Ask Gruven

[digitalmonkey 929]

Bumped from the dark depths of page 4. Which should prove my dedication in wanting this question answered.So Mr Gruven, could you explain Marek Svato's contract extension with Colorado? Surely he is one of their top players now and has shown himself to be a very important "clutch" player. But have they only extended his contract for 2 years? Is there a legal issue? I would have thought they'd want to keep this guy as long as possible.Cheers.

Svatos? Top player? Clutch?Am I missing the SW?

[coesillian 0]

Chris, is the current Leafs practices facility worse than when the habs get fully dressed at the Bell Centre then bus it over to the slums where I live and play in the Verdun auditorium. The changing rooms there were too small for a team of <20 high school hockey players. A new state of the art facility is being built with 2 ices identical to the Bell Centre's, but I was always schocked when I would see them getting on and off the bus at the the facility they currently practice at.

[LJB723 0]

Svatos? Top player? Clutch?Am I missing the SW?

I'm no Avalanche fan. But do you not think think that guys like Svatos and Stasny are the future of that franchise. I feel Svatos has been a great player in his short career and if he stays healthy can only get better.

[nell789 0]

I'm no Avalanche fan. But do you not think think that guys like Svatos and Stasny are the future of that franchise. I feel Svatos has been a great player in his short career and if he stays healthy can only get better.

Svatos doesn't belong in the same sentence as stastny in my opinion. Unless you're stating that stastny is far better than svatos.Svatos could be a good sniper if he stays healthy and has the chance to develop though.

[LJB723 0]

Svatos doesn't belong in the same sentence as stastny in my opinion. Unless you're stating that stastny is far better than svatos.Svatos could be a good sniper if he stays healthy and has the chance to develop though.

That was the basis of my question. I think Svatos has a load of talent and will be very important to Colorado in the future. But I think he has been very good so far too. Perhaps I am wrong but I don't think so.

[runthemover 39]

he's played about 60 games each season. basically he's been a second line scorer. if he'd get more assists to go with those goals, he'd be a very good second line guy. he's basically averaged 25 goals/year over the past three (32 - 15 - 26)if he plays with a guy like stastny then his totals will go up but I don't think they're on the same level

[ajs510 122]

Svatos? Top player? Clutch?Am I missing the SW?

I looked for one too.

[nell789 0]

he's played about 60 games each season. basically he's been a second line scorer. if he'd get more assists to go with those goals, he'd be a very good second line guy. he's basically averaged 25 goals/year over the past three (32 - 15 - 26)if he plays with a guy like stastny then his totals will go up but I don't think they're on the same level

Stastny also has a much better all-around game than svatos

[gruven 530]

Bumped from the dark depths of page 4. Which should prove my dedication in wanting this question answered.So Mr Gruven, could you explain Marek Svato's contract extension with Colorado? Surely he is one of their top players now and has shown himself to be a very important "clutch" player. But have they only extended his contract for 2 years? Is there a legal issue? I would have thought they'd want to keep this guy as long as possible.Cheers.

I will check into it and see what I can find out... on the surface, it looks simple: He had a knee injury last season, and was up for arbitration. The Avs needed to sign him to avoid the arbitration, and they probably want to make sure he's healthy before they sign him long term. Also, with Sakic potentially wrapping it up, roles on the team could change significantly, so perhaps they are just adopting a 'lets get it done for now and we'll see what happens' approach..

[gruven 530]

Chris, is the current Leafs practices facility worse than when the habs get fully dressed at the Bell Centre then bus it over to the slums where I live and play in the Verdun auditorium. The changing rooms there were too small for a team of <20 high school hockey players. A new state of the art facility is being built with 2 ices identical to the Bell Centre's, but I was always schocked when I would see them getting on and off the bus at the the facility they currently practice at.

Yes. The dressing rooms at Lakeshore are lovely, in fact, almost identical to the ACC. The ice is horrible. Verdun has good ice. I'd rather take care of my players' knees and groins than their lattes..

[serge 904]

I will check into it and see what I can find out... on the surface, it looks simple: He had a knee injury last season, and was up for arbitration. The Avs needed to sign him to avoid the arbitration, and they probably want to make sure he's healthy before they sign him long term. Also, with Sakic potentially wrapping it up, roles on the team could change significantly, so perhaps they are just adopting a 'lets get it done for now and we'll see what happens' approach..

Are you hearing that Sakic is done for sure???or will he pull a Niedermayer?

[Belanger25 3]

Are you hearing that Sakic is done for sure???or will he pull a Niedermayer?

No, it's pulling a Selanne, Forsberg.

[serge 904]

Chris,If the Leafs go into the season with $10 million in cap space, cant this be looked upon as Fletcher "not trying to win" and playing for a higher draft pick?I have never been in this situation as a Leafs fan where we are dumping players and not spending to our capabilities. I think its still possible to make the moves Cliff has and still try to win every game out there.Its common knowledge that the Leafs financially are the most succesful franchise in the NHL and by not spending the max they arent trying to win.I hate the notion that the media(led by our friend Howard Berger) and most fans are ok with the notion of trying to get Tavares or Hedman.I may still be wrong and maybe Cliff is waiting a 100% for the Sundin situation to be over and he will add more talent, or he has a move up his sleeve to add more salary through a major trade.The way that its set up I honestly believe with two first line players(which $10 million should buy) the Leafs will be competitive and will be winning WHILE rebuilding....The notion that rebuilding and losing have to go hand in hand is not necessarily correct.What do you think?EDITthe figure is roughly $9.2 million

[gruven 530]

Welllllllll........... the quick answer to your question is that, no, it would not be looked upon by the league as a violation of the fair play rules. The problem (and it's a new one) is that now the salary cap is as much a factor in your team's long term success as any other single item. Young talented teams (See: Penguins) have to find ways to re-sign their young stars before the 25/7 free agency kicks in (And, as an aside, that 25/7 free agency is the single biggest mistake the owners have made in 30 years, and will likely be the cause of another lockout in the very near future). So a team clearing cap space to rebuild wouldnt be seen as an attempt to take a dive as much as a necessary evil. The salary cap floor is there to make sure you ice at least SOME kind of a team. As far as Tavares goes.... well, there are no guarantees in this world. Even if you finish last, you aren't guaranteed the first overall. But, high draft picks are absolutely necessary to rebuild. So here's what I REALLY think..... I think the long term plan for this franchise is to be bad for TWO years, not one. If you look at their salaries, the contracts they put into play this year, the structure of the team, and their talent pool, it seems to SCREAM two year plan to me. Schenn will be really good in two years. This year? Not so much. Toronto has a grand total of four players signed beyond next season. Most teams have six or seven. The Sundin thing? I agree with Daniel: NOTHING I have heard suggests that Mats has ANY intention of A) starting the season or B) coming back to Toronto. Now, if we know this, then you can bet the barn that Cliff Fletcher knows this. So, if you REALLY wanted a first line centre, and you know Mats isn't coming back, then go out and sign one. But a talented first line centre would be counterproductive to the long term plan. So, for a Toronto fan like yourself Serge, I guess it's a good news/bad news scenario. The good news is, with a little luck and some shrewd moves, this team should be REALLY good in three years or more. The bad news is, for now they are going to suuuuuuuuuuuck. As for being competitive right away..... I honestly don't believe the addition of one more legit star would make them a playoff team, so why burn up the assets to get that player? I think the worst scenario for a fan is to have a team that just squeaks into the playoffs every year with no shot of winning. Don't let the Edmonton Oilers of a few years ago fool you: just getting in and anything can happen? Myth.

[serge 904]

Welllllllll........... the quick answer to your question is that, no, it would not be looked upon by the league as a violation of the fair play rules. The problem (and it's a new one) is that now the salary cap is as much a factor in your team's long term success as any other single item. Young talented teams (See: Penguins) have to find ways to re-sign their young stars before the 25/7 free agency kicks in (And, as an aside, that 25/7 free agency is the single biggest mistake the owners have made in 30 years, and will likely be the cause of another lockout in the very near future). So a team clearing cap space to rebuild wouldnt be seen as an attempt to take a dive as much as a necessary evil. The salary cap floor is there to make sure you ice at least SOME kind of a team. As far as Tavares goes.... well, there are no guarantees in this world. Even if you finish last, you aren't guaranteed the first overall. But, high draft picks are absolutely necessary to rebuild. So here's what I REALLY think..... I think the long term plan for this franchise is to be bad for TWO years, not one. If you look at their salaries, the contracts they put into play this year, the structure of the team, and their talent pool, it seems to SCREAM two year plan to me. Schenn will be really good in two years. This year? Not so much. Toronto has a grand total of four players signed beyond next season. Most teams have six or seven. The Sundin thing? I agree with Daniel: NOTHING I have heard suggests that Mats has ANY intention of A) starting the season or B) coming back to Toronto. Now, if we know this, then you can bet the barn that Cliff Fletcher knows this. So, if you REALLY wanted a first line centre, and you know Mats isn't coming back, then go out and sign one. But a talented first line centre would be counterproductive to the long term plan. So, for a Toronto fan like yourself Serge, I guess it's a good news/bad news scenario. The good news is, with a little luck and some shrewd moves, this team should be REALLY good in three years or more. The bad news is, for now they are going to suuuuuuuuuuuck. As for being competitive right away..... I honestly don't believe the addition of one more legit star would make them a playoff team, so why burn up the assets to get that player? I think the worst scenario for a fan is to have a team that just squeaks into the playoffs every year with no shot of winning. Don't let the Edmonton Oilers of a few years ago fool you: just getting in and anything can happen? Myth.Well thats a fair post and appreciate your comments..However as a Leafs fan when I turn the game on Saturday night, I cant say to myself I hope we lose so we improve next year..As a fan, and more specifically the players on the ice will do whatever they can to win every game...My argument was by having $10 million in cap space if the opportunity came up to add a franchise player like an Ovechkin,Lecavalier (obviously not those two) they would be in a position to make a move to acquire an asset like that...With respect to Sundin I dont get it because I guess I am not an athlete, but i would think if you have even 1% doubt you should go and play as that opportunity will never be there again...10 years from when you are 47 and want to play you wont be ABLE to...We will see what happens.

[Zach6668 513]

Serge, how can a team win, and rebuild?I mean, if you draft extraordinarily well, and make ridiculously good pickups and trades, I guess you can (see Detroit Red Wings), but that's not something a team can just do overnight. That's something that has to be a part of the organizational philosophy for a long time.And, all accounts I hear are that the Leafs have never been a team to draft particularly well. That's not a knock on them, drafting is hard, lots of it is luck, especially in later rounds.Rebuilding is no longer to 5-6 year process it was before the lockout. Look at the Flyers. They got lucky, or Atlanta and Nashville were just dumb, and got some VERY good young players back in exchange for their aging starts (Forsberg and Zhitnik). They had ONE year where they weren't competitve, and they come back the next season and make the conference finals with a very good, young team. Take the Lightning of this season, AND they were spending to the cap last year, but they finish last, end up with Stamkos, now they want to rebuild with young players. They got a few good young guys in exchange for Richards, they've got their two superstars locked up, and tried to add some young guys in around them to complement them. It remains to be seen how succesfull they will actually be, but if they aren't a playoff team this year, they will be next season.The only difference, is that Tampa overpaid some guys, and signed some older guys, so they aren't quite like the Flyers. At the same time, they were smart enough to only give Roberts and Recchi 1 year deals, and I'm sure they didn't sign Kolzig for too long. They got Meszaros and Malone locked up long term. Looks like they probably overpaid now, but in a few years, when they get a bit older (at least in Meszaros' case), and the cap goes up, these deals will look like steals.So anyways, I'm rambling now, but, I just wanted to know if you could propose a way to win while rebuilding. What's your business plan? What's your model?

[serge 904]

Serge, how can a team win, and rebuild?I mean, if you draft extraordinarily well, and make ridiculously good pickups and trades, I guess you can (see Detroit Red Wings), but that's not something a team can just do overnight. That's something that has to be a part of the organizational philosophy for a long time.And, all accounts I hear are that the Leafs have never been a team to draft particularly well. That's not a knock on them, drafting is hard, lots of it is luck, especially in later rounds.Rebuilding is no longer to 5-6 year process it was before the lockout. Look at the Flyers. They got lucky, or Atlanta and Nashville were just dumb, and got some VERY good young players back in exchange for their aging starts (Forsberg and Zhitnik). They had ONE year where they weren't competitve, and they come back the next season and make the conference finals with a very good, young team. Take the Lightning of this season, AND they were spending to the cap last year, but they finish last, end up with Stamkos, now they want to rebuild with young players. They got a few good young guys in exchange for Richards, they've got their two superstars locked up, and tried to add some young guys in around them to complement them. It remains to be seen how succesfull they will actually be, but if they aren't a playoff team this year, they will be next season.The only difference, is that Tampa overpaid some guys, and signed some older guys, so they aren't quite like the Flyers. At the same time, they were smart enough to only give Roberts and Recchi 1 year deals, and I'm sure they didn't sign Kolzig for too long. They got Meszaros and Malone locked up long term. Looks like they probably overpaid now, but in a few years, when they get a bit older (at least in Meszaros' case), and the cap goes up, these deals will look like steals.So anyways, I'm rambling now, but, I just wanted to know if you could propose a way to win while rebuilding. What's your business plan? What's your model?

Ok....this is what I would suggest..As you know I dont agree with rebuilding the way the Penguins and Ottawa have done in the past..Meaning lose for 5-7 years and get lucky in the draft...And lets admit that the Penguins could of had a monkey draft and probably wouldnt have been any worse. I dont agree with feeding your fans a product for a long period of time that doesnt resemble NHL hockey.What CLiff has done so far is good...He has gotten rid of expensive contracts(Tucker,McCabe,Raycroft) and gotten ridden the type of players that dont fit into Wilson's defensive style(Wellwood and Darcy) and in the meantime shed a lot of cap space....Now he has about $9 million to spend..Next year depending on what happens, we may have about $15 to $20 million to spend in the free agent market...I would throw the maximum money at Hossa and or Gaborik and then just draft solid ...You can also move up in the draft like they did this year...He has picked up a lot of non sexy names in Mayers,Hagman,Grabovski and Finger. Added a solid character guy in Joseph and drafted a monster in Schenn. The team is better on and off the ice than it was last year. There arent any soft players on the team, they will play tough and wont get blown out of any games....There is no reason not to believe that this team cant finish as high as 4th in the conference with the addition of two front line scorers.

[Zach6668 513]

Ok, good start here.Couple things, with respect to the Pens "rebuilding", it did have a lot more to do with the economics of the league, and their terrible ownership situation than it did with purposely tanking. They didn't ice a competitive team, yes, but there were more factors in play than just rebuilding, and that's why it took so long, and we were lucky enough to be able to draft some of the potentially best players of this generation.And, I do agree, a monkey could have picked the Pens guys with their top 3 picks, of course.So, back to the Leafs. You still didn't really explain how a team can win and rebuild. It's pretty clear the correlation between future success, and current winning/losing for a lot of teams. The current Leafs (say last year), are not a winning team. If that's what your definition of a winner is, then sure, we'll go with that, but we can disagree on it.So anyways, a team can't win the cup, AND stock the cupboard full of prospects. To ice a cup winning team, or even a contender, you have to sacrifice some future for that extra little bit, so that's why there's a bit of a cycle.So now, back to your theory about the Leafs. I agree, they've done well in getting rid of McCabe, Tucker, Raycroft, Wellwood, etc, but they didn't do much for themselves by signing Finger to the contract he got. He may be a perfectly serviceable and solid defensemen, but the Leafs overspent, and I don't think you can argue that at this point. But nonetheless, their future is looking better now than it did in March. And of course, Schenn was a great pick, and he'll be a guy to build a solid, defensive team around.However, you can't just throw money at a guy like Hossa or Gaborik and expect to have a winning team. If that was true, why wouldn't Hossa have put a team like the Pens with Crosby and Malkin over the top, and they essentially won their division without Hossa, and for the most part Crosby. You need to build a TEAM around a superstar. There's a reason why the Rangers haven't won anything for a while. All they did pre-lockout was throw money at big names, and it got them literally nowhere. Even post-lockout. Throwing money at one, or even two superstars is not the answer.Teams don't have to take 5 years to rebuild anymore. It's just unfortunate the Leafs made mistakes many years ago, signing everyone to terrible deals. If they hadn't done that, they would have been able to trade their prized assets for actual returns, instead of having to include a pick in order to get rid of McCabe, etc. That's how Philly did it.And, I think you actually have a poor perception of "tanking". Hockey isn't played in a vacuum at one year intervals. Each year is dependent on the years before and after it. The Flyers may not have had a very good team, but they let their youngsters play, helping them get accustomed to the NHL game, and that translated into success the following year (in addition to their shrewed trades). So, what I'm saying, is that one year of not icing a winning team, with the goal being to give the younger guys some exposure and a chance to improve is MUCH MUCH better than finishing 9th, 10th, 11th, and trying to do it with high priced guys who don't play as a team.

[MapleLeafpoker 1,462]

In some ways, using the Flyers and Tampa as examples for what the Leafs may be able to do are really off base.Philly: This was not a "rebuilding" team. This team was already built. They were coming off three 100pt seasons, and to top it off, we're about to start bringing up 2 young stars in Carter+Richards. They did a great job of drafting while still a high team. Keep in mind this 100pt for 3 seasons team had Pitkanen+Gagne+Umberger+Nittymaki to go along with older vets, so obviously, not a bad team. What happened to them was a year wracked with injuries to top players and terrible soft play on gtd/D. They were lucky/smart to pawn off their top talent, but its not like it was a choice....they were way out of it, had no need for a Forsberg/Zhitnik. Luckily, other teams were eager to help. Then, they used free agency to get players Briere+Timonen+Hartnell, and achieved a quick turn around thanks to a base that was already there.Tampa: They havent rebuilt a thing for the long term. Other than Stamkos, they have made no real long term gains. They were fortunate to win the lottery, thats all. Their minor system is one of the worst, if not the worst, in the NHL. All they did was go out and sign a bunch of free agents. I'm not suggesting they are not a good team this year, but if the Leafs did the same thing, everyone on here would be saying "here comes another 9th place finish". (rightly so probably)If Tampa doesnt win the Cup in the next 5 years, shouldn't we all be saying they made a mistake not building around a star like Stamkos.so while I think both teams are very good, neither is the example you want to use for the Leafs. The Leafs, in what seems to be the popular opinion, need at least 2years of losing/high draft picks it would seem. They are a team ridiculously devoid of top end talent, and I have seen nothing to suggest Schenn will change that. I go back to something a friend of mine said years ago........it would appear the Leafs will never, in our lifetime, have one of the top 5 players in the NHL. And thats sad, cause thats about 30yrs of watching hockey.

[Zach6668 513]

Ah, good points.I think Tampa is ok for long term. Having Lecavalier, St. Louis, and Stamkos is a good thing. The rest can fall into place.

[Fubar The Sperm 1]

Ok....this is what I would suggest..As you know I dont agree with rebuilding the way the Penguins and Ottawa have done in the past..Meaning lose for 5-7 years and get lucky in the draft...And lets admit that the Penguins could of had a monkey draft and probably wouldnt have been any worse. I dont agree with feeding your fans a product for a long period of time that doesnt resemble NHL hockey.What CLiff has done so far is good...He has gotten rid of expensive contracts(Tucker,McCabe,Raycroft) and gotten ridden the type of players that dont fit into Wilson's defensive style(Wellwood and Darcy) and in the meantime shed a lot of cap space....Now he has about $9 million to spend..Next year depending on what happens, we may have about $15 to $20 million to spend in the free agent market...I would throw the maximum money at Hossa and or Gaborik and then just draft solid ...You can also move up in the draft like they did this year...He has picked up a lot of non sexy names in Mayers,Hagman,Grabovski and Finger. Added a solid character guy in Joseph and drafted a monster in Schenn. The team is better on and off the ice than it was last year. There arent any soft players on the team, they will play tough and wont get blown out of any games....There is no reason not to believe that this team cant finish as high as 4th in the conference with the addition of two front line scorers.

It's not like Ottawa had much of a choice. As an expansion team we were given other teams scraps. Plus our owners didn't have as deep pockets as others around the league. Ottawa had to build through the draft and put together an organization that players would play for while taking less money. Ottawa built a sold team with way less money then Toronto did. There isn't really a good excuse for the situation Toronto has been in the last few years. Plus most players want to play in Toronto. They should have thrown money at scouts, coaching staff, etc and grabbed good players through free agency who were willing to take less then market value. What they need to do now is build around Toskala and Scheen and stop overpaying aging veterans or players who had 1 good year.

[Fubar The Sperm 1]

What is the punishment for being over the cap and what is it for being under. I think for being over a team should forfeit a 1st round pick and for being under it should be a financial penalty.

[serge 904]

What is the punishment for being over the cap and what is it for being under. I think for being over a team should forfeit a 1st round pick and for being under it should be a financial penalty.

From my understanding of the rule its a hard cap. So you cant be over the max and you cant be under the floor..PERIOD..If you dont abide I believe you cant ice a team...I maybe mistaken.

[MapleLeafs 142]

From my understanding of the rule its a hard cap. So you cant be over the max and you cant be under the floor..PERIOD..If you dont abide I believe you cant ice a team...I maybe mistaken.

I don't think not icing a team would ever ever be an option. Do you think if the Rangers go over the cap that Bettman steps in and says they can't play until they get under? That wouldn't go well with revenues/tickets.I'm not certain on this but I'm sure to some degree all transactions have to be approved by the NHL office, so if a move would put a team over the cap, then the league would step in and not allow it.

[Fubar The Sperm 1]

I don't think not icing a team would ever ever be an option. Do you think if the Rangers go over the cap that Bettman steps in and says they can't play until they get under? That wouldn't go well with revenues/tickets.I'm not certain on this but I'm sure to some degree all transactions have to be approved by the NHL office, so if a move would put a team over the cap, then the league would step in and not allow it.

Teams ARE over the cap though.