team, which means that defectors will be a slightly minor issue for us. There's only so much space for foreigners, and the North American 2-way power forwards that better fit our system aren't going to have many opportunities out in the KHL. In fact, I would imagine that the clubs out there would rather use those limited slots for more established foreign-born players.
I actually think the KHL will be worse for Russian-born players and other Eurasians in the long run, if it is used as a developmental type of league. Pretty soon, it will be dealing with a situation similar to that of Japanese baseball, only worse. 18-year-olds will sign, get paid a little and then defect, leaving the league bereft of superstar talent. Also, if this starts happening, the NHL clubs will just stay away from young talent during the draft, and then poach the talent when the first contract is up. This might give people the impression that it will provide the KHL the growth it wants, since NHL teams won't be drafting Russian stars, but the fact is, the money is in the NHL, and the KHL might keep 1/2 of its major talent.
There will be enough force to draw the talent back to the NHL anyway. Two of the best young Russian players are already in the NHL: Ovechkin and Malkin. There will still be an influx of Russian talent. Even if the young stars are spending their time away from the AHL and ECHL, they will still find their way back to the NHL, because it is still where the best talent plays.
When it comes to prospects, the most important thing is ice time. If some of these players are developing in a separate league, then the only thing the NHL clubs really need to start worrying about is how to scout teams in Russia so they can start picking up the free agents who want to win the greatest trophy in sports. It will become the same as teams picking up free agents who don't get drafted in college. I'm sure we'll find a way to make it work out for us.
ARTHUR: The combine started today, and I hear the first question to every KHL invitee was, "Will you come and play in the NHL?" as though the kid wasn't sitting there.
I agree that the NHL/KHL agreement to mutually respect contracts took steps to neutralize poaching. That, along with the KHL's new five-player limit next season, will be key in stemming temptation amongst NHL players. However, I think the danger here is not that anyone will stay in the KHL or even that they go in the first place, but that they'll break ties with the team that drafted them, develop in the KHL and raise their value before they return to the NHL. In the Salary Cap Era, that has to be a nightmare for teams trying to manage their draft picks, assets and development.
From a player's perspective, if you're not a part of your NHL team's long-term plans, of course you'd want to leave the AHL and ECHL. In the KHL, you get a shorter season, a better paycheck and the ability to prove yourself with some NHL-level teammates. Why not spend a season keeping pace with Sergei Fedorov, and prove your old team was foolish not to call you up?
But I think the vindication for these overlooked players could ultimately damage the NHL's farm system. Five players per team may not seem like a lot, but if you poach a few players of borderline talent from every AHL team, some AHL franchises will start to fail. How can every team afford to rent the players and staff from its NHL affiliate when they're putting nothing but career AHL players on the ice? The Ducks are already having trouble getting their money from Iowa, and the Ducks' playoff scoring this year was 42% CHOPS. Also, as a GM, how do you sign serious one-way contracts with guys that have never played in your system or under your minors coaching staff? And with your minors team depleted of future NHL players, how do you not?
I don't think the Ducks' homegrown assets are in danger, though they may be hesitant to acquire borderline-bust players from other teams, now. But I do think that, though the NHL keeps its superstars, the KHL will still have an impact on the league. Fewer teams will be able to keep players on sweetheart entry-level deals. AHL teams will have fewer future NHLers. And the risk/reward on depth players may change dramatically.
Pop quiz, boys and girls. Who holds the record for the longest tenure with the Anaheim Ducks?
If you said Selanne or Rucchin, good guess, but wrong. The answer is David McNab. Anaheim's longtime Assistant GM was one of three initial hires for the Ducks organization, after Ferreira and Gauthier, and he has just closed out his 15th year in the front office. Only equipment manager John Allaway, Wild Wing and the Pond itself can claim similar longevity with the franchise. McNab recently interviewed for open GM positions around the NHL, though with yesterday's announcement that Chuck Fletcher will be taking the reins in Minnesota, it's more than likely McNab will remain with the Ducks.
Anaheim Calling would like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to Mr. McNab, as well as our hope that he stays with Anaheim until the Ducks gain the good sense to promote him to General Manager. But first, for those who only know him from the news articles praising his NCAA free agent scouting prowess, a quick bio: A native of Vancouver, David McNab was born into a hockey family. Most notably, his father Max played championship time at center with Gordie Howe and the '50 Red Wings before beginning a well-respected career as a general manager, which included time with the San Francisco Seals, the San Diego Gulls and a stunning turnaround of a Washington Capitals team that seemed trapped in the cellar. During his father's GM years, David attended Point Loma High School in San Diego, then travelled east to play hockey for the Wisconsin Badgers. The young McNab served as the backup goaltender for the legendary '77 team that shocked Michigan in the closing seconds and overtime of the NCAA championship game.
After college, McNab joined his father and the Washington Capitals as a professional scout. He held that position for four seasons before moving on to Hartford for a seven-year stint, which included two years as the Director of Player Recruitment. In 1989, he joined the New York Rangers, but left after four years to work for the newly minted Mighty Ducks.
In his time in Anaheim, McNab has worn various hats of varying influence, but we note the following accomplishments (only because there are too many to list to our satisfaction). McNab was the Ducks' first Director of Player Personnel, overseeing the drafts that brought players like Steve Rucchin, Pavel Trnka, Oleg Tverdosky, Mike Lecerlc, Ruslan Salei and Matt Cullen to the team. McNab also served six years as the GM of the Ducks' AHL affiliate, uprooting the franchise from its dismal circumstances in Baltimore to a very successful setup in Cincinnati. In 2007, McNab drew hockey headlines with the contribution of FIVE (McDonald, Kunitz, Penner, Shannon and Carter) undrafted NCAA players to the championship team, all of whom he'd personally scouted and counseled. The Stanley Cup win and recognition of McNab's efforts came just months before his father Max passed away. End Bio.
First, I'd like to point out that writers like Scott Burnside jumped on David McNab’s story in 2007 without noting WHY very few front offices took a chance on undrafted NCAA players before McNab: it was expensive. Before the cap, first year entry-level salaries were limited to ≈1.5M with a signing bonus limited to 50% of the player's base salary. Today, the cap is 850K/10%, giving teams a forgiving margin of error on undrafted signings. McNab put faith in kids like Andy McDonald when it was fiscally risky. And though he got in on the 'ground floor' with many players, they all drew additional attention come signing time, and would have had suitors willing to bid the league maximum were they courted in the Salary Cap Era.
But make no mistake, they still would have signed with Anaheim because McNab is persistent with these kids. Every single one of them talks about how grateful they are for the time he spent with them, not just convincing them they'd see playing time with the Ducks, but just talking hockey. You see, McNab's an old school scout, the kind that spends 50% of his time driving to games, 20% watching them and the other 30 talking to these kids. I came across my favorite McNab story in the Calgary Herald last year. In 1988, Cujo was on the fence about hockey and committing to play for Wisconsin, until he received a number of handwritten letters telling him how good he was in net, all signed by an NHL scout he'd never met, named David McNab.
I have a rather personal affection for a die-hard college hockey fan from the West Coast, and it was McNab’s faith in the NCAA that made me a Ducks fan. I cheer every time we draft a college kid or pick up one that’s supposedly busted. His passion for bringing these kids into the NHL is strong. Just look at the draft boards. When McNab left the Rangers in ‘93, NY drafted Clarkson University standout Todd Marchant in the 7th round. Three years later, the Ducks picked up St. Cloud State's Matt Cullen in the 2nd Round.
In his three decade NHL career, David McNab has increased the credibility of both NCAA and West Coast hockey tenfold. In that, his life's work is kindred with the very purpose of this blog. And while I was sad to hear he didn't find a GM position this Spring, I'm even sadder that he isn't already the Ducks’ GM.
DANIEL: It's hard to argue that the man knows how to find the diamond in the rough. Although, I think what endears him to me more than anything is his ability to make calm scouting decisions. If you look at the players he has acquired, they all have one thing in common: an ability to do their job. You and I have always contended that Penner has had so much trouble in Edmonton because the Oilers didn't know how to use his skills, and were asking him to be an Ilya Kovalchuk, i.e. carry the scoring load by himself at times, instead of using him as the grinder he is and putting him with size/skill guys who can get him the puck in the crease. My point is that McNab has an ability to pick out a player based on how his skills work for specific situations. All of the players he's encouraged us to sign have been contributors and strong role players.
McNab has been involved in California Hockey since before you or I had ever seen a sheet of ice. He stuck with our team through a lot of bad times, including the Disney jokes, an arrested owner and Pierre Page. I think, as fans, it's easy for us to throw praise/blame at players, coaches and general managers, but so much happens behind the scenes. Scouts are responsible for finding good players and a GM is usually following someone else's advice. For 14 years that someone else has been McNab, and he hasn’t led us down a wrong path. I don't know what else to say about the man, except he scouts great players that fit our system. He's been a model citizen, and proven time and time again that he is capable of spotting the talent our team needs to progress.
I agree that he needs to be our next GM. I think Murray did a lot in terms of getting value for his assets at the deadline, and I like his fire. But McNab has a knowledge of players and an ability to get value from picks that reminds me of what happens in the Red Wings organization. The reason Detroit has been so successful for the past 18 years or so is their ability to get the best value for their picks, and to keep those people in the organization because they like the team. I think McNab would be able to provide that kind of leadership in the GM role.
ARTHUR: The offseason talk has begun for the Anaheim Ducks. At this point, it looks like they'll make a play for most, or all, of their Restricted Free Agents (Bodie, Brown, Christensen and Wisniewski), as an unmatchable offer sheet for any of those players is unlikely and well-worth the draft picks of any team foolish enough to tender it. In the UFA department, Hedican will likely retire, the elder Niedermayer gains you the younger, Beauchemin may become unaffordable and Todd Marchant may come back at a discount or at the same price as a permanent 3rd line center. As far as free agents on other teams, those waters are still a bit murky (though Whicker of the OC Register is ready to toss a contract Chad Larose's way).
Let's deal in the concrete, Daniel. Assuming we sign Scotty, which is not TOO great a leap, considering he'd like to be ready to play in the Vancouver Olympics next year. What's the trade you would make? Do you move Prongs for Kariya, as you suggested earlier? Do you dangle the prospect of Montreal in front of Jiggy (though WHO you could get back, not named Markov, from that free agency depleted team, I don't know)? Or do you move some other big contract for some other player I haven't even thought to consider? Who's your big move and for whom? DANIEL: I have an interesting scenario. First, I'd like to say I still love a Pronger for Kariya trade. We should get a pick in the deal. I think a 3rd or 4th rounder would do, mostly because St. Louis will get more use out of a veteran blue liner than it will out of a player like Kariya. We wouldn't save a lot on the cap hit, but Kariya would do so much for us. If we can't sign Niedermayer, we need to find a way to take Kariya out of St. Louis without giving up Pronger because he can do a lot of the same rover things from the point on a power play and he would solidify our second line.
But onto trades, I think we should trade in the division. Every time I look at the list of what teams have and what they might be willing to part with, I'm very unimpressed. The free agent market is going to be great this year. Not because of all the high priced talent, but because of the sheer depth. There will be plenty of opportunity to fill need at very reasonable prices, more so upfront than on the blue line, which makes it that much harder to part with Pronger. But I think L.A. would make a great trading partner. They have the 5th overall pick this year. So, they might be more willing to part with a Top 6 forward. Plus, they have two young defensemen in need of a mentor, who knows how to teach solid play and, more importantly, how to be dominant. There have been rumors surrounding Frolov before, not very serious ones, but rumors nonetheless. I think if we get Frolov and the Kings' first round pick in the 2010 draft, it's a good deal for Pronger. The Kings look like they are on the way up. So, maybe a pick in the teens in 2010 won't be something they feel they need to hold onto. I'd also like a pick in the later rounds of this year's draft, if we can get the deal done by then, maybe 4th or later, but 3rd would be nice.
On the flip side, I see this as an equally good deal in a Giguere trade--
ARTHUR: Wait a minute. You think the Kings would take on a 6M salary at goalie? Where they already have two goaltenders, both of whom carry GAA's at least .5 a goal better than Giguere?
I'd maybe give you Pronger because he is an asset at only an extra year, but I doubt the Kings, the SMALLEST payroll in the league, who haven't tried to keep a multi-million dollar player since-- I don't know --Ziggy Palffy, and who have only one player making 4M (though Kopitar's 7M kicks in next year) would move a single asset to add a player at a position where their depth chart is full, qualified and priced at less than 1.5M for BOTH goaltenders.
DANIEL: Yes, I do. I'm not sure the Kings are as SET at goalie as people think. The one problem they have always had, since Hrudey was released, has been in net. The chance to anchor that position and let the team flourish, even for just two years, should be worth any price. It's not like they haven't tried to pay a goalie before, remember Cloutier? The difference, here, is that Jiggy has a ring and a Conn Smythe that Cloutier didn't.
I don't deny that Quick and Ersberg are quality between the pipes, but they have a collected 0 playoff wins to their names and the Kings will be looking to make that jump to a playoff team this year, after a promising start to last season. Jiggy will give them the experience they need in net to make that jump. I don't see how having a 23 year old rookie sit for a year and a half behind Giguere is bad. And if they re-sign him as an RFA, Quick will still only be 25 when Jiggy's contract expires. This means he'll still have 7-10 years between the pipes for the Kings. Also, Ersberg becomes a trade asset at that point. Two years gives the Kings time to groom another backup and shop Ersberg for extra scoring or defensive depth, which they definitely need. I think the Kings can tolerate the contract in order to make sure their franchise goalie can handle the pressure of a Stanley Cup run. The Kings have been second class in So Cal Hockey since we won the Cup; picking up Jiggy could be enough to make them relevant again.
Although, if we were to deal Jiggy instead of Pronger, I would want a Kings draft pick this year. Jiggy is a Conn Smythe winner and worth two first rounders. Frolov was a first round pick; seems like a fair price. So, for those keeping track, it would be Jiggy for Alexander Frolov, the 2009 first round pick, and a late pick in this draft, possibly a 4th or, better yet, a 3rd.
I think the Giguere trade ends up being the best bet. The Kings can slow up Quick's development and have him be around a hard working goalie, who knows how to get it done at a high level. We get a forward, who scored 32 goals last year and who is very capable of playing the power style of game we like, but who also has speed and a little finesse in the transition game. This gives Carlyle much more flexibility in moving around the likes of Perry and Bobby Ryan because Frolov could play on the top line or round out the second line. Although, I'd much rather see a transition forward like Perry with Ebbett and Selanne. This also has the bonus of Giguere not moving far, so maybe he'd wave his no-trade clause and let it happen.
I'm not completely sold on moving Pronger. He became so much more of a monster when he realized he was staying for the year. If this is how he plays with job security, I think he deserves an extension with a no-trade clause. Pronger doesn't seem to be dropping off too far, and if we can somehow keep those 5 defensemen we were working with during the playoffs with us all year, we might win another division title.
ARTHUR: Alright. I'll agree that Frolov is about the perfect size/speed of player we're looking for, which is hard to come by in the free agent market. It's probably my lack of faith in the Kings that makes me question the move.
It pains me to say this, Daniel. As you know, I'm the only one we've seen at Ponda Center who rocks Jiggy's Halifax jersey, but . . . I'd move Giguere. It's Pronger, Giguere or both, the way I see it. As far as what you get for them, I'd say you fill a hole on the team, add a superstar or get prospects and save money.
Here's the thing though, if you're going to move at least one of them, why move Pronger? We saw this team make a run without Giguere, and they were pretty good. We have no idea what they'd be like without Pronger, and Carlyle even switched to an effective Pronger/Niedermayer pairing in Game 6 against the Red Wings. It would be hard for me to see this team move Pronger, and not think of it as rebuilding. Yes, we technically prepared to move him by picking up Whitney, but we know Whitney can't actually replace him and that losing Pronger AND Beauchemin would severely deplete this defensive corps. I think losing Pronger is the Devil-we-don't-know, whereas losing Jiggy is the Devi-we've-become-acquainted-with this Spring.
So, where do you move a guy with a no-trade clause? I'd imagine Jiggy's first choice would be Montreal, and I'm sure the Habs would love to have him. The Habs may get some more players under contract by then, but for now, I'd say this is a prospect trade. We move Jiggy for a 1st/2nd Round Draft pick, Ryan McDonagh and a young NHL player (maybe Latendresse if the RFA re-signs) or rookie (most likely Max Pacioretty or Yannick Weber). If we need a goaltending insurance policy, we take Price in the deal instead of a skater. Sounds steep, I know, but a Conn Smythe backstop is hard to come by in any offseason market.
Believe it or not, I actually like a Montreal trade, both for the likelihood of Giguere signing off on it and for what it would bring to the Ducks. But since this IS a blog, and I should start a totally off-the-wall rumor: Giguere for Cheechoo. Yes, the logical suitors for Giguere are Colorado, Tampa Bay and maybe Philadelphia, but if the Sharks are down on Nabokov, you have to ask HOW down they are. The contract lengths match, the cap hit for Giguere is 12M over the next two years, the cap hit for Cheechoo is 6M over the next two years and both players make an additional 1M in salary over those numbers.
On the likelihood of such a ridiculous trade, I say the Sharks do it because they've shopped Cheechoo before, and they may truly be down on Nabokov after his performance in the First Round this year. The Ducks do it because Jiggy will probably sign off on such a short geographical jump to a legit contender in a region with similar healthcare agencies and experts for his son. And the Ducks also do it because the whole "trading within your own division" thing has never really applied to these two teams. They've done the 'big' trade before. The pre-lockout schedule means fewer games against each other, most of which the Ducks can concede to the Sharks. And both players will see an expanded role if traded, but are equally likely to be the "difference" in any series between the teams in the near future (i.e. the remaining two years on their contracts). So, Giguere for Cheechoo with Anaheim spending the extra money on a free agent.
If the Ducks had advanced to the Western Conference Finals, they would have automatically forfeited the 15th pick (earned by virtue of having the worse of the two 8th seed records), and drawn no better than 27th. It's not "good" news if you thought this Ducks team had a chance at the Cup, but as a Ducks fan, you have to chuckle that you were able to watch two series of bonus hockey, but you still get to pick immediately after the lottery teams on Draft Day.
In my last Penalty Kill, I said that based on Anaheim's prospect pool, the smart money is on a solid blueliner or a pure scoring Top Sixer. I chose John Moore as the best defenseman available at 15th, and I'd like to point out now that he's also a superior pick to any Top Sixer that will be available at 15th. After the lottery picks, most of the remaining forwards in the First Round are two-way players. Generally, that's a good thing, but the Ducks have so many two-way forwards in their prospect pool that they should be willing to sacrifice a little defensive sense in the name of pure scoring talent. That's not easy to find in the this year's First Round class.
If the Ducks are hell-bent on getting a Top Sixer, I personally feel that leaves them with three options (only one of which guarantees them the pure scorer they're looking for):
1) Trade Up. If the Ducks trade into the Top 14 picks, they can pick up Scott Glennie, a pure scorer who is the subject of this Penalty Kill.
2) Stay at 15th. If the Ducks stay at 15th, but still want to draft a forward, the best pick for them is probably Zack Kassian. He's a more appropriate pick at around 17th, but he's a Big Bad player who's shown enough scoring ability this year that Anaheim might be able to develop him into a power forward.
3) Trade down. The Ducks showed they were willing to trade down last year to get the player they wanted. Gardiner was overvalued at 17th, but that was as far down as Burke could trade. This year, the Ducks can trade into the last ten picks and pick up Drew Shore. Shore's got the recent Ducks pedigree: North American-born, committed to an American college (University of Denver) and a hard worker with competitive grit. Murray may find his slow development preferrable to bringing along the offensive skills of players available at 15th, like Kassian, Peter Holland or Landon Ferraro.
So, how far up does Anaheim have to trade to get Scott Glennie? I'd say they need to get at least as high as 12th (MIN), but more likely 11th (NSH) to nab him. He's ranked 19th overall by ISS, 7th (North America) by Central Scouting and projected to be drafted around 11th by TSN. More importantly, though, why should they draft Scott Glennie?
There are "hot words" when reading through scouting reports because there are things that scouts are willing to say and there are things that scouts are hesitant to say. The rare words that always catch my eye are: "NHL level speed." That's usually enough for me to go find out more about a kid, and in this case, to watch his WHL games online.
This kid is FAST. And he can score in 5th gear, or downshift and finish in another gear if the play calls for it. If you were putting any stock in Landon Ferraro winning the CHL's Fastest Skater competition at this year's Top Prospects game (tweaking his groin to post a 14.009 lap time), SELL IT. For whatever extra torque Ferraro has in the engine, Glennie has a faster top speed, not to mention 2 more inches in height with the prospect of filling out his 182 lbs. frame.
Glennie plays with the much-lauded Brayden Schenn for the Western Hockey League's Brandon Wheat Kings. Brayden and Scott were the Wheat Kings' first and second picks, respectively, in the 2006 WHL bantam draft, and they combined with fellow rookie Matt Calvert to form one of the most productive first-year lines in WHL history, knotting 193 points. Glennie's share of that was 26G and 32A at a plus/minus of 10. He was quick to drop the gloves that year, and he played a physical and gritty game similar to Schenn's, despite the disparity in size between the players.
This year, Glennie cut his PIM in half (to 25), and he notched 70 points in only 55 games with a plus/minus of 22, before he broke his left elbow, slamming into a goalpost at the end of the Wheat Kings' 7-6 overtime win in Calgary on January 31st. He was out for the remainder of the season, but returned for the Playoffs to turn in an impressive performance and 18 points (as many as Schenn).
Glennie's not a defensive savant, though the Wheat Kings trust him as a penalty killer. However, between him and the projected Top 10 Brayden Schenn, most agree that Glennie is the superior offensive talent. And Central Scouting places a heavy emphasis on his ability to play a physical game in his rookie season in the WHL. For that, they welcome comparisons to Jonathan Cheechoo and Jonathan Toews-- a natural offensive ability coupled with power moves and confidence with the puck.
Upside? Glennie is an NHL level speedster, who can finish at top speed. He has a powerful and accurate shot, and he knows where on the ice to take it. He's played some time at center (which should warm Randy Carlyle's heart) and some time on the penalty kill, and while he hasn't shown defensive prowess, per se, he's been physical in the WHL, which is usually a strong indicator of a player's courage at the NHL level.
Downside? The kid needs to fill out his 6'1" frame, but remain effective. Getting dumped at high speeds has been a problem for Glennie. He needs to build some size and durability to make sure that NHL level hits don't combine with his NHL level speed to equal NHL career ending injuries. Also, Glennie is undoubtedly overvalued due to playing with a complete player like Brayden Schenn. There is some question as to whether he will ever look like an 11th overall pick, though that is the cachet in which he will be traded if any team moves picks to get him.
DANIEL: Alright, the Ducks are out of the picture, and the playoffs are still happening. After crying, I decided it would be better to keep blogging. Also, I wanted to get Arthur to stop making fun of me. So, Arthur, let's take a quick look at the two series that are left, and give me your picks. ARTHUR: A close second to my disappointment in the Ducks is the elimination of Boston. No chance of an Original Six finals, now. My alternative matchup is Pittsburgh/Chicago: Battle of the First Overall Picks. I like that storyline more than a DET/PIT rematch and more than anything involving Carolina. This is a rematch 17 years in the making (less if you count the Jean Claude Van Damme movie). Like '92, Pittsburgh would be returning to the Finals, but unlike '92 they're returning as the previous year's losers. So, no, we won't see a dynasty with this matchup (unlike a Detroit repeat). No, we don't have anyone resembling Lemieux involved. And no, we won't see Chelly whoop Larry Murphy. BUT, it would give every lottery team faith in the draft system, and I think it'd be a hell of a matchup and an explosive series.
So, I'm picking Pittsburgh/Chicago. Even though Cam Ward has never lost a series and Staal proved he couldn't be shut down. Even though Detroit was 4-2 against this Chicago team in the regular season, and have shown they're not all that impressed by the Hawks' transition game. I'm picking Pittsburgh/Chicago because Gonchar will be taking the ice, Malkin's waking up, Fleury's got larceny on his mind, Detroit looked tired in Game 7 (not a good sign in a series where they'll need their legs) and the Hawks made Luongo look pedestrian. Pittsburgh/Chicago.
DANIEL: Eastern Conference:
Pittsburgh v. Carolina: I have to pick the Penguins. They just came off of an epic 7 game series against the Caps where they dominated the last game. Crosby is on fire, and Fleury may not be amazing right now but he's more than acceptably solid. Right now, this series has two teams that know how to get there, so I think experience is a wash. I just don't know if Carolina has the scoring to win a 6-5 game, which they'll have to do at least twice in this series. Pens in 6
Western Conference:
Chicago v. Detroit: Detroit just finished a dogfight with the Ducks, and they've got to be more than a little damaged. They're defense can hold, and Osgood has shown he will not be a liability this offseason. But Chicago looks great. They've comeback from multiple goal deficits throughout the playoffs. They look hungry, and they don't give up on the game no matter how far behind they are. That youngster trio looks so dangerous, and they are playing well. Not to mention, they have the Ducks old stopper in Pahlsson. Look for him to give all the Red Wing forwards fits. The rebirth continues. Chicago in 6
Anaheim Calling claims no affiliation with the NHL, ANAHEIM DUCKS or their associates. The use of any TMs, registered or previously used in commerce, is purely for informational purposes related to 'fan discussion' and is not intended to tarnish or promote said marks. Any site traffic created from their use is incidental.
Anaheim Calling reserves all copyright interests in the text and images displayed here as exclusive intellectual property of its authors, referred to as "Arthur" and "Daniel." Any intellectual property belonging to a third party will be properly marked and attributed. ALL embedded YOUTUBE links are the property of the YOUTUBE member associated with the video and/or the entity that captured/commissioned it.
