It's time Bleacher Report had a hockey roundtable, where the best and brightest hockey writers on the website gather around and give their two cents on a particular subject.
In this article, seven of the best NHL writers on Bleacher Report gave us their input on this NHL off season's winners and losers.
I want to thank them all for putting the time in to make this roundtable possible. I hope you enjoy...
Greg Caggiano (New York Rangers Community Leader)
Since this article is going to be long enough, I'll only give the analysis of one team, the team I know best, the New York Rangers. I believe that they were one of the many winners in this off-season, mainly because they said good-bye to captain Jaromir Jagr. No longer do they have to cater to his needs of what he likes and dislikes. Instead, Tom Renney is free to roll four lines without worrying about matching up.
The acquisitions of Markus Naslund and Nikolai Zherdev will help up front with guys like Aaron Voros, Dan Fritsche and Patrick Rissmiller helping on the bottom two lines. The last big signing comes in the name of Wade Redden. Maybe this change of scenery will turn him into the offensive power house he once was. If not, it's going to be a long six years.
Ken Armer (NHL & Anaheim Ducks Community Leader)
Biggest Winners:
Tampa Bay: I think many will disagree here, but read the entire section before freaking out. The Tampa Bay Lightning came out a champion in the free agency, signing great players all over the forward positions, new coaches, and new owners. A season ticket owning source says regardless of wins, the Lightning have new life with fans. "Hockey Bay" may not win now, but they may not be far off either. Signing Vinny Lecavalier to a lifetime contract is a good choice for this program, and Stamkos will be an instant star in Tampa. The team has confidence in its goal and defense, even though the league itself doesn't.
39 comments Last one added 11 months ago — Leave a Comment
Alan Bass 11 months ago
great job, greg. thanks a lot for the chance to put in my input!
Edit Comment Cancel
Chris Hoeler 11 months ago
Good stuff Gregg... We will have to do this again during the season.
Edit Comment Cancel
Ken Armer 11 months ago
Anytime I'm able to have my hockey knowledge and analysis ego stroked I am up for it, but did everyone notice I'm ahead of BT? Looks like Greg swings for the fence from the get-go. Just kidding BT!
Joking aside, i think this went great everyone. Nice Job Greg and everyone else!
Edit Comment Cancel
Bryan Thiel 11 months ago
Just remember I gave you your job...watch your step Armer.
BT
Edit Comment Cancel
Chris Bouthillier 11 months ago
Yeah this turned out pretty good, I liked it. We definately have to do it again.
Edit Comment Cancel
Greg Caggiano 11 months ago
Derek Harmsworth's input has now been added!
Please excuse the rough formatting of this article, the next round table will have a standard format everyone will have to meet.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jersey 11 months ago
I'm surprised no one called the Rangers "losers." There's plenty of debate about their offseason, and not one person thought they got worse? Well, allow this fan to give some input:
1. Jaromir Jagr may not be himself anymore, but he was still their most talented scorer. He's a huge loss, and you can't simply ignore that. Meanwhile, as one writer said, "Marcus Nasland is at least his equal." This comment is completely off-base. First of all, Naslund has never put up Jagr's offensive numbers. How on earth is Naslund "at least equal?" Take a look at last year's numbers, a season in which Jagr had his worst production in years. He had 25 goals and 46 assists for 71 points, with a plus-8 rating. Naslund, meanwhile, posted the same 25 goals but had only 30 assists, for 55 points, with a minus-seven rating. He also had 12 fewer penalty minutes, because he lacks Jagr's toughness. Losing Jagr is a loss, and while he may not be in his prime anymore, he's still much better than Naslund. Naslund has never been Jagr's equal, not even when Jagr struggled like he did last year.
2. Wade Redden does not improve the Rangers' D at all. He's not a physical defenseman (only 60 PM last year), and he's known as a puck-mover. Yet this "offensive threat" mustered only 6 goals and 32 assists last year! This sin't just one bad year, either: the year prior, he had only 7 goals and 29 assists! Redden is on the decline, and Ottawa was happy to see him go. There's no way this guy is worth 6.5 mil per season over six years. No way.
3. They let Sean Avery walk. Say what you will about the guy, he's a talented player on both ends of the ice. He's so annoying to play against, and that makes him an invaluable weapon. Who will replace his toughness on the team? That said, the Rangers got a lot softer, not only by losing Avery, but Ryan Hollweg as well. Hollweg may not be very good, but he was one of only two enforcers the Rangers had left, and his departure makes this team very, very weak.
4. Nikolai Zherdev may be a very good scorer, but he's also a head case. Alex Kovalev is also extremely talented, but he was awful both stints with the Rangers. I'm not saying this move was bad, but it sure is ominous to Ranger fans out there. It's not as stellar as it looks.
5. Don't forget losing Martin Straka and Brendan Shanahan. Straka is solid, and they didn't replace him. Shanahan may be old, but he's not done yet, he plays on both the PP and PK, and he's a damn good leader. Because of his age, he'd have come cheap, too. Not the biggest loss in the world, but still a loss.
The Rangers downgraded significantly this offseason, and I would declare them losers. I'm not saying you guys had invalid points, but I'm stunned that not one of you could think they had a poor offseason. Meanwhile, I only saw one declaration that the Devils were winners, when I think there should have been more: their only loss was Sergei Brylin (and losing him actually improves the team). Meanwhile, they added a great scorer in Brian Rolston (a move that will also seriously help the power play), a very good enforcer in Holik (not a goal scorer at all, but a guy who will finish checks and annoy opponents, a la ex-Ranger Sean Avery), and they brought back key players Jay Pandolfo and Bryce Salvador. while they didn't address every need (they could still use a puck-moving defenseman), they've vastly improved over last year, so how could they not be winners?
Edit Comment Cancel
Chris Hoeler 11 months ago
Kovalev was not horrible in both stints. The 2nd time he was but the first time he was great. He was unbelievable during the playoffs that year.
And the fact they lost these guys doesn't mean anything. They get better because they are going from a system centered around 1 guy (Jagr) to one centered on a balanced attack involving all parts of the ice. This team is a better team. They have become more unpredictable. If you think Naslund or Zherdev are supposed to replace Jagr then you aren't looking at it right. They are parts of an offensive system that will work. It may take time but it will work.
Edit Comment Cancel
Greg Caggiano 11 months ago
1. It was time for Jagr to go. This team may not win a cup without him but they weren't going to win one with him either. The Rangers no longer have to cater to his every need. They can just go out and play. I believe Naslund will be revitalized with a change of scenery and could score 30-40 goals.
2. I'll agree with you that Redden's contract was way too long and that they over paid for him. But the theme of the NHL nowadays is overpayment. Fans bitched and moaned about not having a powerplay quarterback and they get one with Redden. I think a change of scenery will do him good as he's only 31 years old.
3. The Rangers offered Avery a fair contract and it was his decision to leave. I liked the guy but it's not the end of the world that we lost him. Fans never saw any wrong in his actions and furthermore didn't see what a detriment he was to his team in the locker room.
4. Zherdev is the winger that Gomez lacked all season long. Someone who can score goals, make plays and can actually keep up with Gomez who flies through the zone. I think the two of them will be amazing together.
5. Your like the fifth person to tell me that losing Straka and Shanahan is a bad thing. In fact, you couldn't be more wrong. Straka was only brought here because Jagr wanted him. Straka without Jagr is a useless player and the guy just will not shoot. If he was coming down against an empty net, I believe he would think to pass first. The guy gave his heart and sould every night but I still won't miss him. As for Shanahan, I loved the guy. His leadership skills are matched by no one else, which is why, if he really wants to help out the Rangers, he should return as an asistant coach.
Edit Comment Cancel
Bernie Horowitz 11 months ago
Zherdev and Naslund combined scored more points than Jagr and Straka last season. Also, I think it's fair to say that we can expect them both to do better this year (for semi-different reasons). Naslund is in on a team that will allow him more freedom, and I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that he'll score five more goals this year compared to last year. Zherdev is still very young and will hopefully develop, and also will have more freedom. I think we agree that Jagr and Straka are declining, and would have done even less next year if they stayed in the NHL.
Edit Comment Cancel
Josh Lewis 11 months ago
I thought the Rangers were losers, but they were #4 or 5 on my list so I ran out space. Naslund is a downgrade from Jagr, and they've replaced one headache with another one (Zherdev). Redden is a shadow of his former self at a grossly inflated salary, and it may sound funny, but he won't even replace Tyutin and Backman, let alone improve the blueline.
About the only good thing the Rangers did was add Kalinin, IMO.
Edit Comment Cancel
MJ Kasprzak 11 months ago
As the person who said Naslund is at least Jagr's equal, I guess it is incumbent upon me to defend that position. Before I do, let me credit Jersey with a comprehensive response.
1. Jagr is not "tough" in any sense of the word. He was shut down most of the playoffs on a great team and not for the first time, so he can hardly be considered mentally tough. He has never been a fighter, so I cannot imagine you meant physically tough. The only thing I can say is he has shown the ability to play in front of the net, but so has Naslund on the offensive end; I concede that he has been not as bad defensively throughout his career and will finish with a WAY better career even if he never plays in the NHL again. I just don't think Marcus' game has deteriorated as much as JJ's post-lockout.
2. Redden may not be physical, but he does okay defensively, and he is still better than anyone the Rangers had last year. Kalinin may be better yet--I feel he is underrated.
3. Avery hurt the team in ways that did not show up, too: players were inspired by the hatred he engendered.
4. Shanahan's age has been catching up to him for a couple years now; I doubt he will do much this season.
But you are totally right about Zherdev, and thank you for also giving me props as the only guy who mentioned that the Devils were winners.
What I don't get is how many teams appeared as winners and losers on various lists. And sorry, Ken, but A TEAM CANNOT BE BOTH A WINNER AND A LOSER! Make up your mind, dude...what do you expect from a guy who is both a Ducks and Stars fan! LOL!
By my count the following teams received the following vote counts:
Blackhawks: +5, with 5 positive and no negative votes.
Red Wings: +4, with 4 positive and no negative votes.
Rangers and Coyotes: +3 (3 positive, no negative)
Sharks: +2 (2 positive, 0 negative)
Devils, Jackets, Oilers: +1 (1 positive, 0 negative)
Blues: even, with one vote for each
Lightning: -1, as they somehow got three positive BUT four negative votes. The following other teams received just one negative vote: Thrashers, Canucks, Sabres, Senators, Avalanche (those last three are mine--I think stronger cases were made than the last two, such as the Islanders, but the Sabres should have been on someone else's list!), Penguins (?), and Kings (sorry, but you can't get worse than the worst team in the league!).
Predators: -2--how could only one other person think this team was one of the biggest losers?!
Leafs: -2/-3--couldn't tell if BT really considered them one of the biggest winners, but they were on three lists among the biggest losers.
Islanders: FOUR of you put them on the loser list, with no winner votes.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jordan Vertone 11 months ago
great analysis everyone!
Edit Comment Cancel
Andrew Kneeland 11 months ago
Excellent job, guys. About time the NHL had one of these!
Edit Comment Cancel
MJ Kasprzak 11 months ago
Does this mean you are starting to take an interest in hockey, even though you have moved FROM Minnesota to ARIZONA?
Edit Comment Cancel
Andrew Kneeland 11 months ago
Haha, possibly...
Edit Comment Cancel
Ken Armer 11 months ago
Id like to add that just because the Ranger didn't improve doesn't make them losers for the topic we discussed. I know for my "losers" i looked more at who had something to prove going into next season and didn't live up to it. The Rangers in my opinion are a wash, as they lost a lot, but with proper development, I think they should do just fine.
Edit Comment Cancel
Bryan Thiel 11 months ago
The Rangers got rid of Ryan Hollweg....that alone makes them winners...
BT
Edit Comment Cancel
Bryan Thiel 11 months ago
Hell....they got something FOR Ryan Hollweg.....give them the cup
Edit Comment Cancel
Greg Caggiano 11 months ago
Thanks for selecting this as article of the day!
I really don't deserve it, unless the eight other people that submitted there analysis can share in the credit. Awesome job guys! This is for you!
Edit Comment Cancel
MJ Kasprzak 11 months ago
Yeah, can I get a piece of that? At least I was listed on Fox Sports.com again because I am mentioned in this article, right? And by the way, for the record I am only the CO-community leader for the Sharks--I don't wanna fail to recognize Danielle Marchell, my partner in crime. I can't believe only one other person listed my Sharks as big winners: they won this off-season and are now the team to beat, yo!
Edit Comment Cancel
Greg Caggiano 11 months ago
Did this article make it to Fox Sports.com?
Edit Comment Cancel
MJ Kasprzak 11 months ago
I thought all the picks of the day did since the partnership began.
Edit Comment Cancel
Laky Mohan 11 months ago
i guess its all rangers comments so i might as well continue. the idea that naslund is as good as jagr is laughable. we all know this isnt true. not to say he wont be successful, just that naslund is not nor can not replace Jagr 1 for 1. I think the worst misconception about the jagr move was the first reviewer who said the rangers no longer needed to match lines. It was other teams that matched their best defense pairs against jagr, not the other way around. now scott gomez will be expected to carry the offensive load, lets see how he deals with playing against the oppositions top defense pairing night in night out.
Edit Comment Cancel
MJ Kasprzak 11 months ago
It is not at all laughable to say Naslund is an equal replacement to JJ. He is more than a year younger and his numbers are dropping off much less quickly. Jagr's fallne off more than 25 points/year for two years running, more than Naslund's have fallen off total in that time. And last year Naslund put up as many goals and two-thirds as many assists as Jagr, so he is close already.
Edit Comment Cancel
Matt Gilmartin 11 months ago
Excellent contributions all around guys. I'm looking forward to the next one.
Edit Comment Cancel
Adam Amick 11 months ago
I love it... Dallas once again sneaks in under the radar.
Though I'm not sold on giving up two young Finns to get the League thug in Sean Avery...
But with Brad Richards in for the full season this could be interesting for a team that out-performed EVERYONE's expectations last season.
Go Stars!
Edit Comment Cancel
Michael Wagner 11 months ago
I love hearing other people calling the Blackhawks offseason a success, many Hawks fans are really frustrated that we have almost 13 million invested in goalies next season. I do however see Dale Tallon dealing Khabby and Barker in a package for a forward and to cut some payroll. Only time will tell.
This was a great read guys, I enjoy all of your stuff but to see you all collaborate...AWESOME!
Looking forward to future articles.
Edit Comment Cancel
Bryan Thiel 11 months ago
Not all of us are overlooking it though—and in a roundabout way, the Huet signing makes the Chicago offseason a success. As I said, with the addition of Huet, it gives Chicago the option of turning Khaby into picks/players/whatever they'd like, and they still have a legitimate starting goalie in net—not one that could easily revert back to past habbits (like Patrick Lalime—although he's done well to rebound I have to admit). The Huet signing kind of saves them money in a strange way, because logic would dicatate that the Hawks' can't take on more salary, so whomever they dump (be it Khabby or not) they'll be saving money and opening up cap space to further improve the team. As well as most likely getting younger.
If Khabby isn't the one they trade, then it's a strange offseason but a winning one nonetheless, as instead of just signing players like Chicago was doing a few years ago, they addressed their need for a puck-moving defenseman, and were able to get players (and retain players like Patrick Sharp) that worked with their system.
Besides, it's never a terrible thing to have two quality netminders if Khaby stays—sure $13 million is a lot, but if one gets hurt then you guys are laughing. If Vesa Toskala had been hurt for an extended period of time last season, then Steve Stamkos may be wearing a Leafs jersey, and all of Tampa Bays forwards would have room on the roster.
On one hand it's frustration...on the other—at least you don't have to worry about Andrew Raycroft being your 1B goalie. Haha
BT
Edit Comment Cancel
Greg Caggiano 11 months ago
The Hawks can ride Huet/Khabibulin like the Rangers did Giacomin/Villemure in the mid 70's.
Edit Comment Cancel
Doug E Fresh 11 months ago
I think Huet will be a great pickup for the Hawks. I'm a Caps fan, and I got to watch Huet's stretch run in Washington up close. Don't listen to the haters, Huet was great, it was the Caps' defense that stunk against the Flyers.
That being said, everyone seems sure the Hawks will trade Khabibulin, but how many teams can afford to spend $6.5 mil on a thirtysomething goalie in decline? The only way I see Khabi leaving Chicago before 2010 is if Hawks' ownership bites the bullet and buys out his contract.
Edit Comment Cancel
The Captain -Brian Kates 11 months ago
Great article, Greg. Keep up the good work during this off-season. Just a couple of months to go though!
GO WINGS!!!!!!!!!!!
Edit Comment Cancel
Matt Eichel 11 months ago
Great read Greg!
Edit Comment Cancel
Josh Lewis 11 months ago
Great idea, Greg. Thanks for giving us the chance to give some analysis. There are lots of things here that I could comment on, but I'll leave it to this:
Whoever said that Andy Wozniewski would bolster the Blues' defense corps... BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
This is all I have to say about that: http://s114.photobucket.com/albums/n259/red_heifer94/wozisgone.jpg
Edit Comment Cancel
Doug E Fresh 11 months ago
Love the article. Next time, you should try to get everyone at an actual roundtable so there can be heated arguments and possibly even fisticuffs.
Edit Comment Cancel
Greg Caggiano 11 months ago
Thats pretty hard when virtually all of us are in different states...
Edit Comment Cancel
Doug E Fresh 11 months ago
I was only joking about the actual roundtable.
Edit Comment Cancel
Greg Caggiano 11 months ago
I know. You're too smart for that to have been a serious suggestion.
Edit Comment Cancel
steve duncan 11 months ago
tampa is hard to judge.the way i see it ,they are aquiring assets irregardless of position.they sighned boyle with the intention of trading him.noy a bad move really.carle is a hair away from being great and they still keep an eye on the future with the first rounder.there will be teams that come out of the gate with obvious offensive problems and tampa will have a glut of fowrards to comply with a trade.what they are doing is unconventional,but it just might work.they paid waaaaaay to much for malone though.30 goals playing with malkin and crosby is no real feat.
i agree with the devs.rolston is brindamouresk when it comes to conditioning and holik is worth every penny of his mill he got.i like these moves enough to put jersey as a fav to make the final next year.
toronto are losers because..they are toronto.nuff said.
it amazes me how people get ticked about how much teams overpay for players,but never give the sabres props for being realistic and providing a solid team at the same time.i npick them to make the playoffs this year.
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.