Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Players Ready To Welcome Gay Teammate

The case against trading Jason Spezza

Last week, there was an article published here advocating trading Jason Spezza to be considered. My initial reaction was shock, followed by rage, but since then I have cooled down a bit. However, I have also decided to present my case for why it would be a mistake for the Ottawa Senators to trade Jason Spezza.

The main reasons listed for trading Jason Spezza were that his production can be expected to begin declining with the drop starting around the time the Senators return to contention. While I disagree with the time the Senators will need to return to the playoffs and Spezza's output declining, this is mostly my opinion. So for the purpose of the analysis, I will assume that the Senators won't be a playoff club for three more years and Spezza's output will drop then.

Spezza compared to a likely return

In the salary cap era, there have been three big name forwards traded, and one of them was Ilya Kovalchuk on an expiring contract. The other two were Joe Thornton and Brad Richards. Thornton was traded by the Boston Bruins to the San Jose Sharks in exchange for Marco Sturm, Wayne Primeau and Brad Stuart. There would be very few people arguing that the Bruins won that trade. Brad Richards was traded with Johan Holmqvist for Mike Smith, Jeff Halpern and Jussi Jokinen. Of the three, only Jokinen has become a top six player, but only since leaving Tampa.

I don't think Sens fans would be happy with that kind of return for Spezza, so let's assume we can manage to trade him for a top-ten pick and a high-end prospect, which were the returns speculated in our previous post on trading Spezza. What will that return likely produce? Is it going to be an Eric Staal, a Blake Wheeler or a Mikhail Yakubov?

Star-divide

Since the NHL instituted the current draft lottery in 1995 up to and including the 2007 draft, there have been 83 forwards selected in the top ten picks of the draft. For the analysis, I have compiled the statistics of each forward selected in the top ten from Year Four to Year Nine (Click here to see the data). That is, from the fourth NHL season after the year they were drafted to the ninth season. This is not the player's fourth NHL season but simply four years in the future. For example, if a player is drafted in 1997, the stats would start counting from the 2000-2001 season (discounting 1997-1998, 1998-1999 and 1999-2000). Trading Jason Spezza for a draft pick and a prospect would obviously hurt the Senators in the short term, so I did not bother comparing the first three years.

For defining a high end prospect, I added the condition that the top-ten draft pick prospect must have at least played at least ten games in Year Four, or enough for the entry level contract to kick in. The reason for this is, a couple of years after the player was drafted, I would assume that Bryan Murray would pick a prospect who is less likely to be a complete bust by year four. Here is the comparison:

 

It can be seen that Jason Spezza is likely to be better than either player received in a potential trade for him, even 9 years from now. Compared with the average top ten pick, Spezza is projected to produce 40% more points over the entirety of his career. Even a potentially high-end prospect is likely to be below Spezza for the remainder of his career. One might be tempted, as I have in the past, to add up the points of the players and feel that this is greater than Spezza. However, by keeping Spezza, the Senators won't suddenly play with one less player on their roster. These prospects might turn out to be Hart Trophy winners, or they might never play in the NHL. On average, however, this would essentially equate to trading Jason Spezza for a future second-liner and a future third-liner. If the Senators do return to the playoffs in three years, they are going to find themselves without a first line centre. Thus, this would actually shorten the contention window for a player such as Erik Karlsson.

One more comment I would add is that while I used the projections from the original article for Spezza's point total, I feel his numbers would actually be higher. Spezza's worst season after his first full season has been 0.89 points/game and he has a career average of more than a point per game. Using a pool of players with three seasons of 0.70 points/game would result in many players that are not as good as Jason Spezza. This would further the gap between Spezza and a likely return. The Senators might find a number one centre from somewhere, but it is unlikely to be from this trade.

Spezza's trade value at its lowest

After the trades of Mike Fisher, Chris Kelly, Alex Kovalev and the expiring contracts of Pascal Leclaire, the Senators have no need to clear up cap room. With the cap expected to rise to $63.5 million, the Senators have just under $19 million in cap room with 17 players signed. The season after, the Senators have $32 million in room with 9 players signed and they have $45 million in cap room in the last year of Spezza's contract with only 5 players signed. They have plenty of flexibility in what they want to do on that front, whether they want to spend up to the cap in 2012 or they want to completely retool their roster.

Having no reason to trade Spezza from a cap point of view, I would also argue that Spezza's value is at its lowest. He is coming off a couple of short seasons at 57 points each. He is likely worth far more to the Senators than he is to another club. Things like his bigger leadership role, his importance to the penalty kill are likely more noticeable to the Senators than a club who wouldn't have a chance to scout him before making a trade. If Spezza is to put forward another season around 60-65 points, his trade value likely won't diminish too much from what it is now. However, if he stays healthy, and puts up 85-90 points while the Senators finish in the bottom five again, then maybe the Senators can consider trading him for a higher return. Sure, Spezza could put up 40 points next season too, and in the process kill his trade value, but in my opinion that is far less likely than him having a dominating season.

Losing Spezza's impact on the young players

If the Senators are to lose Spezza for a draft pick and a prospect, they will have lost their top three centres in just a few months. This will require either Stephane Da Costa, Peter Regin, or one of the draft picks to play on the first line centre position (barring the acquisition of another first-line centre). This would put a huge amount of pressure, perhaps too much, on a young player. In addition to this, it would also have a negative impact on Bobby Butler and Colin Greening. All six of Greening's goals were scored while playing on a line with Jason Spezza, while seven out of Bobby Butler's ten goals were scored while playing on Jason Spezza's line.

If the current run by the Binghamton Senators has put the club's prospects into a culture of winning, trading Spezza would offset that as they would be very likely to be among the NHL's worst clubs for a few years.

The current state of the Senators

If the Senators were considering trading Spezza, it would imply they want to totally gut the club's veterans and start afresh. This does not then reconcile with re-signing Chris Phillips or Craig Anderson. While Spezza wasn't spectacular for the entire season, he was still 11th among NHL centres in points-per-game this season. I would argue that Spezza's impact on Butler or Greening is greater than Phillips' with one of the club's young defenders. As for Anderson, signing him to a four-year extension would suggest that the club is not conceding the next few seasons.

So what are the Senators needs? As it stands, including Spezza, the Senators have a number one centre, they have one top-six winger in Milan Michalek and hope to have another in Bobby Butler. Daniel Alfredsson is nearing the end of his career, but if he can stay healthy he is likely another top-six, if not top-line, winger, and the Senators do have two first-round picks coming up, the highest being sixth overall. While that player is unlikely to be of Spezza's calibre, that is another potential top-six player in a few years. If this player is a winger, playing with Jason Spezza can only help his development into the league. If the player is a centre, being able to play some what sheltered minutes on the second line would also be beneficial. The Senators' system is filled with good third- and fourth-line players so there isn't a need there.

On defence, while the Senators are loaded with defensive prospects, it remains to be seen how they will perform. But in terms of potential, they do have two highly regarded prospects in David Rundblad and Jared Cowen, as well as a proven NHL star in Erik Karlsson. They also have a goaltender in whom they had enough trust to give a four-year contract. If Craig Anderson can perform, they should at least have slightly better than average goaltending, even if we can't expect him to continue playing as he finished last season. Behind Anderson, they also have Robin Lehner for the future.

So, what the Senators need is a first-line winger. By trading Spezza, they would need a first-line winger and a first-line centre. Considering how hard it is to get one top-three player, now the Senators would have to find two of these players.

Conclusion

As all of us fans watched this season, we watched Jason Spezza develop into a solid penalty killer, while still amazing us with his incredible offensive skill. We also saw Spezza's determination to return from injury to a club in the bottom of the league's standings. It is apparent that Spezza cares for the club and he wants to be a part of the solution. His strong play down the stretch this season, along with Erik Karlsson and Craig Anderson, gave the fans hope for the future.

If he remains on the club, there are few doubts that he will be the next captain of the Ottawa Senators. If he is to leave, there are no obvious choices, especially if Chris Phillips' minutes decline into the later years of his contract.

No player is untradable, everyone has a price. I am sure there is some combination of assets that if offered, would entice the Washington Capitals into trading Alex Ovechkin or the Pittsburgh Penguins into trading Sidney Crosby. However, given what is likely to be the return on Jason Spezza, given what he means to the club, given the effect Spezza has on the club's younger players, and given the Senators current assets and their recent decisions, it would be a huge mistake to trade Jason Spezza.

Comment 69 comments  |  3 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Nice job Adnan

Very well done… Adnan. It never ceases to amaze me just how much fan interest there is around Jason Spezza. I enjoyed the discussion last week, and echo your sentiments about trading him.

I would add that having Spez on the team increases the likelihood than Bobby Butler becomes a legitimate scorer. It is REALLY difficult to find a center with the puck distributing skills that Jason has… as GD #15 found out. Now that GD #15 doesn’t get all of those tap ins setup by Spez anymore, his stats have taken a dive. I expect that Butler will be the recipient of a number of those tap ins.

Who knows, perhaps even Michalek with Spez’s help will become a player now if all of his injuries are healed.

You can’t just gut a team’s centers even during a rebuild. You have to have something to build around… and I know that Mark will argue that by the time the rebuild is done and we’re ready to contend Jason will be a senior citizen with zero trade value (exaggerated for effect). Nevertheless with him we will win some games and do what we need to do which is build a winning team.

The last thing is that without Jason around, things would be boring. There is no player since Yashin that brings out the fans passions more than Spez.

by Marvellous on Jun 6, 2011 7:37 AM EDT reply actions  

Ha! If you know I'm going to say it, then why bring it up?

No one is saying you don’t build around something, but I don’t believe you’ll find anyone who will say a 34-year-old center is the piece you build around. You wouldn’t build a bike around a chain with 10 years of wear on it, would you?

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

If the chain is in optimal shape and performs well, why get a new one?

by LeTigre on Jun 7, 2011 3:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

Really compelling stuff

What’s most interesting to me is that the numbers portray a nightmare scenario where the Senators will never be able to replace Spezza via the draft.

Of course we know players like Nicklas Backstrom, Jeff Carter, and Anze Kopitar and even Adam Oates (undrafted!) can be found in the draft, but if it’s unreasonable to assume the Senators are anywhere but near the average rebuild time, it’s equally unreasonable to assume they’ll be able to buck the average and draft a PPG center for for some silly reason like “Well, Murray drafts well.” As my fantasy football league knows too well, hope is not a strategy.

Though this argument isn’t enough to sway me, I think it’s extremely telling that we both came to the same conclusion about what Ottawa’s primary need is with Spezza on the roster.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 8:06 AM EDT reply actions  

I think this is the most important

Whether or not this team chooses to build around Jason Spezza if management fails to bring in the other building blocks, because no matter how valuable he is, Spezza won’t be able to lead this team on his own. He needs those wingers, so if we’re not going to get them for him, we might as well trade him because we’re not giving him the pieces he needs to succeed.

by Peter Raaymakers on Jun 6, 2011 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yep, I'm in agreement there

There’s no reason to believe Spezza himself is incapable of leading. Especially after last season, I have no doubt about it. The only question in my mind is if Murray and staff give him the opportunity to do so while he’s still capable of it.

If, for instance, Bobby Butler emerged as a 40-goal scorer next year, the reasons for trading Spezza disappear like Heatley in the playoffs — the team’s success now rides on the other lines, since Spezza will undoubtedly be doing his part to carry the load.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

28th birthday in one week

I looked over the chart that you did again just to review your fears about his pending decline. In exactly one week, Spez hits 28 years old. To me according to your chart, all else remaining equal, what this means is that in two years when I think we’ll be ready to contend again, we can expect a window of about four years where his production will be around 60 points until he hits the ripe “OLD” put him out to pasture age of 34.

Sixty points is not chopped liver. Personally I believe that his production is going to go up this year and for the next few years if he stays healthy because his all around play means more ice time if he can handle it. If his production goes up then the decline you were talking about will be to 70 points or so.

Maybe I’m too much of an optomist here. Alot depends on the number of games he can stay healthy for. We shall see.

My only worry is can he handle alot of ice time and stay healthy? If he keeps getting injured, then it’s time to move him on for high draft picks next year or the year after.

If he plays really well for Team Canada, that will drive his value upwards.

by Marvellous on Jun 6, 2011 9:05 AM EDT reply actions  

Re-read Mark's post

He posits that it takes teams, on average, about three years to return to playoff contention from lottery pick position, and his data also suggest that after that point we will see Spezza’s production begin to decline.

by Peter Raaymakers on Jun 6, 2011 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions  

Right

Historically, it’s taken three years, so that leaves a three-year window. If they’re ahead of the curve, it’d be a four-year window. There are a few important points to consider:

1) Increased points do not necessarily mean increased production. This is critical to understand. I strongly believe we’ll see Spezza exceed the 57 points he put up last season. However, his 57 points in 62 games represent a production level of .92PPG. If he plays all 82 games and only puts up something like 70 points, that would actually be a drop in production to .85PPG.

2) His current contract expires at 31. The team may not get a chance to enjoy his services after that point.

3) Sixty points is not chopped liver by any stretch of the imagination. It’s practically ideal for a second-line center. If the Senators are able to fit Spezza into that role at 34 (or somehow fit Brad Richards into that role at 34), they are in extremely good shape.

But it’s not reasonable to accept that a 60-point guy whose production will continue to decline should be the building block of the long-term future of the team. Short-term, there’s no doubt that Spezza is that guy. But as you’ve acknowledged, that leaves a very small window for success, and as Adnan points out here, the chances of replacing that production afterward aren’t ideal.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

Considering this is our first rebuild, and that this is the first time I have actually focused so much on a rebuild...

… don’t teams hold on to a few of their veterans for during the rebuild? Also, a team like Pittsburgh for example, built around a talent that they knew was a SURE thing. If we traded our only SURE thing, who would we build around? If we did draft a guy that management had high hopes in, and we wanted to build around, and then he flops, that would set us back a lot.

by Los Blancos Chicca on Jun 6, 2011 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions  

These are great questions

The team would have to add some veterans to offset the loss of Spezza.

The big challenge is that there’s no such thing as “sure thing” when it comes to prospects. Daigle taught us that firsthand. In general, I have a hard time accepting uncertain outcomes as a reason for not making an action — wait for a sure thing and you’ll be waiting forever.

I certainly can’t deny that trading Spezza would come with its own challenges. Adnan makes a compelling case that the team couldn’t overcome them with draft picks and prospects alone.

In the end, I think the only thing we can say for sure is that the need to replace Spezza is inevitable. One day the team will have to do it, and it’s not going to be easy.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 10:03 AM EDT up reply actions  

I also don't accept "uncertain outcomes as a reason for not making an action"..

.. but in any rebuild you need to have something to build around. And if we did trade the one guy we can build our offense around, then we would need to write off a year or two until we find the next guy to build our offense around. That’s just one, although it’s a pretty big one.

The other thing we would need to replace is his veteran presence and leadership. I am not writing off Alfie, by any means. But younger guys connect better with a young leader. Like most work places. So yes you would have to bring in other veterans to offset the loss of Spezza.

Also, something we can’t forget, the prospects will not develop properly without direction. Writing off the next year or two in order to find the guy to build around will hinder the development of our prospects and we would be losing out on those development years. If you don’t have a person to build around (let alone the right person) then what direction do you develop your prospects in?

by Los Blancos Chicca on Jun 6, 2011 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think the difference between Spezza and the next guy is the window

Writing off that one or two years while Next Guy develops is easier to swallow given that we can assume a 14-year window of production out of him. Take off two years and we’d have 12 left, which is double what we have for Spezza as of this season. Building around Spezza (and lets say it only takes two years) leaves the team with a window of elite production one-third of what they’d have with Next Guy — so that route also presents some challenges for the organization.

As for the development, I’d point to the coaching staff to help shoulder that load. I think a big part of Spezza’s development these past years has been Clouston’s influence. Player development isn’t necessarily limited to teammates, right?

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

Of course..

The coaching staff would have to step in large. But every team and every building block has a nucleous in which they are built around. The sooner and earlier you can identify the nucleous in a rebuild, the better. By doing this you give the team an identity, set a style and develop towards it. When a team can successfully do this, they will be dominant for a while. Example, Pittsburgh and Detriot. (Kinda like the Steelers and the Patriots.)

I just don’t see how the coaches can make up for the loss of the nucleous, the leadership, the on-ice influence while developing a big chunk of our team. I just feel their focus would be wider and unclear.

I am not a coach, or an NHL player or anything, so it’s hard for me to see how that gap would be good for the team. And I also don’t see a point in trading Spezza and let’s say getting Richards for example. We will need an established first line centre anyways, so I just don’t see the point of trading the one we have, the one we love and the one our prospects seems to look up to.

by Los Blancos Chicca on Jun 6, 2011 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah trading Spezza and then getting Richards wouldn't make sense to me

As Richards is even older than Spezza. The trade DW19 mentioned below involving Backstrom would be a compelling argument to trade Spezza though, as it would give us an established number one centre now and even later when the team as a whole has improved.

Lastly, Barcelona is just too good. :(

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah the Backstrom trade is very good..

We all think it is farfetched though but something like that would definitely pique my interest. Everyone would benefit from this (Backstrom not immediately)

Grrrrrrrr don’t get me started but they definitely won that game fair and square.

by Los Blancos Chicca on Jun 8, 2011 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

Compelling arguments

Compelling arguments and definitely food for thought.

As you said it’d be ideal to have Spez be the #2 center, and then he could probably handle those kind of minutes. But hey… first line centers need to be drafted… Even if we’re willing to drive up the Brinks truck for Richards, he won’t want to come here with the plethora of offers he’ll be receiving. And is it wise to spend that kind of money for another center who isn’t a goal scorer. (average 23 the last 3 years, albeit on year was shortened with injury).

by Marvellous on Jun 6, 2011 10:03 AM EDT up reply actions  

Is it wise? Man, I don't know

I guess that’s why I’m not a GM. I guess the main question is, “Does the team think it can win now?” I think, if the answer is yes, the only option is to go all-in, spend big money on an elite winger, draft a top-6 winger (Landeskog), and add a high-end second line center. Halfassing it won’t get the team the success they’re looking for.

Ideally, the team bags their first-line center of the future with their top pick this year (I believe Couturier is that guy) and eases him into that role with the luxury of Spezza producing at elite level for the next six years. After that point, the roles simply flip and the team enjoys outstanding center depth for another four or five years.

As Adnan points out, that might be too much to hope for.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

We don't have to win NOW though.

We can win the year after. I do realize Spezza will be declining all that stuff, but we don’t need to win NOW. We are in a very good position to make this a shorter rebuild without the need to be a “win now” and “we are making the cup finals next season” team.

Goal – set. Defensive prospects (although not proven) – abundance. Fourth liners, thrid liners, set. Half of our top 2 lines – set. A lot of cap room – set. I really think we can develop, rebuild and win games simultaneously. It does not have to be one or the other.

by Los Blancos Chicca on Jun 6, 2011 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

No, it definitely doesn't HAVE to be one or the other

The only reason to shift to NOW would be to maximize Spezza’s remaining six years of elite production.

We are in a very good position to make this a shorter rebuild

I have an article looking at this queued up, I promise, but I bumped it because Adnan’s piece deserves the same consideration mine got.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions  

You're right, it does deserve the same consideration.

Which is why I am all over this today hahaha.

I am looking forward to your article. I don’t disagree with you at all by the way, I just don’t see a scenario (unless it’s completely farfetched) where I would say “Yes this is a fair trade for us, Spezza and our future.”.

by Los Blancos Chicca on Jun 6, 2011 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

All-in would be great

It will be really exciting if we go all-in… except that Coutourier will be LONG GONE by the time we get to the podium so we’d have to be moving up to get him.

And we could do that… we have the draft picks to move up.

Without a second line center, forget it. It ain’t happenin’… and when Spezza gets injured because he gets played to death, then what?

by Marvellous on Jun 6, 2011 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

I really feel like Tampa highlights why you keep your older stars...

.it wasnt long ago that they were in the same situation as us. I’m sure they dont regret keeping St. Louis and Lecavalier. In fact, think about where that team would realistlcally be had they traded those two players. And that is only with regards to their production, nevermind their important leadership roles.

by alfie4PM on Jun 6, 2011 11:49 AM EDT reply actions  

The interesting thing will be to see where Tampa is in two years, when St. Louis and Lecavalier aren't the players they are now

They have a very small window with those two remaining. If they don’t win a Cup, I wonder if they’ll feel keeping them was worth it?

It’s an interesting situation to watch, for sure.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

One thing I would like to add - what a good compensation would be

Is that the projected point totals for the prospects are absolute totals. If a player was drafted in 1997, and wasn’t in the NHL in 2002, his point total was 0 for that year. This obviously brings the points total down. This is fair though, because there is the chance we’ll draft a player that won’t play in the NHL in a few years and flake out.

The average game played was around 55 with 35 points. If we get a player who has played 10 games in year 4, as you can see, the production jumps from an average top 10 pick. The production also jumps up the higher the pick is, I didn’t do this in the analysis, but I did attach the raw data.

My compensation for Spezza would be:
- top 2 pick
- another top 10 pick (either in a future year or previous year)
- a young forward around 22 that is already playing.

This is likely outlandish, but that is what it would take for me to trade Spezza right now.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 11:54 AM EDT reply actions  

A top 2 pick really limits your trading partners, though

And there wouldn’t be any guarantee of a future top 10 pick… you’d have to say a future1st round pick, right? I guess you could specify “your next top 10 pick” but that’s so impossible to predict.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

True but

If you are getting a top 2 pick this year, there is a decent chance of top 10 next year. Or you could throw in a conditional 2nd if next pick isn’t top 10.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Unless Milbury is re-hired by the Isles this off-season...

…I don’t see a bottom-2 team wanting to trade their top pick for Jason Spezza. Why would they? They would be in a similar position to us, except maybe even worse off.

by dzuunmod on Jun 6, 2011 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

I didn't say anyone will give it to us

Which is why I don’t think trading Spezza is a good idea. We don’t have to trade him just for the sake of trading him.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Indeed

Trading him just to trade him would be absurd, to turn a phrase. ;)

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, it's not a case of best offer wins

That might have been true in Heatley’s situation (although some would argue even then it wasn’t).

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

Imagine you are BM for a minute.

If you call around to every team that is in a remotely similar situation to your own to find out if they are interested in Spezza, and no one is, what does that say to you? To me, it says that the consensus is that maybe a player like Spezza is not a good fit for a team in that situation.

by dzuunmod on Jun 6, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

And to be clear, this isn’t to denigrate him. I like Spezza, and I won’t be terribly upset if we hang onto him.

I just think that maybe he would be more valuable to, like, a good team than he is to ours right now.

by dzuunmod on Jun 6, 2011 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

Another scenario

Adnan, I didn’t get your opinion of my alternative Spezza for Nicklas Backstrom trade proposal. That kind of trade, Spezza to a team on the cusp in exchange for a younger #1 centre might be something that the Senators should consider. Of course, they would need a motivated trade partner(perhaps Washington feels they need more leadership to get over the hump).

by DW19 on Jun 6, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

That would be a deal to definitely consider

But I am not sure why Washington would do that. Backstrom is already a point/game player after 4 seasons.

Granted he had an awful playoffs, and his stats might be inflated with Alexander Ovechkin finishing off his passes, but there is no denying he is an excellent player.

I can’t think of a very good reason to turn that deal though. All of the reasons I listed for not trading Spezza, such as uncertainty over replacing him, or much lower if not non-existent in exchange for Backstrom.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think the reason would be the extension of elite production window

Washington would have to either be really down on Backstrom or really high on Spezza to shorten their own production window.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sorry I meant a reason for not doing that deal

From a Sens point of view, if offered.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

I would say so

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't think it is so clear cut

I think that depends on what the goals of the Capitals are. If they want to “contend” for a longer time they keep Backstrom. If they want to win the cup next season then they might be better off with Spezza. Considering that salary cap entropy is going to start tearing away useful complementary players it might behoove them to go for it sooner rather than later. They may loose Laich this offseason. They may lose Carlsson before long. They may not want to wait.

This is just a thought meant to throw a different slant on the discussion and get away from necessarily dumping all contributors for draft picks. There could be other teams with young budding centres who want to accelerate their ascension and think that trading the raw for the finished would suit their needs.

by DW19 on Jun 6, 2011 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well I meant in terms of replacing Spezza

There is a lot more certainty in replacing Spezza at least as a number one offensive centre if we get Backstrom back instead of a bunch of picks.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I would think of a deal along those lines as a potential win for both sides.

by DW19 on Jun 6, 2011 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

Washington would do it for a few reasons:

- to shake things up while they still have a window to win the cup
- Spezza has already lead the Sens to the finals, why couldn’t he lead the Caps there
- Salaries more or less match
- At present, Spezza is probably a better all around player (penalty killing, faceoffs, etc.)

by DW19 on Jun 6, 2011 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I feel the ideal trading partner would be one feeling they need an elite center to be a Cup contender

But Adnan’s opinion of his worth is totally legit. Opinions about subjective things can’t be wrong… know what I mean?

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh for sure. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about what the asking price for such a deal ought to be.

by dzuunmod on Jun 6, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

Great job!! Keep this pimp J. Spez around.

Spezza is obviously the leader of the team moving through the rebuild. We lose invaluable experience if we trade him away for a couple of crummy ass picks, or a prospect and a crumb ass pick. He is always improving his game, and quite frankly I think he gets back to his 90 point form next year. There is no way we would ever get fair return in a deal.

by oldmonk on Jun 6, 2011 11:56 AM EDT reply actions  

There's no reason to believe he'll return to 90 points without an elite winger

Which is something we currently don’t have, and we don’t currently have any prospects of developing one.

Question (and I’m not sure how serious you’re being): If you consider high draft picks to be “crummy ass”, how do you propose that the team rebuild? Or do you not feel the team needs to rebuild?

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

True enough about the winger

It would be tough for J. Spez to return to form without one, but I think he’ll do just fine next year. Maybe 80 points then.

I fully support rebuilding the team using high draft picks. But I would consider a high draft pick to be completely crummy ass compared to Spezza. I’m incredibly anxious for the draft this year, but I’d rather have Spezza than Derick Brassard and 8th overall (hypothetically). I just don’t think there are many scenarios where we get the right deal.

by oldmonk on Jun 7, 2011 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd agree with you there

If it’s not the right scenario, a trade doesn’t make sense. It would have to give Ottawa ideal building blocks for the future.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 7, 2011 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's not wasting Spezza to hold on to him

Holding on to Spezza does something valuable – it keeps the number one center line occupied for a coupe of years while a capable replacement is found/groomed. We’re going to be developing forwards for the next few years, and having Spezza in a leadership role is perfect. He’s someone who’s had playoff successes and failures, has been a lightning rod for criticism and praise, and has the attention of the opposition’s top line on a nightly basis. Is it really wasting Spezza if he’s the player that can insulate our most talented young center for the next 3-5 years, and then assume a role as second line centre and captain? Having a second line centre who’s good for 40-50 points until he’s 37 doesn’t sound too terrible to me.

by Druke on Jun 6, 2011 12:24 PM EDT reply actions  

I think the data here illustrats the difficulties with finding a "capable replacement"

Of course it’s not a waste, to have Spezza insulate our future #1 center — but we don’t have that player, and Adnan shows here how challenging finding them through the draft will be. The argument that Spezza will insulate a currently non-existent player is a leap of logic I’m unwilling to make.

There’s no argument that having a prospect to let us slide Spezza into a second line center role in the twilight of his career is the ideal situation for Ottawa, but it’s not one that looks very likely as of today — by extension, that means that the team may likely be wasting Spezza’s production.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

We're more likely to develop a first line centre with Spezza being the mentor

Especially since we don’t have a prospect particularly groomed for it, having Spezz helps since it won’t thrust Regin or whoever else it will be into a position they are clearly unprepared for. Since we definitely won’t be receiving a player of Spezza’s potential in return, I don’t see how we’re better prepared if we send him away. If we thought our fans were tough on Spezza, they wouldn’t be patient enough to watch a first line centre carousel get another coach fired. As much as Jason may be more comfortable on a winning team, we need him. That’s why we pay him $7 million.

by Druke on Jun 6, 2011 1:16 PM EDT reply actions  

Both me and Mark did average analysis

But your comment gives me another idea, a first round pick might average 35 points, but what is the probability that they are:

Superstars (90+ points)
1st line players (65+ points)
Upper 2nd line players (50-65 points)
General 2nd line players (40-50 points)
3rd line players (20-40 points)
4th line players (10-20 points)
Not NHL calibre (<10 points)

I would guess, and it is just a guess, that Spezza is more likely to be a 2nd or 1st line player, but the draft pick would be more likely to be 3rd, 4th, non-NHLer or 90+ points.

This is a separate topic though, I might do a different analysis for the probability of different tiers we could draft.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Copper & Blue has some analysis on those probabilities

I’ll shoot you a link when I get home. Unsurprisingly, top-10 picks are far more likely to hit.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't think the team is more likely to develop a first line center with Spezza as a mentor

Can you show a factual correlation between existing PPG centers and their eventual replacements posting similar numbers? I’d be very surprised if you could.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

I would point to Giggles own development

Where he wasn’t thrust into the pressure and was given a smaller role at first. I think a few seasons playing against slightly inferior competition could help a high end prospect gain some confidence and tabulate a few good seasons.

It is similar to not thrusting Lehner into the spotlight right now, letting him play in the AHL, and then maybe as a backup in the NHL.

Even if we don’t play our top pick on the top line, someone will have to play there who isn’t ready.

I don’t have a quantifiable impact of this, but this reasoning seems logical to me.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

But doesn't that argument presuppose that Next Guy MUST be thrust into the top center role as soon as it's available?

The team wouldn’t have to play Next Guy on the first line the second Spezza was gone, right?

In the case of Spezza, the team traded away their number one center (Cash-in Yashin) and drafted his replacement, but took the time to develop him properly. Radek Bonk was the top center until Spezza was ready to assume the role. There’s no reason Ottawa couldn’t repeat this process by bringing in an outside veteran to take over that role, right?

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Senators were the highest scoring team in the league that season

While last year’s team was the lowest scoring in franchise history. I think with Spezza gone, there would be a lot more pressure on the new kid.

Although, now that I mention it, I supposed we can’t quite ease the kid in even with Spezza around, as we were after all, a very low scoring team even with Spezza.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think there'd only be the pressure if he were forced into that role, though

Regardless of the situation, I believe it would be a mistake to rush any players we have because of need.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Also, the Senators were the second-highest scoring team that year

Detroit was first. Just nitpicking.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Jun 6, 2011 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Oh I was talking about 2003-2004

His first full season, but yeah technically he wasn’t a rookie then, in 2002-2003 Detroit had more.

An Ottawa Senators supporter in Toronto, Ontario. I am cool like that.

by Adnan on Jun 6, 2011 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Giggles was never brought up under a "mentor"

The first-line centre for much of Spezza’s development time was Radek Bonk, and I doubt he had much of an impact on Spezza’s development. And the reason Spezza wasn’t thrust into a high-pressure situation was, in large part, because the NHL lockout gave him an extra season to dominate in the AHL. It’s unlikely our next top centreman will find himself in that situation.

by Peter Raaymakers on Jun 6, 2011 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

Bad influences

Yeah and Spez had two things against him as he was developing. Number one a coach with initials JM whose motivation was by punishment… so he got punished instead of taught how to be an all around player…

And number two a buddy who said "Let’s fill the net and to Hell with defending… we’ll leave that grunt work to Alfy.

Mark is right that Clouston was the best thing that ever happened to Spezza. That and his interaction with Hitchcock with Team Canada.

by Marvellous on Jun 6, 2011 2:16 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The unofficial Ottawa Senators blog

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Sb_small
Alfie: "The kids want me to continue."

Recent FanPosts

Sens_small
Signing our own free agent?
Karlsson_small
Targeting Del Zotto
Nhl_entry_draft_portraits_8_xtv5um7c5l_small
A look at senators depth: Defensemen Addition
Small
Clouston Fired yet again
Small
BM's summer vacation
Nhl_entry_draft_portraits_8_xtv5um7c5l_small
A look at senators depth: Center Addition
Marv_facebook_small
Our style won't win us any playoff series
Karlssonpoint_small
Playoffs prediction competition: round three
Small
Sens sign D Fredrik Claesson to three-year entry-level deal.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Heritage_small Peter Raaymakers

Hutz_small DarrenM

Editors

Sens_small Mark Parisi

Sens-suicidebooth_small Ryan Classic

Authors

Small DaveYoung

Karlssonpoint_small Adnan

Small Varada

Bobby__small bobbykelly

Bosch_small Amelia L