Koivu's contract compared to Plekanec & Backstrom
by SO_RyanP on Jul 17, 2010 1:53 PM EDT
Email
Print
I was part-way through a post on my blog about Koivu's contract when I read Gabe's article and all the comments here last night.
Given all the good conversation, I altered my post a little to include some of the thoughts here. Take a read, let me know what you think, blast me, whatever comes to mind.
The article is after the jump.
Yesterday over at Behind the Net, Gabe made a post about Mikko Koivu’s contract extension with the Wild. In the comments, there was some great debate about how the contract compared to those signed by Tomas Plekanec and Nicklas Backstrom. Given that I’d written up reviews of both contracts here and here, I figured it was worth comparing Koivu’s deal to these two.
First off, we need to compare Koivu’s extension to the top 25 forwards by cap hit. I’ve used GVT as the measure of value here since Goals Versus Threshold should be fairly universal, given that it combines both offense and defense.
Put simply, does Koivu have the same production for every dollar the Wild spent when compared to the other top-paid forwards in the league? Overpaying for a player that isn’t truly top-tier can be the easiest way to sink a team’s cap space, just ask the New York Knicks.
The salary data, as usual, is from CapGeek.com while the GVT data is from Tom Awad’s all-time GVT spreadsheet.
Looking purely at GVT, Koivu’s contract is 17th in value out of the top 25 contracts. GVT may not account for his tough minutes or poor teammate quality perfectly, but it definitely gives us a proxy for value. I would say that Koivu’s contract isn’t a bust but he’s unlikely to outperform it.
I looked at GVT value for all free agents signed until July 8th and the average value for forwards was 4.12 GVT per $M, which somewhat validates Gabe Desjardins’ assertion that defense is becoming overvalued.
Maybe this is due to Montreal’s great "defensive system" in the playoffs (please note that quotes indicate extreme sarcasm).
As for Koivu’s contract compared to Plekanec and Backstrom, take a look at this more in-depth table.
All data is from BehindTheNet.ca.
At first glance, it’s easy to say that Koivu and Plekanec are more similar than Koivu and Backstrom.
Both Koivu and Plekanec were used in the defensive zone (see zone starts), faced the opposition’s better forwards and played with weaker teammates from a Corsi perspective. Backstrom is paired with top wingers and is deployed offensively.
From the comparison, Koivu appears to be the stronger player, given his much better Corsi while the differences in QoC and QoT balance each other out.
That said, Koivu’s deal appears to be immense. He is phenomenal value for the last year of his current deal at a $3.7M cap hit, but his value drops dramatically when his cap hit jumps to $6.75M. Having a cap hit higher than the Sedins and Toews seems extravagant and possibly a bit desperate.
Obviously it’s hard to measure the value of locking up a team captain and fan favorite, Flames fans understand this better than anyone. There is also value in having player that does the hard work possession-wise, making it easier on a team’s scoring forwards. Not only that, but Minnesota isn’t considered a destination team, despite having great hockey fans.
Koivu can be the centerpiece of a very good team, but if they don’t put something around him his contract will be wasted.
18 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
which somewhat validates Gabe Desjardins’ assertion that defense is becoming overvalued.
Would you mind elaborating? I’m not quite sure what you mean.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
If the average forward was signing a contract with a GVT per $M of 4.12, but defensive forwards or “tough minute” forwards like Plekanec and Koivu are only providing 1.91 to 2.32 GVT per $M, they may be getting paid too much for the value they provide.
Not sure whether I believe this yet or not, but the number provides some backup to the theory. That said, value is not linear in contracts. As the skill becomes more scarce, the bigger the incremental salary to acquire that player. If there are only so many forwards who can successfully sled the tough minutes, then they’re more valuable.
Ryan
Sports Opinionated, Front Office Fans, Pink Shirt Wise Guys: Italian Soccer Podcast & occasionally even Puck Prospectus. Yes, I'm a sports-writing whore...don't hate me.
but defensive forwards or "tough minute" forwards like Plekanec and Koivu are only providing 1.91 to 2.32 GVT per $M, they may be getting paid too much for the value they provide.
I don’t think that’s true. If anything, players who play with awesome teammates and against crap competition in the SE division are getting overpaid because people think they’re elite offensive producers.
GVT is great for an overall measurement, but there are plenty of things that a defensive forward does that don’t come into that equation. Few players can play the minutes Koivu has and come out with the RATING and pts/60 he has.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
I agree with you that GVT doesn’t show it all, that’s why I only use it as a general gauge of value. And if anything, it seems to penalize the guys who play the tough minutes.
I also agree that teams need players who play the tough minutes to go along with the offensive players, but I think they can be paid a lot for what they do. If there are only 7-10 guys of his caliber, then it makes sense. If there are 60, there is no point. Scarcity makes a difference.
Ryan
Sports Opinionated, Front Office Fans, Pink Shirt Wise Guys: Italian Soccer Podcast & occasionally even Puck Prospectus. Yes, I'm a sports-writing whore...don't hate me.
more scarce than top-scoring forwards?
Ryan
Sports Opinionated, Front Office Fans, Pink Shirt Wise Guys: Italian Soccer Podcast & occasionally even Puck Prospectus. Yes, I'm a sports-writing whore...don't hate me.
How is Koivu not a top scoring forward? His ES pts/60 this year was greater than Iginla, Booby Ryan, Jeff Carter, Kopitar, Nash…you get the point. I think those guys are “top-scoring forwards,” and Koivu brings himself into their level due to his scoring rate. This doesn’t even factor in his high level of competition and low level of teammates.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
Also, it’d be interesting to include PDO and Gabe’s RATING in your table. Backstrom’s 104.5% PDO this year is definitely coming down next year, so he might not look as good as his totals this year project.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
One point to add—I’m fairly sure GVT undervalues defense (and Tom Awad I think has said as much). That’s a huge part of Koivu’s game. Maybe guys deployed purely defensively are being overvalued, but Koivu is a guy who can play big minutes as well.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
This is correct. It also doesn’t measure strength of competition, which is another factor of Koivu’s game.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
You’re absolutely right about GVT undervaluing defense. Also GoPens makes a good point about QoC. GVT is not the only solution, but I find it a good proxy to begin with.
The more-detailed comparison of Koivu vs Plekanec is probably a better measure. In my mind, Koivu has more value than Plekanec, but the real question is whether it’s worth an extra $1.7M per year. Had his contract been $5.5M, then I’d be ecstatic about it. $6.7M isn’t unreasonable, but it’s not a steal either.
Ryan
Sports Opinionated, Front Office Fans, Pink Shirt Wise Guys: Italian Soccer Podcast & occasionally even Puck Prospectus. Yes, I'm a sports-writing whore...don't hate me.
I think there are still real differences between Koivu and Plekanec. Koivu is a positive Corsi guy while Plekanec gets hemmed in his own end. Koivu also comes out near the top in relative +/-, whereas the same can’t be said of Plekanec; Koivu is also better in the dot. I’d say the pay difference is more than justified between the two.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
Some of Plekanec’s negative Corsi might be a team effect. It’s actually kind of scary how players joining the Habs almost invariably take a nosedive in Corsi — this goes for usually reliable high-Corsi performers such as Scott Gomez and Brian Gionta, but virtually every Hab over the last three years has seen the effect. That’s anecdotal, of course (there just isn’t much data!), but pretty suggestive. Whether is due to the quality of the Habs’ players or a definite strategic decision is an open question. (I really do need to get off my lazy ass and get an article for Olivier to go with the chart.)
On another note, asking Plekanec to be “up there” in relative Corsi or relative +/- when the other top center on his team is Scott Gomez is a little unfair to him, whereas Koivu’s competition at center was composed of Andrew Webbett, Kyle Brodziak, and James Sheppard, all of whom were heavily negative in Corsi. Team-relative stats are heavily affected by who else is on your team…
On another note, asking Plekanec to be "up there" in relative Corsi or relative +/- when the other top center on his team is Scott Gomez is a little unfair to him, whereas Koivu’s competition at center was composed of Andrew Webbett, Kyle Brodziak, and James Sheppard, all of whom were heavily negative in Corsi. Team-relative stats are heavily affected by who else is on your team…
I think that just bolsters the argument that Koivu is better than Plekanec. MTL has other players they can fall back on; no one on that team has to shoulder the tough minutes like Koivu does in Minnesota. Sure Koivu’s relative +/- is aided by the lack of quality on the rest of the MIN roster, but I’m taking Koivu over Plekanec any day of the week.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
My answer is the same: being surrounded by weaker teammates does not, in and of itself, make Koivu a better player. Besides, the fact that there’s nobody else to shoulder tough minutes doesn’t impact much how Koivu personally handles his own minutes, it impacts the performance of the rest of the team far more.
In any case, Koivu may be better than Plekanec, but I certainly don’t see how he’s 1.75 M worth of better!
Koivu has a better +/-ON/60 than Plekanec and a much better Corsi ON. Sprinkle in the increased level of difficulty in the West, and I think there’s some good distance between the two.
being surrounded by weaker teammates does not, in and of itself, make Koivu a better player.
Koivu does just as well if not better than Plekanec while having more responsibility. His line’s Corsi Rel QoC is the highest among Wild forwards. That counts for something in my book.
Hockey Blogger at Pensburgh.com
which shade of grey
Sounds like everyone agrees that Koivu is better than Plekanec, it’s just by how much. 1.7M was enough to get a steal like Tanguay in free agency and that has to be considered. 5.5 to 6 million seems reasonable to me if Plekanec is the comparison. The extra 700k isn’t a terrible overpay for the Wild to keep their best player. Just think, there are players like Steve Staios making ~3M.
Ryan
Sports Opinionated, Front Office Fans, Pink Shirt Wise Guys: Italian Soccer Podcast & occasionally even Puck Prospectus. Yes, I'm a sports-writing whore...don't hate me.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Arctic Ice Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
