I don’t think the NHL or the refs understand what’s in the rule book

This post, when I ran it originally on 10/15, referred to that night’s Kings/Rangers game. I am reposting it because, in light of the Red Wings non-goal scandal, I wanted to vent a little on the subject, then remembered I already had.

The noteworthy difference between the Kings/Rangers “goal” and the Wings/Stars “goal” is that the circumstances were the same but with exactly opposite outcomes. The original title of the post:

Last night’s disputed goal and (gasp)

what the actual official rule book has to say about it

The play in question: the second goal in last night’s Kings/Rangers game. The Rangers scored; the ref blew the whistle after the puck crossed the line; the ref waived off the goal; they reviewed it “upstairs”; they ruled it was a goal; the ref reported to Terry Murray that it was ruled a goal by the off-ice officials. Subsequently, everyone on earth noted that, supposedly, when the ref waives off a goal, it’s not reviewable with respect to when the puck crossed the line, since the ref’s decision is “final.” Now…

…usually when people talk about the rules saying the ref’s decision is final, they are referring to rule 32.2, which states:

32.2 Disputes – The Referees shall have general supervision of the game and shall have full control of all game officials and players during the game, including stoppages; and in case of any dispute, their decision shall be final.

[now the controversial and/or annoying clause:]

As there is a human factor involved in blowing the whistle to stop play, the Referee may deem the play to be stopped slightly prior to the whistle actually being blown. The fact that the puck may come loose or cross the goal line prior to the sound of the whistle has no bearing if the Referee has ruled that the play had been stopped prior to this happening.

Clearly, the intent of this rule, and the thing that annoys a lot of people (including me), is that the ref’s state of mind regarding when he intended to blow the whistle becomes the determining factor in the ending of every play. Thus, video review is not necessarily relevant in terms of showing that the whistle blew first or didn’t. Because it might have blown first in the referee’s mind. And the rules clearly state that the referee is the final arbiter of when the play really ended. Ref trumps video review. To wit, 32.2 continues:

In the event of any dispute regarding time or the expiration of penalties, the matter shall be referred to the Referee for adjustment and his decision shall be final. He may use the Video Goal Judge to assist in rendering the final decision.

However, the part of the rule I put in bold above is written in a horrible, fucked up and ambiguous manner. “The fact that the puck may come loose or cross the goal line prior to the sound of the whistle has no bearing if the Referee has ruled that the play had been stopped prior to this happening.” The key phrase is “if the referee has ruled that the play had been stopped prior to this happening.” “Has ruled” when?

Does this refer to the initial call?

Or after further rumination by the ref during the stoppage of play?

The rule does NOT say, “if the referee rules that” (present tense) but “if the referee has ruled that.” “Has ruled” is past tense. One reasonable interpretation of the rule as written is that, once the referee “has ruled” that there is no goal, he cannot overrule himself. As in, “sorry, too late! If only we could go back in time, but we can’t!” The rule does in fact literally say that whether or not the puck crossed the goal line before the whistle HAS NO BEARING  ON WHETHER OR NOT IT’S A GOOD GOAL IF THE REFEREE HAS RULED that the play had been stopped. And he obviously ruled that the play had been stopped before the puck crossed the line, or else he wouldn’t have blown the whistle in the first place, and given the “no goal” signal.

However, the “has ruled” wording makes no sense if you take it literally, because of “In the event of any dispute regarding time or the expiration of penalties, the matter shall be referred to the Referee for adjustment and his decision shall be final. He may use the Video Goal Judge to assist in rendering the final decision.”

The matter shall be referred to the referee for adjustment. Therefore, there can be adjustment of the ref’s initial call, at the ref’s discretion.

[DRAMATIC PAUSE] THERE CAN BE AN ADJUSTMENT. OKAY? NO MATTER WHAT HE SAID DURING THE PLAY, HE CAN CHANGE HIS MIND. WITH REGARD TO “TIME,” NO MATTER WHAT THE VIDEO PEOPLE TELL HIM, HE CAN OVER-RULE THEM.

And we’re unambiguously talking about potential goals here, since the rules specifically refer to the ref being able to consult with the VIDEO GOAL JUDGE before rendering “THE FINAL DECISION” [caps mine]. Again, no other way to interpret this. There can be an adjustment of the initial call, leading to the ref’s final decision. And that’s supported by this:

Rule 39.4 (viii) The video review process shall be permitted to assist the referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g. to ensure they are “good hockey goals”).

So, in sum, it seems this whole “not reviewable” thing with regards to the refs blowing the whistle before the puck crosses the line … is only true if the ref wants it to be. He has the discretion, according to the rules, to choose to review it and change his mind. Is there any other way to interpret this?

[in the original comments section was this exchange:]

dbushik said, on October 15, 2009 at 5:23 pm

The only thing missing is that the ref claims he had not waived off the goal and had made no ruling on the ice regarding goal/no-goal.

How that fits in here, I can’t say with confidence…

I’m currently interpreting this as the ref blowing the play dead but being unsure of whether the puck crossed the goal line, with the presumption on his part being at the time he blew the play dead the puck had already crossed the goal line, assuming it had actually done so, which is what was reviewed.

quisp said, on October 15, 2009 at 7:50 pm (Edit)

Well, if he’s unsure, he would simply make no signal at all and skate to the scorer’s table to initiate a review. The “no-goal” signal only makes sense in the context of a response to a play that appears to be a possible goal or to a player or players who think a goal has been scored. You don’t just make the “no goal” signal willy-nilly. In a sense, it’s an answer to a question. The question is “goal?” The answer: “NO!”

The ref clearly believed he had to pretend later that he didn’t signal no goal, which suggests to me that NO ONE understands what the words in the rule book actually say. Based on the ref’s reaction to his own obvious and really not disputable “no goal” signal, I must conclude that the ref thinks the rule is that if he waives it off, it makes it non-reviewable. But the rules don’t say this. As far as I can tell, the discretion is entirely the ref’s.

*****

Now, I ask you: is it really possible that these people haven’t read their own rule book, or don’t understand what they’ve read? Because the words on the page don’t mean what they think they mean.

UPDATED Who’s Vulnerable? (a.k.a. Cap Idiots Chart #2)

[UPDATE TO THE UPDATE: if you navigated here from a link not on this site, go instead to the corrected, updated chart here]

Just a few quick observations before sleep. Since last time, the Kings and Colorado were big movers. The Kings dropped into the gray zone. Colorado went from bad to gray. With the Kings dropping down, the number of buyers is reduced by one.

Meanwhile, in the orange and red zones, everyone’s making their situations worse by varying degrees. Well, not everyone; Washington and Pittsburgh are standing pat. San Jose has shrunk its wiggle room down to unworkable levels. And Chicago has joined Philly in the joyous red zone.

For the hell of it, I granted the Rangers honorary orange status, because any team that must average $1.3MM per player and has THIRTEEN players left to sign, is screwed even though it’s not Chicago or Philly screwed yet. They’ll get there.

“CAP#” = current cap hit

“SGND” = players signed

“C-Sp” = Cap space

“cush” = cap space w/ 10% cushion

“perP” = cap space per player left to sign

“LTS” = number of players left to sign to get to a 24 roster.

In light of today’s events, I looked up my old post: Can you afford to sign Hossa?

[NOTE: some of the musings are out of date; I am not updating anything other than to throw some highlighting on the Chicago stuff and I am adding one editorial comment in a big blue font; you have been warned]

Let’s organize this by “contenders, “Stocks rising,” “Stocks falling” and “rebuilders.”

Contenders:

Detroit — in this thought experiment, they have signed Franzen and let Hossa go. [UPDATE: Detroit has signed Franzen, so we're half way there]

San Jose — $10MM in cap space with 11 players to sign, including Clowe, Goc and Moen. Also, they have Marleau to think about, who is a free agent in 2010. Verdict: they can’t do it.

Boston — $10MM in cap space with 10 players to sign, including Kessel and Krejci. Verdict: can’t.

Washington — $11MM in cap space with 10 players to sign. Verdict: can’t.

New Jersey — $16MM in cap space with 11 players to sign. Hmm. Lots of space, relative to the others. They’ve got Gionta, Madden, Holik, Rupp, Shannahan, Oduya, Havelid, Zajac and one of Weekes or Clemmenson to sign. Let’s say they commit $8MM to Hossa. Now they’ve got $8MM left to sign 10 players. So, I’m going to say it’s just barely doable, but they would be replacing all the aforementioned vets with prospects or like-priced players. It would therefore be a totally different team. Verdict: can’t.

Chicago — $20MM in cap space with 13 players to sign. They’ve got six or seven RFAs this summer and Toews and Kane RFA in 2010, so they can’t do anything to their cap that would push those salaries through the roof. If they don’t re-sign Havlat or Khabibulin, they could conceivably sign Hossa, and Hossa might actually like playing in Chicago with Kane and Toews. However, it would be dangerous, since Kane and Toews will get big money in’10 and there simply wouldn’t be room for all those contracts. Is Chicago willing to part with Havlat, Bulin wall this year, and make themselves vulnerable to an offer sheet for Kane or Toews which they would be hard-pressed to match? I doubt it, but crazier things have happened. Let’s say they sign Hossa to $8MM this year and then next summer they sign Kane and Toews to contracts at…(okay, I have no idea, but I’m going to conservatively say) $11MM/year total for the two of them put together. [UPDATE: after the playoffs these two have had, their prices are going up.] For the 2010 season, they would then have $10MM in cap space with a likelihood that it will be less than that because the cap will probably come down, and they will have 15 players to sign. So in that light, signing Hossa would be a horrible idea that would only look horrible after the 2009 season. Verdict: shouldn’t (one step down from can’t). Doesn’t mean they won’t. But I think they won’t. Because I think they’re not stupid.

[UPDATE: THEY ARE THAT STUPID.]

Calgary — $11MM in cap space with 10 players to sign. They can’t afford Cammy, but they’re going to sign Hossa? Verdict: can’t.

(bonus category!) Second Tier Contenders:

Philly —  $4MM in cap space, five players to sign. Verdict: can’t.

Carolina — $14MM cap space, 9 players to sign. It’s almost kinda sorta possible for them, if they let Cole walk as a UFA. Say  they sign Hossa, then they’ll have $6MM left to sign 8 players. If they let Ruutu walk as well, they could just about do it. And it might sort of be worth it, but there would be some retooling needed the next year with a big crop of UFAs coming ripe, many of whom would have to go. Verdict: possible (which is like shouldn’t but with slightly more upside).

Vancouver — a whopping $25MM in cap space, but with 13 players to sign. Of their nine biggest forward contracts, only three are signed for next year (Demitra, Kessler and Johnson). That’s one top-six player. They’ve got eight UFAs who could end up anywhere. It’s anybody’s guess what’s going to happen to the Sedins and Sundin. Vancouver certainly could make room for Hossa, sort of plug him into the Sundin expensive UFA slot. But if I’m Hossa, I don’t think I’m willing to sign a long-term contract with a team that has so many question marks that won’t be answered until the end of the summer, if then. Verdict: won’t work.

Pittsburgh — $10MM cap space, 10 players to sign. Can’t.

Montreal — $34MM in cap space, 13 players to sign. Their biggest forwards under contract are two Kostitsyns and Georges Laraque. Everyone else is UFA or RFA. If I’m Hossa, I have no idea what this team is going to look like in the fall. Verdict: won’t work.

Rangers — $15MM in cap space, 14 players to sign. Can’t.

Stocks Rising:

Columbus — $17MM in cap space, 6 players to sign. Hmm. Team is up and coming, good coach, that’s all good if you’re Hossa. They might even be able to keep some space for re-signing Nash the following summer, which is their biggest upcoming cap issue. Verdict: possible.

Nashville — $24MM cap space, 11 players to sign. I’m just going to say that’s doable. I’m not sure what would make Hossa pick Nashville over Columbus or Los Angeles, but the numbers themselves could work.

St Louis — $13MM cap space, 6 players to sign. They’ve got an Erik Johnson and goalie issue the following summer, but they could conceivably sign Hossa at $8MM and five more players with the remaining $5MM. They would be cutting Tkachuk loose, but that’s okay. Add them to the list of teams that could swing it, but again, why Hossa would pick St. Louis over anybody else in this category is beyond me.

Los Angeles — $14MM cap space, 4 players to sign. Two of those — Purcell and Boyle — will be cheap-ish. The third, Johnson, will be medium expensive. Plenty of room to sign Hossa. The pitch is, come skate with Kopitar and Frolov. The team is built so that they don’t have to break up the core because of any one contract, even Hossa’s. Also, the team doesn’t have to cut anyone loose to make it work (c.f. Carolina, Chicago, Minnesota). Verdict: doable.

Stocks falling:

Minnesota — oh, I don’t know. Maybe their stock really isn’t falling. They could afford him by not re-signing Gaborik, but what’s the point of that? I get it from the team’s point of view, but not from Hossa’s. Who’s he going to skate with?

Edmonton — $10MM in cap space, 6 players to sign. Can’t.

Buffalo — $10MM in cap space, 9 players to sign. Can’t.

Anaheim — they’re dumping assets. Once they decide what’s happening with Niedermayer, they’ll have a better idea how much cap space they have left. And they can hardly put themselves in a cap position where next summer (’10) they can’t afford to pay Bobby Ryan. Anyway, so many reasons Hossa won’t end up in Orange County. [UPDATE: the Ducks redeemed themselves quite a bit since I originally wrote this, but I'm going to stick with the assessment that they are on a downward trajectory and in any case have too many cap issues to work out. And I really don't think Hossa wants to go to the hated Ducks. Projection on my part? Maybe.]

Dallas — They could let Lehtinen and Morrison walk, sign Zubov and pay Hossa his $8MM. They’d then have three or four million to sign five players, which could happen. But Dallas can hardly pitch themselves as a team of the future, cap space or not.

Ottawa — no cap space, too many big contracts already.

Rebuilding:

Toronto, Phoenix, Atlanta, Colorado, Tampa Bay, Islanders — he’s not going to a team that’s virtually guaranteed to miss the playoffs.

So, to sum up: Chicago, Carolina, Nashville, St. Louis and Los Angeles (and you may as well throw Minnesota into the mix), all could do it. One is a contender. One is sort of almost one. The rest are not. If I’m Hossa, and those are my choices, I would try for either Chicago or LA. If the Chicago numbers are what I think they are (i.e. season after next the whole house of cards falls apart if they sign Hossa), that really leaves LA looking pretty good.

Not to say Hossa will therefore sign with the Kings. My point is merely that a lot of Hossa’s first choice destinations become far less likely once you look at the numbers. And that calculus always leaves the Kings looking better by comparison.

KuklasKorner : Abel to Yzerman : Gary’s Wallpaper

Fascinating, must-read:

We’re going to say this one more time and I’m going to make it as clear as I can.  No one here has claimed a “conspiracy.” No one has said Gary Bettman orchestrated a Pens Cup.  It’s not Gary Bettman’s fault that Hal Gill accrued a grand total of 2 penalty minutes over the entire series.  Really. It’s not.

What we have said, and will continue to stand behind on this blog, is that he got what he wanted.  He wanted a North American “face of the NHL.” He wanted to be able to point to the Pens as a franchise he “saved.”

He marketed Sidney Crosby.  He branded him.  Now he’s got him.

That’s not all of it. Read the rest: KuklasKorner : Abel to Yzerman : Gary’s Wallpaper .

OK, so now it seems likely Hossa will be headed to LA after all…

…but only because that’s where the good shrinks are, and he’ll be needing years of therapy to recover from Cup-induced PTSD. I actually expect the Wings to sign him now, because for him to leave Detroit after one year, in search of a Cup on yet another team, would be just lame. I was wondering, during the Chicago series, if Chicago were to win that series, would he then go sign with Chicago, setting up the sort of delightful pattern where he always has to sign with whoever beats him, like a demented version of Stockholm Syndrome. Maybe he’ll do a Kariya deal with the Wings for $1MM or something.

Ken Campbell: Best the Wings will ever be?

The link failed to import for some reason, but this is from Ken Campbell’s blog at The Hockey News: 

Ask Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland about it and you get a terse, “I’m not going there.” Ask Red Wings veteran Kris Draper and you get the death stare.

(Trust me, I got it when I asked him about it.)

But no matter what transpires over the next two games, the Red Wings – once again – will be faced with some difficult decisions over the summer and they know there are players in their dressing room who won’t be with them next season.

And we’re talking about core players here. If the Red Wings are intent on signing Marian Hossa this summer – and every indication is they are – it’s going to mean some very loyal and productive players are going to be leaving Hockeytown this summer.

The Red Wings already have $53.5 million dedicated to their salary cap next season and that’s before Hossa takes a hometown discount. So you don’t have to be Warren Buffett to come to the conclusion that there are going to be some key players gone next season.

“We know we have some difficult decisions ahead,” said Holland. “This is probably the best team that we’re going to be able to put together in the cap world. We’re going to lose some players.”

This time last year, the Red Wings were in the middle of the NHL pack when it came to the salary cap, which was about $5 million under the high-water mark. That allowed them to trade for Brad Stuart at the deadline and sign him to a long-term deal over the summer, then sign Hossa to a one-year deal as a free agent.

“We got lucky (last summer),” Holland said. “We signed some guys long-term and they took some big jumps in their careers and they were at the tail end of their contracts, it allowed us to add a star in Marian Hossa. Those days are over.”

Hossa will undoubtedly take a discount and will sign on the Red Wings terms if he wants to stay, but even then they still have to re-sign Ville Leino and decide what to do with Jiri Hudler, who is due to become a restricted free agent. Henrik Zetterberg’s cap hit jumps from $2.65 million to $6.08 million in 2009-10 and Johan Franzen’s cap hit goes from $942,000 to $3.95 million.

Mikael Samuelsson will become an unrestricted free agent July 1 and, as surprisingly good as he has been in his four seasons as a Red Wing, it’s difficult to fathom there will be room for him on next year’s roster. Hudler is another prime candidate to go and the Red Wings might be at least able to get something for him if they take him to arbitration and the team acquiring him knows what his salary will be for next season.

What about Tomas Holmstrom, who appears to have been rendered redundant by Franzen? Have veterans such as Draper and Kirk Maltby played their final games for the Red Wings? Will Chris Chelios come back knowing there’s a good chance he won’t play any more than the 28 games he played this past season?

Although Red Wings coach Mike Babcock has not dwelled upon it, he realizes there will be changes next season. He has watched as players such as Brendan Shanahan, Mathieu Schneider and Robert Lang left the organization without the Red Wings being too adversely affected.

“We don’t want to lose players,” Babcock said. “So I don’t know how Kenny (Holland) is going to work his magic there, but he usually comes up with some theory to keep as many players as he can. And we try not to lose players that we think are the cornerstones to our organization.”

One thing that takes some of the sense of urgency away is teams can be 10 percent over the cap during the off-season. But if it doesn’t go down this summer, any ceiling increase will be negligible and that doesn’t help, either.

“If the cap was going up again $7 million, maybe it would be different,” Holland said. “But we’re faced with the same kinds of decisions 29 other teams are and we’ll make them.”

cut-and-paste of my own comment from Inside the Kings, just so I don’t forget I said it and because it’s so hard to find anything in the Inside the Kings archives

The season after next will be interesting cap-wise, as [commenter "src3" on the Inside the Kings "board" said] said. Not just because of Frolov being a UFA and the cap coming down a bit, but also because both Quincey and Quick will be RFA. Next year, Fro’s hit is 2.9, Quick’s .8, Quincey’s .6, and it would be reasonable to expect those three to be at cap hits of 5, 2.5 and 2.5, conservatively, with their new contracts. That’s AT LEAST $6MM more cap room we’re going to need, not next year, but the year after (which, after all, is really just next summer, one year from now — yikes).

Is DL factoring that into his thoughts about Frolov and whoever he’s going to bring in this year as a UFA (or via trade)? Absolutely. And clearly trading Frolov would make room for whatever will be necessary to do for the 2010 season. But, since DL has to think Frolov will be tradable at the deadline or even next summer, I don’t know that he’s really going to worry too much about that now. Actually, I think DL might make the calculation that putting Frolov and (to pick one of the UFA names) Hossa on the same line will drive Frolov’s numbers way up, thus driving his value up as well. In other words, it’s reasonable to assume that Frolov will be more valuable a year from now than he is now. And he’s pretty valuable now.

But let’s play the thought experiment:

Kings sign Hossa (or Havlat or Gaborik), re-sign Frolov, Purcell, Johnson and Boyle. Now, let’s skip the entire 09-10 season. It’s summer of ’10. Quick has had a great year, as have Quincey and Drewiske (all RFAs). They are resigned at 2.75, 2.5, 1.5. Frolov at 5. That’s a cap hit of $11.75. Let’s just say that’s a cap increase of $7MM. SOD retires.

Frolov/Kopitar/Hossa
Williams/Stoll/Brown
xx/Handzus/xx
xx/xx/xx

The xx’s are the smaller contracts (Moller, Boyle, Purcell, Simmonds, whoever we draft this year, etc.).

Here’s what I think the actual strategy will be (and, in fact, ought to be). Sign the big UFA, resign Frolov, go up to within a couple million of the cap ceiling. Clearly, next summer, something will have to give. Somebody’s big contract is going to have to go, maybe two somebodies. But does DL want to get rid of Frolov NOW because he’s got to pay Handzus for two more years? I don’t think so. Handzus, actually, I think is the most vulnerable of all the big salaries. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him traded at the deadline next year. I think Handzus was the team MVP last season by numerous measures; but he’s overpaid and he’s a third-line center ideally. Also, he’s a defensive specialist and will be attractive to someone at the deadline, as he supposedly was this year.

Trading Handzus would be, of course, entirely dependent on other centers stepping it up and proving themselves to be ready. Namely, Moller, Boyle, Lewis, Loktionov, Azevedo, someone we might be drafting in a month… 

Meanwhile, there are other candidates to be moved. Let’s say, for example, that we sign Hossa and keep Frolov, and next year we have our first line (with Kopitar) the likes of which we haven’t seen since Palffy/Alison/Deadmarsh. Now, what happens if Brown has a crappy year next season? He might be the one to get dealt. Let’s just say, Handzus is a rock and the first line is clicking… DL is going to be looking very closely at that group of Williams, Stoll and Brown. One of them would literally HAVE to be traded. Same thing is true on defense. If the prospects don’t pan out next season and don’t look like they’re progressing, veterans like Greene are safe. But if the prospects pick it up, Greene is another contract that can be dealt.

I think DL will play this out very deliberately and carefully. And you [SRC3] are certainly correct that if DL signs a UFA this July, next summer something’s gotta give. I just don’t think that means Frolov will be leaving. One of Frolov, Kopitar, Brown, Stoll, Handzus, Williams or Greene — definitely. In 2010. Not now.

Think of it the other way. You aren’t going to deny yourselves Hossa and Frolov this season because you might have to trade Handzus or Greene next season, right?

Pot Meet Kettle: Ducks Say Wings are (wait for it) Dirty! (GASP!)

Anaheim accused Tomas Holmstrom of delivering a dirty elbow to the head of James Wisniewski after he had been injured by a puck to the chest Tuesday in Game 3. They said Johan Franzen cross-checked Scott Niedermayer in the back of the neck.

The Red Wings’ response essentially was this: Quit your whining.

“From my perspective, come on, it’s like a rodeo after every whistle,” Detroit coach Mike Babcock said. “So there could be a penalty after every single whistle. If you think Homer was saying, ‘That guy got hurt on the play and now I’m going to elbow him in the head?’ Come on. That’s not how hockey is.

“Let’s play the game, let’s play hard. It’s a hard series. There’s lots of skin flying around out there. It’s entertaining.”

Wisniewski might not play tonight in Game 4 because of a lung contusion, which Anaheim coach Randy Carlyle said wasn’t helped by Holmstrom’s hit during the same sequence in the second period.

“What would you think if you were (doubled) over and gasping for air and somebody gives you an elbow to the side of the head?” Carlyle said. “How would you feel about that?”

Ducks defenseman Ryan Whitney said the hit “looked dirty.”

“I don’t know if he meant to do it, but he comes around and smokes him in the face with his elbow,” Whitney said. “It definitely wasn’t a clean blow.”

Holmstrom said it wasn’t intentional.

“I didn’t know that I hit him at all,” he said. “I didn’t see him, I had no idea he was behind me. I had two guys on my back. Unfortunately, he had his face there.”

Niedermayer said of Franzen’s cross-check: “I don’t think it’s legal. Is it out of the norm? I don’t know.”

Red Wings defenseman Brad Stuart said those kind of plays happen all the time in an intense series.

“First shift, second period, (Ryan) Carter smashed my head against the boards. No call,” Stuart said. “To sit here and whine about it doesn’t do any good. Both teams are getting away with stuff. That’s how it is.”

Said Detroit’s Dan Cleary: “All the extra stuff — the elbows, the cross-checks — they’re no strangers to that either.”

via Ducks accuse Red Wings of dirty play – Detroit Red Wings Hockey: News, Blogs, Photos, Audio, Schedule & Stats – MLive.com.

Red Wings Central – Red Wings Cap Trouble Generator Allows You to See for Yourself What I’ve Been Saying About Keeping Hossa

Try it. You won’t like it. 

Red Wings Central.

Kukla’s Korner: McLellan requests to return to Wings, Retroactive to April 1 (hilarious)

In a stunning turn of events, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman on Monday accepted the request of San Jose Sharks coach Todd McLellan to return to the Detroit Red Wings.

Unaware that the playoffs had even started, Bettman admitted that McLellan’s request was unprecedented and caught him off guard.

“This was a surprise,” Bettman said. “But in the end, the league determined that it would be best for the NHL if McLellan returned to a city where people actually care about the sport.”

via KuklasKorner .

Incompetent B.S. from the Edmonton Journal on the Topic of Hossa, Franzen and the cap

It’s no surprise that Johan Franzen is getting an 11-year, $43-million contract that runs until 2021 to spread out the cap hit ($1 million the final two, years when he’ll be 38 and 39 years old).

Uh no, the cap hit is the same every year, dumba**. [UPDATE: oh, I see. The parenthetical refers not to that which precedes it, but to the contracted payment; at least, I think that's what he thinks he's saying.]

Same story with Henrik Zetterberg ($6.1 million cap hit over 12 years). They may eventually close that loophole, but Wings’ GM Ken Holland is simply playing by the rules now. And Franzen’s average cap hit of $3.95 million is actually close to what a veteran agent thought he’d get last week. Franzen will get $36 million in the first seven years, starting at $5.5 million next season — his salary more in tune with his tremendous goal-scoring ability. “Let’s see now, we have an 11-year contract and a 12-year contract, so I guess Marian will take 10 or 13 years,” laughed Hossa’s agent Ritch Winter, who talked to Holland about numbers Saturday, although Holland won’t be able to sign Hossa until June because of their cap situation.

Actually, that makes no sense at all. 

Hossa is going nowhere. His cap hit will be in the $6-million range. “I will tell you this: despite what people are saying, the salary cap in Detroit will definitely be no impediment to Marian signing there,” said Winter.

Right. Do the math: in order for the Wings to sign Hossa with a cap hit of $6MM, they will have to dump at least two huge salaries. Who are they going to get rid of? Filppula and Stuart? Kronwall and Stuart? Take your pick. But you can’t say there will be “no impediment.” 

UPDATE: Just to be sure, I added the numbers up again. A Hossa cap hit of $6MM would leave the Wings with a cap number of $59.3 with four players left to sign. That means, assuming entry level salaries, that they would have a cap hit of around $62MM. Assume the cap will go up nominally, a couple million. The Wings must shed at least one huge salary and probably two, in addition to losing Samuelsson and Hudler. So call it Samuelsson, Hudler, Stuart and maybe someone else. I don’t believe it. And still, it’s not NO impediment. 

via More Hockey World .

Kukla’s Korner: Who Deserves 11 Year Contracts?

There’s no questioning his ability to put the puck in the net, but is he a core guy on your team that you want to keep until he’s 40? There’s no way to predict things, but goal-scorer skills tend to decline pretty fast once you hit your mid-30s. Ask John Leclair about that; his whole game was based around putting the puck in the net from within a 15-foot radius around the crease, and in the end, he couldn’t have begged his way onto a team.

via KuklasKorner : Mike Chen’s Hockey Blog : Who Deserves 11-Year Contracts? .

Detroit’s Cap Issues UPDATED FRANZEN CONTRACT EDITION

Datsyuk 6.7, Zetterberg 6, Franzen 3.95, Filppula 3.0, Cleary 2.8, Holmstrom 2.25, Draper 1.583, Maltby .750, Lidstrom 7.45, Rafalski 6.0, Stuart 3.75, Kronwall 3.0, Lilja 1.25, Lebda .650, Meech .483, Ericsson .900, Osgood 1.417, Hudler RFA, Hossa UFA, Samuelsson UFA, Kopecky UFA, Conklin UFA.

TOTAL $52.016

But need to sign 6 forwards and 1 goalie. If the goalie is Howard, add 0.717. Now: $52.733. That leaves $3.967MM left to sign six forwards. 

[the following is cut-and-paste from my previous analysis of Holland's options, from a few weeks ago -- with today's updates/edits indicated:]

Option #1: Sign Hossa for…I don’t know…say $5MM (cap hit), which is about a million less than the pay cut everything thinks he’s going to get. But let’s call it $5MM. Maybe Holland does some fancy footwork and front loads the contract so the cap hit is less than the salary. That would leave just under $3MM for six forwards. Which is under $500K per guy. Which means they would have to let go not only of Franzen, but Samuelsson, Hudler and Kopecky and replace them with dirt cheap prospects at, well, league minimum salary. And this would put them exactly at the cap, which give Holland no wiggle room at all. I think Hossa is going to cost more than a $5MM cap hit, but since the Zetterberg hit is $6MM, I’m going to say it’s possible. I just don’t think even at that price they can avoid dismantling the team. So, basically, that option sucks.  [option #1 is off the table]

Option #2: Let Hossa walk; sign Franzen at a cap hit of $3.5MM (front loading salary, I guess). [cap hit of $3.95MM, as it turned out] That would leave something like $4.5MM $4MM to sign six other forwards. Still tight, but doable. Sign two of Samuelsson, Kopecky and Hudler (for the sake of argument, let Hudler walk and sign the other for…less than $2MM total; again, a stretch, but doable). That would leave $2.7MM-ish  [$2.2MM-ish] for 4 forwards, which means four prospects basically. That’s possible, but just barely. UPDATE: Assuming the cap goes up nominally this season, it will give Holland the room to make this work. Again, no wiggle room, but in this scenario, they’ve retained Franzen, Samuelsson and Kopecky (say), and lost only Hossa and Hudler. That’s a more-balanced roster. But still, it’s financially very, very [UPDATE: VERY VERY VERY] tight.

Option #2a: Holland convinces Hossa to take the offer he was going to give to Franzen, $3-4MM. Then he lets Franzen walk. This will never happen. Thus the “2a” designation. 

Option #3: Trade someone away for picks and prospects, clearing some cap space. Only four names seem even remotely plausible, and two of those are borderline: Filppula, Cleary, Stuart and Kronwall. Their salaries are big enough to make a difference. Trading a forward creates a hole in the roster that you have to fill, however, so I’m going to say option #3 would require moving a defenseman. Stuart or Kronwall. Stuart, probably. Trade Stuart to someone for picks or prospects or (maybe even better), prospects who can fill those cheap forward slots.  Although that part is not as important as freeing up the salary. Then, with just shy of $11.75MM to spend, maybe they can sign both Hossa and Franzen. Still, how much would those two (combined) have to take in order for the numbers to work. Let’s say the other five forwards (Samuelsson, Kopecky, plus three faceless cheap-ass prospects) run $4MM, which is about the cheapest that’s going to happen. That leaves $7.75MM for both Hossa and Franzen. And that’s after having traded away Stuart or Kronwall. And that’s at least $2.25MM less than what the so-called conventional wisdom says those two players might sign for. So common sense says, forget it. It would literally have to be Hossa taking $5MM and Franzen taking less than $3MM. [UPDATE: now that Franzen is locked in at $3.95MM, Hossa would have to take $3.55MM for this option to work.] 

Is that going to happen? Oh, probably not. [UPDATE: come on! No way, right?] If Holland can deal a defenseman, free up cap space, and then talk two superstars into accepting a deep pay-cut for the privilege of playing for the Red Wings, he (Holland) deserves some kind of sparkly prize. 

Option #4: Several deals to free up even more space. But once you move beyond the option of trading away one expensive player (as per option #3), you’re twisting yourself into a pretzel just to retain two guys that might not be — probably won’t be — worth the contortions. 

Holland has to reason that he has won cups without Hossa, and will be able to do so after Hossa moves on to play on that line with Frolov and Kopitar at the beach. I think he lets Hossa walk. [UPDATE: this seems even more likely now.]

Detroit Red Wings sign F Johan Franzen to $43.5 million, 11-year deal – ESPN

Detroit signed forward Johan Franzen to an 11-year, $43.5 million deal Saturday, keeping him off the free agent market and retaining talent that helped the Red Wings win the Stanley Cup.

The contract averages $3.95 million per season. The team said the deal for Franzen, known as Mule, is the second-longest in team history.

via Detroit Red Wings sign F Johan Franzen to $43.5 million, 11-year deal – ESPN.

Detroit’s cap issues

Warning: I am attempting to add. 

Datsyuk 6.7, Filppula 3.0, Cleary 2.8, Zetterberg 6, Holmstrom 2.25, Draper 1.583, Maltby .750, Lidstrom 7.45, Rafalski 6.0, Stuart 3.75, Kronwall 3.0, Lilja 1.25, Lebda .650, Meech .483, Ericsson .900, Osgood 1.417, Hudler RFA, Hossa UFA, Franzen UFA, Samuelsson UFA, Kopecky UFA, Conklin UFA.

TOTAL $48.066

But need to sign 7 forwards and 1 goalie. If the goalie is Howard, add 0.717. Now: $48.783. That leaves $7.917MM left to sign seven forwards. How the h*** is that going to work? 

Option #1: Sign Hossa for…I don’t know…say $5MM (cap hit), which is about a million less than the pay cut everything thinks he’s going to get. But let’s call it $5MM. Maybe Holland does some fancy footwork and front loads the contract so the cap hit is less than the salary. That would leave just under $3MM for six forwards. Which is under $500K per guy. Which means they would have to let go not only of Franzen, but Samuelsson, Hudler and Kopecky and replace them with dirt cheap prospects at, well, league minimum salary. And this would put them exactly at the cap, which give Holland no wiggle room at all. I think Hossa is going to cost more than a $5MM cap hit, but since the Zetterberg hit is $6MM, I’m going to say it’s possible. I just don’t think even at that price they can avoid dismantling the team. So, basically, that option sucks. 

Option #2: Let Hossa walk; sign Franzen at a cap hit of $3.5MM (front loading salary, I guess). That would leave something like $4.5MM to sign six other forwards. Still tight, but doable. Sign two of Samuelsson, Kopecky and Hudler (for the sake of argument, let Hudler walk and sign the other for…less than $2MM total; again, a stretch, but doable). That would leave $2.7MM-ish for 4 forwards, which means four prospects basically. That’s possible, but just barely. Again, no wiggle room, but in this scenario, they’ve retained Franzen, Samuelsson and Kopecky (say), and lost only Hossa and Hudler. That’s a more-balanced roster. But still, it’s financially very, very tight.

Option #2a: Holland convinces Hossa to take the offer he was going to give to Franzen, $3-4MM. Then he lets Franzen walk. This will never happen. Thus the “2a” designation. 

Option #3: Trade someone away for picks and prospects, clearing some cap space. Only four names seem even remotely plausible, and two of those are borderline: Filppula, Cleary, Stuart and Kronwall. Their salaries are big enough to make a difference. Trading a forward creates a hole in the roster that you have to fill, however, so I’m going to say option #3 would require moving a defenseman. Stuart or Kronwall. Stuart, probably. Trade Stuart to someone for picks or prospects or (maybe even better), prospects who can fill those cheap forward slots.  Although that part is not as important as freeing up the salary. Then, with just shy of $11.75MM to spend, maybe they can sign both Hossa and Franzen. Still, how much would those two (combined) have to take in order for the numbers to work. Let’s say the other five forwards (Samuelsson, Kopecky, plus three faceless cheap-ass prospects) run $4MM, which is about the cheapest that’s going to happen. That leaves $7.75MM for both Hossa and Franzen. And that’s after having traded away Stuart or Kronwall. And that’s at least $2.25MM less than what the so-called conventional wisdom says those two players might sign for. So common sense says, forget it. It would literally have to be Hossa taking $5MM and Franzen taking less than $3MM. 

Is that going to happen? Oh, probably not. If Holland can deal a defenseman, free up cap space, and then talk two superstars into accepting a deep pay-cut for the privilege of playing for the Red Wings, he (Holland) deserves some kind of sparkly prize. 

Option #4: Several deals to free up even more space. But once you move beyond the option of trading away one expensive player (as per option #3), you’re twisting yourself into a pretzel just to retain two guys that might not be — probably won’t be — worth the contortions. 

Holland has to reason that he has won cups without Hossa, and will be able to do so after Hossa moves on to play on that line with Frolov and Kopitar at the beach. I think he lets Hossa walk.

“Is this team really that promising?”

Ersberg (commenter on “Inside the Kings,” not the actual Ersberg) asked the following great questions in the Inside the Kings comments section:

“Does anyone else think the Kings seem to not have the type of offense that some teams have that can be a threat on almost any possession? They just seem anemic on O, [yet] they have a lot of the same guys as they did last season [who] scored a lot. [...] With [...] regard to our prospects [...] how are [they] going to get it done next season?

 [...] Is it, in fact, Terry’s system? Are we missing key guys? Are some of our ‘older, younger’ guys not what we thought they’d be (Kop, Fro, Brown, etc.)? Was it a fluke last season when guys like Brown scored 30+? Is it the guys below our top scorers [...] that are the issue[...]? [...] [D]o you feel our guys have a higher “ceilings” than what we’re seeing? Do you see guys like Johnson, Greene, Quincey getting better? What about Purcell, who’s 24(?) [...]? It seems like they’re trying real, real hard, but they end up coming short, which is why I believe they need some more changes and additional players.

Who do we add? Who goes? Who do you think will actually want to come here? [...] Is this team really that promising? Columbus [...] has had a lot of changes, some very young additions, and they are sitting in a playoff spot. I see the Kings being very much the same.

[...] In addition [...], ask yourselves this: when was the last team any sports team (4 major sports) went cheap, and won a championship? I’m thinking it was the Angels in 2002. It seems to me we’re a ‘cheap’ team.”

The problem on offense: certainly, part of the drop in production is due to TM’s defensive system. There’s really no way around that. You’re always going to sacrifice some offense when you play a tighter defense. As it has turned out, the Kings GF and GA have both dropped about 0.3 goals/game. So it’s basically a wash. However, notice that reducing both goals-for and goal-against by the same amount has resulted in better results (assuming the Kings don’t proceed to lose the next nine games). 

Looking at the offensive numbers: this season, the Kings have averaged 2.0 goals per 60 minutes of 5-on-5. Last season, they averaged 2.3. That’s all of our loss of production. Five-on-four, the Kings are up to 6.6 goals/60min from 5.8 the previous year. Five-on-three, we’re at 22.9, up from 21.0 [just to clarify, 22.9 goals/60, 5-on-3, means that if they were to play an entire game 5-on-3, they would score on average 22.9 goals]. In short, this season, the special teams are slightly better, and 5-on-5 we’re much worse. Of course, it’s 5-on-5 where the defensive system is in full force, so that’s another reason it must shoulder (at least) some of the blame. 

Actually, those numbers alone ought to be enough for those who are predisposed to blame TM to put the last few nails in the coffin. My purely statistical response to that would be, per above, to point out that a commensurate drop in offense and goals-against yields better results, in terms of wins/points. 

I would also say, in TM’s defense, that if the Kings had stuck to their defensive system even more than they have, they would be looking at the playoffs right now. Before the season started, I pointed out in the ItK comment section that if the Kings were able to reduce their goals-against from last season’s 3.24 (from memory, I could be off a few 1/100ths) to around 2.75 they would make the playoffs, 2.75 being the usual threshold for a playoff team. They were on track to do this for about half the season, I think, but they got sloppy. In this context, TM’s benching of Frolov makes a lot of sense. He (TM) knows that it’s the defense that’s going to make the difference. 

Underline: even with the drop-off of production, the Kings would have made the playoffs this year had they stuck to the system. That’s okay. It’s not a knock against the players that they didn’t just magically see the light. You have to learn by experience.

Re “are we missing key guys?” — DL made a revealing comment in an interview a few weeks ago that [paraphrase] Kopitar was basically a second-line center who has the potential to be a first-line center. The expectation has to be that he grows into the role of #1 center, otherwise frankly he’s not earning his contract. DL was just being honest (maybe too honest, since it opens him up to a lot of criticism — why pay that much for a #2 center, etc.). But I did get the feeling this season that Kopitar looked like the understudy suddenly forced to play the lead part. And he’s done okay, especially of late. But watching him in the #1 center role makes me (and I think a lot of other people) long for a game-changer. 

As a mental exercise, I sometimes try to imagine where our various guys would fit in on a powerhouse, elite team, say, Detroit. Kopitar would be a great #2 center on the wings. Brown, a great third line winger. Frolov, 2nd liner, but maybe still in the doghouse for his lapses (see Fedorov). Stoll, 3rd line center. Handzus, third line center. Williams, 2nd line, maybe third. Calder, scratch. Armstrong, waived. Ivanans, Westgarth, waived. Zeiler, waived (they waived Ellis, who is a better Zeiler). What this exercise reminds me is, on the Kings roadmap to Elite-ness-itude (-ity), we’ve already got ourselves a great third line, a great second line, and no first line.

And, boy, doesn’t it feel like that’s just what we have? 

I’m not saying Kopitar won’t grow into the #1 center role.  I think he will, actually. He’s still a kid. But, as far as “missing key guys” goes, I would say, yes, definitely, it’s time to get a true, top-line sniper, a finisher, a star. You do that, and you take the pressure off Kopitar, he won’t see the other team’s best shift after shift, and he will have room to grow. 

re “prospects, how are they going to get it done?” — Simmonds, Doughty and Quincey are unqualified successes this year. Purcell, Moller, Quick and Harrold are successes with asterisks attached. In Purcell’s case, it took him most of the season to get it together. Moller started strong and then had a run of bad luck (followed by TM’s odd insistence on keeping him out of the line-up because he wasn’t strong enough, as if this wasn’t also true at the beginning of the season when he was leading the Kings in PP goals, etc. — file that under “don’t get me started”). Quick was an instant star and then lost some of his star-power, but has still been huge. Harrold gets an asterisk because he’s a “veteran” prospect and he has the curse of doing a lot of things well, but nothing spectacularly well. He’s extremely useful, but easy to pencil out. Of those guys, can we expect them to get better? Absolutely. Simmonds and Moller, for one thing, are kids. They’re physically immature. They’re going to get bigger and stronger. Doughty, we forget that in addition to everything we’ve seen from him, he likes to check, and has been known (as we’ve seen in glimpses of him this season) to take over games. When he’s mature, he’s going to be that much more dominant. Johnson, whom you mentioned, has to play smarter, but that’s not unusual for young defensemen, and JJ is following a much more traditional d prospect path. We’re spoiled by Doughty stepping right in and playing a dominant role. That happens, well, almost never. 

Re the Kings being a “cheap” team — It’s hard to argue against that when the Kings have the lowest cap figure in the league. However, I must. First of all, next season, with Kopitar’s and Greene’s contracts kicking in, the Kings will not have the lowest cap figure anymore: they’ll be somewhere around $47-48MM, i.e. more or less halfway between the ceiling and the floor. If they sign a big UFA, they’ll be much, much closer to the ceiling. There’s a good chance the ceiling will come down season after next, and some have said as low as $52MM. This would mean many teams would have to shed salary in order to comply. I don’t think DL is cheap. I think he’s smart. There is simply no way in the post-lock-out NHL to have a team that has several superstar contracts (or even more than two — three is pushing it). You must have a balance between big names, medium names, role players and prospects. Look at Detroit: Holland cannot sign both Hossa and Franzen, unless he’s willing to forego team depth, which he clearly doesn’t want to do. The Kings could easily be in that position in two years, and, p.s. would have been for certain if they had given Cammellari the $6MM he asked for, given POS the $4MM or whatever and kept him, both of which would have meant giving Kopitar more, giving JJ more this summer, etc., etc.. 

The distance between floor and ceiling is quite small. DL kept near the floor this year. Signed Kopitar and is halfway to the ceiling. This summer, he could go all the way to the ceiling with one signing. 

Re “who would want to sign here?” — Let’s take Hossa as an example. Hossa wants to stay in Detroit. Detroit wants him. He’s willing to take less, but how much less is not known, and the talks have stalled. If Hossa doesn’t sign with Detroit, he’s going to seek more money elsewhere. The question is, (1) who wants him? (2) who’s attractive to him? and (3) who can afford him? 

Answer to #1: more or less, everybody. 

Answer to #2: first choice, a contender. Who are the contenders? San Jose, Washington, Calgary, Chicago, Boston, Vancouver, New Jersey, Pittsburgh. But see answer #3…

Answer to #3: none of the contenders have cap space to sign him. Will someone sign him and then put themselves in the Brian Burke position of having to trade assets when the entire world knows they are over a barrel? Probably, they won’t. Will someone go on a draft day fire sale to shed salary in order to make room for Hossa? Dangerous to do that, since you might not get Hossa, and then where will you be? 

Who has the cap space? A bunch of losers, that’s who. I’m including the Kings in that. A bunch of teams that aren’t going to look too attractive to Hossa. Among which, he may have to pick the team with the brightest future. The loser with the brightest future. Among said losers, there is no one regarded to have a brighter future than the Kings. 

That’s our hope. We have the cap space, we are the future, and we need to be successful now. Now is the time. 

That’s not a horrible pitch. Will it be good enough? Who knows.

re “next season…how are they going to get it done?” — For one thing, it will be a slightly different “they.” I believe DL will push very hard to bring a big UFA forward in. He needs to. As many have pointed out, not getting into the playoffs a year from now will be a failure placed solely at DL’s feet. The pressure is mounting and the team is going to have to produce next season. He’s going to try very hard to bring in some big-bucks snipery finish for the first line. Will he succeed? I am going to put my money on … probably. 

So, first piece of the puzzle is one big tasty UFA. Second piece of the puzzle is, no Calder, no Preissing, no Gauthier, no Armstrong, probably no Zeiler, maybe no Ivanans. Third piece, bigger, stronger, older Doughty, Moller and Simmonds. Purcell coming into his own. Lewis hopefully on the team full time on the third line. Hickey, Teubert, Voynov…one of them will make it, maybe even two. Jon Bernier…I still hold out hope that he will top them all in camp this September. 

The other issue, I think, is finding a workable fourth line that has an actual theme and purpose and use, as opposed to it just being a catch-all for players who are dressed but benched in the third period. I liked the old Donnelly/Millen third line idea, small/speedy tertiary scoring. I think there’s a version of the Kings with a Moller/Loktionov/Azevedo/Richardson type third line configuration, that would be terrifying and beautiful to behold. That would free up the fourth line to be a Handzus/Lewis/Simmonds/Brown/Wudrick type ordeal. Yes, okay, Brown on the fourth line. But I’m talking about rolling four lines all game, with much more balanced ice-time. Think Detroit. And let all the “unhealthy Detroit fixation” gossip begin.

Contract talks between Red Wings and Marian Hossa, Johan Franzen on hold

Contract talks between the Detroit Red Wings and free-agent forwards Marian Hossa and Johan Franzen appear to be at a standstill, as neither side is budging.

General manager Ken Holland is hoping to sign one before the end of the regular season. If he has no deal in place by the first week of April, he will postpone talks until after the playoffs.

“I’ll obviously stay in touch,” Holland said. “I understand where they’re at and they understand where I’m at. We’re talking.

“They both have indicated their first choice is to stay. I can address it in June if I have to. They know the (team’s other) contract commitments.”

Holland met with Hossa’s agent, Ritch Winter, over the weekend. Hossa signed a one-year, $7.45 million deal last July but realizes he must take less (perhaps in the neighborhood of $6 million per season) to stay.

“If we’re not able to find a way, you know what, we had a great player come here for one year,” Holland said.

Franzen’s price tag is expected to be in the $4 million-a-year range.

While Holland said there is a chance he can sign both, he knows he would have to unload a few other players in the process.

“The decision we got to make is, do we want to be top-heavy and not have any depth?” Holland said. “That’s why I’m not rushing into any (moves).”

via Detroit Red Wings Hockey: MLive.com.

NHL Rumors – Monday, March 23, 2009.

“SPECTOR’S NOTE: The Wings currently have about $9 million in available cap space and St. James suggests they’ll try to dump some lower-end salary this summer. The problem is Wings GM Ken Holland hopes to re-sign both Hossa and Johan Franzen. Even if he can somehow pull this off for this summer and re-signs both without seriously cutting into his roster depth and cap space he’s got to be careful about handcuffing himself for the 2010-11 season, as the cap for that season could drop to as low as $52 million [emphasis mine].”

via NHL Rumors – Monday, March 23, 2009..

Red Wings junior prospects 2008-09 review – Hockey’s Future

“Stephen Johnston, LW – Belleville Bulls (OHL)

Acquired: 6th round, 181st overall, 2008

6’1, 175 lbs.

Drafted as a project player, Johnston has shown flashes of brilliance that indicate he could be another late-round gem uncovered by the Red Wings. He’s been able to flourish on a very deep Belleville team, insulated by promising prospects such as Eric Tangradi (PIT) and P.K. Subban (MTL). After finishing his rookie season in the single digits for point production, Johnston exploded offensively, quadrupling his point total to 36 in 58 games.”

via Red Wings junior prospects 2008-09 review – Hockey’s Future

Ken Holland on Hossa, Franzen

Holland:

“It’s about team building, it’s about our philosophy. We can keep Franzen and Hossa, but then we’ll have to let a whole lot of other players go. I don’t know if that’s the answer to being competitive. But if I can get a number that I think allows us to have one extra player, you start to think more and more about doing something. Right now, I’m not really close to where I’d like to get to with either side.”

Ken Holland seeks price for Marian Hossa | Freep.com | Detroit Free Press.