Make or Break #1: Thrashers Bet Season on Pavelec and Lehtonen
The Atlanta Thrashers have assembled a competitive roster this season, but the Eastern Conference is highly competitive and the battle for the last few post-season slots should be intense. Each of these playoff contenders has question marks, for the Thrashers goaltending will either make or break their quest for the playoffs.
Incumbent Kari Lehtonen has talent, but lacks consistency and the ability to stay in the lineup. Challenger Ondrej Pavelec has posted outstanding numbers in the QMJHL and AHL, but he struggled a bit last year with a weak Chicago Wolves team. He has been hot and cold in his NHL starts and still overplays the puck at times. Veteran backup Johan Hedberg annually ranks among the worst NHL goaltenders in the traditional metrics of GAA and SV%, but is beloved by teammates and management.
One the major decisions of Thrashers Training Camp was what to do with the goal position. Coach Anderson indicated that the team would start with 3 goaltenders. Given that Kari Lehtonen will begin the season on the IR, this seemed to suggest that Manny Legace might make the Thrashers squad. However, the team released Legace from his tryout yesterday.
The Thrashers choose Hedberg over Legace and I'm afraid this could come back to haunt them. Legace has played on some pretty bad St. Louis Blues teams over the last three years. He was their #1 guy in 2006-07 and 2007-08 and he posted respectable numbers despite the quality of the team in front of him. In 2008-09 the Blues qualified for the post-season but Legace lost the starter job and played in few games.
Looking at Goals Against Average on the last three years (see below), Legace has a much better average.
| NHL Goals Against Average 2006-09 | ||||
| Player | Minutes | Goals | GAA | |
| Legace | 7638 | 333 | 2.62 | |
| Lehtonen | 9264 | 448 | 2.90 | |
| Hedberg | 4700 | 262 | 3.34 | |
| Pavelec | 946 | 54 | 3.42 | |
And if you look at Save Percentage (below), Legace is 2nd only to Lehtonen and much better than Hedberg and Pavelec.
| NHL Save Percentage 2006-2009 | |||
| Player | Saves | Shots Against | SV% |
| Lehtonen | 4685 | 5133 | 0.913 |
| Legace | 3161 | 3494 | 0.905 |
| Hedberg | 2139 | 2401 | 0.891 |
| Pavelec | 437 | 491 | 0.890 |
Based on talent alone, the Thrashers kept the wrong guy.
There are question marks around both Lehtonen and Pavelec. Both could be outstanding--or far less than than outstanding. The Thrashers are rolling the dice that either Lehtonen or Pavelec will step up and deliver. If Lehtonen is hurt for long stretches and Pavelec is not ready for the NHL, the team will find it very expensive to acquire another veteran goalie.
Are there any good reasons to let Legace go? Yes. Keeping Legace would have eaten up a lot of the remaining budget. If the Thrashers had kept Legace, he probably would have wanted a salary of $1-1.5 million and eating Hedberg's contract ($1.15 million) would have consumed $2.5-3.0 million of the team's budget. That's a lot of money to spend on your insurance goalie. On the flip side, if Lehtonen/Pavelec/Hedberg trio perform well, the Thrashers might have budget space to make a trade deadline acquisition or two assuming they are in the playoff hunt. Even better, if they could find a trade partner to take Hedberg's contract once Lehtonen returns, that would clear even more budget space for a trade deadline addition.
It might all work out in end, but the Thrashers did not keep the best player in the Legace vs Hedberg battle and it is because of bad contract decisions made two summers ago. I'll never understand why borderline guys like Hedberg and Boulton were both given multi-year contracts in the summer of 2008 after the Thrashers finished 28th in a 30 team league. If those guys were really difference makers, the Thrashers woud not have finished 28th. If they are "replacement level players" then there is no need to make the multi-year commitment.
Conclusion
The Thrashers quest for the playoffs largely rests on the quality of goaltending they receive this year. The team is gambling by thinking Lehtonen and Pavelec will be sufficient--because backup Johan Hedberg clearly is not going to carry this team. In part, this decision was financial and the Thrashers have saved some money which might enable a roster acquisition later in the season.
0 recs |
20 comments
|
Comments
This is all pretty funny. I remember a couple years back I was thinking, “Well, the team needs some work, but with Lehtonen and that Pavelec kid, at least we’ve got goaltending taken care of for awhile.”
That said, I’m not convinced that Manny Legace is the difference between the Thrashers as a bottom-dweller and the Thrashers as a playoff team.
by timmyf on Sep 29, 2009 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know if Pavelec’s numbers really fit in those charts, looking at that shortage of games, but Legace/Lehtonen numbers are quite intriguing. Legace played in 140 RS games to Kari’s 162 over those 3 seasons. Look at the shot difference! Legace may have played on some very weak St. Louis teams as you put it, but not nearly as defensively weak as Atlanta’s.
Also, I feel the Hedberg and Boulton 2 year contracts were based on character more than ability. Was it the correct approach? Hard to tell as we aren’t in the locker room.
by EvilMilkshake on Sep 29, 2009 11:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What!? You two disagree with me! :)
re: Shots Against. Well some people think Kari is responsible for the high number of SA/G, while other people believe the Hedberg’s mysterious mojo magically creates more offense at the other end of the rink when he is in net. (I’m skeptical of both propositions.)
Here are Shots Against per 60 minutes for the last three seasons combined.
33.2 Lehtonen
31.1 Pavelec
30.7 Hedberg
27.4 Legace
All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com
by The Falconer on Sep 29, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can absolutely believe the team lets more shots through on nights Kari is playing. For however bad we feel on those nights that Kari is “off”, the team must feel worse. Plus they get the added bonus of hearing ALL about… everything we don’t.
I don’t think Manny was by any means a silver bullet, but at the very least, he would’ve been a couple of steps in a better direction. What if the sticking point with him wasn’t really money, but playing time/defined role? Manny’s probably looking for a STARTER job and not a “sure you can play here ’til we think the kids are ready again” job.
Being a Thrashers fan - it's kind of like being punk rock in a hick town.
www.BirdwatchersAnonymous.com
by aaron b on Sep 29, 2009 11:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m also in that group that feels the team plays different with Hedberg in net, presumably because they know his abilities v Kari’s.
As stated previously, I would have liked to see Manny stick, but there are complications with that scenario and the management/coaching staff decided to go in a different direction.
by EvilMilkshake on Sep 29, 2009 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You hit the nail on the head with the reference to the contracts for Hedberg and Boulton. They completely hamstrung this team. Lehtonen and Pavelec really should have started last season as the goalie tandem and this season Legace and Pavelec should have the slots. I think DW has a problem with sticking with “his” guys for too long just because he likes them. He’s allowed “unskilled, good lockerroom guys” to hang around this team time and time again. He’s simply too nice of a guy and not cut-throat enough to be a consistently good GM.
by Pfloyd75 on Sep 29, 2009 12:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hedberg and Boulton Contracts
“Hamstrung” is a bit strong for two, relatively small contracts. The 12-ye Hossa contact? That’s gonna be the definition of “hamstrung” by 2015. Without hindsight, signing what was then the most reliable (and relatively decent) goaltender this team had ever seen to a two-year contract was, if nothing else, comforting. Boulton is another issue, but his contract is not so large that it is detrimental to the team’s roster decisions.
The funny thing about player movements is that you never know what happened. Maybe Legace wanted too much or wanted a clause that would prevent sending him to the AHL. Maybe Anderson didn’t like the way he handled himself in camp. Maybe Waddell doesn’t like his smell. Maybe Dudley had seen enough of Legace to know that his skills have really deterioated to the point where it’s a toss-up between him and Hedberg. No one knows.
Truth is, Pavelec has played some good games at the NHL level, and he’s played some miserable games. What’s more important is that the team in front of him controls the ice and wins some games when Pavelec can’t win for them.
by Jarndyce on Sep 29, 2009 12:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agree. If this team is “hamstrung” by 2 contracts totalling less than 3.5M, things are dire indeed.
by Pogue Mahon on Sep 29, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My reference to hamstrung had less to do with the time and amount of contracts but more to do with roster spots. I wouldn’t be annoyed if management lived up to their word and roster spots were “not decided by contracts” but it is apperent that they are. At least somewhat.
by Pfloyd75 on Sep 29, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also was puzzled by the Boulton and Hedberg contracts at the time, just as I am similarly puzzled by the decision to lock up the oh-so-valuable Thorburn to a 2 year deal. The Hedberg contract led to the Pavelic theatrics of a year ago, something I think everyone wants to forget.
With 1 pre-season game played, for whatever reason it does seem that Legace wasn’t really and truly given a shot at making the team. And with limited resources, I think it came down to a choice of Afinogenov or Legace, but not both, and the organization has (I think) decided to keep Afinogenov.
Actually, Hossa’s contract isn’t that bad. Because of his age at the time of signing, the current rule is that if he retires at any point prior to the expiration of the contract, all that remaining money comes off the books immediately. So if Hossa retires at, say, age 40, the final 2 years are wiped away. This is a loophole that other teams may explore and consider exploiting. Luongo’s current deal is similar – if he retires prior to the end of the deal, the remaining money is wiped off the books. Pronger’s deal is different because of his age at signing and 100% of that money counts against the cap until the contract ends. Pronger could retire next summer and the Flyers are on the hook for it. All 3 contracts are back loaded with cheaper years at the end to drive down the avg. cost against the cap for now. I suspect that the NHL will insist on new rules regarding contracts. One might be that if a contract extends past a player’s 40th birthday that the years after 40 count against the cap regardless of injury or retirement. They could also stop this averaging idea and make each contract count for its exact value per season. Or they could guarantee all contracts regardless of age of the player signing it.
by Zontar on Sep 29, 2009 1:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think they should institute a 0.50/2.0 rule: over the term of a contract, no single season may have a salary less than one half the average (cap) value of the contract, nor may any single season have a salary greater than twice the average (cap) value of the contract.
So if you have a 12-year deal at an average of 6 million a year, each year much fall in the range of 3 to 12 million.
It’d be a good way to keep teams from tacking on a few extra years at 1 million each.
by timmyf on Sep 29, 2009 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know they have a restriction on the front end, the first year for example can not diverge from the cap hit by much. They should probably just eliminate the option to front and back load, make the dollar values equal across all years like the cap hit.
All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com
by The Falconer on Sep 29, 2009 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hossa Contract
The problem isn’t that years after retirement can come off, it’s that they’ll have to pay him as long as he wants to play. Don’t get me wrong, I think Hossa is one of the world’s elite RWs and worth every penny of his contract this year, and the next 3-4 years. After that, they’ll be paying significant salary to a player they can’t move and who likely will see his skills and speed diminishing. Regardless of how you feel about the potential for cap movements, he’ll still be eating a bunch of it, and they’ll have trouble finding cap room for their young guns.
But hey, they’ll make a hell of run this year…
by Jarndyce on Sep 30, 2009 7:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why does the pessimist in me...
… thinks that we’ll be seeing a MacIntyre/Hedberg tandem in the near future?
Because Mac’s our depth. And that’s where it pretty much stops, because everyone underneath him is about 12 years old. That’s another reason this lack of signing Legace was a mistake. Pavs needs another year down to mature. Next season we could manage to have a Kari/Pavs tandem, because Mannino should be mature enough at least to be an AHL backup.
The issue is what do you do with Legace when Kari comes back? Trade one of them? Trade Kari?
Fine. And then next season you have a Pavs/Mac tandem in goal, unless they re-sign Hedberg to another season as an emergency – or unless they were to have signed Manny to a multi-year deal.
Each decision has its pros and cons, and I’m sure it was a tough decision to make. Honestly, though, Kari’s costing us wins by being injured. Again. For the third season in a row. Does no one see a problem with this?
Reporter: There`s a "stamp out the Beatles movement" underway in Detroit. What are you going to do about it?
Paul McCartney: We`re going to start a campaign to stamp out Detroit.
by hildymac on Sep 29, 2009 7:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I do
And I’m gathering up the horses to hook up to the “Trade Kari” bandwagon. It’s such a dissapopinment since he was deemed to be an ELITE NHL goalie. For me,he has not panned out as as that FRANCHISE goalie. He’s a good goalie—but he’s NOT as advertised. Not all his fault either since we all know bunches and bunches of goals were scored (over seasons past) because of lazy, bone-headed uninspired defensive play. I’d give him one more shot (he’s got the dangling carrot at the end of this season, so he may be inspired to play his ass off). But since he’s out on IR, play the dickens out of Pavs and let him settle in. I haven’t seen him yet and I see folks posting about his squirreliness at the NHL level. But he should settle. If Kari stays injured, or puts up mediocre efforts, then load him in my wagon.
by Gumpucks on Sep 29, 2009 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree that it's not his fault...
… a lot of it his fault. Here’s a guy who has never taken his conditioning seriously. He spent the first year in Chicago with a McDonalds meal and has spent the last 4 years being hurt almost constantly or giving half-ass efforts. He’s either made of glass or he doesn’t work hard enough. Either way, I’ll be out by the street waiting for you to swing by to pick me up in the wagon.
by Pogue Mahon on Sep 30, 2009 8:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As of now, I don’t see any impediment to me going back to New Orleans this Spring. Teflon Don has never known what to do with the goalie situation so this should come as no surprise to anybody that has followed the team.
by Bongo on Sep 30, 2009 7:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So it seems...
…many didn’t want to go to Chicago.
Good to know that the team is still keeping lines of communication open.
Being a Thrashers fan - it's kind of like being punk rock in a hick town.
www.BirdwatchersAnonymous.com
by aaron b on Sep 30, 2009 2:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't Understand......
I’ve never understood why they have stood behind Kari so much. When the kid is good, he’s fantastic. When he’s bad he’s bad. So he’s an average goalie. But for a few years he’s struggled with not committing to off-season conditioning, which have caused him injuries, and some injuires were just injuires. In a year when there were plenty of goalies that were free agents. Hedberg, although not the greatest goalie, but you know what you’re getting each game, and it’s not costing 3 million a year on a year to year basis. My complain isn’t really that they should have signed Legace (However when I heard he was at training camp I ran around the room shouting ‘they finally figured it out’), but should have addresses this sooner. Now looking at this season, I can see Kari struggling and Hedberg and Pavelic to try and keep the Thrashers in this thing. I have been a fan of this team since it got here, and I really hope that I am wrong this year. But I would have addressed the Goalie situation last year. Instead it looks more like they are trying to sign enough scorers to make up for the weakness in goal.
by revjasper on Sep 30, 2009 11:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

























