Where’s It Going?
In the salary cap era of the NHL every season is an adventure, as teams learn to look beyond just the upcoming year and balance their payrolls accordingly. It’s no longer just a question of finding the right mix of star power and work horses, stud goalie and hot young prospects – now you have to fit all of them, with their increasing salary demands and their long-term hopes, under the salary cap by the time the puck drops October 1.
Every team has a different way of doing this, and it’s interesting to see where the money is going. What players are pulling down the biggest paychecks? What chunk of a team’s payroll is dedicated to defense vs. how much they spend on offense or goaltending? How much does that tell you about a team’s system or whether they’re anchored by a franchise player and the salary that goes with him?
The salary cap is currently $56.8 million for the 2009-10 season; most teams carry a 22-player roster, usually 13 forwards, 7 defensemen and 2 goalies. So if every team meted out the cash at each position based on the percentage of the roster, the forwards would make up 59% of the payroll, or about $33.5 million. The defense, at about 32%, would be at $18.2 million, leaving $5.1 million, or 9% for the goalies.
…anyone’s eyes crossed yet? Lots of numbers coming at you, stay with me.
Let’s take a look at the forwards first – the top ten spenders at the forward position are as follows:
1. Ottawa – $38.545 mil
2. Carolina – $37.217
3. Los Angeles – $35.951
4. Pittsburgh – $35.425
5. Chicago – $34.450
For many of these teams the connection is pretty clear – a system that favors offense equals big bucks for the forwards, and high-flying teams like the Penguins and Hawks aren’t surprising.
And for the rest there’s always one or two that make up a huge chunk of the payroll. There’s Malkin and Crosby in Pittsburgh, Staal in Carolina, Hossa in Chicago, and Kopitar and Smyth in LA. Ottawa actually has four contracts over $5 million, with Heatley, Spezza, Alfredsson and Kovalev making up the bulk of their payroll up front.
On the other end of the spectrum it’s not surprising to see teams that are either more defensively focused or are going through a rebuilding process or both. Colorado, Nashville, Toronto, Atlanta, Phoenix and the Islanders are all at or below $25 million for their forwards. The Islanders haven’t even cracked the $20 million mark with their young group…something that will probably change in a few years when Tavares needs a new deal.
So what about defense? Here’s the top 5:
1. Toronto – $25.232
2. Philadelphia – $24.426
3. Detroit – $23.483
4. Calgary – $22.392
5. San Jose – $22.133
Not surprisingly, the Maple Leafs lead the way after their summer shopping spree along the blue line; considering the fact that their goaltending hopes now lie in the hands of Toskala and an as-yet unproven “Monster”, that was probably wise. Philly’s saddled with a couple more big contracts in Timmonen and Pronger.
And like Toronto, the other three teams really tend toward a more defensive style – helped by names like Lidstrom, Blake and Bouwmeester, of course.
Which leaves us with goaltending – the top 5:
1. NY Islanders – $8.4 mil
2. Boston – $8.2 mil
3. NY Rangers – $7.6 mil
4. Anaheim – $7.3 mil
T-5. Buffalo – $7.25 mil
T-5. Vancouver – $7.25 mil
Quite possibly the most cut and dry, this is simply a list of the teams with the best goaltenders over the past few years – Thomas, Lundqvist, Giguere, Miller, Luongo. Oh, and the team with the most goaltenders (including one very expensive one made of glass) in the Islanders.
These teams are paying well over the average for goaltending, with the bulk of it obviously going toward their superstar starter. For teams like the Rangers, Vancouver and Buffalo that have in recent years relied on their goaltending more than others, it’s money well spent.
Of course it should also be noted that of those teams, only Anaheim has won the Cup in the last decade – and none of the other teams have gotten past the second round in at least that long.
The bottom 5 tell a different tale:
26. Los Angeles – $2.553
27. Nashville – $2.475
28. Philadelphia – $2.425
29. Detroit – $2.133
30. Columbus – $2.105
Say what you will about Osgood, but the Wings have won a couple of Cups with him and because of his bargain price tag have been able to retain guys like Zetterberg, Lidstrom and Datsyuk. LA, Nashville and Columbus are all nurturing young goalie prospects who could bump them into that top 5 soon enough.
As for the Flyers…they keep popping up on the wrong side of all of these lists, and their bargain basement tandem of Emery and Boucher just cements the hat trick.
Naturally at the end of the day every team is going to approach the cap differently. Some teams definitely do it better than others but where the money is spent often depends on the style of team and the players who fill the team’s roster. You won’t have talents like Ovechkin and Backstrom and all of their contemporaries without pushing the cap, and with it expected to go down significantly next year it’ll be harder and harder to balance.
It is worth noting, however, that in their Cup-winning years the last two champions were right around or well below the league average in all three areas. They spent money but focused on spending wisely and at all positions rather than blowing a ton of cash on players who felt short of being the face of their franchise.
Something to ponder, anyway.
[...] View From the Cheap Seats looks at some of the big spenders by position under the NHL salary cap [...]
Pingback by Thursday Afternoon Links « Punch in the Face Blog — July 23, 2009 @ 2:40 pm
Great breakdown. It’s always interesting to see how teams are (over)spending in their quest for the Stanley Cup.
Loved the article!
Comment by Teebz — July 23, 2009 @ 6:21 pm
Nice analysis — gives a good general-trend picture, at least for the top/bottom spenders.
Comment by OrderedChaos — July 24, 2009 @ 12:13 pm
I’ve played around with some of this as well. Would be interesting to see the correlation between spending on particular areas (maybe even more specific such as top 2 D or top 2 forwards) and winning/losing percentage. You’d perhaps see if ‘overspending’ for particular types correlates with losing and compare that to other correlates. Just a thought…
Comment by JpR — July 26, 2009 @ 10:30 am