Should the Thrashers Buy Out Todd White?
The NHL buy-out window will be open for the next two weeks. Only a few teams use this technique to get rid of contracts/players. The Thrashers have only gone this route one time to excise Alexei Zhitnik from their roster. How about Todd White? He's a potential candidate since the Thrashers will pay him $2.6 million next season with a cap hit of $2.35 million.
You may recall that Todd White was a below average 2nd line center who was signed to a four year contract at age 32 by Don Waddell. That contract (along with the Holik deal) was proof positive that Waddell really didn't understand the career curve (or thought he was smart enough to beat it). Most NHL players tend to go into decline after age 33--with the chief exception being Hall of Fame level or near Hall of Fame level talents. If you're going to have to overpay someone to come to Atlanta, better a younger player who is not a lock to become an boat anchor by the end of his deal.
I don't know of anyone who considered Todd White to be an elite forward three summers ago--and now Mr. White appears to have hit the wall last season at age 35. Nobody should be shocked by this development, Father Time comes calling on all us eventually. So if you're the Thrashers you have to ask yourself this question: what are the odds that at age 36 Todd White will rebound and be a productive forward who can handle top six ice time? I'd say the odds are lousy. If anything White appears on a trajectory to be this season's Slava Kozlov--a practice body who is a healthy scratch most of the 2nd half of the season.
So now it comes down to doing your basic cost/benefit analysis. What are the costs? If you buy out Todd White he is due 2/3rds of his final season salary and 2/3rd of his cap hit will count against the cap. The cap hit is spread out across the next two seasons, but considering that the Thrashers are nowhere close to the cap ceiling, they need not worry about the cap expense. The real problem is this: Atlanta will owe White $1.73 million and they will then need to spend money paying someone to replace White on the roster. Let's project that Carl Klingberg takes White's roster spot and he earns $0.8 million in the NHL. The total cost for the buying out and replacing White is $2.6 million or a complete wash in terms of money saved.
So the decision to keep or replace White shouldn't be driven by a dollars calculation but rather one about ice time and player development. Are the Atlanta Thrashers going to get closer to being a contender because they retain Todd White at $2.6 million? Or are the Atlanta Thrashers going to be closer to being a contender by buying out Todd White and playing Carl Klingberg at a cost of $2.6 million. In my mind the 2nd option is clearly the better route.
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Comments
agreed
I like white because he is from my area, however the team needs to make moves that will pay off, both this season and future seasons. Better t pay now then later. Let’s give the young talent some shots and clear out some of the cob webs from past seasons.
"To all the critiques, thank you for the motivation… because it has been an edge for me and will continue to be an edge for me" - Tim 'the Mile High Messiah' Tebow
by ATLbronco on Jun 16, 2010 8:48 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Projecting Klingberg into the second or high 3rd line is a little aggressive, I think. I know you aren’t a big fan of White and I’m not either, but by buying him out shouldn’t the intent be to make the team better instead of just treading water?
I don’t see White as an effective scoring player anymore, so both Klingberg and White are 3rd line guys.
All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com
by The Falconer on Jun 16, 2010 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not trying to justify the White signing at all, but the money wasn’t terrible on the contract. And for one season it was a fantastic bargain. At the time White was signed, Waddell probably took a look at his stats. White had finished in the top 6 scorers on Minnesota both seasons he played there and he had been a productive 20 goal scorer for Ottawa one season. White did have low point totals with Minnesota which should have been the clue that he wasn’t all that good, but Minnesota was a low scoring team. I’m sure that Waddell let that fool him and he rationalized that White could probably still score, but playing in Minnesota was hiding that. Waddell was wrong. If I could use one word to describe White in his NHL career it would be “inconsistent”.
Waddell had a very very bad habit of expecting 3rd and 4th line guys to step up into top 6 forward roles on the cheap, with mostly disastrous results. Steve Rucchin comes to mind. White has been awful for 2 years out of 3. John Sim is probably the biggest “success” in relative terms of bottom 6 guys that Waddell tried to make into cheap top 6 forwards, so that will give you an idea of how poor this idea is in general. White was just another link in that chain.
The Thrashers should have put White up on waivers in the hope that someone would claim him at 50% cost on the 2nd pass. That would have been slightly cheaper than buying him out. I don’t really care if they keep him for the final year or buy him out. Either is OK with me. At least with Waddell no longer being the GM I don’t have to worry about White being re-signed. And if the idiot GMs had ever agreed, as was proposed, to allow teams to pay a portion of the cost of salary of a departing player in a trade, White might have been tradable, although not for much.
Buy Him Out, Buy Him Out Now
There’s no question that he should be bought out. As Falconer points out, the financial effect is relatively neutral (though no one wants to pay a player to sit at home), but the player development effect could be significant.
White is tracking as a great example of age effect on NHL players. Points decline past the age of 30/31, with a bump year at around 34 or so, and then decline along the previous trend minus the bump year.
Expected points based on actual games played (Age 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35): 45, 50, 45, 50, 33
Actual Points: 40, 44, 37, 73, 26
His bump year is obvious (!), but we should expect him to put up about 30 pts or so next year, if he plays in 75+ games. As point of reference, that’s about what Kane contributed. Would rather have Todd White giving you those 30 pts, or next season’s rookie player?
Little – Antro – Berg
Kane – Pevs – UFA
Clarke – Slater – Prospect/UFA
Prospect/UFA – Reasoner – Thorburn
UFA
Assuming you buyout White, don’t bring Max or Boults back and make an offer to all your RFA (I am not sold on Clarke) then you are still looking at signing a top 6 forward, a 13th forward, and putting either a prospect or UFA on the 3rd and 4th lines. To me that is a rather tall order. I wouldn’t be surprised if White is kept as a 13th forward since he can play C or W and can fill in short term top or bottom 6. Granted he is vastly over paid but if you buy him out are you really going to find a better 13th forward for the 900k you just saved?
I think the failure in the cost benefit analysis is assuming White would take a 2nd or 3rd line role away from a prospect. I argue that White at his current price is still value added as a 13th forward which is a position that has no negative impact on the development of a prospect.
@timmyf
Pettersson, Klingberg, Cormier and Machacek are all possible solutions on the 3rd line. It will be an interesting prospect camp to say the least.
by Brandon Rice on Jun 16, 2010 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions
$2.6M for a 13th forward?
That’s roughly $85,000 per point, and that’s if he plays 70+ games. As a 13th forward, you’re basically saying he plays half the games. Then you’re talking about paying him more like $150,000+ per point. At that rate, any minute he takes away from a prospect is cost prohibitive, and I don’t care what the prospect does on the ice. At least he’d be learning something. White is done.
I make this argument for the exact reason I made the argument against signing Afinogenov for anything more than a year or two max: You can’t build a team by signing long-term deals with players in their 30s.
If you compare the cost of buying out Todd White to the cost of keeping him you are looking at 2.6M (salary if kept) – 1.7M (buyout) = 900k to keep him. My argument was that for 900k he is worth keeping as a 13th forward.
In my opinion he shouldn’t be competing with a prospect for ice time if he is the teams 13th forward. If a prospect can’t secure playing time they would be better served getting full ice time on whatever team they were called up from. Letting White rot away this year as an insurance policy allows any prospect who can to earn NHL ice time without forcing a prospect to be a healthy scratch as the 13th forward.
by Brandon Rice on Jun 16, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I Understand Your Logic
Keeping White as a 13th makes sense if you don’t have such serious salary constraints. And you’re right that a prospect shouldn’t be kept on as a 13th, but think of it like this:
Budget sits at $50M, and 12 forwards, 8 d-men, 2 goalies already signed use up $47.4M, so $2.6M remains. Your choice is to keep White at the full $2.6M and use him as a marginal third/fourth line player half-time, and your expectation as such is about 15-20 points. Or, you could buy him out for $1.7M and use the remaining $.9M to bring in a Jeremy Morin-like player (given that he could make the team out of camp) and play 60-70 games on the third line, and produce 20-25 points. With a Morin-ish player on the roster, say that Thorburn and Boulton would be relegated to the 13th.
Now, let’s just also say that 2010-2011 will be White’s final season in the NHL (very likely). Do you still want to pay him the $2.6M, or would you rather pay Morin and get him the experience, with similar contribution?
A friend told me today that he expects the Thrashers to be run about $1-2 million over the cap floor because he believes that the Atlanta Spirit are trying to sell them. A buyout of White could simply be a clue that he is right about the short term direction of the team. Already we know that Dudley gave Afinogenov a 1 year “take it or leave it” offer that Afinogenov has elected to leave. Is this a foreshadowing of a team that’s going to be run very cheaply next season? Maybe. Maybe not. But if the Thrashers are strangely silent during free agency and just come up with maybe one very cheap addition to their team, it could be.
Zim made a comment on the team boards that White is a decent insurance policy, the question is can that money be better spent. Since the cap is really not a concern and buying out White and replacing him is a wash the saving is really only the salary of the player (Klingberg/Machacek) who replaces him. It might be better to have another experienced player around who can fill a role or two should the injury bug hit. 2.6 mil is an expensive insurance policy but it might be a better option for next season.
todd getting smushed
i recently had my neck problems diagnosed by the same doctors that treat the thrashers.
i thought it was totally hilarious that todd white as a senator is on their splash page getting run over by andy sutton.
http://www.atlantasportsmedicine.com/
time machine!

by 





















