Theory of Relativity, Part 2
July 3rd, 2008 by Jason ChenI’m a Brian Burke guy. I think he has one of the brightest minds in hockey and has a very good understanding of market value (the guy has a law degree from Harvard), although his evaluation of talent leaves something else to be desired. He is very much a man of his word, and what he wants, he gets. I think that is one of the strongest attributes any GM can have. He speaks his mind, which is important for any public figure, and isn’t afraid to call someone out or defend his players and coaches.
Today he spoke out against Kevin Lowe yet again, blaming him for the ridiculous amounts of money thrown at players in this year’s free agent market. The Ducks have not made any free agent signings this summer, but it can be argued that they don’t need to anyway. He says this is the second time the Oilers have driven up free agent prices, after it was reported that the Oilers offered Marian Hossa a $9m/year deal. The first time of course, was Dustin Penner, which Burke is presumably still fuming about today. It’s not clear which salaries Burke thinks are exuberant - it could be all of them or none of them. He has a very clear idea of what “market value” is to him.
I said before that it’s really hard to put a price tag on a player because of the different ways teams evaluate players. Some teams value experience, others youth and talent, and others consistency. I think Jeff Finger is a player who’s recent signing has perplexed a lot of people, including me. Steve and I have discussed his signing at length on his thread “Leaf Sign a Trio,” but I think I should just give a summary of why he’s not worth $3.5m/year, purely based on relative salaries.
1. Finger has played in 94 NHL games, and he turned 28 years old today. For argument’s sake, let’s just use Finger’s draft year (1999) as the basis for comparison, since players drafted in that year are all near the same age. Asides from Derek MacKenzie of Columbus, Finger has the least NHL experience among all active players from the draft year. Niclas Havelid (550), Frantisek Kaberle (493), and David Tanabe (449), lead the defensemen from that draft class in games played. Havelid earns $2.9m, Kaberle $2.2m, and Tanabe $0.75m.
2. Finger has 24 points in 94 games and is a career +22. Once again, using the three most experience defensemen from his draft class, each of them has broken the 19-point barrier, Finger’s career high. There should be little doubt that Finger will surpass that mark next year, but purely based on points per game production, Finger’s 0.255 is only slightly ahead of Tanabe’s 0.253, but below Havelid’s 0.276 and Kaberle’s 0.375. Finger’s 19 points in 72 games last year ranks him 85th among defensemen in the league. Kent Huskins of the Ducks also put up the same number of points in 4 more games, but also put up a very impressive +23. He earns a modest $625k/year after being signed as an unrestricted free agent. Tim Gleason put up the same number of points and I believe he doesn’t break the $3m/year mark either. His +12 this season isn’t too shabby, but Mike Weber of Buffalo only needed 16 games to achieve this feat. Bryce Salvador also accomplished this in 64 games, and he just recently inked a new contract that will pay him $2.9m/year.
3. Finger’s 19:57 TOI/G ranks 101st among defensemen. Just above is Hal Gill at 19:59, and below is Trevor Daley at 19:48. Both players put up 24 points last year and earn just a little over $2m/year. Finger’s 121 hits ranks 40th among defensemen and 117 blocked shots ranks 47th. A rough glance and I see that Bryan Allen is 112-119, Andreas Lilja is 133-114, and Paul Ranger at 106-118, all of them with comparable numbers. Allen earns $2.9m/year, Lilja $1.25m/year, and Ranger at $0.933m/year, although I do believe Ranger is still on second contract.
4. A lot of players these days, especially with the new CBA, are signed based upon potential. While I am no professional scout, I don’t think anybody on this website is either. I think it’s really difficult to argue whether or not Finger has the “potential” to live up to his contract. But as fans and outsiders we can see this: Finger was an 8th round pick in a fairly weak draft year and was not a lineup regular until this year when Colorado went stretches without some of their top puck-movers in John-Michael Liles and Jordan Leopold. Asides from being named St. Cloud’s outstanding freshmen player, Finger has yet to win any significant awards or suited up for (to my knowledge) Team USA.
Purely based on relativity, based on relative games played, points, +/-, blocked shots, and hits given with his peers, I find it very difficult to believe $3.5m was a justifiable figure for Finger. Perhaps the Leafs know something the rest of the world doesn’t know, and I hope for their sake that the deal works out and Cliff Fletcher makes me eat my words.
Posted in Uncategorized
9 Responses to “Theory of Relativity, Part 2”
By dan on Jul 4, 2008
That seems to be the simple answer with this Leafs management. They seem to know something that everyone else doesn’t. They have been picking up players from here and there that all look to have great potential if you believe what you read. First there was the draft, where they picked up a bunch of large players who were rated high early in the year and they were able to pick them up in the later rounds…
Then the signing of Finger, who from everything I read sounds like your classic late bloomer who has the right kind of attitude that the team is looking for. Drop down, stop shots, putting up pretty good points dispite only 1 min per game on the PP. Defencive minded (did I seriously read something about him only being on for 5 even strength goals against??? can’t be…), likes to hit and doesn’t have a lot of milage on his frame - no injuries either to speak of…
Then there is the signing out Sweden, this defenceman, Jonas Frogren. ,who doesn’t put up any numbers, but seems to be good enough to make the club.
You tell me if thats what they’re trying to do. Do they know what they are doing? Who knows…
By Jason C on Jul 4, 2008
Maybe I’m biased in my view, but it seems like anything Toronto does is considered holy. We really won’t know what type of player Finger is yet, and time will tell if it’s a good signing or not, but so far it’s perplexed and baffled a lot of people. Maybe Fletcher will make me and the TSN panel eat my words, and I really hope so, for his sake.
As for Finger being only on the ice for 5 even-strength GA, the counter-argument to that is that Hannan and Leopold and Liles draw the other team’s best forwards, leaving Finger to defend against the lower two lines.
The Leafs really seem to think that every player they sign will make a profound impact on their team. Jonas Frogren, who I’ve read had ONE point last season, made front page news on TSN over the Canucks’ trade for Bernier and a potential offer sheet to Filppula. Now neither Bernier nor Filppula are considered top-end players, but it’s a bit perplexing that one-point Frogren would grab more media headlines than those two established NHLers. Even Josef Melichar didn’t get as much fanfare when he signed with Carolina after spending a year in Europe.
By dan on Jul 5, 2008
It’s like buying a lottery ticket. The chances that one of these players are going to be impact players is slim, but I think everyone likes to dream a little. This could be all that it is. Everyone is looking for the next big thing, and it’s great, it’s giving a lot of players a second chance.
Time will tell, but if that 5 goals against even strength is true, then that is an amazing stat even if the first defence pairing was playing against the top lines. McCabe’s had games where he had 5 goals against even strength… and this guy did it over one year? Did you confirm this?
By Jason C on Jul 5, 2008
Not quite true. Finger only finished in the minus in five games last year, which is still impressive, but that does not mean that he was on the ice for only 5 EV-GA for the entire season.
After reading some scouting reports from Avs fans and websites, it seems as if although Finger is an every-situation defenseman, but is too slow and needs to work on his positioning. They liken him to a Staffan Kronwall type player.
By David W on Jul 5, 2008
I enjoy reading this site… so sorry to start out with a negative first post, but:
There are a lot of statistics in your post but you are not putting them to good use….unless your point is merely to illustrate that unrestricted free agents are paid more than other players (and since the cap has been rising 10% per year, each year’s unrestricted free agents are paid more than the last). The fact that UFAs are overpaid is well known. The reason that UFAs are overpaid is also relatively obvious: the UFA can accept the largest contract any of the 30 GMs is willing to pay. Anyway, it’s distracting and not particularly interesting to compare UFA contracts this year to non-UFA contracts or UFA contracts in previous years.
A second point is that as a (largely defensive) defenseman, Finger’s productivity is not well measured by most of statistics you’ve cited. Probably the best one is icetime, as that at least allows you to evaluate his worth relative to the other players on his team (at least in the eyes of his coach). Points, hits, blocked shots really don’t say much about how good he is at preventing the other team from scoring.
Anyway, Fletcher did say that he thought they overpaid a little bit. Still, in the Leafs current situation, I don’t think that makes it a bad signing. For nothing other than money, it gives them a warm, youngish body with some experience on defense. It allows them to trade other players (Mccabe, Kubina, White, etc) for draft picks and prospects. The leafs do not have to worry about spending to the cap max in the short term as they won’t be challenging for the Stanley Cup. So there’s really no downside to this acquisition. Worse case, he turns out to suck and they simply demote him to the minors or trade him in a couple of years.
By Daniel on Jul 6, 2008
About Finger.. I haven’t done any actual check of the information given in the blogpost below, but at a first glance, it seems as if the Leafs have severely mixed things up.
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=16043
When Fletcher and Wilson have been talking in the media, they have described situations that Finger is supposed to have played in, when in fact all those “stats” they mention match up better to Kurt Sauer.
By Jason C on Jul 6, 2008
Thanks for the comment David W, be it positive or negative they’re always welcome. You readers make us bloggers accountable, despite Al Strachan’s wildest claims that we’re the ones polluting the hockey media.
“Anyway, it’s distracting and not particularly interesting to compare UFA contracts this year to non-UFA contracts or UFA contracts in previous years.”
Fair enough. However, when compared to UFAs signed this summer, Finger’s name is surprisingly in Orpik and Stuart’s bracket. Should Daniel be right and that the Leafs have somehow mixed up Sauer and Finger, Sauer is only making $1.75m/year.
“A second point is that as a (largely defensive) defenseman, Finger’s productivity is not well measured by most of statistics you’ve cited. Probably the best one is icetime, as that at least allows you to evaluate his worth relative to the other players on his team (at least in the eyes of his coach).”
Hockey, unlike baseball, is such a fluid game it’s hard to use stats to pinpoint exactly how good a player is. However, just based on ice-time alone, Finger ranks no higher than 5th among Avs defensemen in EV TOI/G, SH TOI/G, or PP TOI/G.
Daniel, thanks for the link, I find the article somewhat amusing.
By Dave W on Jul 8, 2008
As a Leaf fan, I’d definitely like to have Orpik or Stuart and their contracts as opposed to Finger. Unfortunately, that just wasn’t an option for Fletcher. Orpik & Stuart took less money than they would have received from many other teams to stay with a winning group.
Here’s how I’d evaluate the signing: Does it make the leafs a better team? Or does it make them worse (hindering either short term or long term development? As I said, I think it makes the Leafs better by adding a body signing; facilitating trades; not pinning them down with no-trade clauses. The couldn’t have gotten Orpik or Stuart so there’s no point worrying about the fact the Leafs would be better with those two (just like there’s no point worrying about the fact that they’d be better with Crosby).
I am glad they have finger at his salary instead of many other recent D signings that were perhaps more plausibly signed by Toronto: Rob Blake, Wade Redden, Brian Campbell, Jason Smith. Those guys are all too expensive/too old to be a good addition to the leafs.
Perhaps signing Sauer would have been a feasible low-cost move. But then again, he’s apparently had tons of injury problems over the last couple years.
As for icetime, It has been reported that his icetime increased substantially as the year went on (I believe I recall a reliable poster on another hockey board stating he was averaging around 22min over the last 30 games as opposed to closer to 17 earlier in the season.)
Anyway, I’ll have to wait to see him on the ice as a leaf to evaluate his game. I haven’t seen him play.
By Jason C on Jul 9, 2008
By using your criteria for evaluation, it can be argued that every signing’s a good signing. Even if the Kings were to re-invest in, say Dan Cloutier, it would make them a better team because it gives them another body on the roster, facilitates possible trades of Quick, Ersberg, or Labarbera, and does not pin the team down with a no-trade clause.
Of course time is the best evaluator of how good a signing is. I’ve said before that intangibles are a really hard aspect of a hockey player to put a price tag on, but if you’re going by pure stats alone, you can’t really stray much further than the traditional GP, G, A, Pts, +/-, PIM, and TOI. Because Finger is relatively unknown and inexperienced, his hard numbers are the only facts that we can really play around with.
I also do recall that Finger’s ice time increased as the season wore on, but I really don’t have the stats to prove it, and if Finger was truly as invaluable as Quenneville and Wilson claim him to be, the fact that he was a healthy scratch in the playoffs is a bit mystifying. I really wonder what Francois Giguere had to say about this?