How Colin White's Defensive Performance Compared with Similarly Paid Defensemen in 2009-10
by John Fischer on Aug 18, 2010 6:58 PM EDT
in Devils Issues, Views & Analysis
Email
Print
Yesterday, I posited that Colin White was a pretty good #3 defenseman. In analyzing his usage, I used his ice time (from NHL.com, quality of competition, and zone start information (the latter two from Behind the Net) to determine his role on the New Jersey Devils in the last three seasons. It is accurate to conclude that White is a defensive defenseman who plays on the team's second pairing, and that he draws tough assignments regularly. I utilized the shots against per 60 minutes and goals against per 60 minutes rates to establish how he performed on defense from Behind the Net, which was (and will continue to be) his main role. White has a no-trade clause and will be paid $3 million in the next two seasons by New Jersey.
In the comments, ILWT user FrankG929 asked an interesting question: How does Colin White compare to other defensemen in the NHL who make a similar amount of money?
I used nhlnumbers player comparison capability and pulled all the defensemen who will make between 2.75M and 3.25M in 2010-11. Pretty good company. Perhaps seeing where Colin ranks among his monetary peers might finally quiet some of his critics (among which I do not number).
Edler, Alexander; Robidas, Stephane; Seidenberg, Dennis; Wisniewski, James; Coburn, Braydon; Allen, Bryan; Barker, Cam; Gleason, Tim; Leopold, Jordan; Lydman, Toni; Quincey, Kyle; Tyutin, Fedor; White, Colin; White, Ian; Klesla, Rostislav; Salvador, Bryce; Vlasic, Marc-Edouard; Greene, Matt; Morris, Derek
This is a very good question. Has Colin White been earning that $3 million salary, relative to others who make that much? I went back to Behind the Net and pulled the numbers from last season for these players. I focused on their performance (GA/60, SA/60, impact on both stats, quality of competition) rather than their role. Not all of these defensemen have the same skillsets or the same roles on their team. Cam Barker, Matt Greene, and Rostislav Klesla didn't even hit the 15 TOI/60 requirement that I've used yesterday. However, the request was to see how Colin White ranks among Frank's group; so that implies comparing performance. Keep that in mind as you read on (and please set your viewing to "Wide" before continuing).
As with yesterday, I'm focusing on shots against per 60 minutes (SA/60) and goals against per 60 minutes (GA/60) as they give us a picture of how the player performed on defense. Plus, I've added impact values for both, or the difference between off-ice SA/60 or GA/60 and on-ice SA/60 or GA/60. This way we can tell what happened when that player stepped on the ice. Of course, all numbers are for 5-on-5 hockey, since players will play the most minutes in a game in that situation.
All rankings came from a list of 132 NHL defensemen who played at least 20 games and 15 TOI/60 last season; Greene, Barker, and Klesla were added since Frank specifically mentioned them. I didn't include zone starts, as I noted on Saturday how White was among league leaders in starting in his own zone way more often than in the offensive zone. It'd be pointless to say over and over how Colin White had it harder since he started off in his own end so much.
I've organized this chart by quality of competition (QUALCOMP). Among all 135 defensemen, Colin White's quality of competition ranked 52nd, but among the group of comparable-salary defensemen, it sits at seventh. That's not bad at all. White's on-ice numbers ranked well among the entire league as well as his peers here. Even his slightly negative impact on SA/60 put him above average among the league. In fact, the only stat where Colin White doesn't look good is on his impact of GA/60.
(Aside: For some reason, when I did yesterday's post, I was using the same numbers I had from the Paul Martin series of posts for rankings of White's numbers. Since the season already ended, I didn't expect the numbers to change, but they had slightly when I pulled them again. So Colin White's rankings yesterday were off by one or two. The numbers themselves were exactly the same, though. Weird.)
Here's a few quick points among this group:
- Seven defensemen in this group had a lower on-ice GA/60 than Colin White. In order from smallest to largest before White, they were: M-E Vlasic, Greene, Salvador, Lydman, Seidenberg, Quincey, Barker. Colin White had a higher quality of competition value than all seven, though.
- Only two defensemen had a lower on-ice SA/60 than Colin White: Greene and Tyutin. White had a higher quality of competition than both, as well.
- Actually, by now, you may have noticed that Matt Greene had excellent numbers across the board. He played some decent 5-on-5 minutes with a TOI/60 of 14.28, and he was actually starting in his own zone a few more times than in the offensive zone. However, before you get excited, let me point out that his quality of competition value of -0.044 was the second lowest among this entire group, and ranked 121 among the larger population of defensemen. In short, look at those numbers with a grain of salt.
- Given that Colin White's impact on GA/60 was so terrible; let me point out who finished below him among this group: Stephane Robidas and Rostislav Klesla. In a word: Oof. Just to fulfill any unasked curiosity, the only defensemen who were worse than Klesla in this stat last season was Steve Staios ($2.7 million in 10-11), Sergei Gonchar (will make $5.5 million for Ottawa), and Jack Johnson ($1.425 million, becomes a RFA in 2011).
- Poor Klesla! He was injured for much of the season with a torn groin muscle. When he did play earlier in 2009-10, he got pounded. I hope for his and the Blue Jackets' sake that he's healthy and ready to bounce back.
- White's slightly negative impact on SA/60 didn't throw him down the list in this group. Six defensemen had a positive impact on SA/60 last season, in order from largest to smallest: Tyutin, Greene, Robidas, Morris, Leopold, and Lydman. Ian White had no impact, so he's the seventh one above Colin White. Leopold (0.098), Robidas (0.077), Ian White (0.061), and Morris (0.039) all accomplished this with higher quality of competition values than Colin White.
Overall, I think the same conclusion from yesterday's post applies here. Among his salaried-peers, White is good but not great. I'd say the top defensive defenseman among this group last season would be Fedor Tyutin. He played a decent level of competition, didn't play with a high level of teammates, he had an excellent impact on SA/60 and a low on-ice SA/60, and he had a positive impact on GA/60 even though his on-ice GA/60 wasn't that good.
Bryce Salvador stacked up quite well, and unlike Matt Greene, you can't fully discount him since his quality of competition was respectable. Though, Salvador had a higher quality of competition and while his on-ice stats were great and had a positive impact on GA/60, he had a worse impact on SA/60. Depending on your view of what is a defenseman's main job (preventing shots, for example), you may see that more as a negative.
For the most part, everyone on this list has some area where they didn't do so well. Dennis Seidenberg and Toni Lydman had excellent GA/60 stats, a good impact on SA/60, but not a good on-ice SA/60 stat. Like Colin White, Derek Morris's impact on GA/60 sticks out like a sore thumb among his other solid numbers. Other defensemen are good in one area but not the other, like Marc-Edouard Vlasic looking great on GA/60 but not so good on SA/60. When you throw quality of competition (and quality of teammates) into the mix, it's another factor to consider. It makes me more sympathetic to someone like Stephane Robidas, who didn't have good numbers but played tough competition, more so than someone like Cam Barker, who ranked well in three out of the four stats but did it against really weak competition.
Plus, there's the giant elephant of offensive skills. Colin White isn't offensive at all and I completely agree that's a big reason for justifying salary. Alexander Edler may have been consistently above-average in all stats here, but his group-leading 42 points last season definitely justifies his salary. It's a lot easier to forgive Robidas' not-so-good advanced defensive stats given that he gave his team 10 goals and 31 assists last season (tied for 23rd in NHL defensemen scoring last season). I can easily tell you that Colin White would not stack up well in terms of offensive performance. Therefore, I've focused solely on defensive stats to see whether Colin White's performance there stood up well or not to his similar-salary peers. He's a defensive defenseman, so he should be judged on those merits.
I think it's easy to see that while he's not dominating the group, White ranked well enough within this group (and not too poorly within the league) in three out of the four categories while having a respectable quality of competition. Again, good but not great. Based on his defensive performance in 2009-10, it seems to me that White's $3 million salary is more justifiable given this comparison to his peers.
Now it's your turn. Do you agree that White compared well to his fellow salaried defensemen in the NHL least season? While his defensive performance compares well to his peers, do you think it (further) justifies his $3 million salary? If not, what do you think he can do to fully earn his $3 million? Please leave your answers as well as other thoughts about this comparison and Colin White in the comments. Thanks for reading, and thanks to Frank for the idea.
29 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great work John. I suspected Colin would compare reasonably well with his economic peers. I suppose we should be glad we’re not LA or Minnesota fans, we’d probably be throwing (Matt) Greene and Barker to the wolves. Like you said in yesterday’s post, Colin’s not going to show any drastic improvement offensively, but it’s good to know that he does what he is paid to do pretty much as well as the folks around the league that are also paid a similar amount to perform the same job.
Well, we can always boast on JFTC that our Greene is better than your Greene :-)
Go Devils
Go Jets
Like sports betting? Sign up with centsports and do it for free
This is nice…but while it’s a foregone conclusion to say that White’s offensive performance won’t impress anyone, I feel it’s important to be able to see how he stacks up in this salary group. It would be nice if the analysis were like the analyses you did for free-agent defensemen, with GFOn impact, SFOn impact, etc.
If you tell me that White’s GAOn/60 impact was the 3rd worst on this list and his SAOn/60 impact is squarely in the middle of the list, that his QualComp is slightly above median, and that the only two players with a GAOn/60 impact worse than him both had the same or better QualComp as he had, then I draw the following conclusions:
1. White has a terrible GAOn/60 impact among players in his salary class
2. And an essentially average SAOn/60 impact among said players…SAOn has a wide distribution and if his SAOn impact were -0.3 instead of -0.1 (well within statistical variability), he would have actually ranked slightly below average in this category as well.
3. Between (1) and (2), I would have to say that White’s defensive performance is POOR given his salary.
On top of performing poorly defensively, it’s not a stretch to say that he would probably rank in the bottom third of this list in GFOn and SFOn impacts. So to conclude, he is defensively poor and offensively poor-to-awful, which means he is AT BEST a poor value for his salary.
Moreover, the most relevant comparison of all is White-to-Salvador. After all, if the Devils are unable to trade Salvador, they may be forced to waive either White or Salvador and bury one of them in the minors. Say what you will about Lou’s legendary loyalty and that Salvador benefited from playing with Greene (hence the higher qualteam and opportunity to spend more time in the offensive zone), but that staggering 0.84 difference in GAOn/60 is hard to ignore. It is a HUGE difference.
GA/60 regresses to the mean, SA/60 does not. looking at GA/60 in one season is not a good indicator of who’s good and who isn’t.
(1) Every statistic has a “true mean”, and given a large enough sample size, every statistic will approach the true mean. Yes, the sample size is smaller for GA than for SA, but the SA will, in absolute numerical terms, have a wider distribution. A SA difference of 0.5 is nowhere near as big a deal as a GA difference of 0.5….the equivalent would be closer to a SA difference of 5.0.
(2) The game is about scoring more goals than the other team, or if you prefer, giving up fewer goals. It’s not about getting more shots. A good defenseman can have a poor SA but a good GA by forcing opposing forwards to take low-percentage shots. How can SA be more meaningful than GA?
you’re right that i was cavalier with my use of regression to the mean. but you’re not familiar with the latest thinking in hockey. no, not all shots are equal, but most of them are.
why shots against is more meaningful than goals against
a good defenseman cannot have a poor SA.
this article you cite makes no mention of comparing the value of the shots against stat vs the goals against stat.
Regarding (2), I can’t agree that a defenseman who allows a lot of shots, low-percentage or otherwise, is good in his own zone. His job there is to help their goalie (and by extension their team) by preventing the other team from getting opportunities.
SA/60 is going to say a lot more about how a d-man is preventing chances, taking the heat off their goalie, etc. with GA/60 as context then the other way around.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Aug 19, 2010 11:23 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
In addition to (2), low percentage shots are still that, percentage shots. Some years Brodeur might stop all of them, some years he might stop a below average number. In number form…50 shots taken from an area that allows 3% goals is 1.5 goals against. Some years that number will be 0, some it could be 3-4. Not allowing said shots is the easiest way not to worry about it.
It’s true that 50 @ 3% is better than 50 @ 12%, but neither is as good as 0 @ x%
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
Blueshirt Banter - "ARISTH"-Assuming Redden is sent to Hartford
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Aug 19, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Wait, poor?
1. White has a terrible GAOn/60 impact among players in his salary class
2. And an essentially average SAOn/60 impact among said players…SAOn has a wide distribution and if his SAOn impact were -0.3 instead of -0.1 (well within statistical variability), he would have actually ranked slightly below average in this category as well.
3. Between (1) and (2), I would have to say that White’s defensive performance is POOR given his salary.
I see (1) and (2), but how do you jump to (3) as being poor? If he’s just above average among defensemen who are paid similarly to him (8 out of 19 would be above average unless the rules of division just changed) and being above average among the entire league for defensemen who have played at least 15 TOI/60 in 3 out of 4 stats here, then that would just make him above average, no? It would mean that he’s good but not great. It would also further suggest that his salary is actually justified due to his above average place in this group in terms of defensive stats. If he ranked as badly as Klesla did here (or Jack Johnson if you want to take the whole league into account), then he’d be (extremely) poor. But he’s not that bad; he’s within the group that gets paid roughly $3 million, keeping pace if not a bit ahead of it.
He’s only in the bottom half in both groups (the other 18 similarly salaried players, the 134 other d-men in the league I parsed) for one category: GA/60 on-ice impact. Let’s take a closer loook. The on-ice GA/60 of White was 2.32, which is quite above average in the league and just above average in this group. The impact means that the off-ice GA/60 of White was 1.90. Seriously, 1.90 GA/60. With a value that low, only the very best are going to make it lower somehow.
Yes, it’s bad that the GA/60 went up so much when White stepped on the ice, but it wasn’t going up so high that it was so apparent that White = goals against on the ice. That he started in his own zone so often and plays against relatively tough competition on his team helps account for the spike in addition to starting off with a ridiculously low off-ice GA/60.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Aug 18, 2010 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions
colin white has the 2nd highest GF/60 among NJ defensemen (if we don’t count anssi salmela, who played the majority of the season with atlanta). he has a higher GF/60 than andy greene. i’m not going to compare his GF/60 to other D on this list, but again – GF/60 and GA/60 for one season are not particularly meaningful.
His GAOn/60 was 8th out of the 19 here and 47th out of the 135 defensemen in the league, but he also played on the best defensive team in the league. If he’s a “good” defenseman on a great defensive team, then his performance by that metric should be somewhere between good to great, not merely above average.
The whole point of “impact” stats is to try to tease out what the player’s individual performance was when accounting for his team’s proficiency. I can’t just give him a free pass on his GA impact just because the off-ice GA was a phenomenal 1.90. That’s like saying, “Hey, the rest of the team is picking up the slack for you so it’s okay that we get more goals scored against us when you step up the ice.” I also can’t give him a pass on his QualComp, because it’s really not that great. It may be the best on the team, but only a little better than Salvador’s. Evidently, White and Mottau weren’t the only pair deployed against top lines.
The zone starts do mean something, but how many goals does 100 extra zone starts really lead to? Half the time, the Devils win the faceoff, some other percentage of the team the opposition doesn’t even get a shot off before the Devils clear the zone, and of the times that a shot is taken on goal, just around 10% actually end up in the net.
You’re arguing that Colin White is a “good” #3 defenseman. Out of six defensemen playing in a game, #3 would be above average. And given that only 80 defensemen are paid better than him, and there are 30 teams in the league, he is certainly being paid like a #3 defenseman. Yet his ES and total TOI/gm have essentially ranked 5th on the team the past two years, and the team gives up more goals – a hefty chunk more – when he steps on the ice. He isn’t entrusted with PP time, and though I haven’t seen his GFOn/60 stats, no one’s confusing him for an offensive defenseman. So what is he, then, as a defensive defenseman who is giving up more goals than the rest of the defensemen and ranks #5 in ES ice time? He’s more like a #5 defender, not a #3!
Is he a good #5 defender? Sure. But #5 defenders in this league make about $1.3M, and #4s make about $2.0M, so he is grossly overpaid given his role on the team. Even if you gave him the benefit of the doubt and said that he would be a #4 guy on any other team, he’s overpaid by a million.
I agree with you 100%, dr(d)evil. It has always looked like the team was picking up his slack. At the end of the day, goals are what matter, and White’s GAOn/60 Impact shows he’s not a good #3 defenseman. He’s paid like a #3 and plays like someone who may lose his roster spot.
It has always looked like the team was picking up his slack.
Except he was paired with a guy last year who hasn’t been re-signed… so who was picking up whose slack?
At the end of the day, goals are what matter, and White’s GAOn/60 Impact shows he’s not a good #3 defenseman.
The part you seem to have missed is: “Seven defensemen in this group had a lower on-ice GA/60 than Colin White… [he] had a higher quality of competition value than all seven, though.”
You can’t just look at the raw numbers and base an opinion (well, you can, since you’ve said your mind is already made up and no amount of evidence will change it). One has to take other contributing factors into consideration also, like the quality of the competition and teammates the player shared the ice with.
The problem is he’s a second pairing defenseman being played as a first pairing defenseman against the other team’s top players and his numbers suffer for it.
He’s paid like a #3 and plays like someone who may lose his roster spot.
Barring some completely surprising set of circumstances or an injury, Colin White will be on the NJ Devils roster. Deal with it.
Playing Devils' advocate since 1982.
what pure sophistry. first of all, you don’t even look at his GF/60, even though it was 2nd on new jersey, and first among defenseman who played more than 40 games. oh, and it was second on the team in 2008-09. you just assume that he cannot have an effect on goal scoring. i’m sure this stat will be handwaved away, but you make the argument that hockey is about scoring and not being scored upon, which is essentially the argument for territorial stats, and then you don’t even bother to look at them or think about them.
I’d LOVE to see the GF/60 stats. I said as much in my first post on this article. And please do provide the actual numbers for all the defenseman, not just White’s.
If the theory is that White is better defensively than offensively, and the stats support the opposite conclusion, then I’d have no choice but to question either the validity of the theory, the stat, or both.
My argument for giving more weight to GF/GA rather than SF/SA is based on a belief that GF/GA are more closely correlated to wins than SF/SA. Advocates for territorial stats like SF/SA or time spent in the offensive vs defensive zone would suggest that those stats are somehow correlated to wins. I don’t doubt that there is a correlation, but I think it’s not as strong as the GF/GA correlation to wins.
Sophistry? That’s rather insulting. As far as I can see, I disagree with John on this matter simply because we choose to give different weight to different stats. My reasoning is right there in plain sight, fully explained. Your responses, on the other hand, have been heavy on asserting your opinion rather than offering a line of reasoning.
GA/60 regresses to the mean, SA/60 does not. looking at GA/60 in one season is not a good indicator of who’s good and who isn’t.
assertion of an opinion.
colin white has the 2nd highest GF/60 among NJ defensemen (if we don’t count anssi salmela, who played the majority of the season with atlanta). he has a higher GF/60 than andy greene. i’m not going to compare his GF/60 to other D on this list, but again – GF/60 and GA/60 for one season are not particularly meaningful.
at least you threw in a semblance of a stat here, but again, an assertion of an opinion. why aren’t GF and GA meaningful? are you admitting that white is poor offensively, therefore the stat must be wrong? how about the SF data? is greene better than white in SF, therefore supporting the notion that greene is better than white offensively, and by corollary supporting the idea that SF is more valuable a statistic than GF?
you’re right that i was cavalier with my use of regression to the mean. but you’re not familiar with the latest thinking in hockey. no, not all shots are equal, but most of them are.
why shots against is more meaningful than goals against
a good defenseman cannot have a poor SA.
first of all, the link was irrelevant to the conversation. second, you make an assertion that a good defenseman cannot have a poor SA but let someone else do the arguing for you. third, you insinuate that you’re “in” on the latest thinking in hockey, while I am not.
i’m sure this stat will be handwaved away, but you make the argument that hockey is about scoring and not being scored upon, which is essentially the argument for territorial stats, and then you don’t even bother to look at them or think about them.
another insulting assertion of an opinion. you’re on fire.
Frankly, I wouldn’t have bothered responding to any of your comments in this thread because you didn’t give any reasoning in any of them, except that I couldn’t let this accusation of sophistry slide.
how you can read that link and not think it’s relevant is absolutely beyond me. did you stop to think about it? save percentage measures two things: goals and shots on goal. i.e. GA/60 and SA/60, in a translated form. the fact that save percentage against (e.g. GA/60) is not controllable should demonstrate something. and given the wide range of shots against/60 that defensemen exhibit, it’s not a stretch to suggest that they can control that.
My argument for giving more weight to GF/GA rather than SF/SA is based on a belief that GF/GA are more closely correlated to wins than SF/SA. Advocates for territorial stats like SF/SA or time spent in the offensive vs defensive zone would suggest that those stats are somehow correlated to wins. I don’t doubt that there is a correlation, but I think it’s not as strong as the GF/GA correlation to wins.
GF/GA are not as predictive as SF/SA (at even strength). they are given to in-season fluctuation due to chance. a good example are the boston bruins, who got extreme luck in 2008-09 and rode that to a first place finish, only to do better territorially in 2009-10, yet they were barely a playoff team. familiarize yourself with jlikens, vic ferrari, or gabe desjardins on the subject – i don’t have the inclination to go dig up a bunch of old links that are basically the baseball equivalent of ‘on base percentage is better than batting average’ – the idea that shots are important is so canonical in this way of thinking. if i remembered where the canonical articles are, i’d link them for you.
John
Let’s just say, hypothetically, that the GMs of the rest of the league’s teams saw Colin White in the same way that you do here in this article you wrote. Would that mean White would be good trade bait? I know he has a NTC, but if he could be persuaded to waive it, could the Devils get something good in return for him and maybe a prospect? I still don’t believe White is any good, but should I be wrong I don’t see why the Devils shouldn’t try to trade him and get someone with more of an offensive upside.
I don’t know, it depends on team needs. You’re asking about the Devils asking someone to waive a NTC. Something that hasn’t happened in this organization as far as I can remember.
So, hypothetically, I’d also ask whether a unicorn was coming the other way.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Aug 19, 2010 8:23 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
OK, put it this way, hypothetically, pretend NTCs don’t exist. Now would the Devils get back value in a hypothetical trade for Colin White?
Go Devils
Go Jets
Like sports betting? Sign up with centsports and do it for free
I think they would, provided they’re trading with a team that wants a defensive d-man like White and the Devils demand it. Mind you, the return may not be something to get so excited over, but a second pairing d-man isn’t going to yield low picks and depth players either.
Let me put it this way: if NTCs didn’t exist, it’d be raiser to move White for something than to just dump Rolston.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Aug 19, 2010 2:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
What answer are you looking for here? Because there’s no possible way to answer that question without knowing at least some of the variables involved.
In a general sense, is it possible Lou could get a decent return for White? Absolutely. Some team somewhere at some point will probably have need of a solid, experienced 2nd pairing defenseman for about market value.
Playing Devils' advocate since 1982.
Washington, San Jose, Anaheim are all currently looking for that in fact, as far as I can tell.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
Blueshirt Banter - "ARISTH"-Assuming Redden is sent to Hartford
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Aug 19, 2010 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I think that’s exactly the answer njss4 was looking for with the original question that I paraphrased.
Go Devils
Go Jets
Like sports betting? Sign up with centsports and do it for free
Trading a player with an NTC who is mildly underperforming his contract like White is NOT a unicorn. Trading Rolston straight up for Bobby Ryan is a unicorn. The word just gets thrown around likes it’s nothing on this site these days.
First of all, the fact that the Devils have never traded a player with an NTC doesn’t mean much. The cap has only been in place for 5 years. Pre-cap, if a player had an NTC, you just sucked it up and kept him because you could afford to. At least the guy would provide veteran leadership. Post-cap, the Devils who have had NTCs were Brodeur, Elias, Langenbrunner, White, Rolston, and Pandolfo. Whether they had an NTC or not, the Devils weren’t going to trade Brodeur, Elias, or Langenbrunner.
As for the rest, let’s look at them one by one. The Devils might not have traded Pandolfo, but they made it clear he wasn’t wanted. You think the NTC somehow would have kept the Devils from sending Pando to the minors? He asked for a buyout because he knew the odds of that were very strong. Otherwise, why would he give up a third of his salary next year and run the risk of not getting signed to a one-way contract in free agency?
Rolston, frankly, is very nearly untradeable without sweetening the deal more than any GM has ever sweetened a salary dump deal. He is also undemotable. I don’t doubt that if Rolston could be sent to the minors, Lou would have done it, Kovalchuk would be signed by now, and Zubrus and Salvador would be safe.
As for White, he’s not lost as much value as Rolston and Pando have. White is a $3M defenseman playing at a $2M level. Rolston is a $5M forward playing at a $2-2.5M level. Pando was a $2.5M forward playing at a $500K-$1M level. White isn’t so bad that he should be buried in the minors, so the possibility of a trade is, I think, real.
And to answer the original question, I think that White would be viewed as a #4 defenseman by a majority of teams in the league. I think the Devils are one of about 5 teams where he ranks as a #5, and I think there are maybe 5 teams where he could step in and be their #3 guy. If the Devils weren’t in such a cap bind, they could get something of value, commensurate to the value of a #5 defenseman, in return for White. But given the fact that the Devils are in a tough situation, I think the Devils would be lucky to just give him away for zero return.
If White is a #5, who are #s 1-4?
I get Volchenkov and Greene and can see the argument for Tallinder, but that leaves Salvador, Salmela and Fraser on the roster that you’ve got above him… so I’m assuming Salvador?
Playing Devils' advocate since 1982.
In my opinion, Salvador and White are pretty close. I like Sal better, but if you want to call White a #4 I don’t have much of an objection.
Salvador has been paired with Greene for much of the past two seasons, while White has been paired with Mottau. On the one hand, I’d prefer to keep Sal because of better established chemistry with Greene, who is definitely a keeper for now. On the other hand, I do hope that what I’ve perceived as White’s poor performance was in fact attributable to Mottau, and that he’ll have a better year this season with a new partner. Realistically, I think the odds heavily favor a Salvador trade than a White trade so….it’s kind of a moot point.
I see what ure saying but two be a second pair defensman he is not worth it anymore. He is afraid to block shots and he is too soft. He is also not a good skater. He won’t may h his money anymore.
by brodeur30 on Aug 19, 2010 10:05 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on In Lou We Trust
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Saturday’s Three Stars: Reimer, Vokoun post shutouts; St. Louis nets hat trick
- Fight Video: Ilya Kovalchuk KOs Flyers’ Brayden Schenn with nasty right hook
- Penguins’ Brooks Orpik launches Daniel Paille with massive hit (Video)
- Penguins, Bruins face their challenges in Eastern Conference showdown
- Olli Jokinen’s slump-buster is a Big Mac meal from McDonalds (Video)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
